10-11-11KALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD & ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 11, 2011
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, Rory Young and Phillip Guiffi-ida. Blake Sherman and
Richard Griffin were absent. Tom Jentz, Sean Conrad and P.J.
Sorensen represented the Kalispell Planning Department. There
were 7 people in the audience.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the September 27, 2011 special meeting of the
Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission were
approved unanimously on a roll call vote.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
STATE OF MONTANA
A request from the State of Montana Department of Military
DEPARTMENT OF
Affairs to annex 19.77 acres of land and zone the land P-1 (Public)
MILITARY AFFAIRS -
upon annexation. The property is the current location of the
ANNEXATION
National Guard facility located on the east side of Highway 93
North, approximately one mile north of the intersection of
Highway 93 North and West Reserve Drive. The property
addresses are 2987 and 2989 Highway 93 North.
STAFF REPORT KA-11-3
Sean Conrad, representing the City of Kalispell reviewed Staff
Report KA-11-03 for the board.
Conrad reviewed the vicinity map and noted this property is
approximately one mile north of the intersection of Highway 93
and Reserve Drive on the east side of the highway. The property is
just under 20 acres and is owned by the State of Montana and
serves as the National Guard Armory. The facility was built in
approximately 2005 and at that time it was developed with an on -
site well and septic system. Over the last several years the Armory
has been finding contaminants and metals in their water so instead
of upgrading their system they are requesting annexation into the
city to hook up to the city's water main.
Conrad reviewed an aerial photograph of the site and the location
of the city utilities. He noted the site is designated as an urban
mixed -use area and the P-1 Public zoning district is appropriate
given the nature of the facility which is surrounded on three sides
by the city limits. The property is well within the annexation policy
boundary that city council adopted late last year. The P-1 zoning is
consistent with the growth policy map and the existing land use on
the property.
Staff recommends that the Kalispell Planning Board adopt Staff
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of October 11, 2011
Page 1 of 1 a
Report KA-11-03 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 P-1, Public.
BOARD DISCUSSION
None.
APPLICANT/TECHNICAL
Steve Herzog, CTA Architects stated he submitted the application
SUPPORT
on behalf of Department of Military Affairs and supports the
annexation. Herzog said this facility is presently on a septic system
and as they were working through the design not only would they
want to hook up to the water lines but if they have the funding they
would also like to hook up to the sanitary sewer lines.
Schutt asked if the poor quality of water is wide -spread in this
neighborhood and Herzog said although he is not a water quality
expert he does know they have a filtration system that they have to
pay a monthly fee for maintenance and this system has had some
failures. Herzog added the well itself is fine but the quality of the
water isn't up to the standards and they need a dependable water
supply.
PUBLIC HEARING
No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed.
MOTION
Guiffrida moved and Schutt seconded a motion to adopt Staff
Report KA-11-03 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 P-1, Public.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Hinchey asked about property taxes and Jentz said this facility is a
public entity and is tax exempt however they will pay special
assessments for utilities.
ROLL CALL
The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
HAGESTAD CONDITIONAL
A request from Edward (Mick) Hagestad for a conditional use
USE PERMIT
permit to allow the construction of a 40' x 70' (2,800 square foot)
building to be used for the storage of equipment and materials
associated with the painting business currently occupying the
property. The property is located at 1020 West Center Street on
the south side of the street approximately 250 feet east of the
intersection of South Meridian Road and West Center Street.
STAFF REPORT KCU-11-3
Sean Conrad, representing the City of Kalispell Planning
Department reviewed Staff Report KCU-11-03 for the board.
Conrad reviewed the vicinity map and stated the property is zoned
B-2 (General Business) that allows a variety of residential uses
including single-family and apartment units and also a variety of
commercial businesses. It also conditionally permits contractor
storage yards which is the application before the board.
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of October 11, 2011
Page 2 of 10
Conrad reviewed an aerial photograph of the site and noted there is
an existing building on the south side of the property that is being
used for paint storage and the owner is looking at putting in a new
building, approximately 2800 square feet to the north of the
existing building, for the storage of equipment and materials
related to his painting business. Surrounding land uses includes
residential to the east; retail/appliance repair/chiropractic offices to
the west; and north of the site across Center Street is a light
industrial zone that includes a tire store and vacant commercial.
