Loading...
05/28/02 and 05/14/02 Planning Board MinutesBOARDKALISPELL CITY PLANNING i ZONING COMMISSIOJ MINUTES OF MAY 28, #t CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL The regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and CALL Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 PM. Board members present were: Ron Van Natta, Mark Brechel, Jim Atkinson, Bonnie Spooner, Bill Rice, Sue Ellyn Anderson and Jean Johnson. Narda Wilson represented the Tri-City Planning Office. There were approximately 40 people in the audience. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Atkinson moved and Rice seconded to approve the minutes of the Kalispell City Planning Board meeting of May 14, 2002, as submitted. Brechel asked that his statement of May 14, 2002, regarding his article in the Daily Interlake, be wholly presented in the minutes of the last meeting. His written statement was submitted to staff to be included as part of the record. On a vote by acclamation the motion passed unanimously. Rice stated the article in today's Daily Interlake about Glacier Mall written by William H. .Rice is not he. He is William C. Rice and he tries to come to each meeting unbiased and objective. ALARK OWENS/WEST VIEW A request by Mark Owens, dba LBO Limited Partnership, for ESTATES MASTER PLAN an amendment to the Kalispell City -County Master Plan on AMENDMENT approximately 58 acres for property located at the northeast corner of Stillwater Road and West Reserve Drive from Agricultural to Urban Residential, High Density Residential and Neighborhood Commercial. STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson, of the Tri-City Planning Office, gave a #KMPA-02-1 presentation of staff report KMPA-02-1, a Kalispell City - County Master Plan amendment. Staff reviewed the project background and explained the nature of the request. Wilson explained the proposal would amend the Master Plan for the area from Agricultural to Urban Residential on approximately 42 acres, to High Density Residential on approximately 9 acres and Neighborhood Commercial on approximately 7 acres. The amendment would facilitate the development of a 119-lot residential subdivision and future development of high -density residential and small scale commercial. Once the Master Plan amendment is approved, annexation of this property to the City of Kalispell and assignment of appropriate zoning would be undertaken immediately. Upon evaluation of the proposal staff made two recommendations; the adoption of findings of fact for KMPA-02-1 and Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 1 Resolution KMPA-02-1; adoption of land use designations, as per staff report and the goals and policies of the "West View Estates Development Plan" as outlined in Attachment A. Wilson noted a minor amendment of condition 8, Attachment A; rather than a traffic analysis, it should read; development of the approach onto West Reserve Drive should be done accordance, etc. APPLICANTIAGENCIES Erica Wirtala spoke on behalf of Mark Owens and LBO Development. She noted the name change from West Valley Estates, to West View Estates. Wirtala stated they were in agreement with the staff report, especially regarding the goals and policies in Attachment A. However, she suggested alternate language under policy #2; "the residential component of the development plan should be substantially complete prior to the initiation," etc., changed to; "the residential component of the development plan should be initiated and under construction." That way they are putting forth a good faith effort in the residential area before any construction in the high density or commercial areas begin. Wirtala agreed that the requested language regarding the traffic analysis should be amended. She explained their position on the Master Plan request and the three phases of the project. Mike Fraser, of Thomas, Dean, 8s Hoskins, 690 N. Meridian, noted that with the proposed land use change, the appropriate zoning in the Commercial component could be R-5, as well as B-1. And urban density would require both public water and sewer. He noted that water would be available from Stillwater Utility, which currently serves Stillwater Estates. He said there is adequate water supply to meet these needs. This also provides fire protection and other municipal services. He noted West Reserve as a secondary highway, which is currently not at capacity. Stillwater Road is paved and is an urban arterial and also not at capacity. He said it is the right project in the right location with necessary infrastructure. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak on the issue. PROPONENTS Mike Fraser, 300 Three Mile Drive, spoke as an adjoining owner in Stillwater Estates, in favor of the project. He said it made good sense in urban development and it would be served by appropriate utilities. Fraser added this density was saving four times this amount of land by developing this type of density here rather than spread out in the County as rural parcels. He said good growth is served by public facilities, public infrastructure, and is well planned. This project meets all three and he asked for their support. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 2 OPPONENTS ENTS Steven Williams, 1300 Haskill Basin Dr., said he owns a lot in Stillwater Estates abutting the project. He was confused about the impacts of annexation to Stillwater Estates. He wondered if he would have to, after putting in a septic, then pay a hook-up fee for City services. He didn't know what the lot sizes were going to be but Stillwater Estates was set up for Montana size lots of % acre plus. He expressed concerns about the style of housing going in and their effect. He wanted more information. He also had concerns about the water coming from Stillwater Estates. He wanted to make sure this development was consistent with what they were doing in Stillwater Estates. Dave Mills, 119 Essex Place, spoke in opposition to the proposal. He stated he lives one lot away and is against high density residential. He did not like the idea of living next to apartments. He said it doesn't' seem to fit next to farmland. He had concerns about maintaining property values. He stated he was never notified this area would be developed into high density residential and he lives 200 feet away. He didn't like how Mike Fraser and Frank Strickland, who own the water and act on their behalf, don't seem to be working for them. He said they seemed to be more concerned about making money. He thought the project directly impacted the neighborhood and property values. He knew it would be developed and said if they make it single family he was all for that. Dan Peterson, 1023 Walton Dr., said he heard of this through word of mouth. He said he doesn't have a problem with the new subdivision, but is opposed to apartments. Peterson also had concerns with missing storm drainage, no shoulder on W. Reserve, and a second entrance for fire protection. He said they should have sidewalks, not three- foot strips with a line painted down the side. He thought there were a lot of expensive issues with both properties. He didn't think the planning has been thought out, they just want to get the homes in. He noted major flooding in the spring and the Homeowners Association said it was not their problem. He said the water is trapped between the Jehovah Witness and W. Reserve with no drainage. He added that Stillwater said they would dig holes and add pipe and gravel for next year, so there is construction going on. He hoped the new subdivision would be well thought out. Steve Trimble, 130 Essex Pl., said he was the most effected since his lot backs to the proposed high density. He stated that when he bought his lot he specifically asked if anything would be built in this area, since it backed to a farm field, and was told nothing would be built, if anything, it would be homes like ours. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 3 Kristy Zorb, 113 Essex, stated she is opposed to the apartments, high density residential and the commercial tract. She said there is a convenience store at Highway 35. Zorb stated concerns about Stillwater Estates supplying the water and thought the Homeowners Association had a responsibility to discuss that with homeowners before giving their water away. She agreed with concerns about drainage problems and no walk path. She was opposed to doing away with vacant land and thought they should be imposing parks. She added that nobody was noted and thought everyone should be notified before a change could be passed. Van Natta addressed the issue of notification. Wilson stated there is no legal notification requirement for a Master Plan amendment, but they did notify people within 150 feet of the perimeter. Ed Warner, 132 E. Bowman, spoke in opposition stating his main concern is giving away the water to another subdivision. He wondered what would happen when they ran out of water for their subdivision. Bill Cramer, 125 Essex Pl., was opposed to the lack of available information from the developer. He wanted to know what impacts it would have to home values if they built apartments. He said duplexes might be appeasable. However, he wanted to go on record as opposed. Marye Flowers, 2770 Upper Lost Creek Rd., stated she wanted clarification on the water system issue. She said Kalispell Public Works raised questions of integrating independent water systems. She also suggested some protocol to encourage developers coming in with Master Plan amendments to first hold a neighborhood meeting where homeowners can meet and be apprised of the proposal. They could also look at clustering, open space, and trails at that time. No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Atkinson moved and Spooner seconded to adopt staff report KMPA-02-1 as findings of fact for the Master Plan amendment for West View Estates Development Plan and Resolution KMPA-02-1 and to forward a recommendation to the Kalispell City Council to adopt a land use designation of Urban Residential for approximately 42 acres, High Density Residential for the area at the southeast corner of the site for approximately 9 acres, and Commercial for the area at the southwest area of the site on approximately 7 acres, along with the goals and policies outlined in Attachment A of the West View Estates Development Plan. