Loading...
09-14-10KALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 14, 2010 CALL TO ORDER AND The regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and ROLL CALL Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Board members present were: John Hinchey, Chad Graham, Bryan Schutt, C.M. (Butch) Clark, Richard Griffin and Troy Mendius. Jason Mueller was absent. Sean Conrad, PJ Sorensen and Tom Jentz represented the Kalispell Planning Department and Mike Baker and Chad Fincher represented the Parks and Recreation Department. There were 4 people in the audience. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Schutt moved and Graham seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the July 13, 2010 meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. PUBLIC COMMENT No one wished to speak. TRINIDAD HOLDINGS, LLP A request by Trinidad Holdings, LLP to annex approximately 0.90 REQUEST FOR of an acre into the City of Kalispell. The owners have requested R- ANNEXATION AND INITIAL 4 (Two Family Residential) zoning on the property. The property ZONING proposed for annexation and initial zoning is located on west side of 8th Avenue West approximately 200 feet south of the intersection of 8th Avenue West and 1Ot'' Street West. The property address is 1010 8th Avenue West and spans from 8d' Avenue West to Ashley Creek. STAFF REPORTS KA-10-04 Sean Conrad representing the Kalispell Planning Department reviewed staff report KA-10-04. Conrad reported this is an annexation request for less than an acre of property located on 8 h Avenue West between 10`l' & 1 l'h Streets West. Conrad noted the owner is looking at further development of the property and in order to do so needs to connect to city sewer and water and therefore must be annexed into the city. Conrad said the property is currently zoned County R-1 and the owner of the property is requesting city R-4 zoning. Conrad noted the other properties within the city nearby are primarily single family and are zoned R-4 which is a residential district that permits single family homes and duplexes. Conrad reviewed an aerial photograph of the property for the board and indicated the Kalispell Growth Policy designates this area as Urban Residential and this request for R-4 zoning complies -with the growth policy designation. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 14, 2010 Page 1 of 11 Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report KA-10-04 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the property be annexed and the initial zoning for this property upon annexation be R-4, Two Family Residential. BOARD QUESTIONS Griffin said this is one of the few lots in the city that abuts a creek and asked if the city has any regulations that are above and beyond State regulations regarding setbacks for properties adjacent to waterways. Conrad said the city's Floodplain Regulations and he added when they have a plan for development of the property additional setbacks to the creek will then be discussed. Griffin reviewed the current location of water and sewer utilities and asked who would bear the cost of extending sewer to this property and Conrad said the property owner. Conrad added the minimum size of the piping would be 8 inches which would be adequate to serve most of the county lots along 8t' Avenue West. Griffin said he was confused as to why there were no transportation impact fees and asked what determines when those fees would be required. Conrad said when residential properties are annexed they are typically assessed police and fire impact fees, however when further development of the property occurs they are then assessed additional impact fees. Conrad noted the two other properties being considered for annexation tonight are commercial/industrial properties which are assessed differently for impacts. Griffin said he also noticed there are no impact fees for stormwater for any of the properties on tonight's agenda and there could be significant impacts to stormwater from the commercial properties. Conrad said when the city adopted the stormwater impact fees they did a base study (2007-2008) and the study concluded that the impact fees would be assessed for properties constructed after 2008. Conrad added anything that was in place before that date is not going to be assessed an impact fee upon annexation however, if additional development occurs on those properties impact fees will be assessed including stormwater impact fees. Mendius noted in the cost of services analysis the net revenue to the city is estimated to be a loss and asked if that can be expected on all residential properties annexed from here on out. Conrad said based on the general costs of services and the amount of taxes the city would receive for a majority of residential properties they anticipate a loss. Conrad added it is the commercial and industrial properties and residential properties assessed at $250,000 or more that would generate revenue for the city. Conrad said the board will now be seeing a cost of services analysis for all properties proposing annexation since the city council has requested the board also review annexations of properties. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 14, 2010 Page 2 of 11 Conrad said currently these property owners are using city streets; local city parks; and if they have an emergency the city fire department responds. Conrad noted they are receiving city services now but do not pay taxes. By being annexed into the city, Conrad added, the taxes they will pay will close the gap. Hinchey said it appears that the neighborhood is primarily single family but this lot is larger than most. He asked if that is why staff is supporting R-4. Conrad said the R-4 is supported because most of the neighborhood is already zoned city R-4 and even though the homes are older single family homes a lot of the properties could build a duplex on their lot. This property owner indicated he may add on to the existing house to make it a duplex or may consider splitting off a portion of the lot and building a duplex. APPLICANT/TECHNICAL None. SUPPORT PUBLIC HEARING No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Schutt moved and Clark seconded a motion to adopt the findings in staff report KA-10-04 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the property be annexed and the initial zoning for this property upon annexation be R-4, Two Family Residential. MOTION TO AMEND STAFF Clark moved and Graham seconded a motion to amend the staff REPORT report on Page 5, Section I, #4, 1" paragraph, last sentence to replace will with shall which would then read as follows: "If annexed, the property owner shall connect to city water and sewer services as part of developing additional dwellings on the property. ROLL CALL — STAFF The motion to amend the staff report passed unanimously on a roll REPORT AMENDMENT call vote. ROLL CALL The original motion, as amended, passed unanimously by a roll call vote. YOUNG LEGACY, LLC A request by the Young Legacy, LLC to annex approximately 2.07 REQUEST FOR acres into the City of Kalispell. The owners have requested I-1 ANNEXATION AND INITIAL (Light Industrial) zoning on the property. The 2.07 acre project ZONING site is located on the south side of Highway 2 West at the intersection of Highway 2 West and Highway 93 alternate route. The property is developed with a commercial building (Flathead Beverage) with the address of 1370 Highway 2 West. STAFF REPORTS KA-10-03 Sean Conrad representing the Kalispell Planning Department reviewed staff report KA-10-03. Conrad said this is an annexation and initial zoning request from Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 14, 2010 Page 3 of 11 Flathead Beverage which includes two properties totaling approximately 2 acres on the south side of Highway 2 West, immediately adjacent to the Highway 93 Alternate Route. The properties are currently zoned county I-1 light industrial. The property owner is requesting annexation because through the highway expansion MDT purchased a portion of their property that included the well site and drain field. Conrad reviewed an aerial photo of the site and the surrounding uses including other light industrial properties. The Kalispell Growth Policy designates this property as light industrial and the owners are requesting the city I-1 light industrial zoning so the request is consistent with the growth policy and the adjacent land uses and zoning. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report KA-10-03 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the property be annexed and the initial zoning for this property upon annexation be I-1, Light Industrial. BOARD QUESTIONS Griffin noted on the cost of services analysis this property will be assessed $2,757 for transportation impact fees and because this is an existing facility with an existing use which is not going to change and because it doesn't abut onto any city transportation infrastructure he doesn't understand the impact. Conrad said the city is probably trying to catch up on the impacts from this business. However, Conrad added, it will be up to the council whether they concur with the assessment. Griffin said on the other hand the stormwater impact is zero and he feels this is where the real impact lies because we would be taking that runoff from their roof and parking lot into the city's sewer system. Conrad said they do pay an assessment through their taxes and presumably that assessment will help with the costs of constructing stonnwater infrastructure in this area of the city as more properties are annexed to the west. Clark asked for clarification on who is paying for the connection fees for this property and Conrad said MDT is paying for Flathead Beverage to hook up to water and sewer as part of the compensation package for R/W for the Highway 93 Alternate Route. APPLICANT/TECHNICAL None. SUPPORT PUBLIC HEARING No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Clark moved and Schutt seconded a motion to adopt the findings in staff report KA-10-03 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 14, 2010 Page 4 of 11 Kalispell City Council that the property be annexed and the initial zoning for this property upon annexation be I-1, Light Industrial. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. AKB INVESTMENTS, LLP A request by AKB Investments, LLP to annex approximately 9.46 REQUEST FOR acres into the City of Kalispell. The owners have requested B-5 ANNEXATION AND INITIAL (Industrial -Business) zoning on the property. The property ZONING proposed for annexation and initial zoning is located on east side of Highway 93 South at the intersection of Highway 93 and the Highway 93 alternate route. The property address is 3145 Highway 93 South and is the location of Triple W Equipment. STAFF REPORTS KA-10-02 Sean Conrad representing the Kalispell Planning Department reviewed staff report KA-10-02. Conrad said this property is the current location of Triple W Equipment on Highway 93 South at the intersection of Highway 93 and the Highway 93 Alternate Route. Conrad said here again MDT purchased a portion of their property for R/W which is where the drain field was located. MDT paid for Triple W Equipment to hook up to the city sewer and paid the impact fees. Conrad added hooking up to city sewer necessitated this property's annexation. Conrad reviewed the vicinity map, the location of the city limits, and surrounding uses and zoning which includes city B-5 zoning adjacent to this property. The Kalispell Growth Policy designates this property as an urban mixed -use designation and the requested B- 5 zoning is consistent with the land use designation. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report KA-10-02 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the property be annexed and the initial zoning for this property upon annexation be B-5, Industrial -Business. BOARD QUESTIONS Griffin again questioned the transportation impact fee and the fact that the property doesn't access any city transportation services at this point. Conrad said the property is not hooking up to water at this time because they have a well that serves the business and there are city fire hydrants along Highway 93 South installed when the water main line was extended to Old School Station. At this time they are just hooking up to sewer. Griffin asked for clarification of the city limits in this area which Conrad provided. Clark asked how they would be billed for sewer without the water connection and Conrad noted Public Works contacts the owner and installs a meter on their well which is read every other month and the Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 14, 2010 Page 5 of 11 city bills from that reading. APPLICANT/TECHNICAL None. SUPPORT PUBLIC HEARING No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Mendius moved and Schutt seconded a motion to adopt the findings in staff report KA-10-02 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the property be annexed and the initial zoning for this property upon annexation be B-5, Industrial - Business. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. DNRC CONDITIONAL USE A request by the Montana Department of Natural Resources and PERMIT Conservation (DNRC) for a conditional use permit to allow the Flathead Valley Community College to hold classes in the administration building at the former DNRC campus site. The 26.4 acre site is located 2250 Highway 93 North at the southwest corner of Highway 93 North and Reserve Loop. STAFF REPORTS ICU-10-05 Sean Conrad representing the Kalispell Planning Department reviewed staff report KCU-10-05. Conrad said this is a conditional use permit (CUP) to hold FVCC classes on the former Department of Natural Resources and Conservation campus located at the corner of Reserve Loop and Highway 93 North Conrad noted the property is zoned P-1, which is a public zoning district that requires a CUP to locate post -secondary schools or hold classes in this zone. Conrad reviewed the surrounding land uses which includes P-1 and commercial zoning. There will not be any access to this site off Highway 93 North the building will be accessed from Reserve Loop. The building is proposed for classrooms and administrative offices and will generally be used Monday through Friday from 7 am to 8 pm with the possibility of an occasional Saturday class. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report KCU-10-05 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the conditional use permit be approved subject to the 3 conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD QUESTIONS Griffin asked if it is unusual when they look at the conditional use that just a portion of the property is being reviewed for the CUP and Conrad said the CUP would cover the entire property but in this case they are proposing using just the one building and the surrounding parking lots for FVCC. Conrad said if they plan any further Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 14, 2010 Page 6 of 11 expansion than what is covered by this CUP they should contact the city and it could either be handled by an administrative CUP if it is a minor expansion or if the scope and scale is large enough it would come back before the planning board and require approval by the city council. Hinchey said he is concerned with students crossing the highway to get to class. Conrad detailed the desired route which would be