Conrad reviewed the site plan and said it will include the existing
shop, a new shop between the existing one and West Center Street,
a driveway access and six parking spaces.
The proposed floor plan includes a small office area, restroom, and
is primarily for the storage of tools and equipment associated with
the business.
Conrad continued as staff reviewed the conditional use permit for
the new building there were no big surprises and no real issues.
However the neighboring property owner to the east brought to
staffs attention that as part of the general operation of the painting
business they do outdoor painting and staining from time -to -time
just outside the existing building in a location that is about 50 feet
from the back of the house. The staff report notes that the painting
business has operated on this site for approximately 35 years and in
that time there has been outdoor painting and staining usually once
or twice a week usually during the months from May to September,
weather permitting.
Conrad noted the concern from the adjoining property owner was
that with the outdoor work the fumes tend to carry into her back
yard and in through her windows and sometimes they have to close
the windows because it becomes so intrusive.
Conrad said as part of the conditional use permit process staff
looks at any impacts the proposed use may have on abutting
properties including excessive noise, traffic, smokes, fumes, gas or
odors. The proposed building itself does not inherently cause any
of those impacts because it will provide storage for equipment and
materials for the existing business. However based on the concerns
from the neighbor staff felt when the new building is constructed it
was appropriate to require any kind of outdoor painting or staining
be located further to the west and south of the existing building.
That would almost double the distance between the painting area
and the residence. Conrad added the neighboring property owner
felt all outdoor work should be brought inside however staff didn't
feel that the addition of a building would warrant that requirement.
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of October 11, 2011
Page 3 of 10
Conrad recommended the board hold the public hearing and then
consider this issue and whether it is appropriate to require all or a
portion of the painting and staining operations be conducted inside
or moved to the west behind the existing building. Conrad noted
that Condition #2 addresses this issue.
Staff recommends that the Kalispell Planning Board adopt Staff
Report KCU-11-03 as findings of fact and recommend to the
Kalispell City Council that the conditional permit be approved
subject to the 5 conditions listed in the staff report.
Conrad reviewed the letter from the adjacent property owner Cathy
Fabel a copy of which is attached to the minutes.
BOARD DISCUSSION Guif&ida asked if the Knox Lock program that is referenced in
Condition #3 is still a voluntary program and Conrad said not for a
commercial business. Conrad said the Fire Chief will require a
Knox Lock if the owner decides to put in a security gate. Jentz
added the program is voluntary for residential properties and has
been in place for quite some time.
Young asked for the location of the access easement and Conrad
said there is a 16 foot wide alley easement all the way through to
North Meridian Road. It was put in place years ago when the water
and sewer lines were installed. Young said he was concerned since
the recommendation is to move the painting area into an easement
which may be required for future use. Conrad added the painting
area will have to be located outside the paved and easement area.
The space between the pavement and the edge of the building is
between 5 and 8 feet.
Graham asked if there have been any comments from other
residents regarding the odors, vapors, etc. and Conrad said no.
Graham noted fumes, overspray, etc. don't have any boundaries
and asked if staff felt by moving the location of the spraying
operation it would help dissipate the odor and fumes and Conrad
said yes, with a greater distance there would be more dissipation
between this area and the neighboring residence.
APPLICANT/TECHNICAL Edward (Mick) Hagestad thanked the board for hearing his request
SUPPORT and Conrad for all the work he has done. Hagestad said he would
answer any questions the board may have.
Hinchey asked if they have considered the possibility of moving
the painting operation indoors and Hagestad said yes they
considered putting a spray booth into the new building but if they
do that there will be quite a bit more cost involved because they
would have to install sprinkler systems, fire walls, and a ventilation
system. Hagestad said if it fits into their budget they would like to
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of October 11, 2011
Page 4 of 10
add the spray booth.
Graham asked if the ventilation system would have a scrubber -type
filter that would take the fumes out or would they just be ventilated
out into the air and Hagestad said there are usually filters
associated with the exhaust system which have to be changed.
Hagestad added they currently do not have a design for a system
but there are two ways of doing it, direct the fumes into the ground,
or ascend the fumes through a stack which would dissipate the
fumes over a wider area.
