The URL can be used to link to this page

01. Resolution 5552 - Annexation Request - Joshua & Shelby FarnhamPLANNING FOR THE FU rURE REPORT TO: Kalispell Mayor and City Council FROM: Sean Conrad, Senior Planner Charlie Harball, Interim City Manager Planning Department 201 1st Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Fax: (406) 758-7739 www.kalispell.com/planning SUBJECT Annexation and initial zoning of B-1 (Neighborhood Business) with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay zoning MEETING DATE: Apri12, 2012 BACKGROUND: The Kalispell City Planning Board met on March 13'h and held a public hearing to consider a request from Joshua and Shelby Farnham to annex 3.5 acres of land and zone the land B-l/PUD (Neighborhood Business/Planned Unit Development) upon annexation. The property is currently developed with a single family home addressed as 610 W. Spring Creek Road. A small drive through coffee stand is located north of the existing home and the owners intend to operate the coffee stand once annexed into the city. The property is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Three Mile Drive and West Spring Creek Road. The property is surrounded by existing roads with Three Mile Drive on its south boundary, West Spring Creek Road on its west boundary and Farm to Market Road on its east boundary. The 3.5 acre site can be legally described as Parcel A as shown on Certificate of Survey No. 15268 located in Section 2, Township 28 North, Range 22 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. Kalispell Planning Department staff presented staff reports KA11-4 and KPUD12-1, reviewing both the proposed annexation and planned unit development overlay zoning requests. Planning staff noted the reason for the PUD is when the Fire Chief reviewed the annexation and initial zoning application he had concerns, not with the existing house and coffee stand on the 3.5 acres, but with a B-1 zoning coming into the city where there is the potential for additional commercial development to occur in the future. Planning staff talked with the Fire Chief and it was decided that the best avenue to address the fire safety issues and the need for hydrants was to propose a PUD overly zoning. Staff concluded their report to the planning board with a recommendation of approval of the annexation with the initial zoning of B-l/PUD subject to the six conditions for the PUD listed in the staff report. During the public hearing Mr. Farnham spoke in favor of the proposed annexation and PUD project. Mr. Farnham also responded to questions from the planning board regarding when the coffee stand was constructed, its hours of operation and if he has any fixture plans for the property. No one else spoke for or against the proposal and the public hearing was closed. During the planning board's discussion on the annexation request opinions varied on whether the planning board should recommend annexation to the city council or not. One planning board member expressed his opinion that the PUD and annexation doesn't come within what he would consider a clean annexation. He thought clarification of the next phase of development in the PUD is missing which leaves many raveling ends. He also stated that he wanted to help the applicant but at the same time he has to look at what's in the best interest of the city and the applicant especially down the road when changes to this property are proposed. Another planning board member had concerns about the cost of services analysis. In his opinion the $2600 a year that the city will have to make up to provide services to this property, based on the cost of services analysis, was a road block for him to consider a favorable recommendation on annexation. The same planning board member also stated he in no way feels that every annexation into the city has to be a money maker nor does he think they all have to lose money for the city either. However, in this case he did not feel comfortable recommending approval of this annexation. On the opposite opinion, one planning board member stated that the board can't look at every annexation as a money maker because cash flow isn't the only issue to consider. He agreed that the property requesting annexation is an ideal commercial spot that may not pencil out today but eventually he sees a convenience store/gas station sitting on those 3 acres and thought that the property is right for annexation. The motion to recommend annexation to the city council was moved and seconded. The motion to approve annexation ailed on a roll call vote of 3 in favor and 4 opposed. Following this recommendation, planning staff requested that the planning board act on the PUD and initial zoning in the event council decides to annex this property. A motion was made and seconded to recommend the zoning for the property be B-1/PUD subject to the 6 conditions listed in the staff report. The motion passed unanimously. RECOMMENDATION: A motion to deny the annexation request based on the planning board's recommendation would be in order. FISCAL. EFFECTS: The attached cost of services analysis for this annexation shows the annexation will cost the city to serve the property initially. That cost is estimated to be at approximately $2,596. This cost to the city is based on the estimate of current taxes the property would pay and the relatively minor commercial improvement on the property. With 3.5 acres, the property has the potential to increase the scale of commercial buildings or uses on the property. This in turn would increase the property value and may eventually show a net payment to the city's general funding based on the current cost of services analysis. However, the estimated cost to initially serve the property weighed heavily on several planning board members and was a reason cited by one planning board member in their vote to recommend not annexing the property. In the event the City Council approves the annexation request, the following zoning recommendation by the planning board should be considered: A motion to approve the B-1 zoning district with a PUD overlay zoning subject to the six conditions recommend by the planning board would be in order. ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the city council. Respectfully submitted, Sean Conrad Senior Planner Report compiled: March 26, 2012 c: Theresa White, Kalispell City Clerk C� Charlie Harball Interim City Manager 2 OF OF iING THEREIN AS AN ANNEXATION CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS PARCEL A AS SHOWN ON CERTIFICATE OF , NO. LOCATED IN SECTIONTOWNSHIP NORTH, RANGE 22 WEST, P.M.M., FLATHEAD COUNTY, MONTANA, AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED WHEREAS, the City of Kalispell has received a petition from Joshua and Shelby Farnham, the owners of property located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Three Mile Drive and West Spring Creek Road, requesting that the City of Kalispell annex the territory into the City; and WHEREAS, the Kalispell Planning Department has made a report on the petitioner's Annexation Request, #KA-11-04, dated March 6, 2012; and WHEREAS, the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission recommended denial of the annexation request, on a 3 to 4 vote, based upon the cost of services analysis that indicates that the costs to the city to provide municipal services to the property are in considerable excess of the tax and assessment revenues to be derived from the properties as well as concerns expressed by the city fire department regarding fire safety issues. FOLLOWS:NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL AS SECTION I. It is the finding of the Kalispell City Council that it is not in the best interests of the City of Kalispell at this time to grant the request of the petitioner to annex the subject property, described herein, into the City of Kalispell for the reasons expressed by the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission in its recommendation to deny the request. ,. J. �....! �C is �'•'• CITY OF KALISPELL, THIS 2ND DAY OF APRIL, 2012. Tammi Fisher Mayor ATTEST: Theresa White City Clerk 1D1:4:1V-1# A ,UI To telly.1191 ml 291 DI 0 i , The property is described as Parcel A as shown on Certificate of Survey No. 15268 located in Section 2, Township 28 North, Range 22 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. Return to: Kalispell City Clerk PO Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 a, ". 1, .� ! ;� � _,�. a� � � -�: i. <► � �� t. �. �. �, � �, � WHEREAS, the City of Kalispell has received a petition from Joshua and Shelby Farnham, the owners of property located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Three Mile Drive and West Spring Creek Road, requesting that the City of Kalispell annex the territory into the City; and WHEREAS, the Kalispell Planning Department has made a report on the petitioner's Annexation Request, #KA-11-04, dated March 6, 2012; and WHEREAS, the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission recommended denial of the annexation request, on a 3 to 4 vote, based upon the cost of services analysis that indicates that the costs to the city to provide municipal services to the property are in considerable excess of the tax and assessment revenues to be derived from the properties as well as concerns expressed by the city fire department regarding fire safety issues; and WHEREAS, in the event the Kalispell City Council elects to approve the annexation request, the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission recommended that the territory be zoned City B-1, Neighborhood Business, with a PUD overlay, on approximately 3.5 acres upon the annexation into the City of Kalispell; and WHEREAS, the City of Kalispell desires to annex said property in accordance with Title 7, Chapter 2, Part 46, Montana Code Annotated. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL AS • • SECTION I. That all the real property as described on Exhibit "A" below be annexed to the City of Kalispell and the boundary of the City is altered to so provide, and shall be known as Farnham Addition No. 416. SECTION II. Upon the effective date of this Resolution, the City Clerk is directed to make and certify under the seal of the City, a copy of the record of these proceedings as are entered on the minutes of the City Council and file said documents with the Flathead County Clerk and Recorder. From and after the date of filing of said documents as prepared by the City Clerk, or on the effective date hereof, whichever shall occur later, said annexed territory is part of the City of Kalispell and its citizens and property shall be subject to all debts, laws and ordinances and regulations in force in the City of Kalispell and shall be entitled to the same privileges and benefits as are other parts of the City. SECTION III. The territory annexed by this Resolution shall be zoned in accordance with the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. SECTION IV. This Resolution shall be effective immediately upon passage by the City Council. ATTEST: Theresa White City Clerk Tammi Fisher Mayor LEGALEXHIBIT A , • ♦:, 1 ♦ ' The property is described as Parcel A as shown on Certificate of Survey No. 15268 located in Section 2, Township 28 North, Range 22 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE March 26, 2012 Charlie Harball, Interim City Manager City of Kalispell P.O. Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 Planning Department 201 1" Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Fax: (406) 758-7739 www.kalispell.com/planning Re: Annexation and initial zoning of B-1 (Neighborhood Business) with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay zoning Dear Charlie: The Kalispell City Planning Board met on March 13`h and held a public hearing to consider a request from Joshua and Shelby Farnham to annex 3.5 acres of land and zone the land B-l/PUD (Neighborhood Business/Planned Unit Development) upon annexation. The property is currently developed with a single family home addressed as 610 W. Spring Creek Road. A small drive through coffee stand is located north of the existing home and the owners intend to operate the coffee stand once annexed into the city. The property is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Three Mile Drive and West Spring Creek Road. The property is surrounded by existing roads with Three Mile Drive on its south boundary, West Spring Creek Road on its west boundary and Farm to Market Road on its east boundary. The 3.5 acre site can be legally described as Parcel A as shown on Certificate of Survey No. 15268 located in Section 2, Township 28 North, Range 22 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. Sean Conrad, with the Kalispell Planning Department, presented staff reports KA11-4 and KPUD12-1, reviewing both the proposed annexation and planned unit development overlay zoning requests. Mr. Conrad noted the reason for the PUD is when the Fire Chief reviewed the annexation and initial zoning application he had concerns, not with the existing house and coffee stand on the 3.5 acres, but with a B-1 zoning coming into the city where there is the potential for additional commercial development to occur in the future. Planning staff talked with the Fire Chief and it was decided that the best avenue to address the fire safety issues and the need for hydrants was to propose a PUD overly zoning. Mr. Conrad concluded his report to the planning board with a recommendation of approval of the annexation with the initial zoning of B-1/PUD subject to the six conditions for the PUD listed in the staff report. During the public hearing Mr. Farnham spoke in favor of the proposed annexation and PUD project. Mr. Farnham also responded to questions from the planning board regarding when the coffee drive through was constructed, its hours of operation and if he has any future plans for the property. No one else spoke for or against the proposal and the public hearing was closed. During the planning board's discussion on the annexation request opinions varied on whether the planning board should recommend annexation to the city council or not. One planning board member expressed his opinion that the PUD and annexation doesn't come within what he would consider a clean annexation. He thought clarification of the next phase of development in the PUD is missing which leaves many raveling ends. He also stated that he wanted to help the applicant but at the same time he has to look at what's in the best interest of the city and the applicant especially down the road when changes to this property are proposed. Another planning board member had concerns about the cost of services analysis. In his opinion the $2600 a year that the city will have to make up to provide services to this property, based on the cost of services analysis, is a road block for him to consider a favorable recommendation on annexation. The same planning board member also stated he in no way feels that every annexation into the city has to be a money maker nor does he think they all have to lose money for the city either. However, in this case he does not feel comfortable recommending approval of this annexation. On the opposite opinion, one planning board member stated that the board can't look at every annexation as a money maker because cash flow isn't the only issue to consider. He agreed that the property requesting annexation is an ideal commercial spot that may not pencil out today but eventually he sees a convenience store/gas station sitting on those 3 acres and thought that the property is right for annexation. The motion to recommend annexation to the city council was moved and seconded. The motion to approve annexation ailed on a roll call vote of 3 in favor and 4 opposed. Following this recommendation, Mr. Conrad requested that the planning board act on the PUD & initial zoning in the event council decides to annex this property. A motion was made and seconded to recommend the zoning for property be B-1/PUD subject to the 6 conditions listed in the staff report if the council elects to annex the property. The motion passed unanimously. Please schedule this matter for the April 2, 2012 regular City Council meeting. You may contact this board or Sean Conrad at the Kalispell Planning Department if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely, Kalispell City Planning Board John Hinchey President Attachments: Conditions of Approval Staff Reports #KA-11-4 and KPUD-12-1 and supporting documents Draft minutes from the 3/13/12 planning board meeting c w/ Att: Theresa White, Kalispell City Clerk c w/o Att: Joshua and Shelby Farnham, 735 W. Center Street, Kalispell, MT 59901 . "1: FARNHAM �l1/�.Z�7: k•TiSi�l The Kalispell City Planning Board held a public hearing on this matter at their meeting on March 13, 2012. The following conditions are recommended with approval of the planned unit development overlay zoning: Prior to issuance of a building permit for any additional buildings or prior to any further commercial uses on the property, the property owner and/or developer shall extend a city water main to the property and install the required number of hydrants based on a review of the development plan by the Kalispell Fire Chief. The Fire Chief may, at the Chief s discretion, waive the requirement to extend the water main and hydrant installation based on the scale of development proposed. 2. Further development of the 3.5 acre site shall require approval of a master site plan to address the following: • Building orientation • Parking • Internal sidewalks and sidewalk connections • Landscaping • Signage • Infrastructure extensions (water and sewer mains) and improvements (Streets) This condition or portions of this condition may be waived by the city's site review committee based on the scale and purpose of the development. Commercial buildings shall incorporate four-sided architecture in their design for review and approval from the city's architectural review committee. 4. The property owner(s) shall waive their right to protest the creation of a special improvement district for upgrades to both West Spring Creek and Three Mile Drive as they abut this property. 5. At the time additional commercial development on the property is proposed, plans shall be submitted to the city to upgrade West Spring Creek Road and Three Mile Drive, along the property's frontage, to city urban minor arterial standards which includes but is not limited to the following: • Possible additional right-of-way dedication to the city • Widened pavement • Improvements or reconstruction of the road sub -base • Bike lanes or sidewalk on the abutting side • Curb and gutter, • Landscaped boulevard with street trees • Sidewalk • Street lighting • Appropriate right-of-way and construction of turn bays at the major intersections (to be determined by the Kalispell Public Works Department) Approval and timing of the road upgrades shall be reviewed and approved by city staff. The installation of the upgrades will be based on the location and scale of existing and proposed development. 