Loading...
07-25-787-25-78 A regular meeting of the Kalispell City -County Planning Board, was h.e1d .TuesdAy, July 25,. 1978 at 7:30 .p.m. in the Flathead County Courthouse East Community Room, 723 5th. Avenue East, Kalispell, Montana. Members Present: Others Present: James Thompson 1 APO Staff Representative Walter Griffin James E. Mohn Dorothy Garvin Approx. 20 Guests Bill Lupton Robert LeDuc Dale Haarr John Kain President Dale Haarr dispensed with the minutes. of the meeting and proceeded with opening the meeting at 7:36 p.m., and requested that communications be read. Communication: Jim Mohn read the preliminary approval with conditions Brd. of Comm. of the Ridgwood Terrace Mobile Horne Park Expansion. Letter 7-11-78, (Copy attached). Re: Ridgewood Ter. M.H.P. Exp. Public Hearing: President Haarr then opened the public hearing by Glenwood Addition explaining the hearing procedures for the Glenwood #92 to Kalispell. Addition No. 92 to Kalispell and requested that Jim Mohn Tract 5BBB, NE-4 read the Staff Report. Jim Mohn stated that the Glenwood of the NE4 of Addition .was located just south of the Adams Addition Sec. 12, T28N, at the end of Glenwood and Rosewood Drives, and stated R22W, PMM, that it was 3.717 acres proposed for 6 duplex and 6 Flathead Cty, Mt. four-plex lots with a 7,500 sq. ft. minimum lot size and Jim indicated that the map he was using was color coded (Tabled to 8-8-78 according to land uses. for Submittal of Area Map) Jim also indicated that along with the Staff Report was a Supplemental Report, which was the result of the 8th Work Meeting of the Kalispell Zoning Commission, which set a recommendation and goal for the Adams Addition Area designating that area as R-4 (Copy of Staff Report and Supplement Report attached). Jim then proceeded to read the Staff Report completely, indicating the various areas on the map as applied to land uses and when he got down to G. Expressed Public .Opinion stated that at the time the report was written he had nothing for this criteria, but had sinze talked to two adjacent landowners personally and their primary concerns were the storm drainage problems in the area, where the spring runoff occurs and accumulates in the Liberty Street -Glenwood intersection and continues on down Glenwood to the north line of this property. Jim then proceeded to read the rest of the report, giving a brief design summary relating it to the maps then read the Staff Supplement with the recommendation for approval subject to conditions.Under Condition #3, Jim stated that in the discussion with the Commissioners on the extension of the drainage ditch, although the Commissioners were agreeable, this would not be done 1. at county expense. Jim then read Condition 4 and asked for any comments or questions regarding what he had previously read. Mrs. Nordtome wished to know what sort of storm sewer would be put through there and Jim indicated that at the present time they were just requesting that the current ditch be extended up the south line of the property, as it stopped just short of the property. Mrs. Nortome stated that it did extend on up and another woman in the audience indicated that the ditch and culvert would not handle the amount of water that came through and that was the reason that it jumped the curb and filled the street, and property, because the dirt washed down and filled it in and she indicated that they needed a ditch like there was. on 3 Mile. Drive from north to south. President Haarr indicated that the Commissioners were aware of the problem and the .public wished to know where they were this evening. President Haarr indicated that they did not plan on doing the work and therefore the Board would recognize the problem, but that a solution to the runoff would be handled as the development progressed. The audience felt that this should be handled prior to any development and John Kain indicated that a Storm Drain Study had been done several years previously and Jim Thompson said that consideration should be given to this, because he had lived there and knew how much water came down and it should be handled---�, before it became a serious problem. With the adjacent lands being developed, this would soon all be annexed along with this storm drainage problem. John Kain stated that the study would have to be updated. Questioned was the density and Jim advised that his recommendation of 6 d.u.p.a. was based on the original recommendations from the Comprehensive Plan. Jim proceeded to explain that RA-1 apartment zoning designa- tion.for that area immediately south was the Board's Zoning Commissions Work Meeting recommendation for that area and at the present time this proposal was not zoned, and that it was feasible to go from a 6 to 10 d.u.p.a. President Haarr requested that the meeting follow the procedure and requested that the developer or representative present his proposal. Mr. Jim Hanson stated that the purpose of Rosewood being vacated was that the ownership of the ground was divided between 3 different owners and the plan for the land after development was to put a screened fence around the perimeter of the 32 acres and nothing in there was to be over a story and a half high. >ecause of the rent schedules and the costs, there probably wouldn't be many, if any, children, as it was a retired type person's residence.