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 4 BOARD DISCUSSION Brechel expressed concerns about the waste water treatment. Wilson stated there is adequate capacity. He also had a concern for fire safety. Wilson quoted a letter from the fire department stating the department would need to meet the requirements of the uniform fire code and provision of required fire flow. She noted that a loop system may be needed, as well as adequate ingress and egress from the site. Wilson further noted that whether or not this project is approved there is a need for another fire station in this area. Under the current situation with the location of the fire station, the response times are not ideal. Brechel asked for further clarification and Wilson stated the fire department felt they could serve the area adequately, however the distance is not optimal, i.e. more than one and a half miles. Brechel noted they would not have an new station or currently don't have an inter -local agreement . Wilson noted out this is the first step in the review and approval process and the project will take several years to get well underway. She said there would be cumulative effects to the fire department in the area and as the need increases the priority will become greater. Atkinson responded to that saying that if the fire department is not keeping up with response time it would detract from their ISO ratings. He said the circle around the fire station is a lot further than this or other present developments, and we need another fire station for the area and have for a long time. Johnson said he appreciated the concern about water and fire but their charge tonight is to determine if this parcel is suitable for the development. He said the system works by developing and then getting the infrastructure to accommodate the development. Johnson noted two issues under policies; page 14, #2, he said he always thought you couldn't put a condition on a Master Plan amendment. The other item, #8, he felt was already addressed and asked Wirtala for the provided verbiage. She said to strike traffic analysis and insert development of the approach West Reserve. Johnson said this and # 9 are conditions of preliminary plat and not about whether this piece of property is suitable for a Master Plan change. Brechel disagreed and read page 66 of the Master Plan. He said it addressed that and recommended they have adequate fire safety when they consider Master Plan amendments. He said that's planning before we approve. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 5 Atkinson had questions concerning the water supply and Wilson said Stillwater Estates could be classified as a public water system or a water district, where in such case they have design standards and review processes in place. She said the issue is between Stillwater Estates Water District Board and the State of Montana and then ultimately up to the City of Kalispell. Atkinson asked about annexation and Wilson explained that because of the incorporation of additional land into the city limits the issue of annexation becomes pivotal. In review, along with policy #1, there would also be public utilities to serve the proposed density, which is covered in policy #9. She said there is an implicit understanding between all parties that yes, the property would be annexed and yes, public utilities would be used to provide services to the site, including roadways with curb, gutter and sidewalk. Atkinson asked about urban residential lot size and Wilson said it could go from 5,000 to 6,000 square feet, up to under a 1/2 acre in size. Atkinson asked about parkland and Wilson said that would be addressed once they get into the actual review for subdivision, but what is being proposed would be in excess of the requirement. Atkinson commented on the roads to this and surrounding developments as being very poor planning. He said it was good that the development was looking at integrating with the rest of the community. He addressed the Stillwater Estate owners, saying they went in under County rules and regulations, which is why they were developed to rural standards. He asked Wilson about the sewer requirements for Stillwater Estates. Wilson said there was discussion about extending public sewer into phases Two and Three of Stillwater Estates if it was available. P.J. Sorenson said there was a note on the plat, which states that property owners waive the right to protest annexation and SID's. Atkinson asked about notification and Wilson said that as a matter of protocol they noticed property owners within 150 feet, but it was more of a courtesy, it is not required by law. Wilson further addressed Mayre Flowers suggestion of a pre - meeting with neighbors and said it was a good suggestion and they do try to mention it to the developer. She said they would make a better effort to encourage it. She also addressed the consideration of impact fees and said there Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 6 was not a mechanism in place for that. Rice asked about anticipated zoning and Wilson said it depended on what the planning board and city council adopt. She recommended they consider the character of the area immediately adjoining this and to what has been established and anticipated under the existing Master Plan. Rice asked if they could look at the corner as being developed unto itself, as a PUD, so there could be guidelines for the mix of high density and residential use, so it's not labeled R-1 or R-4. The developers would come up with a plan to show how there would be some transition. Wilson said they could integrate a policy statement into Attachment A to encourage the developer to coordinate the design within a high -density residential component, or integrate a variety of housing types, including single family, duplex, multi -family, townhouses. Or, it could come in as a PUD. Van Natta asked if they were getting ahead of themselves and Wilson said, not necessarily. She said they would not want to recommend a zoning assignment at this meeting, but as far as the land use they could assure there is compatibility with adjoining landowners with a simple policy statement. MOTION Brechel moved to amend condition #4, that the Kalispell City Planning Board recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the City first be assured that a fire sub -station be located in this portion of the City as per City -County Master Plan recommendation. No second was heard and the motion died. BOARD DISCUSSION Johnson asked Wilson, based on the knowledge we have today and within the perimeters of the Master Plan, there is nothing in the staff report that would suggest that water would not be available, and she said, that is correct. Johnson asked Wirtala about their requested amendment to item #2, under policies. Wirtala proposed the language for policy #2 to read as follows, the residential component of the development plan should be initiated and under construction prior to the initiation of development, etc. Johnson so moved. No second was heard and the motion died. Johnson moved to amend policy #8. Wilson advised that was part of the staff recommendation to make that amendment to condition #8 using the same language Wirtala provided; development of the approach onto W. Reserve Drive be developed in accordance with, etc. Johnson withdrew his motion. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 7 MOTION Rice moved and Atkinson seconded to replace "substantially complete" with "initiated and under construction with completion of phase one. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. BOARD DISCUSSION Van Natta said it was unfortunate they got into discussion regarding the design of the adjacent subdivision, but those were the problems when you enter into a project where the standards are not the same. He said the water issue has been handled and if the water supply is not adequate the water would come from some place. As for the traffic and pedestrian safety he suggested it might be a lot easier and quicker to get bike path money from the State to get something along one side of the road. He suggested this might be something the City can do. Van Natta said he had concerns about the high density residential adjacent to the larger lots. He said there was a fairly large border proposed, and perhaps there is some kind of buffering they could put in or they could look at high density but not more than duplex. He said he was wrestling with that and if he was an owner in the adjacent subdivision he wouldn't be happy either. MOTION Spooner moved and Brechel seconded to designate it as Urban Residential. BOARD DISCUSSION Wilson offered a finding; the potential impacts to existing adjoining land uses and impacts to the established residential neighborhood character. Rice said he was not opposed to high density. He noted they would have water and sewer and be on a major thoroughfare, so there could be some extra density, but he thought there should be a limit. However, he did not agree it should be straight urban residential. Atkinson agreed with Rice saying there could be some provision for buffering while maintaining a high -density residential status. Brechel asked if the amendment passed and it was annexed into the City could the developer apply for a zone change to R-4, if he could make a case for it. Wilson said he could annex under R-4 with either high -density or the urban residential designation. Wilson said they could come up with language to say properties to the north and east boundaries would be residential in character, or single-family and duplex. There was a brief discussion about requiring buffering. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 8 ROLL CALL The motion failed unanimously on a roll call vote. BOARD DISCUSSION Rice moved and Anderson seconded to add language to item #6, which would delete north and add to the end of the sentence, "to serve as a buffer to the less dense residential development to the east, which would be single-family development along that boundary." ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. ROLL CALL (MAIN) The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. Van Natta called a five-minute recess. VILLAGE HEIGHTS A request by Kal-Mont Dairy Farm for preliminary plat SUBDIiTISION approval of Village Heights Subdivision, an eight -lot PRELIMINARY PLAT townhouse subdivision on 2.433 acres on property zoned RA- 3 on the north side of Village Loop between Whitefish Stage Road and West Evergreen Drive. STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson, of the Tri-City Planning Office, gave a #KPP-02-I presentation of staff report KPP-02-1, a request for preliminary plat approval of Village Heights Subdivision, an eight -lot townhouse subdivision on 2.433 acres. There would be eight, duplex/townhouse lots created in the subdivision that range in size from 9,496 square feet to 29,267 square feet. Wilson reviewed the findings of fact and recommended approval subject to 14 conditions. Van Natta suggested that item # 12 say, be installed by the developer and approved by the fire department. Wilson noted that change. APPLICANT/AGENCIES Erica Wirtala, of Sands Surveying, spoke on behalf of George Schultz, stating there were 4 parent lots and 4 sub -lots for condominium/townhouse style development. For a total of eight sublots She said they would agree to make the donation of cash -in -lieu of parkland since their parkland wasn't adequate as far as offering recreational potential. Village Loop is a dedicated City street and there is a small internal roadway that services Village Loop. She said there was a fire hydrant already in place and Mr. Schultz is in general agreement with the conditions outlined by staff. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak. PROPONENTS No one wished to speak. OPPONENTS Jim Holmquist, 405 W. Evergreen Dr., said he was not in opposition, but his main concern was the trailer where his Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 9 mother lives being substantially impacted by having buildings that close. He was concerned with how much buffer zone was proposed. He wondered if there could be a larger buffer and some kind of border of trees for dust restraint. No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. BOARD DISCUSSION There was a brief discussion regarding a buffer. Wilson said she would question the purpose of the buffer when you have like uses on adjoining properties. She said it would not generally be required of the developer to put in a buffer or provide dust control for adjoining property owners. MOTION Atkinson moved and Rice seconded to adopt staff report KPP- 02-1 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat be approved subject to the 14 conditions as listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Johnson asked and Wirtala answered that they anticipate a homeowners association between the 8 lot owners. She said Mr. Schulz would extend the property lines to go down the hill and maybe overlay a utility easement over the top of that. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. GLACIER MEADOWS A request by Shaw Development for preliminary plat SUBDrVISION approval of Glacier Meadows Subdivision, an 82-lot PRELIMINARY PLAT residential subdivision intended for single-family homes on 38.4 acres on property zoned RA-1 located on the northwest corner of Whitefish Stage Road and Granrud Lane. STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson, of the Tri-City Planning Office, gave a #KPP-02-3 presentation on staff report KPP-02-3, a request for preliminary plat approval of an 82-lot single-family residential subdivision on approximately 38.4 acres in northeast Kalispell. The applicants previously received approval of a 214-unit condominium project, which has been abandoned and replaced with the current proposal. The property was previously annexed into the City and has an RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment zoning. The applicants are proposing the subdivision be developed in two phases with the first phase being developed on the east side of the site and consisting of 36 lots, and the second phase being developed on the west side of the site consisting of 46 lots. The first phase of the subdivision would include the extension of water and sewer from the south where it is located in Buffalo Stage and the development of the access road off of Granrud Lane. There would be two accesses into the subdivision, one from Whitefish Stage Road and one from Granrud Lane. A green belt buffer area is proposed between Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 10 the east portion of the subdivision and Whitefish Stage Road. The lots within the subdivision range in size from 11,761 square feet to 13,939 square feet. Approval of this subdivision will supercede all previous approvals. Staff reviewed the findings of fact and recommended approval of the preliminary plat subject to 16 conditions. Van Natta suggested that item # 12 say, be installed by the developer and approved by the fire department. Wilson noted that change. APPLICANT/AGEN'CIES John Schwarz, of Schwarz Engineering, spoke on behalf of the development team saying they were excited about the project and that it is a good and suitable use for real estate around the community. He provided some background and said their goal was not to have small lots but create a nice urban lot. Therefore, they have substantially fewer lots, more consistent with Riverview Greens. He said they were willing to sacrifice lot density to create a better neighborhood. He commented on the condition that Granrud be upgraded by saying they didn't know what to do. The problem is they have single lots on both sides that front City streets. He said they didn't want the people on Granrud to be looking at the back of lots on the other side of Granrud. He thought they should construct it more as a collector and a bike path alternative, rather than sidewalks on both sides. He looked to the board for direction on that. He said adding sidewalks on both sides will add to the mess and the poor planning that has already been done. Schwarz addressed the parkland stating they would run the lot line out to Whitefish Stage and pay the cash -in -lieu of, or they would create a buffer zone, without reconstructing the bike path. He said the developer has no intention of reconstructing the bike path because significant public funds were spent to construct it and there isn't a problem with it. He added that it may be possible to construct mounds and create an atmosphere with park benches around the existing bike path and if the path is not suitable for a parkland dedication then the developer will extend the lot lines to Whitefish Stage and eliminate that area. He hoped the board concurred it is a good development and compliments the neighborhood. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak on the issue. PROPONENTS No one wished to speak. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 11 Sally Modie, 29 Bruyer Way Loop, spoke in opposition to the OPPONENTS proposal stating concerns with the road and added traffic. She said Granrud is very narrow. She was concerned about having this large of a development just north of where they live when their backyard is just 30 feet from the road easement. Judy Stack, 33 Bruyer Way, said she had the same concerns as to the mess going on behind them. She said she just moved off East Evergreen Road, which is a speedway, to live in a quieter area. Now she wonders what they've gotten into and if it would be as bad as East Evergreen. No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Rice moved and Johnson seconded to adopt staff report KPP- 02-3 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat be approved subject to staff recommended conditions. BOARD DISCUSSION Brechel asked if recommendation #6 had a time limit. Wilson said it would have to be completed or bonded for by the filing of final plat for phase two. Van Natta thought it was an integral part of phase one and Wilson explained that the developer is required to upgrade the road, however if they are allowed to finish phase one they could recoup some expenses first. She suggested alternative language, such as, requiring upgrade by final plat of phase two. Spooner asked for clarity on the issue of phasing. She felt the residents on Granrud would be subject to more traffic. Wilson said there are impacts related to the development, however, it would be utilized as is, according to County standards, without curb, gutter and sidewalks until whatever time the planning board deems appropriate. Van Natta asked and Wilson answered the developer would have to dedicate an additional 20 feet of right of way to bring it to a standard 60 feet of road right-of-way. Johnson asked and Wilson explained that there were two other condo project and one is still active. The position of staff would be that once this proposal is approved the others will be abandoned. MOTION (AMENDMENT) Atkinson moved and Rice seconded to amend the motion, relative to item #6 to read, "Granrud Lane shall be upgraded to City standards in accordance with the City of Kalispell design and construction standards for urban streets within Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 12 24 months of the approval of final plat of Phase Two." BOARD DISCUSSION Atkinson said he was being as liberal as possible because it is unfortunate the County didn't plan so it would be fair and equitable for both sides of the road. He said these folks are the last ones in and they are willing to upgrade the street he thought it only fair to give them an opportunity to recoup some of their costs prior to developing the street. Brechel asked about sidewalks and Wilson said City standards require sidewalks on both sides. ROLL CALL (AMENDMENT) The motion to amend passed unanimously on a roll call vote. ROLL CALL (MAIN) The main motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. Van Natta called a five-minute recess and Jean Johnson stepped down from the board. OLD BUSINESS: A request by Wolford Development, LLC for an amendment to CONTINUATION OF the Kalispell City -County Master Plan on approximately 232 DISCUSSION - GLACIER acres on property located near the north east corner of MALL MIXED USE LaSalle Road and East Reserve Drive from Light Industrial, DEVELOPMENT MASTER Agricultural and Residential to a Commercial, High Density PLAN AMENDMENT Residential and Public. City Attorney Charles Harball commented to the public and the board as to the appropriateness of their review and encouraged them to focus on the Glacier Mall discussion to follow. Van Natta gave a brief overview of the last meeting. The public hearing held on May 14, 2002 had been closed and the protocol for the upcoming for continued discussion was outlined. MOTION Rice moved and Atkinson seconded to adopt amended staff report KMPA-02-2 as findings of fact for the Master Plan amendment for "The Glacier Mall Mixed Use Development Plan", Resolution KMPA-02-2B and the submitted material and map as amended and to forward a recommendation to the Kalispell City Council to adopt, as shown on the attached land use map, a land designation of Commercial for the area between LaSalle Road and west of Glacier Way that is west and south of Trumbull Creek and Glacier Way north of the Park, High Density Residential on the triangular