Hinchey said he did a site visit and currently there is a lot of
supplies and equipment stored outside in the proposed location of
the painting operation and Hagestad said they hope to relocate a lot
of that into their new building. In addition, Hagestad continued,
they have contacted the National Llama Registry who owns
property directly to the south of them about leasing with an option
to buy a section of property and then they could utilize that area for
spraying operations which would move it even further from the
Fabel property. Hagestad added over 95% of their work is done at
the job site.
Hinchey asked how often do they spray at this location and
Hagestad said it varies from every day one week to some weeks
none at all. Their employees usually report to job sites as opposed
to reporting to the shop.
Guiffrida asked if they foresee an increase in the amount of
outdoor spraying just from the addition of a storage facility and
Hagestad said he thinks the level would remain as it is currently.
He added it will depend on how much work they have in the future.
Hinchey asked if they would prefer to move the spraying operation
indoors and Hagestad said 5 to 10% of their work is residential and
that work is done at the shop. Trim packages involve the use of
water or oil based stains and lacquers or varnishes on doors and
some of that work can be done indoors. However some of the
lumber is 16, 18 or 20 feet long which would be hard to handle
inside a spray booth.
Guiffrida said he read in the report the plan is to continue with the
chain link fencing around the property and he asked if they put any
thought into possibly installing a privacy fence. Hagestad said that
would be something to consider and he added the building itself
will act as a privacy fence to the west because it is parallel to the
west boundary of the property. They are, as everyone else, fighting
dollars and cents and if they can put it together they will.
Schutt said so there isn't any provision for indoor painting in the
current plan and Hagestad said not in the original plan but they are
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of October 11, 2011
Page 5 of 10
strongly considering putting one in. Schutt said is a spray booth
required for water -based paint and Hagestad said no and he added
they would probably continue to use water -based paint outdoors.
Schutt said then this new building will not change the amount of
outdoor painting until a spray booth is installed and Hagestad said
that is correct.
Hagestad introduced his son-in-law Kelson Ramey who is running
the company now. Ramey was manager for a construction
company in Spokane and he has a good background for running
this company.
Graham asked about OSHA requirements for the MSDS sheets
and Hagestad said they have the MSDS sheets in binders in the
shop that are available for anyone who wants to see them and they
have several books on all the products that they use.
Graham said the OSHA regulation stated in the letter from Cathy
Fabel seems to be geared more for painting and spraying indoors
because it notes ventilation that is required. The homeowner is
worried about the possible negative effects they may be receiving
from the overspray and transfer of the fumes and Hagestad
admitted there are probably cases where they have been exposed to
fumes.
Graham noted this is a tough decision as the home is located in a
business zone with industrial across the road. Hagestad said when
they purchased the property around 1975 it was an industrial zone
and somewhere along the line the zoning was changed.
Hinchey said last time the board met they recommended to city
council that the West Side Urban Renewal Plan area be expanded
with the intention of trying to beautify the neighborhood. Hinchey
asked what they are planning as far as landscaping and Hagestad
said they definitely want to do some landscaping along the front of
the property but they do not have an actual landscaping plan.
PUBLIC HEARING Cathy Fabel, 1030 West Center Street presented a series of
photographs and explained the painting area is closer to her
property than appears in the photo staff displayed; when they are
spraying the paint it is right next to her fence and lands directly on
the other side into the yard; and the workers are wearing protection
but there is no protection or mitigation of fumes for her and her
family. When the workers are painting inside the garage door is
open and it still comes into her yard. The property is an eyesore,
there are paint stains on the Quonset but so you know paint is
flying through the air and she is concerned that smoking is allowed.
She also wondered what would be allowed to be put in the
dumpster with a business of this type. There are also hazardous
materials all over the contractor's yard.
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of October 11, 2011
Page 6 of 10
Fabel said the easement area is fenced in and she isn't sure how
that would mitigate the problem because there isn't enough space
to move the outdoor painting to that location.
Fabel said she doesn't want to shut down his business she just
wants him to recognize the environmental impact. She is confused
with the B-2 zoning because she didn't see painting as one of the
permitted uses and what a contractor's storage yard means — she
thought it meant storage. Fabel asked if there is anywhere else in
town where someone paints outside that is zoned B-2 and the board
didn't know of any.
Hinchey said the application before the board is for the addition of
a shop for an existing business. He said there is very little the board
can do to address the existing environmental concerns in relation to
this application.