6. A development agreement shall be drafted by the Kalispell City Attorney between the City of Kalispell and the developer outlining and formalizing the terms, conditions and provisions of approval. The final plan as approved, together with the conditions and restrictions imposed, shall constitute the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning for the site that shall be completed and signed by the city and property owner prior to the operation of the drive -through coffee stand. Planning Department 201 Is'Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Fax: (406) 758-7739 www.kalispell.com/planning MEMORANDUM To: Kalispell Planning Board From: Sean Conrad, Senior Planner Date: March 6, 2012 Subject: Farnham Cost of Services Analysis Attached to this memo you will find two separate cost of services completed for the Farnham annexation. One cost of service analysis includes the city's commercial assessments and costs for an approximately 5,000 square foot area of the 3.5 acre property. The 5,000 square foot area includes the drive through coffee stand and associated driveways. The second cost of services analysis includes costs and assessments based on a residential property. This was conducted for the remainder of the property less the 5,000 square foot area. The two cost of services were completed to provide the property owners with an approximate cost for city assessments and taxes that represents the limited commercial development they initially plan for their property. Given that the majority of the 3.5 acre property will be used as their own residence in the immediate future, it may not be practical to tax and assess the entire 3.5 acres as a commercial property at this time. In summary, the cost of services for the property (both the 5,000 square foot commercial foot print and remaining 3.4 acres of residential use) will cost the city approximately $2,596. This cost includes police, fire and street maintenance services and factors in the anticipated taxes and assessments the property would pay to the city. In addition to the city taxes and assessments the property owners will pay a one-time impact fee of approximately $2,627 for fire, police and storm water impacts. Farnham Annexation COST OF SERVICES ANALYSIS FOR 3.4 ACRE RESIDENTAIL PORTION OF PROPERTY PROJECT DETAILS Mumber.of dwelling units proposed to be annexed: 9 Estimated increase in population: 3.0 Average square foot per lot: 148,539 1. COST OF SERVICES Per capita costs based on increase in population: 3.0 Fire: $229 Police: $368 Administration: $135 Solid Waste: $0 Costs per dwelling unit or Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU): 1 Roads (Based on 1,200 feet of frontage) $2,592 Water: $0 Sewer: $0 Wastewater Treatment $0 Stormwater: $0 Parks: $0 TOTAL ANTICIPATED COST OF SERVICE _ $3,324 2. ANTICIPATED REVENUE GENERATED Assessments based on average square foot per lot: 148,539 Storm sewer assessment: $121 Street maintenance assessment: $266 Urban forestry assessment: $150 Light maintenance assessment: $0 Sewer and water bill: $0 TOTAL ANTICIPATED REVENUE _ $537 3. TAX REVENUE Taxable Market Value $100,000 Total taxable value: $2,710 Total additional revenue based on city mill levy: $432 TOTAL ESTIMATED TAX REVENUE _ $432 4. IMPACT FEES Sewer impact fee: $0 Water system impact fee: $0 Stormwater impact fee $0 Police impact fee $41 Fire impact fee $483 TOTAL ESTIMATED IMPACT FEE = $524 SUMMARY 5. TOTAL ANTICIPATED REVENUE GENERATED TO THE CITY (ITEMS 2 AND 3) $969 6. ONE TIME IMPACT FEE PAYMENT TO THE CITY (ITEM 4) $524 7. NET COST TO THE CITY PER YEAR (ITEM 2 + ITEM 3 - ITEM 1) $2,355 COST OF SERVICES ANALYSIS (COMMERCIAL LAND 90 % COVERED) For an approximatley 5,000 square foot area of the property including the drive through coffee stand 5-Mar-12 PROJECT DETAILS Number of acres proposed to be annexed: 0.11 Number of commercial units: 1 Assessed value per property: $25,000 1. COST OF SERVICES . Costs based on commercial acres 0.11 Fire: $103 Police: $132 Administration: $16 Solid Waste: $0 Costs per dwelling unit or Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU): 1 Roads (Based on 100 feet of frontage) $216 Water: $0 Sewer: $0 Wastewater Treatment: $0 Stormwater: $0 TOTAL ANTICIPATED COST OF SERVICE _ $467 2. ANTICIPATED REVENUE GENERATED Assessments based on average square foot per lot: 5,000 Storm sewer assessment: $50 Street maintenance assessment: $90 Urban forestry assessment: $9 Light maintenance assessment: $0 Special assessment: $0 Sewer and water bill $0 3. TAX REVENUE Assessed value per property: $25,000 Total taxable market value: $19,600 Total taxable value: $485 Total additional revenue based on city mill levy: $77 TOTAL ESTIMATED TAX REVENUE _ $77 4. IMPACT FEES Sewer impact fee: $0 Water system impact fee: $0 Stormwater impact fee $2,000 Police impact fee $5 Fire impact fee $98 TOTAL ESTIMATED IMPACT FEE _ $2,103 SUMMARY 5. TOTAL ANTICIPATED REVENUE GENERATED TO THE CITY (ITEMS 2 AND 3) $226 6. ONE TIME IMPACT FEE PAYMENT TO THE CITY (ITEM 4) $2,103 7. NET COST TO THE CITY PER YEAR (ITEM 2 AND 3 - ITEM 1) $241 JOSHUA AND SHELBY FARNHAM REQUEST FOR INITIAL ZONINGUPON ANNEXATIO STAFF REPORT #KA- 11-4 AND REQUEST FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT #KPUD-12-1 i A report to the Kalispell City Planning Board and the Kalispell City Council regarding a request to annex into the city limits with the initial zoning designation of B- I/ PUD upon annexation. A public hearing has been scheduled before the Kalispell City Planning Board for March 13, 2012 beginning at 7:00 PM, to consider the annexation request and the appropriate zoning for the property to be annexed. The planning board will forward a recommendation to the Kalispell City Council for consideration. VIM3 fyX � 11 I-2ilzi The owners have petitioned for annexation and an initial zoning designation of B- 1, a neighborhood business district, with a planned unit development (PUD) overlay zoning district on an existing lot approximately 3.5 acres in size. The property is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Three Mile Drive and West Spring Creek Road. The property is surrounded by existing roads with Three Mile Drive on its south boundary, West Spring Creek Road on its west boundary and Farm to Market Road on its east boundary. The property is currently developed with a single family home and is zoned AG-20 (Agricultural) in the County. The petition to annex and zone the property B- I is based on the property owner's desire to operate a small (approximately 300 square foot) drive -through coffee stand on the property. The property owners had approached the Flathead County Planning and Zoning office to determine whether a coffee stand was permitted on their property under the AG-20 zoning. In a letter detailing the county planning office's history with the property owners dated February 27, 2012 (copy attached) the letter notes the owners met with county planning staff in March of 2011. During that meeting the owners inquired about opening a coffee stand on the property and were told that the coffee stand was considered a commercial use not permitted under the AG-20 zoning. The option for a zone change was discussed with the owner as well as the potential difficulties of approving a zone change to permit the coffee stand based on the county's West Valley Plan for the area. The February 27th letter also notes that in October of 2011, just 7 months later after the owners were told that the zoning did not allow a coffee stand, during a site visit in the West Valley area, county planning staff observed what looked like a coffee stand under construction on the property. Several weeks later the property owners, through the county environmental health department submitted an application for approval to the county planning office for a commercial coffee stand on the property. During the next several months the county planning staff met with the owners to discuss the options available to the property owners if they wanted to operate the coffee stand on the property. The letter states that based on these meetings it was determined that the best option for the owners was to request annexation into the city based on the city's growth policy supporting neighborhood commercial land uses on the property. The property owners submitted an annexation application to the Kalispell Planning Department in late December 2011. Once received, the planning department began its review of the proposal noting that the main reason the owners were requesting annexation was to operate the coffee stand on the property. As part of the planning department's review process, other city agencies provided information on the annexation request. Based on the information provided for the annexation the Kalispell Fire Chief brought up concerns about the lack of fire hydrants for a 3.5 acre property which was requesting a commercial zoning district. The Chief's concerns were based on future development potential and commercial uses on the property, not the existing single family home or the proposed drive -through coffee stand. The Fire Chiefs concerns prompted the planning department to review the city's zoning ordinance to determine the appropriate way to address the Chiefs concerns. The planning department's recommendation to the Fire Chief and the property owners was to apply for a PUD zoning overlay district. The PUD zoning overlay district is typically requested for large scale residential and commercial developments where the developer is requesting a deviation from one or more city development standards. In return for the PUD approval the developer provides the city with a development that enhances the integrity and environmental values of the area. In this situation, the PUD request will not permit any deviations from city development standards; rather it will insure that there is a mechanism in place to require future development on the 3.5 acre property to extend water for fire protection. The PUD review and recommended conditions also include benchmarks for improving the adjacent roads to city street standards and increased architectural standards for future commercial