parcel on the east side of Glacier Way north of and along East Reserve Drive, High Density Residential along the east side of Glacier Way that is 200 feet deep starting on the east edge of the right-of-way and Urban Residential for the area on the east side of Glacier Way that is not otherwise designated as High Density Residential along with the goals and policies outlined Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 13 in Attachment A, "The Glacier Mall Mixed Use Development Plan". And to recommend to the Kalispell City Council to require a Planned Unit Development overlay for the area with a Commercial PUD land use designation that incorporates the goals and policies of "The Glacier Mall Mixed Use Development Plan" as outlined in Attachment A and submitted material. STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson and Thomas Jentz, of the Tri-City Planning #KMPA-02-2 AS AMENDED Office, gave a presentation of the amended and annotated AND ANNOTATED staff report KMPA-02-2, dated May 21, 2002. Wilson explained the background of the meeting of May 14, 2002. Staff reviewed the proposed changes to the staff report and suggested the board break down the issues as they have been outlined in that report to address the various components. Rice asked if Wilson met with the developer, and she said, yes, they had. He asked her to include her insight as to how the developer felt about the changes. Wilson proceeded to review the major changes, noting whether there was agreement, disagreement, and/or acceptance by the developer and/or staff. After discussion and clarifying questions from the board the staff report was concluded with a recommendation for approval of the Master Plan amendment as outlined. MOTION (AMENDMENT) Rice moved and Spooner seconded to accept the staff report as amended and presented by staff. ROLL CALL, The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. BOARD DISCUSSION Rice clarified that if it comes before them as a PUD there would be phases identified and Jentz said, most likely, given the scale of the project that would be the case. Rice noted that with the first staff report he agreed with Commercial on the west side of Glacier Way being more High -Density Residential, but that he felt they dealt with the impacts of that by addressing the back sides of the buildings and the buffering along the road. Brechel commented on the section of High Density Residential bordering Rose Crossing. He thought it made more sense as Urban Residential and said it seems out of place. Van Natta stated he didn't have any heartburn with High Density Residential. He saw it as a transition from Commercial to Residential. Jentz agreed, saying staff sees it as a transition also, from a higher to lower use. MOTION Brechel moved to designate the area as High Density Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 14 Residential and not allow for any commercial uses. No second was heard and the motion died. BOARD DISCUSSION Anderson stated she strongly agrees that a person has the right to sell their own land, however, after listening to people she didn't agree with the proposed density of this project on this location. She received an e-mail from someone who called the mall in Mississippi that Mr. Wolford used as an example and they stated their downtown, after 12 years, is finally coming back alive. She said people don't come to this valley to shop they come to go to Glacier Park, Flathead Lake and Big Mountain. She was concerned about what this will do to downtown and said there needs to be a study done. She agreed with Wilson that it should be done impartially. Anderson stated she has reasonable doubt and didn't feel she had the answers to proceed. She felt she needed answers about the environmental effects on the aquifer, impacts to well water, and effects on the viability of the central business district. Van Natta spoke to that, as an engineer, stating he didn't think there was any problem we couldn't overcome given enough money. Brechel stated he had quite a few concerns, but they didn't relate to this part of the issue. He thought Anderson stated the concerns of the vast majority of people., but unfortunately, much of it could not be addressed tonight, but possibly at the next meeting in June. ROLL CALL The motion passed on a roll call vote with 5 in favor and 1, Anderson, opposed. NEW BUSINESS Van Natta asked if the board wanted to move their meeting time to 6:00 PM for the summer. No one had a desire to do that. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at approximately 12:03 a.m. The next meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission will be held on Tuesday, June 11, 2002. Ron Van Natta, Chairman of the Board Debbie Willis, Recording Secretary APPROVED as submitted/ corrected: / / 02 Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 15 KALISPELL PLANNING BOARD ' D :. ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY it , 2002 CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL The regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and CALL Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Board members present were: Ron Van Natta, Mark Brechel, Jim Atkinson, Bonnie Spooner, Bill Rice, Sue Ellyn Anderson and Jean Johnson. Narda Wilson represented the Tri-City Planning Office. There were approximately 100 people in the audience. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Atkinson moved and Johnson seconded to approve the minutes of the Kalispell City Planning Board meeting of April 9, 2002, as submitted. On a vote by acclamation the motion passed unanimously. Van Natta asked if anyone on the Board had any disclosures that they wanted to make about the upcoming Bucky Wolford LLC Master Plan Amendment. Johnson stepped down from the board due to a possible conflict of interest. Brechel stated he wrote an article that appeared in the Daily Interlake concerning the upcoming Bucky Wolford LLC Master Plan Amendment. He read a statement regarding that article and chose to remain seated. Atkinson was concerned that if he remained seated he may be subject to possible lawsuit. Brechel stated he spoke to the City Attorney about it and chose to remain seated. WOLFORD DEVELOPMENT, A request by Wolford Development, LLC for an amendment to LLC MASTER PLAN the Kalispell City -County Master Plan on approximately 232 AMENDMENT acres on property located near the north east corner of LaSalle Road and East Reserve Drive from Light Industrial, Agricultural and Residential to a Commercial, High Density Residential and Public. STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson, of the Tri-City Planning Office, gave a #KMPA-02-2 presentation of staff report KMPA-02-2, a Kalispell City - County Master Plan amendment. Staff reviewed the project background and explained the nature of the request. Wilson noted this was the first step in a two-step process. Upon evaluation of the findings of fact Wilson made three recommendations; adoption of the findings of fact for the Master Plan amendment; forwarding a recommendation to adopt a land use designation consisting of commercial, high density residential and urban residential, as indicated on the site plan, and, forwarding a recommendation to require a Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 1 Planned Unit Development overlay for the commercial area that incorporates the goals and policies outlined in Attachment A. Wilson passed out an exhibit that reflected staffs recommendation. APPLICANT/AGENCIES James L. "Bucky" Wolford, of Wolford Development, Inc., introduced his team of consultants. He said the team was put together to work on issues that would be dealt with as part of the PUD application, adding that the traffic study would be completed within two weeks and the hydrologist study would be completed with the PUD application. Wolford referred to a site plan to explain their ideas for the mall and the associated center adjacent to the mall. He emphasized the road system would be built by Wolford Development, Inc. and said they were not asking for any assistance or subsidy. He said they would construct Glacier Way and dedicate it to the City. Wolford commented on the importance of the location and gave reasons for selecting this particular site. He stated there were two department stores committed to the project and if approved by fall, they would break ground next spring and open the project in the spring of 2005. Wolford addressed project design and displayed several renderings of the proposed mall. He explained that the design would incorporate natural elements of river rock, timber beams, and sky lighting both inside and out. Wolford also described the food court. He mentioned the size of the project and justified it from a market standpoint by displaying demographic comparisons taken from the 2000 Editors and Publisher Market Guide. He used a comparison of two other areas, Meridian, Mississippi, and Hatiesburg, Mississippi where he has built malls. Wolford noted general merchandise sales leakages to outlying areas, which he attributed to local department stores being undersized. He said he was in present negotiations with Herberger's for that reason. Wolford stated he was in disagreement of what should be the land use on the property. He said he felt strongly the land on the west side of Glacier Way should be commercial instead of high density residential and thought the site was appropriate for financial institutions and restaurants. Additionally, he referred to other land proposed as high density residential and suggested it would be appropriate for Hotel/Motel and should be zoned commercially as well. He said the road would be a major facility between Reserve and Rose Crossing and properties on the side should be in a commercial category. Wolford commented on other land use and zoning issues, particularly the RA-3, which would give them more flexibility. In closing he addressed the issue of employment by saying they would bring in a General Contractor but no sub -contractors, those would be bid locally. However, any project of $100,000 or more would require bonding. He said they anticipated 1,300 employees for the mall and another 700 for mall shops. Wolford projected average salaries of $9.08 per hour for non - Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 2 supervisory positions and $29,000 for store managers, plus $80,000 to $100,000 for department store managers, according to the National Retail Federation. John Parsons stated he was hired by Wolford Development, Inc. to bring the project through the process within the City