No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed.
MOTION Guiffrida moved and Graham seconded a motion to adopt Staff
Report KCU-11-03 as findings of fact and recommend to the
Kalispell City Council that the Conditional Use Permit be approved
subject to the 5 conditions listed in the staff report.
BOARD DISCUSSION Guiffrida said the Knox Lock program should be a voluntary, not
required for private property. He thinks this is too much
government and he added emergency services has the equipment
and will be able to get through the fence.
Fabel said she has been going in circles trying to find a local
agency that could address the environmental concerns and Jentz
suggested she contact the Flathead City -County Environmental
Health Office.
Guiffrida said he understands her frustration but as mentioned the
board is reviewing a conditional use permit for the construction of
a new shop and the odors and fumes from the spraying operation
are not something the planning board can enforce. The new shop
will take care of some of the decay/storage issues and moving the
outdoor painting and spraying operation further from the
neighbor's property will help. Guiffrida added whether the board
approves or denies the conditional use permit it won't change the
way they conduct their business on their property.
Graham agreed with Guiffrida.
Hagestad said he sympathizes with Cathy Fabel and he believes the
operation of the new building and moving the spraying outdoors
further from her property will help. Hagestad said their intent is to
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of October 11, 2011
Page 7 of 10
put in a spray booth and ventilate it if they can. That way the
amount of outside work would be reduced.
Hagestad asked about the easement and Conrad said the 16 foot
easement is a utility easement but it is also a surface access where
that easement can also function as an alley. Conrad added there are
no plans for the city to put the alley in at this time but they could in
the future and then the property owners would have to move their
storage, etc. outside the easement area.
Schutt noted there are no firm plans or commitments for including
the spray booth at this time and Hagestad said they are looking at
whether or not they can afford to include the booth. Hagestad said
to increase their cost by $30 to $40 thousand is a big deal for them
especially in a building of this size. Schutt noted the board has to
look at what commitments are in front of them adding good
intentions can't be enforced. Hagestad said he understood and if
they can afford the booth they plan to put one in.
Kelson Ramey, 421 Northridge Drive stated in terms of their
intentions they have tried to be a good neighbor and clean up the
property as best they can so it is less of an eyesore. The problem is
he is out of room in the current facility and there is no room to
spray or store materials so that's why they want to build the shop.
In terms of how it is going to affect how much spraying is done
inside or outside he doesn't think it will change at all. On every
project they try to spray at the job location whenever possible.
Hinchey asked if Ramey agrees with the condition that they spray
behind the shop and Ramey said that would work fine.
Guiffrida said he went out to the site and they have taken some
proactive steps already. Ramey said the next step for the new
structure is to alleviate the eyesore and then put the spray booth in
down the road. Not only is it healthier for the neighbors but for his
employees as well.
Schutt said this is an existing use and putting in the shop doesn't
change that. This board isn't the correct tool to remedy whatever
harmful effects may be associated with the business.
Hinchey said he agrees. He added moving the painting area is
about as far as the board can go and he is encouraged by the fact
that the applicant has indicated that he will earnestly try to put the
spraying/painting operation indoors.
ROLL CALL I The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
OLD BUSINESS: Jentz said the zoning amendments that were proposed at the last
meeting were forwarded onto city council. However, council
continued the discussion that would allow A -frame (sandwich
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of October 11, 2011
Page 8 of 10
board) signage in the downtown area right-of-way. The allowable
area was proposed to be from Center Street to 5th Street along Main
Street. Council asked staff to come back with some options that
would expand the allowable area. Right now those types of signs
are not allowed in any areas of the city except by a special permit
and only then for 14 days for special events. Jentz noted staff is
still looking at this as a downtown program, not city-wide because
they think downtown has a special character that needs to be
enhanced.
Conrad reviewed a series of pictures of the B-4 zone and noted the
further you get from Main Street the typical urban pattern changes
where there are a lot more parking lots breaking up the row of
buildings and the building have greater setbacks from the street.
Conrad reviewed three options for the board which are attached to
the minutes.
Option 1 is the entire B-4 zoning district south of Center Street;
Option 2 is the original recommendation of Center Street south,
only along Main Street to the alley on the east and west and down
to 5th Street; and Option 3 would expand the boundary to include
both sides of Main Street, 1st Avenue East and 1st Avenue West to
the alleys and down to 5th Street.