buildings. This report evaluates all three requests; the annexation request and the appropriate assignment of a city zoning classification in accordance with Section 27.03.010(4) of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance and the PUD request in accordance with Section 27.19.020(4) of the zoning ordinance. At the conclusion of this report are a series of recommendations on the B- 1 and PUD zoning. A. Petitioner/Owner: Joshua and Shelby Farnham 735 W. Center Street Kalispell, MT 59901 (406) 756-6505 B. Location and Legal Description of Property: The property is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Three Mile Drive and West Spring Creek Road. The property is surrounded by existing roads with Three Mile Drive on its south boundary, West Spring Creek Road on its west boundary and Farm to Market Road on its east boundary. The property is currently developed with a single family home addressed as 610 W. Spring Creek Road. The 3.5 acre site can be legally described as Parcel A as shown on Certificate of Survey No. 15268 located in Section 2, Township 28 North, Range 22 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. P5 Figure 1: Aerial view of the property. C. Existing Land Use and Zoning: As shown in figure 1, The property has an existing single family house on the south end of the property with the coffee stand located just north of the house. The remainder of the property is currently vacant. The current county zoning on the property is AG-20 (Agricultural). This district is defined as "A district to protect and preserve agricultural land for the performance of a wide range of agricultural functions. It is intended to control the scattered intrusion of uses not compatible with an agricultural environment, including, but not limited to, residential development." Permitted uses in this district range from single family homes to a variety of agricultural uses including produce stands, nurseries, stables, riding academies and ranch employee housing. The conditionally permitted uses include but are not limited to animal hospitals, churches, community centers, schools and contractor storage yards. The minimum lot size requirement of the County AG-20 zoning district is 20 acres. D. Proposed Zoning: The proposed B-1 zoning district is a neighborhood commercial zone. The B-1 is a business district intended to provide certain commercial and professional office uses where such uses are compatible with the adjacent residential areas. This district would typically serve as a buffer between residential areas and other commercial districts. Development scale and pedestrian orientation 3 are important elements of this district. This district is also intended to provide goods and services at a neighborhood level. The • is not intended for • businesses that require the outdoor display, sale and/or storage of merchandise, outdoor services or operations to accommodate large-scale commercial operations. The minimum lot size in the B- I zone is 7,000 square feet. E. Size: The area proposed for annexation and zoning contains approximately 3.5 acres. F. Adjacent Land Uses and Zoning: The area is primarily undeveloped with agricultural lands to the west and south. Immediately east, across Farm to Market Road, is a city residential subdivision. North: Residential, City R-2/PUD West: Agriculture, ♦ AG-80 • Agriculture, • AG-80 East: Residential, City R-2/PUD G. General Land Use Character: The general land use character of this area can be described as a transition area between existing large tracts of agricultural land and urban scale residential development in the city. West and south of the project site are agricultural lands however east, along Three Mile Drive, are city residential subdivisions which extend over a mile until Three Mile Drive's intersection with North Meridian Road. H. Utilities and Public Services: Water and sewer main lines are located within the vicinity of the project site. The nearest water main is located approximately 1,000 feet to the east on the south side of Three Mile Drive. The nearest sewer line is located approximately 750 feet north across Farm to Market Road in the Mountain Vista Estates subdivision. The property owners do not intend on connecting to the city's water or sewer mains in the area immediately. They plan on utilizing an existing well and septic system on their property to serve the new coffee stand. If the owners decide in the future to connect to city water and/or sewer, the owners would have to pay the appropriate impact fees for water and sewer connections and extend the water and sewer main lines to the property. Sewer: Private septic system if annexed at this time Water: Private well if annexed at this time Refuse: Contract hauler Electricity: Flathead Electric Cooperative Telephone: CenturyLink Schools: West Valley School District Fire: West Valley Fire Department (currently) Kalispell Fire Department if annexed Police: Flathead County Sherriff Department (currently) Kalispell Police Department if annexed a] A 10 a - . - - 0• The city council has adopted an annexation policy with a corresponding map as an addendum to the city's growth policy document. The purpose of the annexation policy is to give the planning board, the council and the development community direction when property owners outside of the city limits are requesting municipal services and annexation. The property requesting annexation falls inside the annexation boundaries for property owners to request direct annexation into the city. Public water and sewer main lines are located east of the property requesting annexation. If annexed, the property would have access to connect with the water and sewer main lines provided the main lines are extended to the property, the appropriate impact fees and necessary permits are obtained from the city. 2. Municipal Services: As stated above water and sewer main lines are located east of the property. These main lines are adequate to serve the future commercial needs of the property. The owners do not intend to extend water or sewer main lines to their property but instead will utilize their existing well and private septic system for their home and drive -through coffee stand at this time. 5 Figure 2: Current city limits and existing city water lines in the area. 3. Distance from current city limits: The property requesting annexation lies within an area which has the city limits across Farm to Market Road on the property's east and north sides. The map in figure 2 provides an illustration of the current city limits in relation to the property requesting annexation. 4. Cost of services: Once annexed to the city, full city services will be made available to the property owner. Any necessary infrastructure associated with development on the property will be required to be constructed in accordance with the City of Kalispell's Design and Construction standards and any other development policies, regulations or ordinances that may apply. When annexed, the owners do not intend to extend water and sewer main lines immediately. The main extensions may occur in the future if more intense commercial development is proposed on the property or if X required by the Flathead County Environmental Health Department and/or Kalispell Fire Department. A cost of services analysis is provided to the council on properties requesting annexation as an indication of what it may cost to serve the future development on the property. A review of the facility's needs with regard to city services is as follows: Streets: The property, once annexed, will also bring with it the maintenance of those sections of Three Mile Drive and West Spring Creek Road which are adjacent to the property. Farm to Market road is owned and maintained by the Montana Department of Transportation. The property has approximately 673 feet of frontage along West Spring Creek Road and approximately 688 feet of frontage along Three Mile Drive. A memo from the Kalispell Public Works Director dated February 23, 2012, states that it would cost about $2.16 a lineal foot or approximately $2,900 yearly to maintain portions of both the roads adjacent to the property. Parks: There will be no immediate impacts to the city's park system because there is already a house on the property. Bringing the property inside the city limits would require the property owners to pay the city taxes to support the city parks which may already receive use from the residents of the home. Police: The police department regularly travels this length of Three Mile Drive because of the subdivisions east of the project site. Annexing the property will require the police department to go slightly out of their way to patrol or respond to a call. Fire: The resident or business may need to call upon the fire department if there is a fire or medical emergency. However, the Kalispell Fire Department has an interlocal agreement with the West Valley Fire Department, who currently serves this property. Even if the property were not annexed into the city, if an emergency call was placed city fire and ambulance crews would be responding based on the interlocal agreement with the West Valley Fire Department. ® Solid Waste: The property currently contracts with Evergreen Disposal. ® General Taxes: The property will pay into the general fund if annexed. Assessments: The property will be paying the city's assessments for storm sewer, street maintenance and urban forestry. The attached cost of services analysis for this annexation shows approximately $1,195 will be generated from assessments and taxes. To serve the property with police and fire services and street maintenance will total approximately $ 3,79 1. Based on these estimated figures the annexation costs to the city to serve the FA property are approximately $2,596. This cost to the city is based on the estimate of current taxes the property would pay and the relatively minor commercial improvement on the property. With 3.5 acres, the property has the potential to increase the scale of commercial buildings or uses on the property. This in turn would increase the property value and may eventually show a net payment to the city's general funding based on the current cost of services analysis. Conclusion: The request to directly annex into the city is reasonable given the property's location to the current city limits and the property is within the annexation policy boundary adopted by the city council. The major expense to the city by annexing this property is the maintenance of the two adjacent roads. The planning board and city council should consider the short term costs with the potential for increased commercial revenue in the future allowed under the proposed B- 1 zoning for the 3.5 acre property. The statutory basis for reviewing a change in zoning is set forth by 76-2-303, M.C.A. findings of fact for the zone change request are discussed relative to the itemized criteria described by 76-2-304, M.C.A. and Section 27.29.020, Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. 