limits of Kalispell. First step being annexation and the Master Plan and zoning designations. Parsons spoke of the meeting that took place between his client and the planning office this morning regarding changes to the land use. He passed around a letter from Land and Water Consultants and a revision to the staff report based on concerns they had from their morning meeting. He said he was not present at that meeting, but he handed out a map that reflected the agreements made. Jentz agreed that the site plan embraced the concepts they discussed but that in addition there were several policy statements that needed to be attached that further explain the proposal that Parson's presented. Parsons referenced the letter from Land and Water addressing storm water drainage and briefly stated there was additional discussion with Thomas, Dean, and Hoskins regarding traffic. Parsons then handed out a copy of the staff report with additions and deletions as proposed by the applicant. He then jumped into the applicant revised staff report stating multiple requests for deletions and new information to consider. He stated the issues being asked to strike were argumentative, unnecessary and in some cases, misleading. He asked the board to either make a mental note of their questions or indicate his suggestions were amended on May 14, 2002. He also suggested wording for the motion. Parsons then addressed the two resolutions submitted by staff. Again, based on this mornings meeting a new resolution was prepared. He suggested additional verbiage and adopting as shown on the attached land use map. Parsons also referenced Attachment A and requested more deletions and additions to the verbiage. Ken Kalvig, of Kaufman, Vidal and Hileman, stated he was local counsel for Wolford Development. He said the staff report addressed chronology of what had gone on since July of last year when they filed applications with the County Planning and Zoning Office and brought it forward as a County project. He then reviewed the history of actions involving the joint planning boards and joint City -County Master Plan. He noted the action of the County Commissioners in September 2001 to approve a Master Plan designation of commercial on 145 acres and a B-2 zone with a PUD overlay, which the City took exception to because they had not jointly approved the Master plan amendment. The City subsequently filed a lawsuit challenging this approval. He stated his client's position was that they do have Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 3 appropriate zoning on 145 acres of commercial as granted by the County. He said they are presently outside the city limits and seeking annexation. Adding that it made sense for them to bring it forward as a City project with the ultimate decision by City Council. Thus concluding that the application brought forward did not alter the filing or process of last year in regards to the City -County Master Plan and the zoning change approved by the County. He stated the applications they have filed and current proceedings do not preclude or limit them from taking it forward as a County project. He said they want to connect to city sewer and they hope it works out. However, if it cannot, it would not prevent them from getting it done as a County project. He stated they were concerned about the spin on the staff report not being as positive as it should have, therefore, as a matter of public record he read comments from a memo prepared by the City Manger, Chris Kukulski, from a January 14th meeting before the City Council. The memo was signed by Kukulski and Susan Moyer. A copy of the memo was provided, as well as a letter that Kalvig wrote, to Chairman Van Natta. Roger Noble, Land and Water Consulting, spoke on behalf of Wolford Development. He stated that upon contact by Wolford Development his office had a discussion on how they would participate and contribute. They decided it was better to be proactive and a player in the development process by contributing a viable storm water management plan. He said a major issue of concern would be ground and surface water quality, plus contributions to Flathead Lake. Noble stated they do not take the task of storm water contamination mitigation lightly and he defined the team's qualifications. He said they were in the process of modeling the peak flows and identifying various types of contaminants associated with parking lot runoff and treatment alternatives. He noted the concern for potential use of wetlands for dispersion and treatment in the staff report. He stated they recognized that but that there are other sophisticated technologies in the process of designing a storm water management plan and how to treat it, control it, and disperse it. They anticipate the report will be prepared in early June and available for public comment. He said the developer looked at storm and ground water quality as a high priority issue and that it would be adequately addressed. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak on the issue. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 4 PROPONENTS Steve Eudy, Kalispell Chamber of Commerce, spoke in support as a strong advocate for sustainable business. He represented the collective views of their membership and stated they supported the proposed Master Plan change by a ratio of two to one. Reasons for their recommendation to support the amendment were; 30% population growth in the last decade; attracting regional and national retailers and developers; and it is contiguous to the existing commercial development along highway 2. He said Kalispell is the regional retail trade center for Northwest Montana and one of the primary activities of non-residents and visitors is shopping. He recommended a prudent, business -like approach be taken in evaluating this project and asked they review the costs to provide and maintain municipal services. He also recommended they address the water quality issues and look at the potential for short term and long-term tax base erosions. Eudy asked if there was a way to provide for local contractors on the project. Due to the scope of the project he said it would change traffic, shopping and development patterns permanently, which must change land use plans for the area. He emphasized that nearby areas continue to be developed according to urban design standards. He said the project at hand should not be an urban island in the middle of rural development. He stated they could not estimate with certainty what the impacts would be, but they stand ready with time, resources and expertise to assist any business that may feel they are adversely affected by the approval of the Master Plan amendment. Lee Kaufman, Kaufman, Vidal 8s Hileman, spoke in favor of the proposal as representative for Darlene Jump, property owner. Kaufman stated she has acted responsibly and on behalf of her and the Wolford group he said they were without a doubt the most outstanding developer they came in contact with. He said they have jumped through all the hoops and have a right to use the land as she sees fit. Bob Heron, 781 lst Ave. EN, supports the proposal stating it is desirable for growth to occur through quality development that promotes a strong tax base for our schools, County, and City. He strongly supported free enterprise in America and Wolford's decision to be a good citizen by paying for sewer extension, a new road, and $50,000 toward fire protection, stating it was a win/win situation. He said he spoke for the majority of citizens who are tired of the vocal minority who are opposed to growth. He urged the downtown businesspeople to not be afraid, saying it could be the best thing that ever happened. If it captures 60 million dollars being spent in other places then downtown could boom. He encouraged downtown business owners to reinvent themselves and become the dining and cultural art center for Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 5 the valley. Brian Beck spoke in favor of the project in regards to commerce for the area. He said he wanted to see our dollars stay in this area instead of going to Missoula to shop. He thought the downtown was a prime area in addition to the proposed mall. He said it was a quality project and he urged the board to support it and not impose any unreasonable restrictions. He added that he was not in support of added pollution. That we had a big pond to protect and he was concerned as well. Dick Hammett spoke in favor stating he believed Wolford has done their homework. He thought it was a good project and well needed. He looked forward to it happening in the future. Charles Lapp, 3230 Columbia Falls Stage Rd., referred to the Master Plan, which was done in 1986, saying it should be reviewed and changed accordingly every 5 years. He thought it was time something was done other than agriculture and the Master Plan should change to a better use. Lapp stated he was in support of the mall project as a whole. Mike Jopek said he was disturbed by the process, since he came at 7:00 he could not get in the door and there were not enough seats, therefore, he was not able to hear the presentation and not adequately able to comment. Coming from Whitefish, and as Chairman of the Whitefish Planning Board, he was concerned about how this project would affect downtown business in Whitefish. He said there is only one pie to be shared amongst our economic interest. He was in favor of the concept of requiring market studies and socioeconomic studies. He was not able to hear everything, but Parsons saying delete this, delete that of the staff report was a large cause of concern. He noted that the drawings were renderings, and pointed out that they didn't have to happen. Jopek was in favor of tabling the project because they didn't have enough information to make an adequate decision. He also expressed concern about the phasing of the project stating there was no guarantee the other phases would be completed. He commented on the wage statistics saying 50% of retail workers earned less than $ 14,000. He said that if it boosts the economy he was in favor of it, but they needed more data. Jopek stated there were 40 plus members of the public who left because they could not hear and he thought they should have another opportunity. Brent Hall spoke in favor of the project. He stated he was one of the people who created the first Master Plan and it was sold on the premise that it would be re -looked at every 5 years. He thought they needed to be more visionary and plan for the people who come here. He said the 5 to 600 families moving in here a year don't have any place to shop. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 6 He added that the downtown has to learn how to compete. Bob Harris, 853 Highland Dr., spoke in favor. He said he lives in Whitefish and isn't concerned with the competition to Whitefish business, which is always in a state of flux. He said they should consider what would happen to the land if the mall didn't go in, like strip malls, because they could not do what Wolford could do. OPPONENTS Peggy Drayer, P.O. Box 1401, spoke in opposition to the proposal disagreeing with the idea that people come here to shop. She said they come to hunt, fish, and hike. She noted that large-scale buildings do effect the environment and have a significant impact. She said they didn't have all the hard facts. She said that people come for the environment and while she was camping she enjoyed many "Montana moments". She said you could not camp in the parking lot of a mall and she was opposed because she wanted to continue to enjoy those Montana moments. Kris Caister, 203 Skyles, stated there weren't enough facts. He said he wanted to see the issues of water quality, storm run off into Flathead Lake, and the aquifer under Glacier Mall addressed because he would hate to see it deteriorate. He wanted to know how many more empty buildings, which he called the "Ernst effect", were going to be around. He wondered what would happen to the Wal Mart building when they build a Super Wal Mart. He felt the community would end up looking exactly like every other community and thought we should become more visionary and maintain something special. He didn't think the mall would contribute to that idea. Bill Goodman stated he thought the decision tonight was about the appropriateness of the location for this type of development. He said they did not have enough information to make that decision. He feared they would take an innocent 56 acres and put up 20 square blocks of downtown, with three-story tall office space. He said they did not know about economic impacts, water quality, or ground water issues and hoped they would reject it until those questions were answered. He said the Master Plan designated downtown as the central business district and changing it for this development also changes it for downtown. Floyd Thomas, 566 Ash Rd., stated his property, a 2-acre horse ranch, was directly south of the proposed development. He had personal concerns for a development of this magnitude going into his neighborhood. Thomas stated major concerns over water quality because he was on a well and costs to hook into Evergreen water would be close to $ 15,000. He was afraid that if the water quality issue was not adequately addressed it would effect the quality of his Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 7 well water. He was also concerned about traffic and the impact to his property. He listened to the Wolford team address traffic to the north, east and west, but not to the south. He thought they needed more information before they make an amendment to the Master Plan. George Taylor, 504 5th Ave E., stated he was in opposition based on the fact they needed more information. He said he wasn't there to regard Kalispell as a cute, small town with all the amenities of a big city, without all the population, but expressed concern for balance. He wanted more information on the socioeconomic and environmental impacts and said they couldn't make a sound decision with out it. He didn't have a clue where the money was coming from to pay for city services, such as police, fire, road construction, maintenance, or snow removal. He heard there were two big department stores willing to make the investment, but he's heard nothing about big businesses coming in to supplant what will be taken away from downtown if all the money goes 5 miles east. He also had concerns about his property values. He suggested they follow the example of former Governor Roscoe and study the issues, get the facts, then come together for a meeting of the minds. Shellie Spilis stated she was not opposed, but needed more answers. She wanted to know how they could change the zoning when they didn't know how it would affect the water. She stated concerns over the proposed Glacier Way being less than a 1/2 mile from Helena Flats School, where her children attend. She said they had been pleading for a bike path, but that won't insure their safety. She also had concerns for the wildlife. Spilis was baffled by the process and thought it was ridiculous that they could move along in such a swift manner without a public forum. She thought people would want to band together and look at how they want the future to look. She said that maybe they could be innovative, not just jump on the first thing that came along. Cole Milstead, 7th Ave. W., stated they did not have all the answers and he was opposed to the amendment. He noted the first two hours were spent presenting one side and he thought they needed all the facts and figures, especially regarding environment and traffic. He said we already have a mall with a farmers market that comes out in the spring. He likes locally owned businesses because prices are low and the money goes back into the valley. He said he grew up in Austin, Texas and has seen what happens to the competition, which is ghost malls and empty buildings like we have around the valley. He saw sprawl and how it happens. He said he enjoys what we have here, driving down roads and being able to see the mountains. He mentioned the neon and new buildings on the south end of town and said he saw a block to the open spaces we cherish. He saw Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 8 the future as bumper -to -bumper traffic, congestion, and had a valid concern of pollution. He suggested they get all the facts and if they didn't have them all then don't make a decision. Chuck Cummings, 4th Ave. E., stated the inevitable development that was coming to town was unattractive. He agreed with the arguments made about the quality of life, which is the reason people move here. To propose a development of this size outside the main body of town is naive to think it won't have a detrimental impact on the rest of the town. He saw an attractive set of drawings for a development that he wondered if we wanted to trade our town for. He suggested they just say no. Diane Taylor said she is a teacher at Helena Flats School and had concerns because the plans say high density residential. She referred to a similar development in Missoula and said they don't have a school anymore because nobody wants to live around the mall. She wondered what happened to other schools where Wolford malls were built. She also wondered about leaking dollars and didn't understand how buying Old Navy kept dollars here locally. She also didn't know anyone who made $9 an hour working at a mall. She urged them to think about the impacts. She said she didn't like the traffic in big cities and she loved the way it was now. She wished we could keep it this way for the next generations and said it was an awfully big change. Norm Art, 948 7th Ave E., asked to go on record as opposed. He agreed there were not enough facts. He thought there were issues they didn't know about, like what happens to Flathead Lake, and although $50,000 for a fire station was a nice idea, it was a big expense and he wondered who was going to pay for it. Same with the sewer. He agreed with a persons right to sell their property, but thought it would sell one way or another and if they sold to small businesses they would make more money over 100 small checks than 1 big one. He said the money goes to China and big corporations, not to Kalispell. He also had concerns about traffic and the need for expansion of roads, like LaSalle, Reserve and Rose Crossing. Art stated concern about the influx of minimum wage putting strain on our social services. He also brought up the issue of smog, saying if you have a concentration of vehicles in one place injected into high pressure whether you will have an awful increase in smog in the center of the valley. . He added that if people want to be visionary he would like to see public transportation. Janelle Gentry stated that most points had been covered and she was opposed because of the lack of facts. She is a business owner and concerned about the pie being only so big. She said most people don't have excess income to shop Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 9 elsewhere. She added that traffic was a huge issue. She said if the facts support it and they won't end up with more empty spaces she would change her position. Sharon DeMeester, 415Chestnut Drive, spoke in opposition, not as a business owner, because she was sure it would not effect her, but as a citizen. She said she wanted to have good planning, good information, and to know what was going to happen to taxes, which have increased 13% and she wondered what future tax impacts would be. She also wondered, when they annex, what else was involved, how much land and what would happen to that land. She likes the uniqueness of the valley and the small town. She said she hates malls and never goes because they are all the same. She wanted to hear all the facts and in a forum with a large enough area to accommodate the public. She also wanted the board to state their position as to why they came to their decision. Bob White, 636 6th Ave E., said it was difficult to decide for or against. He thought the development would happen, but what tipped the scale was the presentations heavy handedness, telling them that if the annexation didn't go through they would push the project through anyway. He said we have a right and obligation to plan how and where development takes place. As a trained economist he disagreed with the comparison of two communities to Flathead Valley saying we are in a snow belt with residents who leave during the winter. He thought an economic study of this type of development was wise. He noted we had a history of leaving behind relics of former developments. He wondered what their intent was with Herberger's and JC Penny, which would leave a large cavity in the current facility. He thought they should take a proactive approach and try to plan the community. Pauline Sjardal, 234 3rd Ave. W., spoke in opposition stating reasons of recent events, such as Home Depot's statistics and misrepresentations about using local contractors and higher wages. She noted that Stream made similar promises. Sjardal said they all had excellent PR people. She said we don't need anymore empty storefronts and