Conrad briefly reviewed the proposed language as far as size,
location, insurance coverage, and times of display.
Graham said he prefers option #3 that would include 1st Avenue
East and 1st Avenue West and Schutt agreed. Schutt said once you
get off 1st Avenue West and East the ratio of zero lot line buildings
falls off drastically and the zero lot line businesses are the ones that
they wanted to address with this proposal.
Guiffrida said when it was first talked about there was going to be
a trial zone and that is why it was narrowed down to only include
Main Street. If it was opened up to the B-4 as in option #1 some of
the concerns such as finding signs in parking lots would be covered
in the language since the signs would have to be located directly in
front of the business.
Jentz said the entire provision
allowed in the right-of-way and
front of them but right-of-way.
in the downtown core, not to
business in the city. Perhaps a
that the property has to have
participate in the program.
Young said from his
is based on the signs only being
for businesses that had nothing in
The concept was to create activity
provide extra advertising for any
►nditions would need to be added
a zero setback, etc. in order to
the board got it right the first
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of October 11, 2011
Page 9 of 10
time by limiting it to Main Street. It can be expanded in the future
if there are sufficient requests from businesses on 1" Avenues East
and West. The risk of going with options 1 or 3 is it opens it up to
an enforcement nightmare. Let's just do it on Main Street and see
what happens. The way it is written is simple, straight -forward and
enforceable.
Schutt asked wouldn't it be enforceable as written with either
option 2 or 3 and Young said maybe enforceable isn't the right
word — perhaps it would be less liable for abuse. Schutt said the
reason he likes expanding the area as in option 3 is there are a
significant number of buildings and business that are built out to
the sidewalk line. Schutt agreed the language has to be written
correctly so it is not abused no matter which option is chosen.
Hinchey said originally the board talked about just Main Street but
the council has sent it back to the board because they felt it was too
exclusive. Hinchey also likes option 3 because it includes the
Business Improvement District (BID) which does have a number of
businesses with a zero setback. Hinchey said he is willing to try it
with either options 2 or 3 but felt option 1 would be too aggressive
and enforcement might be a problem.
MOTION
Schutt moved and Graham seconded a motion to recommend that
the Kalispell City Council consider expanding the geographic area
to allow signs on the right-of-way to include both sides of the Main
Street, 1st Avenue East and 1" Avenue West designated on the
Option #3 map.
ROLL CALL
The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
NEW BUSINESS:
Jentz noted the subdivision regulations update went forward and
the city council has directed staff to hold a work session the date of
which has not yet been determined.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at approximately 8:30 p.m.
NEXT MEETING
The next work session of the Kalispell City Planning Board has
not been scheduled.
The next regular meeting is scheduled for November 8, 2011.
I t�� /X(- '14
(�
Psident
inchey
APPROVED t �subtnitt corrected: /�1,xl /11
Michelle Anderson
Recording Secretary
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of October 11, 2011
Page 10 of 10
COMMENTS AND CONCERNS FOR CONSIDERATION BY
KALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD AND ZONING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 11, 2011 Meeting
RE: Request by Mick 11agestad for Conditional Use Permit on B-2 Zoned Property at 1020 West Center Street
submitted by
Brad and Cathy Fabel
1030 West Center Street
Kalispell MT 59901
Dear Members of the KALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD AND ZONING COMMISSION:
r On behalf of myself, husband, two sons and dog living at 1030 West Center Street, I appreciate this opportunity to
express my concerns regarding the request by Mick Hagestad for a Conditional Use Permit on B-2 zoned property at
1020 West Center Street. My family has been a neighbor to Mr. Hagestad's painting business since 1991. Immediately
after purchasing our home and property we went along with the adage "good fences make good neighbors" to mitigate
the paint buckets, empty chemical containers, rags, saw horses, etc. that were visibly beyond Hagestad Painting's
property boundary and all over our back yard. We paid to have our property boundary surveyed and a fence built within
those boundaries. This was the only conflict we anticipated as we were told by the previous owners of our house that
Hagestad's quonset but was a contractor's storage facility and many times they had "bucket parties" to throw his
buckets back onto his property.