1. Does the requested zone comply with the growth policy? The property is designated as Neighborhood Commercial on the Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map. The Neighborhood Commercial land use designation is intended for services, offices and limited retail for the immediate neighborhood. This designation was placed on the property and portions of the surrounding properties because of the intersection of West Spring Creek Road and Three Mile Drive. The property requesting the B- I zoning also has Farm to Market Road on its eastern boundary. With three relatively high traffic roads on all sides of the property the land was deemed not appropriate for general residential development. Chapter 4, Policy 2.b of the Growth Policy states, in part, that neighborhood commercial areas should generally be three to five acres in size. The property is 3.5 acres in size in accordance with the stated policy. E-11 The intent of the 13- 1 zoning district is to provide services with the adjacent residential areas. The intent section of the B- I zoning also states that the zoning district would typically be found in areas designated as neighborhood commercial on the Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map. In addition to zoning the 3.5 acre site B- 1 upon annexation the owner is also requesting the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning overlay district be included in the zoning. The PUD zoning will allow the Kalispell Fire Chief to determine the appropriate time frame for the extension of a water main to the property in order to provide adequate fire protection. The relatively minor commercial development immediately intended for the site would not require the extension of a water main however with 3.5 acres of 13- 1 there is the potential for additional commercial development to occur on the property in the future. 2. Will the requested zone have an effect • motorized and nonmotorizeffl transportation systems? I The property is currently developed with a single family home and a small coffee stand. Once annexed and zoned B-1 /PUD, the owners intend to open up the drive - through coffee stand. The anticipated vehicle trips associated with the requested B- 1 zoning and future coffee stand will not negatively impact the road system in this area. Provisions for adequate off-street parking and stacking lanes to accommodate customers of the coffee stand will address potential conflicts with vehicle drivers buying coffee and vehicles traveling down West Spring Creek Road. 3. Will the requested zone secure safety from fire, panic, and other dangers? Adequate access is available to the site in the case of an emergency. There are no features related to the property which would compromise the safety of the public. All municipal services including police and fire protection, water and sewer service are available to the area. 4. Will the requested zone promote the public health, safety and general welfare? The requested zoning classification will promote the health and general welfare by restricting land uses to those that would be compatible with the adjoining properties and not overburden the surrounding road system. 5. Will the requested zone provide for adequate light and air? Setback, height, and lot coverage standards for development occurring on this site are established in the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance to insure adequate light and air are provided. N All public services and facilities are currently available or can be provided to the property. Development should be encouraged in areas where these services are available. 7. Does the requested zone give consideration to the particular suitability of the Property for particular uses? The proposed B- 1 / PUD zoning district is consistent with the city's future land use map. The property has roads on all of its sides with a state secondary road, Farm to Market Road, on its eastern boundary. The uses permitted and conditionally permitted in the 13- 1 zone will be to scale and compatible with current land uses in the area. The 13- 1 zone also gives due consideration of the suitability of this property for the uses in the zoning district. 8. Does the requested zone give reasonable consideration to the character of the district? The general character of the area is the western entrance to the city with land in the area transitioning from larger agricultural tracts to urban residential densities. By assigning the property with the B - I / PUD zoning district the development of this property will be consistent with the city's future land use map and provide an area to accommodate neighborhood commercial uses for the residential subdivision located to the east. 9. Will the proposed zone conserve the value of buildings? Value of the buildings in the area will be conserved because the 13- 1/ PUD zoning will promote compatible and like uses on this property as are anticipated by the city on other properties in the area. 10. Will the requested zone encourage the most appropriate use of the land throughout the municipality? Neighborhood scale commercial development should be encouraged in areas where services and facilities are available. In this case water and sewer lines are located immediately east of the property. The proposed zoning is consistent with the growth policy future land use designation and is appropriate given the size of the property and surrounding road system. 10 [T"vMffbjW'niIjjrII; i'ita"urgo Nature of the Request: The proposed PUD will not deviate from either the zoning regulations or subdivision regulations. The main purpose of the PUD is to provide a mechanism for the Kalispell Fire Chief to require the extension of a water main for the purposes of providing adequate fire flow protection for structures and uses on the property. When reviewing the annexation request, the Fire Chief did not have concerns with the current proposal of establishing a 300± square foot drive - through coffee stand in addition to the existing single family residence. The concern was the potential future commercial uses on the 3.5 acre property. Extending a water main approximately 1/4 mile to the site will cost over $ 100,000 which is cost prohibitive for the current property owners. The location of the property sits at the western edge of the city and city infrastructure, such as water and sewer mains, has not been extended this far west yet. Establishing the PUD and including a condition for timing on the water main extension will enable the property owners to operate their drive -through coffee stand and insure adequate fire flow protection will be provided for if future commercial development occurs on the property. The property owners included a brief letter of their history and intentions for the property with the PUD application. The letter states that with the increased residential development to the east they decided it would be more profitable to open a business instead of trying to farm the small property. The current county zoning prohibits a coffee stand on the property so the property owners are seeking annexation and B- I zoning with the City of Kalispell. The requested PUD zoning was required based on the Fire Chiefs concerns stated in the above paragraph. The following information and evaluation criteria are from Section 27.19.020(4) of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. The intent of the planned unit development district is to serve as an overlay zoning district. The district shall function in concert with one or more of the underlying zones to provide a comprehensive, integrated development plan as well as providing the option to mix land uses and densities while preserving and enhancing the integrity and environmental values of an area. Review of Application Based Upon PUD Evaluation Criteria: The zoning regulations provide that the planning board and city council shall review the PUD application and plan based on the following criteria: 11 A. The compliance of the proposed PUD with the city growth policy and in particular the density and use policies of the plan; Without the PUD overlay zoning district the Fire Chief would not be able to support the requested D-1 zoning. Ultimate zoning of the property rests with the city council however the Fire Chiefs concerns would weigh heavy on the planning department's recommendation of the appropriate zoning. The PUD insures that future commercial development on the 3.5 acre site will be