wondered what would happen to Bitney's and Vann's. She felt this could change the landscape. She reiterated that they didn't have the facts and suggested the project go on hold until they do. She said they have 6 months to 1 year to find out what impacts Home Depot has on the community and asked that they please think about it before developing more land. She pointed out that there were new stores on the south end of town that weren't filled. She felt it left them as pawns of a bigger system. Don Schwenessen, Bigfork, stated he was concerned about Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 10 community planning issues such as traffic, sprawl, clean water, low wages and higher taxes. He thought it was a great mall located in the wrong place. He read from a prepared speech making reference to needing market studies, paying dearly for highways, conferring commercial property rights, sprawl, and spending millions to buy new right of ways and displace landowners in order to build replacement highways, such as the proposed Kalispell bypass, where the State of Montana is already proposing commercial development. He wondered who was taking care of the taxpayer investment in our highways and when we would say no to sprawl. He thought change was inevitable, but true, unregulated growth had the same philosophy as cancer. He did not want to become the next Houston or San Fernando Valley. Asta Bowen, Somers, stated she did not want any more information. She has seen other communities and what has happened and felt this had an outcome that a lot of people didn't want. She thought we were vulnerable to a "rescue fantasy". She said we have treasure here, with irreplaceable farmland and open space that the valley would not be what it is without, which is a small town quality of life. She stated that those who come to bring projects like this development are not beholden to us to preserve our community for our children. She felt the last thing we need is more stuff, that we have enough stuff. She remembered when the landfill was a pit instead of a mountain. She felt we did not need to give up our irreplaceable treasures for more stuff and that growth was NOT inevitable. This is America and that's why it's not inevitable. Susanne Johnson, 680 Stone St., wanted to add that as a capitalist her livelihood depended on growth. She had nothing against the mall, but thought it was in the wrong spot. She said Kalispell is like a jewel and we are in a very good position for developers who would love to come in and develop here, but felt they were putting the cart before horse. She thought they were letting this project decide instead of us deciding how and where we want our community to grow. She said we have Home Depot and guaranteed someone would put in a mall if we wanted it. She thought we should expand the Center Mall and decide what we want Kalispell to look like in 1 to 20 years. She said she hated Missoula and Spokane and thought we were about to shoot ourselves in the foot. Diane Conradi, Citizens For A Better Flathead, stated their charge was not the mall, but looking at the location, which was 250 acres on a critical aquifer. She questioned if this was the right place to handle intensive commercial development. She thought we needed to develop our own vision of the future instead of letting developers come in and direct it. She went through the Master Plan goals and Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 11 pointed out the ones this project was not consistent with. Economics; the Master Plan calls for a diverse economy and a healthy downtown. Conradi broke down the aspects of a healthy economy and spoke on those issues. One being jobs, stating retail growth destroys as many jobs as it creates. She said it was the job of the City to look at the impacts of how many jobs were created by new business verses how many will be shifted from existing business. Another economic element is the downtown core. When the downtown dies we lose who we are as a community. Also, it's very important for the City of Kalispell's tax base, because lands are valued much higher inside the city of Kalispell than in Evergreen. Therefore, the land underlying the mall in Evergreen will be of less taxable value. She said it was easy for a community to be glutted with commercial space, which creates a downward spiral and they are seeing it already. The taxpayers end up footing the bill. Conradi used Bozeman as an example, which has taken the stance that when stores empty they require the buildings to be leased or sold before they can move. Otherwise they end up with a hole in the tax base. She noted the City's current downward trend and suggested they question what the impacts would be. She said there were critical bits of information they needed to know about the longer -term costs of police, crime rates associated with malls, and how the outlying areas will pay their fare share. She noted the growth policy saying it was a legal issue, but that it did not change where they were proposing the mall and what happened with water run off from the parking lot, or what happened to Herbergers. She emphasized it would be located on a critical aquifer and the Flathead river runs 25 feet under it. She said a fast moving aquifer moves 2 feet a day and this one moves 4 inches per second. Any contamination in that area would be in Flathead Lake within a couple of days. She said she wasn't a hydrologist, but with that much pavement, battery acid, waste oil, and heavy metals it was critical to have an answer to that question. Pam Gerwe, spoke in opposition to the project stating the Dome posters were just as impressive. She encouraged the board to check every nook and cranny to make sure the project is what the developers said it was going to be. Marti Kurth, P.O.Box 907, Whitefish, had responses from 42 people who chose to not stay and talk tonight. She said the responses were signed comment cards saying the public and city of Kalispell needed more facts before an informed decision could be made about the mall. They further stated to please reject this Master Plan amendment, there is not enough information about the proposal to make an informed decision in the following areas; water quality, impacts to wells, adequate sewer service, impacts on traffic infrastructure, tax impacts on neighbors and residents, or Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 12 impacts on the economics of downtown Kalispell. Kurth said she was submitting them as a representative of CFBF and she also submitted petitions signed by over 700 people who voted to expand the Kalispell mall instead of abandoning it to a proposal that is not thoroughly thought out. She asked those signatures be included in the public record. Marye Flowers, CFBF, reminded the board that in addition to traffic, storm water, and vision for the community, they had an obligation under the law to comply with additional burdens. She said they were responsible for putting together a set of facts to legally substantiate the decision they were being asked to make. She asked that they make sure they had adequate information to substantiate those facts. She said the public had a right to a clean and healthful environment for present and future generations. Flowers reiterated several facts regarding the aquifer, pollution to Flathead Lake, economic concerns, impacts of paving, increased risk of flooding, insurance risk, and water quality. She strongly encouraged the board to carefully craft a factual set of facts to base a decision on and then open it to another public hearing. No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. There was a 5-minute recess. MOTION Atkinson moved and Spooner seconded to continue the agenda item until the next planning board meeting scheduled for May 28, 2002 so that the board could have time to review all materials and comments presented. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. KRDS PRELIMINARY PLAT A request by Thomas, Dean and Hoskins on behalf of KRDS APPROVAL FOR ISLAND for preliminary plat approval of the Island Subdivision, a 68- SUBDIVISION lot residential subdivision on 25.32 acres on the north side of Three Mile Drive approximately one half mile west of North Meridian Road. STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson, of the Tri-City Planning Office, gave a #KPP-02-2 presentation of staff report KPP-02-2, a request for preliminary plat approval of a 68-lot residential subdivision on approximately 25.32 acres in the northwest part of Kalispell. The property was recently annexed into the city of Kalispell and given a zoning designation of R-3, a Residential zone that is intended primarily for single-family homes. The subdivision would be developed in three phases over a period of time up to nine years. Phase 1 would be near the northeast portion of the site and would include 22 lots. Utilities would be taken from Sunset Court through a private easement. The extension of North Riding Lane would be Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 13 taken from Meadowland Subdivision to Three Mile Drive during Phase 1. Phase 2 would be another 33 lots to the west and the final phase would be 13 lots that would be close to Three Mile Drive. North Riding Lane would be completed during Phase 3 by adding curb, gutter and sidewalk to the pavement. Wilson reviewed the findings of fact and recommended approval of the proposal subject to 16 conditions. She noted a modification to condition 7, with additional language stating the R-3 requirements be met with a 60 foot lot width and a minimum lot size of 7,000 sq. ft., exclusive of any surface utility or road easements. Wilson further noted they received a petition from the property owners in the Meadowland Subdivision to the north, which was passed out to the board. There was concern about the extension of North Riding Lane to Three Mile Drive and the potential increase of traffic. APPLICANT Mike Fraser, of Thomas, Dean & Hoskins, stated he was representing the developer. He said they thought it was a smart growth proposition that is next to the city with City services. He said it would add small, clustered lots. He referenced the petition from Meadowlands and explained they were giving them a second access and city services, such as fire protection and ambulance. He said they were providing this benefit at their cost. He felt it was a good project, the right project, in the right place. Fraser did not have any problem with the modification to Condition 7. He asked the board for consideration, since they were putting in full city services, sidewalks and lights, to let them put sidewalks on only one side since they had to put in street trees, which were expensive. They thought it was a good idea to develop the park, and a bad idea to bring in pedestrian access because it didn't go anywhere. There was no pedestrian network. He said they could attempt it, but it was not in the best interest to bring the path through. Spooner asked about a possible light on Three Mile Drive due to concerns about additional traffic. Wilson explained it was beyond the scope of the subdivision. She said there will be some improvements on Meridian Road, but they wouldn't ask the developer to mitigate that intersection. Spooner said she was concerned about traffic from the subdivision. Fraser said the subdivision was in the other direction and he believed the traffic peaks would not coincide with that of the school. Atkinson asked about phasing and fire hydrants. Fraser explained they had to do a detailed hydraulic analysis for the subdivision requirements to see if they have fire flow. If not they would have to loop in. This will happen prior to the buildings. Atkinson asked about street names. Fraser said the Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 14 developer was in the process of suggesting new names. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak. PUBLIC COMMENT Andrea Kahn-Bomgardner, 163 North Riding Rd., spoke in opposition to the proposal. She said she welcomed progress, but had a true, vested interest in maintaining a quality of life for those raising children and those retired people who deserve a quiet neighborhood to enjoy their home. She took offense to a developer coming in and telling her this was in her best interest. She felt consideration must be given for established neighborhoods. They were not opposed to development on North Riding Lane, but were vehemently opposed to the connecting of North Riding Lane and Meadowlands Subdivision because of the narrow, small lane road. She felt it was dangerous to the children because the road was a narrow, unlit street, leaving no place to walk safely to the bus stop. In the winter there were mounds of snow and during garbage day it became a single lane. She thought the developer or the City would need to pay for widening of the road and lights in a four -block area to insure traffic could pass safely and children could be safe. She noted the upgrades to Three Mile Drive, but no mention of upgrades to North Riding. She said they had no compelling reason to connect these roads and wanted to preserve their neighborhood and quality of life. No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. BOARD DISCUSSION Brechel asked about consequences if the road did not connect and Wilson answered there were compelling reasons, such as a more direct route for emergency services. She said Meadowlands had always planned to extend the road to Three Mile Drive. She added that the City standard required sidewalks, which would provide additional safety for children. Wilson stated they strive to provide a grid system with flow so it's not one way in and one way out because the police and fire departments don't like it. Jentz noted they heard a compelling argument from the Meadowlands residents that if two cars can't pass under the current access road into Meadowlands, then the current system isn't adequate. Anderson noted that by having the connection they would be improving the current situation. Wilson addressed the issue of sidewalks on one side of the street. She said that to eliminate sidewalks on one side the applicants should have applied for a variance. If a variance were requested, they would need some type of explanation Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 15 and justification and it would be evaluated on that basis. She noted the City standard was for sidewalks on both sides. MOTION Anderson moved and Atkinson seconded to adopt staff report KPP-02-2 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat be approved subject to conditions of the staff report, with amendment to condition 7 to include service, utility, or road easements. BOARD DISCUSSION Van Natta asked and Wilson answered that she would add language to condition 13 to clarify that the fire access and suppression system shall be installed by the developer and approved by the fire department. Rice asked and Wilson answered that if Meadowland were to annex into the City the City might assist with an SID to do any improvements to the street. Rice said he was looking for someway they could get some help. Wilson said they should not get more traffic. Rice asked and Fraser answered they computed the $11,000 per acre based on purchase price. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. LES SCHWAB TIRE A request by Les Schwab Tire Centers for amendments to the CENTERS TEXT Kalispell Zoning Ordinance reducing setbacks in the I-1, AMENDMENT Light Industrial zoning district. STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson, of the Tri-City Planning Office, gave a #KZTA-02-2 presentation on staff report KZTA-02-2, a proposal to amend Section 27.26.030(e)(2), Parking in the front and side yard setbacks of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, to include the I- 1, Light Industrial, zone along with the B-1, B-2, B-3, B-5 and H-1 zoning districts, which allow vehicles to park within five feet of the front and side corner lot lines. Additionally, to amend Section 27.18.040(3) to reduce the rear setback requirement in the I-1, Light Industrial, districts from 20 feet to five feet. Wilson passed out a letter from LS Construction supporting the recommendation of staff. Upon evaluation based on statutory criteria staff recommended approval of the proposed text amendment. ,PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak on the issue. PUBLIC COMMENT No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Atkinson moved and Anderson seconded to adopt staff report KZTA-02-2 as finding of fact and, based on these findings, recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance be amended to include the I-1 and B-5 zone in Section 27.26.030(e)(2), to allow parking in the front Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 16 and side yard setbacks within 5-feet and to reduce the rear yard setbacks in those districts from 20-feet to 10-feet. MOTION (AMENDMENT) Rice moved and Brechel seconded to amend staff report KZTA-02-2 to add a five-foot space between parking and setback to be a green landscape buffer. BOARD DISCUSSION Atkinson asked and Wilson explained the proposed expansion, showing curbing and two access spaces. She said it would all be different and it would go to site review. She added that they would put in the landscape buffer. ROLL CALL (AMENDMENT) The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. ROLL CALL (MAIN) The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. FLATHEAD VILLAGE A request by Flathead Village Greens, LLC for an initial GREENS ANNEXATION AND zoning designation of R-4, a Two -Family Residential district INITIAL ZONING upon annexation into the city of Kalispell. STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson, of the Tri-City Planning Office, gave a # -02-4 presentation on staff report KA-02-4, a petition for annexation and an initial zoning designation of R-4, a Two - Family Residential district, on approximately 2.929 acres on the north side of East Nicklaus Avenue in Flathead (Glacier) Village Greens. The property received preliminary plat approval for Village Greens Phase XI, which will be submitted for final plat approval in a separate action. Currently the property is zoned County R-5, a Two -Family Residential district, under the Flathead County zoning Regulations. This report evaluates the appropriate assignment of a City zoning classification in accordance with Section 27.03.010(4) of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. The Kalispell City Council has annexed all other phases of the Village Greens development in a previous action with an effective date of November 1, 2001. This property will be annexed under the provisions of Sections 7-2-4601 through 7-2-4610, M.C.A., Annexation by Petition. Staff reviewed the findings of fact and statutory criteria, thus recommending approval of the request. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak on the issue. PUBLIC COMMENT No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Atkinson moved and Brechel seconded to adopt staff report KA-02-4 as findings of fact and forward a recommendation to the Kalispell City Council to adopt R-4, Two -Family Residential, upon annexation. BOARD DISCUSSION There were no comments from the board. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 17 MELVIN F. POWELL A request by Melvin F. Powell for an initial zoning INITIAL ZONING UPON designation of R-4, a Two -Family Residential district, upon ANNEXATION annexation into the city of Kalispell. STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson, of the Tri-City Planning Office, gave a # -02-3 presentation of staff report KA-02-3, a petition for annexation and initial zoning classification of R-4, a Two - Family Residential so that he can connect to City sewer. The property is in the County zoning jurisdiction and is zoned County R-5, Two -Family Residential district. This property will be annexed under the provisions of Sections 7-2-4601 through 7-2-4610, M.C.A., Annexation by Petition. Staff gave an evaluation based on statutory criteria and recommended adoption of the findings of fact and initial zoning for the property upon annexation to be R-4, Two - Family Residential. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak. PUBLIC COMMENT No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Atkinson moved and Anderson seconded to adopt staff report #KA-02-3 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the initial zoning for this property upon annexation be R-4, Two -Family Residential. BOARD DISCUSSION There was a brief discussion on the allowance of doublewides on this lot and whether it is contiguous to the City. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. OLD BUSINESS No old business was reported. NEW BUSINESS No new business was reported. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at approximately 1:00 a.m. The next meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission will be held on Tuesday, May 28, 2002. Ron Van Natta, Chairman of the Board Debbie Willis, Recording Secretary APPROVED as submitted/corrected: / /02 Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 18