% Mr. Adams, who owns `2 . the first 4 plexes has no children and was restricting his units to no children and Mel Ruder has the other end. Originally had planned to have a courtyard or planned development to screen off the entire development and Mr. Doyle didn't feel that this would go over well with the Planning Board and so came up with this design, in order to seclude this development, with a couple of pillars and a fence entirely around it. Mrs.. Nordtome wished to know who would keep up the landscaping and was advised.that the individual owners would be responsible. Also questioned as to whether Covenants would keep children out and have some type of lease agreement to do this. Mr. Don Ryan stated that he was boxed in all the way around and with a fire there was only one way in and with the drainage and sewer problems, was concerned. He was advised that the road would be extended concurrent with the easement through the proposal. The developer advised that the city did not own the Rosewood easement, only through Liberty. Walt Griffin advised that the two dead end portions of Rosewood and Glenwood were city streets & that the city limits ran on the north boundary of this property line. Mr. Ryan wished to know why it wasn't economical to build single family on this rather than duplexes when it was adjacent to the city and Mr. Hanson advised that there just wasn't that much land available in the price ranges with city sewer and water capabilities and primarily because of the land costs. President Haarr indicated that it was the Board's positi to make a recommendation to the City Council in this instance with comments from the public hearing and conditions. Once again a woman from the audience reemphasized the fact that something needed to be done about the storm sewer. Walt Griffin indicated this would have to be a city -county project. They, that is the people, should be contacting the Commissioners to do the ditch cleaning now, if that ditch is full, and of course the developer can add to it after he develops and it would not help the problem, but if the ditch is filled then it is not doing the work and the county should be made aware of it. John Kain indicated that they could not go into the county and do anything about that, but they can work out a program with the county.. This was extensively discussed, again. Jim Thompson said that Mr. Hanson could work with the city to solve the problem but couldn't force any action, and it would be necessary to go underground and put in storm sewers to solve it properly and on this project the developer would have to waive his protest against a storm sewer and participate on his prorated share. The Board concurred that they could discuss this all night and not solve it. John Kain questioned what type of fence and was advised a cyclone with slats as a screening. His second question 3. 'was regarding the storm sewer easement and he said that if the developer waived the SID for the storm sewer and the street was dug up, this would have to be done properly and the developer concurred. Walt Griffin indicated that on Map 2 in relation to the proposed zoning and said no recommendations had been made because this was on the outside of the city and he questioned the RA-1 zoning, from the standpoint that the entire area including this property south to 2 Mile east and west to Porta Villa and Meridian always visualized that Rosewood and Glenwood would go south to 2 Mile Drive and like the design showing that and a woman in the audience indicated that she did not want Rosewood running through her bedroom. Walt Griffin stated there was a lot on Yellowstone, which had been set aside for'the possible future use as an access and this would mean circulation from Glenwood to Hawthorne but didn't like any of .the other patterns. Jim Mohn and Walt Griffin then discussed the fact that with the RA-2 residential zoning on the front properties and with RA.1 in the back that some landowners would be landlocked because of no access, and although easements could be granted along the sides of the property, as they developed, possibly all property would not be develop ed and then some .would be landlocked. Also discussed was the fact that RA-2 zoning already was generating enough traffic on Meridian. Jim also explained that Hawthorn--� provides access through to two existing collectors, and Walt indicated that an access to Glenwood where the County Road hits Meridian would be of benefit to the people who have youngsters going to Russell School and then explained the high density area, with 2 Mile Drive to the north, Liberty, which takes a lot of traffic with nothing to take the people out of there, and felt there would be a lot of landlocked property, and didn't feel that this proposal would allow this to happen. Hawthorne can become an arterial collector. Jim Mohn then indicated that Russell School was at capacity and that the School District was looking at an additional site. This was discussed at length. Walt Griffin stated there were 100 apartments in the Valley View Apartment Complex, and Hawthorne West, 72-79 townhouses, high priced, small 960 sq. ft. with carport etc., densities, cost and land and families can't live in it because it is too small, and all the four plexes on the north side of Yellowstone and 20 units there and 12 lots on Hawthorne on the east side which would be 48 more units, and the four townhouses with the tennis court between and on Hawthorne and don't feel that that this needs to be enfringed on any more and feels that these should be single family residential, and perhaps smaller lots and perhaps you can build more and sell more. 4. Walt said he would like to see the need when it is $300- $400 a month for a small apartment when a family of 5, with small children can't live in anyway. Off-street parking is required for townhouses and this answered an audience question. Walt felt the RA-1 was too. high a density as it was not in the city and the city has not said it should be RA-1, and changes have been made in the Adams Addition but don't feel it should be spread into this area. As far as the sewers and water, John Kain is public director and he would see that all this was brought up to standard to handle that Audience questioned Jim and asked why he thought this would be beneficial to go with this concept, specially with the water, and the balance of the sites are.boxed in and don't