to use the bike paths to the signal but Hinchey thought students may take a shortcut. Hinchey asked if a shuttle was proposed and Conrad said he is not aware of a shuttle proposal and Conrad added there is adequate parking at this location and most students will drive. Griffin suggested a condition be added that would require administrative action or another CUP and public hearing if the college wants to expand their use of this site and Conrad felt it wasn't necessary because both parties are aware if they want to expand in the future they will have to go through the review process again. Schutt had further questions regarding possible future expansion and the review process. APPLICANT/TECHNICAL None. SUPPORT PUBLIC HEARING No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Schutt moved and Clark seconded a motion to adopt the findings in staff report KCU-10-05 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the conditional use permit be approved subject to the 3 conditions listed in the staff report. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. OLD BUSINESS: None. NEW BUSINESS: Draft Landscape Ordinance Jentz presented a brief staff report on the proposed Landscape Ordinance. He said the ordinance was prepared by the Parks & Recreation Department working closely with the Planning Department. Jentz noted after the work session tonight there will be a public hearing before the board in October and then on to city council for consideration and approval. Jentz added local landscape architects have already been informed of the ordinance by the Parks & Recreation Department. Fincher said in the past the Site Review Committee, during their review of development plans proposed for the city, has made Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 14, 2010 Page 7 of 11 recommendations for landscaping properties, including landscaping in the city's rights -of -way. Through the review of city procedures the city manager and city council has asked that any time a recommendation is made by city staff a code or ordinance is to be cited. Fincher continued after a review of existing codes, zoning and parks & recreation regulations they found a consolidation of the landscaping regulations into an ordinance of its own was the best way to proceed and would provide one document to cite for recommendations and also provide the developers with a reference to assist in planning their projects. There was discussion regarding on -site snow storage and that the ordinance didn't provide any guidelines of how much storage would be required. Staff said the city doesn't want to be involved with the calculation of how much snow storage they would need but wants them to consider the need for snow storage areas when designing their landscaping plan. Hinchey brought up the prohibition of salt -based deicers on the sidewalks and boulevards. Fincher said most of the commercial based deicers are not salt derivatives however, most people may not be aware that the use of salt deicers has killed maple trees in the city, especially on the south end of town. Therefore the intent here is to educate people about the effects of salt deicers on trees and to let them know there are environmentally friendly alternatives available locally. Further discussion was held and Clark suggested the parks department consult with the city attorney on the prohibition of salt -based deicers because he felt it could be a liability for the city. Fincher noted the city attorney has already suggested some changes and will perform a thorough review of the ordinance before it is forwarded to city council. Baker reviewed the department's community outreach program on this issue. Graham suggested changing the section on salt -based deicers from prohibiting them to encouraging the environmentally friendly ones. Hinchey asked if the document was attempting to address maintenance such as trimming of branches as to not block sidewalks or impede the vision triangles; and also sidewalks that are not shoveled in the winter. Fincher said those issues are covered under existing ordinances. Mendius felt that most people won't understand what defines a city right-of-way and suggested a definition be included in the ordinance. Baker agreed that would be a good idea and they could also include a graphic to further explain the right-of-way. Griffin thought there were a couple of places where the ordinance was ambiguous and he referenced 2.B. "Landscape materials should complement the form of the existing trees and plantings...". Griffin asked who would make that determination. Baker said one Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 14, 2010 Page 8 of 11 of the things they see all over the community is people have selected the wrong plant materials for the site. Baker said they are looking at communication with the public and developers by reviewing their landscape plans prior to installation. Baker continued stating the materials used "should complement" means they should stop and think how the plant materials are all tied together and how they will impact other plants, the sidewalk and pedestrian traffic, and the traveling public when