As time went on, it became apparent that Hagestad's painting business entailed more than storage of equipment and
supplies. Once the weather improved, spray painting, lacquering and staining occurred outside, usually between the
months of May -September. This was witnessed during the week when my husband and I came home from work for
lunch, occasionally after normal working hours, and also when we were home on the weekends. The previous property
owners/neighbors to Hagestad Painting admitted to not being home much or being aware of outside painting and
staining occurring mainly because their vintage windows were painted shut. We replaced those windows in 1998
expecting to enjoy opening them whenever possible. Verbal attempts were made with Hagestad's workers to
communicate concern for my family and pet's health when strong smelling fumes permeated the air. Tension escalated
the day Hagestad's crew chose to sandblast the items that needed painting and staining and all of the debris landed in
our back yard. Because the door on the quonset but just said Hagestad, the only contact information available in the
phone book was to Mick's home and I called and visited with his wife sharing my disappointment over what had just
happened. Hagestad's workers did clean up our yard and we were hoping to see improvement in air quality from that
point forward. Unfortunately that was not the case. In June of 2000, we contacted the Flathead County Health
Department who informed us that environmental standards were most likely being violated. A formal letter was sent to
Mick c/o Hagestad Painting and Drywall, Inc. at his home address as his quonset but was not showing any visible
address. Concern was clearly expressed regarding unhealthy air quality and perceived fire hazards. Keep in mind
Hagestad's workers use compressors to spray paint, stain and lacquer outside which lands directly in our back yard.
Sometimes the workers wore masks when they were outside, sometimes they didn't when painting inside the quonset
but with the door wide open still releasing fumes into the air. Many of the workers smoke cigarettes and do it on the
Hagestad premises. It didn't seem unreasonable to request recognition of smoking hazards, modification of obvious lack
of ventilation for the workers as well as blatant disregard for the air quality of neighboring residential and business
owners. At this point we began to take photos to document what was taking place. We contacted the Kalispell Fire
Department to inspect the Hagestad premises for fire safety. Prior notice was given before the inspection so Hagestad's
crew was able clean up the site before the inspection took place and no further action was taken. However, the amount
of outside painting dramatically reduced until 2009 when the pace picked up again. This time we filed a formal
complaint with the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. We were hoping a site inspection would take place
and soil and water samples would be analyzed. Unfortunately, only a questionnaire was sent to Mick where he
indicated he used 8-10 gallons per day of lacquer and it was determined no air quality permit was required. Larry
Alheim, Environmental Enforcement Specialist, indicated his department did not have any jurisdiction concerning
outside painting and emissions and advised us to contact the health department and research local zoning regulations.
I called the Kalispell zoning office who confirmed that Hagestad Painting was in B-2 zoning, the same as our residence.
Upon researching permitted uses in a B-2 General Business zone, I did not see ANYTHING related to painting. A
conditional use permit however, could be granted for a contractor's storage yard. Had Hagestad's Painting business
been usine the auonset but and surrounding Property only as a contractor's storage yard our family would have no
complaints.
Because outside painting, staining, and lacquering continually occurs, I called regarding a possible zoning violation and
visited with PJ Sorenson who indicated intent was the key to his investigation and prepping or working on a project may
be OK in a B-2 zone. PJ appeared to be content with a worker's statement that outside work only occurred occasionally.
Confused by this interpretation of intent for designated commercial and urban mixed use, it appeared working with
environmental agencies was my family's final recourse. I began to collect data from the Environmental Science program
at Flathead Valley Community College. Most lacquers and paints contain hazardous materials: urethanes in lacquers
and cyanates in paints are harmful when inhaled. It is important to paint or spray in a well ventilated area using
approved safety masks that filter offending chemicals. OSHA has established regulations (1910.107) addressing
flammable vapors, dusts and deposits where paint spraying operations occur. Smoking should be prohibited and No
Smoking signs need to be posted in spraying and paint storage areas. Spraying areas need to be mechanically ventilated
for removal of flammable, hazardous and combustible vapor and mist. Mechanical ventilation needs to be kept in
operation at all times while spraying operations are being conducted and for a sufficient time thereafter to allow vapors
from drying coated articles and drying finishing material residue to be exhausted. Paint thinner and paint in general
should be applied in a well ventilated area as the fumes are toxic and have cumulative effects on the brain and nervous
system. All paints, solvents and thinners contain chemicals that are harmful to the environment, for example most Paint
Thinners are made with xylene (highly toxic hazardous waste), and naptha (highly flammable and cacinogenic) and
Varnishes and lacquers and stains and solvents are fire hazards. Rags saturated with them could spontaneously combust.
MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheet) is a widely used system in cataloging information on chemicals and potential hazards
associated with a material or product. In the U.S. OSHA requires MSDS be available to employees for potentially
harmful substances handled in the workplace. The MSDS is also required to be made available to local fire departments.
The American Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Numbers (CAS) provide a unique number for each chemical and is also
used internationally by MSDSs. ARM 17.53.501 incorporating 40 CFR 261 lists the categories of hazardous waste -many
used in painting businesses: Xylene and Ethylbenzene, Toluene, Napthalenamine, Methethylketone,
Dimethylformamide, to name a few. A company can be considered a hazardous waste generator if it uses, produces or
stores oil based paint. As a hazardous waste generator it is the company's responsibility to apply for and obtain and EPA
identification number prior to generating, storing and transporting hazardous waste. Some businesses that were
previously exempt from registering or reporting hazardous waste are now required to do so because the EPA and other
federal, state and local agencies can audit the business at any time. Petroleum distillates in wood stains contain harmful
vapors. They need to be kept away from heat and flame and smoking should not be allowed where wood stain is in use.
Breathing vapors and mist should be avoided and fresh air should be ensured. A Mineral Spirit Label visible on
containers left outside of Hagestad's painting business read, "DANGER! HARMFUL OR FATAL IF SWALLOWED.
COMBUSTIBLE! HARMFUL IF INHALED..... Keep away from heat and open flame. VAPOR HARMFUL. Use only with
adequate ventilation. Wear an a appropriate properly fitted vapor/particulate respirator ..... Contains solvents which can
cause permanent brain and nervous system damage. SEE MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET." This warning label pretty
much sums up my family's health and safety concerns.
Recently a notice of a public hearing was received because my family's property is within 150 feet of the proposed
project by Mick Hagestad. I contacted the Planning Department to voice my concerns and share documenting photos. It
is my opinion that Hagestad's business practices have been taking place "under the radar" of city officials. This public
hearing seemed to be the opportune time to educate zoning and council officials regarding my family's case,
acknowledge the ambiguous interpretation of a permitted use for B-2 zoning and request a positive change. Sean
Conrad was kind enough to listen and recognize our meeting in his report prepared for the October 11th meeting.
While I appreciate being included in the report, on page 4,1 disagree with the evaluation of Mick Hagestad's request
regarding Adequate Access and Environmental Constraints. The map included with the notice of the public hearing
shows an easement that connects from the alley behind my family's property, past Hagestad's quonset but to Meridian
street. This easement access is not there, the area is fenced in by Hagestad and beyond that by Bud Block. This non -
area is proposed as a "compromise" to mitigate the neighborhood effects of outdoor painting. It is not a viable solution.
As researched above, there are MANY environmental constraints when addressing air quality, fire hazards and
hazardous waste not to mention the eyesore the Hagestad property creates with exposed debris. On page 8 of the
report addressing Neighborhood Impacts, I caution that information obtained from Mick Hagestad may not be totally
accurate. I have been informed that Mick is no longer directly involved with the painting business and his son in law
Kelson Ramey is the one familiar with the day to day operations. The amount of outside painting that occurs is not
consistently documented in the report and perhaps further discussion needs to take place with the Planning Department
and Mr. Ramey. I strongly disagree with the Planning Department's reluctance to require installation of an indoor
paint booth based on the past bad business practices of Hagestad Painting the last 35 years. Neighborhood and
Environmental impact should weigh heavily in the final recommendation condition of approval made to City Council,
especially when Mick Hagestad acknowledges in his application for a conditional use permit, "we want to be a better
neighbor and this new shop should help with fumes and smells associated with painting and related work."
I will be attendance at the October 11th public hearing to share my concerns and photos. Thank you for your
consideration in evaluating Mr. Hagestad's request.
Sincerely,
Cathy Fabel on behalf of
The Fabel Family
1030 West Center Street
Kalispell, MT 59901
100,