want anything but residential area, and not commercial. Jim stated he took exception as they, meaning Staff, didn't look at multi family as commercial, but as residential, and trying to remove or least prohibit any additional commercial on Meridian, and the second highest use other than commercial is multi -family, - and in order to achieve a buffer between Meridian and the interior properties you are looking a exceedingly high density with nothing on Meridian. The RA District does not lend itself to single family residential, then the next step down is lower density multi -family as multi -family fronts on Meridian and the backside of that property should be multi -family realizing the cost and that single family is not compatible or saleable. Could step this down to an R-5 which allows duplexes which is almost what the other is. There was a lot of discussion between the audience and the Board. .Mr. Hanson indicated that he couldn't sell them as single family because of the scattered duplexes and four plexes. A gentleman from the audience stated that no thought was given to his loss of property value, aesthetic value of anything else. Jim Thompson said that perhaps R-5 could be put adjacent to the Adams properties and then go to RA-1 on the rest. Jim stated that they talked of splitting the property with the road and making it R-5 on one side and RA on the other. Then discussed was the Rosewood loop, or whether the road should go on down but what needed to be discussed was leaving it as is which would allow for only one ingress and one egress, which could be abandoned and given to the.two property owners on either side and leave it out all together. Jim indicated that what was looked at was the short term effect the development would have on the traffic and with no cul-de-sacs the city wouldn't have to worry, about fire and police protection. 5. One board member disagreed and felt that connecting roads were a much better long range plan for traffic control than allowing a cul-de-sac. B. J. Lupton felt that the road should be as Jim had requested, as the revision, that the cul-de-sac on the east side be done away -with and Rosewood be connected. One board member didn't feel that one cluster of retirement members would good for the community as a whole. The rest of the Board felt that once it was zoned the whole project could change, as factors change. Walt Griffin stated that economics was dictating planning instead of planning assessing economics from a standpoint of better use of the land. Understands the problem but feels that it could be overcome. Felt this is one area it should be stopped in and the Slama Addition was a fine example of it. Questioned was how many residential lots would be developed in the area should it go R-4? 7,200 3.7 acres, 25% for roads would be roughly 17 residential lots per acre, and roughly half of what was being looked at on single family useage. The Board discussed this amongst themselves. The audience also carried on mixed conversations. The Board then declared a 10 minute recess. The meeting was called to order and then briefly summed up what had transpired, such as single family residential to the south was a consideration, a continuation of the Adams Addition, and probably some- where between the multi -family unit and the single family is a solution. In looking at this 3.9 acres should take into that consideration the property to the south and the responsibility of the Board and Staff and this should all have a affirmative note from the standpoint of annexation, etc. and this is usually the way the report approaches subdivisions prior to input. He felt that by reading the Board, that no decision could be reached at this point The Board asked Mr. Hanson if he would consider putting in single family as a buffer on the north half of the property and perhaps require a different design of the road. Mr. Hanson said no, that either he would go with the plan as submitted or go all R-1. He felt that most of the people were.against it because of the multi -family, and then attempted to justify from an economic standpoint the purpose for the multi -family. Jim indicated that 6 single family lots could go across that north boundary, as opposed to 14, with the three duplexes and four plexes on either end. Mr. Hanson wanted to know if Lots 1, 2, & 3 butting to the west against multi -family going multi there and single family to the east, backed up to the Porta Villa area, east of Glenwood. It was felt this was contrary, because it was too close to Meridian. Once again there was a vast amount of discus- sion. 6. The developer indicated that the purpose for develop- ment of the property was to provide more living space and could be better achieved with multi -family. The developer stated that if the only thing the Board was going to consider was the profit then he was wasting his time sitting there. The Board said that they had asked if he would put single family across that north property line and then asked the adjacent landowner if he would permit multi family along that line and Don Ryan, said if it were up to him no. The Board said someplace between has to be a compromise. Mr. Ryan stated that if they were single family that would be a compromise, and he wouldn.".t have to look out at duplexes. The arguement went back and forth between. The Board wished to know if single family lots would sell and Mr. Hanson stated it depended on how many he could get in there and he said that he was selling some on Whitefish Stage for $7500 and up and he said Boise Cascade was only able to afford to put one house on a $7200 lot, and with a qualified maximum home loan that is $33,000, can't be done, so hoping the financing loosens up and people can qualify. Jim Thompson wanted to know what the multi -family lots would sell for Mr. Hanson says he already has three of the lots sold and two