the plants or trees become mature. Baker added the parks department is not dictating what they can plant but the long-term impacts. Griffin suggested adding wording indicating the parks department is willing to work with the owner/developer in selecting materials that will complement the existing vegetation. Baker agreed that is a good suggestion. Schutt said on the top of page 4 "prohibited materials" includes pavers and it is common to use pavers across 5-8 feet of boulevard to connect to the sidewalk that usually lines up with the front walkway to the house. Fincher said if pavers are going to be used for an access walkway from the curb to the sidewalk they would be allowed however, in the past they have received requests to pave the entire boulevard/right-of-way and then you have an impermeable surface that prohibits water from getting to the trees. Fincher noted 3.A.e. states "Access walkways in accordance with the public works standards." So, he said, a walkway would be allowed with approval by public works. Schutt asked if a permit would be required for that work and Baker said typically any work in the right-of-way must be permitted. Hinchey noted page 5, section 4.A.c. states "No person shall, by any type of construction, reduce the size of a boulevard without first applying for and receiving a permit......." "Said permit shall be approved....." Hinchey asked shouldn't that be changed to state "if the permit is approved the work can be done". Fincher said the intent was the public works department and parks and recreation department will review the permit application and he said they will take another look at that section. Hinchey asked on page 5, section 5.A.a.ii. "Trees (Minimum of 4- foot Diameter of Fiber.....", what does that mean? Fincher attempted to clarify and Jentz suggested rewording that item to make it clearer. Schutt asked if this ordinance would apply to just new construction and Fincher said at the tune the ordinance is adopted that would be the point that the standards would be used. Any existing landscaping would become non -conforming and those developments would not be required to make any changes unless they were to come to the city with a request to expand development on the property and then they would be asked to comply with the Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 14, 2010 Page 9 of 11 ordinance. Sorensen said a lot of the sections that call out maintenance such as grass mowing and keeping the vision triangles open are all laws that have been on the books for decades. Sorensen added part of the purpose of the ordinance is to consolidate those regulations into one document. Further discussion was held regarding areas that are void of curb, gutter and sidewalks and Baker said as those areas get developed they will require those projects go to the Site Review Committee and are reviewed accordingly. Baker added currently even if the property is not defined with a curb and gutter the work in the right- of-way requires a permit from public works. Graham asked if this ordinance would apply to private property and Fincher said it applies to commercial property and city rights -of - way. Baker said currently there is a provision within their tree ordinance that their department provide education and guidance for planting trees on private property so if the general public would like to come to them for their opinion on what tree selections would be good for a particular site staff is available to go on -site and make recommendations. He sees this ordinance working the same way. Planning Board Meetine Time Discussion Clark asked to revisit the meeting start time. He stated it is more difficult for him to return home and then come back at 7:00 pm and he would prefer starting the meeting at 6:00 pm. Schutt said he prefers 7:00 pm. Griffin thought 7:00 would be better for the public. Graham stated 7:00 pm works better for him and he is also concerned the public would be unable to attend if the meetings were held at 6:00. Hinchey agrees with Graham. Mendius said he would love to start at 6:00 but because he works until at least 5:30 and often times 5:45 he couldn't guarantee that he could be seated in time if the meetings started at 6:00. Therefore the board agreed to continue to meet at 7:00 pm and revisit the issue for the summer months. ADJOURNMENT I The meeting adjourned at approximately 8:20 pin. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 14, 2010 Page 10 of 11 WORK SESSION I A work session was held immediately following the regular board meeting. The following agenda item was discussed: 1. Annexation Policy NEXT MEETING The next regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission is scheduled for October 12, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. in the Kalispell City Council Chambers located at 201 First Avenue East in Kalispell. The next work session of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission has not been scheduled. Jo Hinchey Michelle Anderson sident Recording Secretary APPROVED as submitted/corrected: 119 / 1,,�—/10 Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 14, 2010 Page 11 of 11