provided with adequate fire protection via an extension of the city's water main and one or more hydrants on the property. The proposed PUD enabling the property to be considered for the 13- 1 zoning district complies with the following policies in the Kalispell West Growth Policy Amendment s the- Policy: sr ' •- s < •• 111111111111 say11111g111111111111111pill- •� - ''alicy 5.a — Neighborhood commercial centers shouldbe sized to serve the immediate- ra one ,s B. The extent to which the PUD departs from the underlying zoning and the reasons why such departures _ or t not deemed to be public interest, and the mitigating conditions that the PUD provides to address th,l:� •- • The requested PUD will not deviate from the zoning regulations. It will serve, however to limit or control future development so that any additional development on site will occur in concert with the extension of necessary infrastructure including both water and street upgrades. C. The extent to which the PUD departs from the subdivision regulations (if subdivision i. publicworksi • ,. • for design y' construction a►, the subjectproperty, a= why departures are deemed• be in the public• the mitigating conditions that the PUD provides to address the deviations; The requested PUD will not deviate from the subdivision regulations or public work's standards for design and construction. D. The overall internal integrity of the PUD including the appropriate use of internal design elements, the use of buffers between different land uses, the use of transitions between uses of greater and lesser intensity, the use of enhanced design features to provide connectedness for both vehicle and pedestrian traffic thr• •: and the use of •: and traditional design to foster more • ,y •le neighborhood The relatively small size of the property and the limited amount of commercial development currently proposed on the property does not require the above listed information at this time. When future development occurs on the property, depending on the intensity of the development, the developer will need to address 12 the above issues. A recommended condition of approval will require a master site plan to be submitted when future commercial development is proposed on the property to address the issues above. E. The nature and extent of the public parks and common open space in the PUD, the reliability of the proposal for maintenance and ♦conservation of these areas and the adequacy or inadequacy of the amount and function of the parks and open space in terms of the land use, densities and dwelling types proposed in the PUD; The proposed PUD would permit a 300± square foot drive -through coffee stand on the property in addition to the existing single family home. No development of permanent housing is proposed and therefore no increase in resident population will occur. Without an increase in resident population the need for park or common open space is not required. The manner in which the PUD plan makes adequate provision for public services, provides adequate control over vehicular traffic and furthers the amenities of recreation and visual enjoyment; The police department regularly travels this length of Three Mile Drive because of the subdivisions east of the project site. Annexing the property will require the police department to go slightly out of their way to patrol or respond to a call. If annexed, the property will be served by the Kalispell Fire Department for fire or medical emergencies. The Kalispell Fire Department currently has an interlocal agreement with the West Valley Fire Department, who currently serves this property. Even if the property were not annexed into the city, if an emergency call was placed city fire and ambulance crews would be responding based on the interlocal agreement with the West Valley Fire Department. Water and Sewer Public water and sewer main lines are located east of the property requesting annexation. If annexed, the property would have access to connect with the water and sewer main lines provided the main lines are extended to the property, the appropriate impact fees and necessary permits are obtained from the city. The property owners intend to utilize the existing private well and an on -site septic system for the drive -through coffee stand. Prior to opening the owners will need to submit approvals to the city building department from the Flathead County Environmental Health Department approving the use of the well and septic system. Storm water There are no city storm water facilities in the area of the property. A storm water management plan will need to be submitted for the drive -through coffee stand to the public works department showing how storm water will be managed and kept 13 on -site. Future development on the property will also be required to address storm water conveyance and storage. 2. Control Over Vehicle Traffic The property, once annexed, will also bring with it the maintenance of approximately 673 feet of frontage along West Spring Creek Road and approximately 688 feet of frontage along Three Mile Drive. Both roads appear to be built to a rural standard including a paved driving width of 24 feet with little to no shoulder and drainage ditches on either side of the road. Both roads are located within a 60-foot wide easement. ;e looking north Figure 4: View of Three Mile Drive along the property's frontage looking east 14 The proposed commercial use of the property is limited to a small drive -through coffee stand. Access to and from the coffee stand would be from West Spring Creek Road. The current road standard this section of West Spring Creek Road is built to and the anticipated amount of traffic the coffee stand is likely to create does not warrant any upgrades to the road at this time. However, with 3.5 acres of B-1 zoning, the potential for increased commercial buildings or uses on the property in the future is high. Comments received by the Kalispell Public Works Department note that both West Spring Creek Road and Three Mile Drive are listed as minor arterials in the city's transportation plan (Figure 2-1 Functional Classification Map (2006) and Figure 11-1 Future Recommended Major Street Network (MSN)). The Department reviewed the city's extension of services plan and cited the following two sections which deal with road improvements in conjunction with annexations: • Chapter 3.11 "As the City annexes County roads, provisions should be made for upgrading to City standards." Chapter 3.11 • Chapter 5 states: "All new development, pursuant to annexation, which further impacts the existing or proposed street network, will be subject to conditions of approval intended to mitigate said impacts." Several options for upgrading streets are outlined in Kalispell's Extension of Service's Plan: one involves the property owner or developer's private funds to upgrade the adjacent roads and the second involves the formation of a special improvement district (SID). The city's transportation plan (2006 Update), chapter 9 Recommended Major Street Network Improvements, recommends the following improvements for West Spring Creek Road (MSN 12) and Three Mile Drive (MSN 29): 15 MSN 12 - Reconstruct West Spring Creek Road between US Highway 2 and West Reserve Drive to a three -lane minor arterial section. This should consist of widened pavement (including one travel lane in each direction), bike lanes on each side, curb and gutter, boulevard, sidewalk, and appropriate turn bays at the major intersections. MSN 29 - It is recommended to plan for, design and reconstruct Three Mile Drive to a three -lane urban minor arterial standard to include widened pavement (including one travel lane in each direction), bike lanes on each side, curb and gutter, boulevard, sidewalk, and appropriate turn bays at the major intersections. The costs to do the recommended road upgrades are significant. Therefore, staff is recommending a condition • the PUD which would require the property owners to waive their right to protest the creation of a special improvement district for upgrades to both West Spring Creek Road and Three Mile Drive. Given the size of the property and B- 1 zoning, future commercial development on the property will likely have an impact •... •• t«:• Staff is also recommending a condition be placed on the PUD requiring the property owner and/or developer upgrade the properties frontage along both West Spring Creek Road and Three Mile Drive when future commercial development is proposed commensurate with the level of development. This would likely be a significant commercial development and would not include the current proposal to operate a small drive -through coffee stand. The future upgrades for West Spring Creek Road and Three Mile Drive would include bringing both roads up to urban minor arterial standards and include the following: • Possible additional right-of-way dedication to the city • Widened pavement • Improvements or reconstruction of the road sub -base • Bike lanes on each side • Curb and gutter, • Landscaped boulevard with street trees • Sidewalk • Street lighting • Appropriate right-of-way and construction of turn bays at the major intersections (to be determined by the Kalispell Public Works Department) if future traffic warranted. In conclusion, with the waiver of protest for the creation of a SID and requirement to improve West Spring Creek Road and Three Mile Drive, adequate conditions will be in place to address future vehicle, bike and pedestrian mobility needs when the property and/or immediate area further develops. 