of the multi -family houses sold. After skirting the question the response was roughly $15,000. Board indicated that they were approving subdivisions all the time and lots were selling for $9,000 and they were selling so something was wrong somewhere. Mr. Doyle stated that Mr. Nash was planning some multi- family in his area and that was compatible, and single family wouldn't be compatible with his on the south. The Board then discussed miscellanous multi -family buildings and the necessity for mobile homes which are being chased out into the county which is more economical to have, also the feasibility and cost of this subdivision as it related to multi -family and single family. Porta Villa was discussed as well as other surrounding developments. Mr. Nash, another prospective developer, adjacent to the proposed development, was questioned by the Board as to whether his development was based on the outcome of this Board's decision. Mr. Nash indicated that the 4 plexes already skirted his land and he would have to do something to match that. He'd like to see the area drained so that he wouldn't lose 40' of his land which was everything this side of the ditch. He stated that the 4 plexes and duplexes looked nice. The Board was concerned, that if they denied, on what basis. The Board also wished to know how long it would take for Jim to put together a large map of the area and what is developed, and Jim indicated he had a small map and John Kain stated that what he was looking for 7. "The Dawn Addition" Recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners after Special Mtg. 7-25-78 am. (Board Reaffirmed Motion for Denial) for was a breakdown on the lots, a bigger map and more detailed. Jim indicated it would only take a couple of hours to prepare it. John Kain moved that the request be tabled and ask Jim Mohn to prepare a plat indicating the lot breakdown for the Board and interested people to thoroughly review, for their August 8, 1978 meeting. Would like noted on there Hawthorne West, Porta Villa, and whatever they are, four plexes, duplexes, etc. so that they can get a good comprehensive overlay of the area. Bob LeDuc seconded the motion: motion carried. The Board suggested that Mr. Hanson pencil in the single family on the east side, and looking at some alternatives also. He questioned whether the people wanted that extension on Rosewood no matter which way this went. The Board was questioned on whether they wanted an extension of Rosewood through to Glenwood and they all agreed that they did. The Board was advised by the President that a few had a meeting with the Commissioners regarding the Dawn Addition and basically the Commissioners were not in favor or the Board'srecommendation to run the road out to LaSalle from Sleepy Hollow so after lengthy discussion they arrived at essentially a solution and want the Staff to submit the conditions which were in the original motion that evening. There were six conditions and gave them all the input.. with the whole Evergreen School Area developing as a cultural center and a couple of the Commissioners are in favor of it. Jim advised the Board that they had made a motion for approval that died and made a second motion recommending denial and the Board questioned whether the Commissioners intended to over- ride it and approve it. The Board was advised that was the purpose of the meeting that they wanted to approve something and wanted the conditions for the original motion and if handled properly could be done. Requested Jim to read the six conditions: 1. That large sewer systems be approved by the State Department of Health and County Sanitarian, 2. that the Covenants be expanded as per Staff outline 3. that a 60' access be provided to LaSalle Rd. from this site, and that a pedestrian access be provided to the north property line, 4. that the developer strongly consider acquisition of the balance of the tract, which is the large portion now on LaSalle and include this tract in a subsequent submittal on the same concept which would have been multi -family, 5. that provisions be made for r/w extension to the west property line, 6. that the developer petition for RA-1 zoning and that the developer put in a stu&T-sewer line at least from the house to the street, which clarify the intent of that zone, and 7. that cash in lieu of parkland be accepted. The Board questioned the discussion involving no children in the subdivision. The Board felt unanimously that there were more children in this town than there were older citizens and were irritated at the exclusion of the,youngsters. The Board felt that in the past they had listened to what the people have said with regards to the schools involving too many children, and that people have to have'a place to live and of course now that the people have their own place to live they don't want anyone to live close to them or have what they have. Walt Griffin stated that in looking at the Evergreen area he wouldn't let the schools control what he feels might be a good development. Walt Griffin wished to know where they as a Board stood on this, as this was the reason that the proposal was defeated, because of the school problems. The Board indicated.that it, didn't meet the guidelines of the RA-1 zone and more than significant variation from what the Comprehensive Plan suggested, including lack of services. Didn't mind the increased dwelling units per acre, but wanted a cul-de-sac on Sleepy Hollow and there was a conflict as to road locations and size, and then they thoroughly discussed the six conditions. Walt felt that if the Board couldn't turn down the proposal and if the Commissioners did not attend.any of.the meetings so that they could get the feel of the location and the people's ideas, then they could not adequately approve or deny and without giving an exact or definite set of standards to turn it down and the Board would be required to approve it. It was felt that it could be developed in any combination and Jim advised that the County Sanitarian wouldn't permit it, nor would the State Dept. of Health. Jim advised that one of the points that the Commissioners were lean- ing on was to have the density controlled by the County Sanitarian. The Board felt that it was a.foregone conclusion that this would be approved and it was just a matter of making it as tight as the Board possibly could. The Board indicated that the Commissioners approved the cul-de-sac on one other proposal and would do it again and Jim said it didn't matter becaus:.e the Board had proved a point, because now a fellow wanted to improve his property immediately west of the Lapp Addition in the back of the other 9. other proposal and now couldn't get there. The Board felt that the Commissioners should really come and see what the people at these hearings really have to say and that way could make a much better decision instead of just relying on a report. The Board also felt -that the people who showed up at the public hearings often times were not the ones who attended the hearings held by the Commissions and this way the Board's decision could be reversed and some conditions be ignored. Once again they stressed that economic was dictating planning, not the board not the city and not the county and this had to be stopped. Conversation and discussion then centered around the expense of land and buildings, including outside money back and Jim explained that under this proposal the County Sanitarian advised that the developer would be luckey to be able to put in a single family residence let alone a four-plex. Walt Griffin felt that all the technical data should be available with regards to septic and water systems even though it cost the developer heavily, otherwise to approve a four or six plex in an RA-1 zone you would need a variance from the Board of Adjustment for a change as a duplex is the maximum in that zone. John Kain sited one instance in Greenacres where one of the conditions for approval was that the water system would conform to city standars and when the water main was looked at, the developer wanted to put in a different class of water pipe because the other was too expensive and John Kain indicated that he was already approached about this change as wanting this entered into the records. Jim Thompson moved that the Board send back a letter to the Commissioners restating their recommendation of denial including the original motion and reiteration of denial, on the condition that the subdivision did not conform and the Board needed their support for denial until adequate planning could be done for that area; seconded by Dorothy Garvin: John Kain wished to have the phrase "at your earliest written response" added to the letter. Discussed was the fact that pressure had been brought to bear on the Commissioners and that the Board did have a split decision and if the Subdivision Regulation were followed religiously then there would be no questions or alterations of decisions. The Board felt that people were aware of the fact that if they committed this area to multi -family they were committing it for a long way. Walt Griffin wished to know whether other Boards had these problems and Jim advised that this Board has the least amount of problems, and that roughly 85%,of the recommends are followed. 10. Proposed Interim Zoning Rec. (Meeting Requested) ee/ 10-10- 78 The Board felt that perhaps a meeting should be set up with the Commissioners in order to discuss some of their problems. Jim advised that the Commissioners spelled out all the criteria and a findings of fact prior to their approval or denial and included these in their recommendation letters. Jim also advised that when the final plat came in it was just checked against the specifics and Walt Griffin said he didn't know whether this fell within the city's minutes and whether he, as Annexation Chair- man or whether the Mayor should have this data pulled from the minutes, involving the findings of fact. Jim indicated that all that was needed was a copy of the City Council's minutes, with the conditions and from the minutes, and from these the resolutions are made. Some of the Board felt that the action taken by the Commissioners was completed before anything came to the Board in writing, however Jim Thompson stated that generally if there is a disagreeance between what the Board.submits as a recommendation and the Commissioners decision, that usually the Board is requested to meet with them to discuss the problem and this is done prior to final decision, particularly if it is contrary to what was recommended. Jim Mohn also stated that usually the only reasons that are submitted are the reasons for denial and conditions for approval and all other conditions can be achieved from the minutes. Motion carried. Jim Thompson restated his motion indicating that essentially the motion was to send the Commissioners a letter restating their reasons for denial. The Board felt the Staff should arrange a meeting with the Commissioners in regard to ,the Interim Zonong as felt that they would be quite receptive, but questioned whether it would be possible to have all three in attendance. The Board then discussed the problems of making decisions that involve the county, including individuals who come in and put the pressure on the City Council: and Mayor, playing one against the other and that it would be a good idea if the City Council and Mayor got together with the Commissioners in order that they could discuss everything that either side knew in order to know what was going on so they would be aware of what transpires on some of these subdivisions. Being no further business the Board moved to adjourn. Meeting adjourned at 10:45 p.m. Dale W. Harr, Pres. Garmen Meadows, Secr. 11.