3. Recreational Amenities Recreational amenities are needed in residential developments or mixed commercial/ residential developments where the project includes a new resident population. This is not the case with the proposed PUD plan. 10 4. Visual Enjoyment The property is located at a prominent intersection of West Spring Creek Road and Three Mile Drive. Farm to Market Road, a state secondary highway, is adjacent to the property's east boundary. With roads on all sides of the property future commercial development will be highly visible to the traveling public. With such a prominent location, a higher architectural standard for commercial buildings is important to establish and maintain the visual quality of the area, now and in the future. To insure this occurs for future development staff is recommending new commercial development be required to incorporate four-sided architecture in the design. G. The relationship, beneficial or adverse, of the PUD plan upon the neighborhood in which it is proposed to be established in concert with the underlying zone; The PUD will ultimately be beneficial to the neighborhood as the west end of Three Mile Drive continues to convert from agricultural land to city residential developments. The PUD and underlying 13- 1 zoning would be in place to serve the future resident population of this area of the city serving the market demand of retail and/or services needed for this neighborhood. H. In the case of a plan which proposes development over a period of years, the sufficiency of the terms and conditions proposed to protect and maintain the integrity of the PUD; The proposed PUD does not include a phased development plan. The property owners intend to operate a drive -through coffee stand if the property is annexed and the 13- 1 / PUD zoning is approved. There are anticipatory conditions provided that relate to the need to extend municipal water and to upgrade adjacent streets if additional commercial development is proposed by the owners. 1. Conformity with all applicable provisions of this chapter. No specific deviations from the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance have been identified based upon the information submitted with the application. 17 It is recommended that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KA- 11-4 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the property be annexed and the initial zoning for this property upon annexation be B- 1, Neighborhood Commercial. It is recommended that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report KPUD-12-1 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council the PUD overlay zoning district for the subject property be approved subject to the conditions listed below: ......... Prior to issuance of a building permit for any additional buildings or prior to any further commercial uses on the property, the property owner and/or developer shall extend a city water main to the property and install the required number of hydrants based on a review of the development plan by the Kalispell Fire Chief. The Fire Chief may, at the Chiefs discretion, waive the requirement to extend the water main and hydrant installation based on the scale of development proposed. 2. Further development of the 3.5 acre site shall require approval of a master site plan to address the following: • Building orientation • Parking • Internal sidewalks and sidewalk connections • Landscaping • Signage • Infrastructure extensions (water and sewer mains) and improvements (Streets) This condition or portions of this condition may be waived by the city's site review committee based on the scale and purpose of the development. 3. Commercial buildings shall incorporate four-sided architecture in their design for review and approval from the city's architectural review committee. 4. The property owner(s) shall waive their right to protest the creation of a special improvement district for upgrades to both West Spring Creek and Three Mile Drive as they abut this property. 5. At the time additional commercial development on the property is proposed, plans shall be submitted to the city to upgrade West Spring Creek Road and Three Mile Drive, along the property's frontage, to city urban minor arterial standards which includes but is not limited to the following: • Possible additional right-of-way dedication to the city Widened pavement Improvements or reconstruction of the road sub -base Bike lanes or sidewalk on the abutting side W." • Curb and gutter, • Landscaped boulevard with street trees ® Sidewalk • Street lighting ® Appropriate right-of-way and construction of turn bays at the major intersections (to be determined by the Kalispell Public Works Department) Approval and timing of the road upgrades shall be reviewed and approved by city staff. The installation of the upgrades will be based on the location and scale of existing and proposed development. A development agreement shall be drafted by the Kalispell City Attorney between the City of Kalispell and the developer outlining and formalizing the terms, conditions and provisions of approval. The final plan as approved, together with the conditions and restrictions imposed, shall constitute the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning for the site that shall be completed and signed by the city and property owner prior to the operation of the drive -through coffee stand. HE Return to: Theresa White Kalispell City Clerk P.O. Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 PETITION TO ANNEX AND NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL FROM RURAL FIRE DISTRICT The undersigned hereinafter referred to as Petitioner(s) respectfully petition the City Council of the City of Kalispell for annexation of the real property described below into the City of Kalispell. The Petitioner(s) requesting City of Kalispell annexation of the property described herein and further described in Exhibit A hereby mutually agree with the City of Kalispell that immediately upon annexation of the land all City of Kalispell municipal services will be provided to the property described herein on substantially the same basis and in the same manner as such services are provided or made available to other properties within the rest of the municipality. Petitioner(s) hereby state that there is no need to prepare a Municipal Annexation Service Plan for this annexation pursuant to Section 7-2-4610, M.C.A. since the parties are in agreement as to the provision of municipal services to the property requested to be annexed. The Petitioner(s) further herein express a intent to have the property as herein described withdrawn from the �� , � al Fire District under the provisions of Section 7-33-2127, Montana Code Annotated; a d that incorporated into this Petition to Annex is the Notice requirement pursuant to said Section; and that upon proper adoption of an ordinance or resolution of annexation by the City Council of the City of Kalispell, the property shall be detracted from said district. In the event the property is not immediately annexed, the Petitioner(s) further agree(s) that this covenant shall run to, with, and be binding upon the title of the said real property, and shall be binding upon our heirs, assigns, successors in interest, purchasers, and any and all subsequent holders or owners of the above described property. This City hereby agrees to allow Petitioner(s) to connect and receive the utilities from the City of Kalispell. This City hereby agrees to allow Petitioner(s) to connect and receive all available utilities from the City of Kalispell excluding solid waste services. MCA 7-2-4736 prohibits the c.ty from providing solid waste services to this property for a minimum of 5 years from date nexation. 1,2 ition r/Own Dat itioner/Ow er Date NOTE: You must attach an Exhibit A that provides a bona fide legal description of the property t1 1' annexed. 2 STATE OF MONTANA ) : ss County of Flathead County On this day of x , -�Q `before me —the un� rsigned, a Notary Public for the State of Montana, personally appeared �Q�f'r) } a ! \ known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I h nd and affixed my otary Seal the ay and year in this certificate first a Qv-=AlwA, , � I Ia 4I I, rt Notary Public, Nate of Mont a R Printed Name �^ n Residing at y P D%JS%JJ� �ry b M Commission ex ires: t STATE OF MONTANA ss County of Flathead County On this P9 day off J before me e and rsigned, a Notary Public for the State of Montana, personally appearedh , f" known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to th foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my 7hnd and affixed myTary Seal the day and year in this certificate firstlovete, , Notary Public,&ee of M ontana��-0�� P Printed Nam Residing at ®^ My Commission expires. STATE OF MONTANA�) , , County of Flathead On this day of , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public for The State of Montana, personally appeared and the , and , respectively, of the corporation that executed the foregoing instrument, and the persons who executed said instrument on behalf of said corporation, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and axed my Notary Seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. Notary Public, State of Montana Printed Name Residing at My Commission expires Joshua & Shelby Farnham Annexation The property is described as Parcel A of Certificate of Survey No. 15268 in Section 2, Township 28N, Range 22W, Flathead County, Montana. PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE, NAME OF APPLI MAIL ADDRESS: CITY/STATE/ZIP INTEREST IN PAUrrn1 x Planning Department 201 1" Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7946 Fax: (406) 758-7739 www.kalispell.com/planning PETITION FOR ANNEXATION AND INITIAL ZONING Other Parties of Interest to be Notified: PARTIES OF INTEREST: MAIL ADDRESS: CITY/STATE/ZIP: INTEREST IN PROPERTY: Igoe PLEASE COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: Address of the property: Legal Description: (Lot and Block of Subdivision; Tract #) (Section, Township, Range) (Attach metes and bounds as`Exhibit A) Land in project (ac): L 10 Ln C� C A Rr� S Current estimated market value �b o(�6 ° GCG — 50% build out J ©6 . o oo • © C) at 100% build out / 0 bD M Q C) Is there a Rural Fire Department RSID or Bond on this property Yes No If yes remaining balance is $ The present zoning of the above property is: Cs The proposed zoning of the above property is: State the changed or changing conditions that make the proposed amendment necessary: The signing of this application signifies that the foregoing information is true and accurate based upon the best information available and further grants approval for Kalispell Planning staff to be present on the property for routine inspection during the annexation process. �— (Date) 13 I 1035 First Ave West Kalispell, MT 59901 406.751.8200 do 406.751.8210 EnArL planningweb@flathead.mt.gov WEB flathead.mt.gov/planning-zoning February 27, 2012 Sean Conrad, Senior Planner Kalispell Planning Department 201 1st Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Dear Sean, I'm writing in response to your request for agency comments regarding Joshua and Shelby Farnham's application to annex 3.5 acres of land and rezone that land from AG-20 Agricultural (County) to `B-1/PUD' (Neighborhood Business/Planned Unit Development). The 3.5 acre property located at 610 West Spring Creek Road can be legally described as Parcel `A' shown on Certificate of Survey No. 15268 located in Section 2, Township 28 North, Range 22 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, MT. As you know, our office has been in communication with Mr. & Mrs. Farnham regarding the subject property and their intended use on the property. I've included a summary of those interactions below to help inform you of the property's history under the County's jurisdiction. ■ September 1 oth, 2004: A zoning violation complaint is submitted to the Planning and Zoning Office regarding 610 Spring Creek Road in Kalispell. The complaint claims there are multiple dwellings present on subject property. ■ October 18th, 2004: Property owners Joshua & Shelby Farnham apply for an administrative conditional use permit (CUP) for an agricultural caretaker's dwelling unit on the subject property. The Administrative CUP is approved on November 3, 2004; the structure that was approved as, and utilized for, an agricultural caretaker's dwelling is the same structure that has been converted to a coffee stand. ■ March 28th, 2011: Shelby Farnham stops by the Flathead County Planning and Zoning Office to discuss opening a coffee stand on the property. The `Planner -on -Duty' that day (myself) discussed with Mrs. Farnham how a coffee stand is considered a commercial use and is not permitted under the existing AG-20 Agricultural zoning. Mrs. Farnham inquired about a zone change on the property, at which point I explained to her the process by which to complete a zone change and also discussed the potential difficulties she may have due to the County's plan for the area (West Valley) and the designated land use for this property (agricultural). I provided Mrs. Farnham with a zone change application as well as a pre- commercial coffee stand/restaurant (not permitted). The option to request annexation into the City of Kalispell was again brought up, and once again we encouraged the Farnhams to pursue this option with the City because the City's plan appeared to generally support the type of use the Farnhams wish to operate on their property. I hope this timeline has provided some insight as to the history of the parcel and our interactions with the property owners to date. At this time the County views no issue with the Farnham's request to annex into the City of Kalispell, and would be in support of the requested annexation. Should you have any immediate questions regarding the above information, please do not hesitate to call or email me at amouch ,flathead.mt.gov; any questions regarding this property after March 2r'd, 2012 should be directed to Alex Hogle, Planner II at ahoglegflathead.mt.gov. Sincerely, Allison Mouch, AICP® Planner II f amaD (DUHTV PLINNIN6 „w, ZDNIN6 .)McE: 406.751,8200 FAY 406.751.8210 1035 First Ave West Kalispell, MT 59901 EMAIL: planningwebCeflathead.mt.gov we5: flathead.mt.gov/planning-zoning 201 1" Avenue East, P.O. Box 1997, Kalispell, Mt. 59903 Phone (406) 758-7720 MEMORANDUM To: Planning Department From: William Shaw, Public Works Director Subject: Annexation of Tract 1DA section 2, T28N, R22W. Date: February 23, 2012 Assuming that this property is considered residential or commercial and the $.019 street maintenance assessment is applicable to the entire 3.43 acres the street maintenance fee would be about $2840 annually. This revenue would have to recompense the City for maintenance of about 13001f of road; about $2.16/lft. A typical city block (75,000 sf) produces about $1425; about $2.33 / lft. If there is an assessment area cap then the street maintenance assessment may be different. If both roads (west and south) are constructed to city standard (assuming that the subgrade does not require reconstruction) a base course and asphalt surface (no curb) could cost about $100,000 to $120,000. If the lot were connected to City utilities, then the owner would have to construct about 1,8001f of sewer line piping (assuming no lift statin is necessary) and about 1,400 lft of water line piping (cost would depend upon whether service line or main line); if main line piping is required cost could be about $250,000 to $270,000. Assuming the highest of all cost, the total cost to deliver a parcel meeting city standard could be about $390,000. Storm water is assumed sufficient via maintenance of existing roadway ditch absorption fields. Planning Department 201 1st Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Fax: (406) 758-7739 www.kalispell.com/planning APPLICATION FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) PROJECT NAME 1. NAME OF APPLICANT: C�S�� C ` G. �f` kn 1[\ (, 2. MAIL ADDRESS: Q 3. CITY/STATE/ZIP: �� PHONE: -130 NAME AND ADDRESS OF OWNER IF DIFFERENT THAN APPLICANT: 4. NAME: _ ) a m. - _ 5. MAIL ADDRESS: 6. CITY/STATE/ZIP: PHONE: 7. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE: 8. MAIL ADDRESS: 9. CITY/STATE/ZIP: PHONE: If there are others who should be notified during the review process, please list those. Check One: X Initial PUD proposal Amendment to an existing PUD A. Property Address: © PC c--Q� � B. Total Area of Property: C C. Legal description including section, township range: D. The present zoning of the above property is: (-t C '�:) 6\(-) E. Please provide the following information in a narrative format with supporting drawings or other format as needed: 1 a. An overall description of the goals and objectives for the development of the project. b. In cases where the development will be executed in increments, a schedule showing the time within phase will be completed. C. The extent to which the plan departs from zoning and subdivision regulations including but not limited to density, setbacks and use, and the reasons why such departures are or are not deemed to be in the public interest; d. The nature and extent of the common open space in the project and the provisions for maintenance and conservation of the common open space; and the adequacy of the amount and function of the open space in terms of the land use, densities and dwelling types proposed in the plan; e. The manner in which services will be provided such as water, sewer, storm water management, schools, roads, traffic management, pedestrian access, recreational facilities and other applicable services and utilities. f. The relationship, beneficial or adverse, of the planned development project upon the neighborhood in which it is proposed to be established g. How the plan provides reasonable consideration to the character of the neighborhood and the peculiar suitability of the property for the proposed use. h. Where there are more intensive uses or incompatible uses planned within the project or on the project boundaries, how with the impacts of those uses be mitigated. i. J How the development plan will further the goals, policies and objectives of the Kalispell Growth Policy. Include site plans, drawings and schematics with supporting narratives where needed that includes the following information: (1). Total acreage and present zoning classifications; (2). Zoning classification of all adjoining properties; (3). Density in dwelling units per gross acre; (4). Location, size height and number of stories for buildings and uses proposed for buildings; (5). Layout and dimensions of streets, parking areas, pedestrian walkways and surfacing; (6). Vehicle, emergency and pedestrian access, traffic circulation and control; (7). Location, size, height, color and materials of signs; (8). Location and height of fencing and/or screening; (9). Location and type of landscaping; (10). Location and type of open space and common areas; E 3 112 acres seems small in the eyes of most, but to the Farnham Fam ily it is home. In 2003 the Farnhams,built their home and have lived on the property for almost 9 years. wher they purchased the land they hoped to one day begin a hobby farm. what changed the Farnhams minds was the housing development that boomed next door to them. They decided it would be more profitable to open a business instead of a small farm. This is where the coffee shop idea was born. The location of the property is excellent for a small business and it would also benefit the community because the Farnhams plan to buy most of their product locally. The only problem keeping them from opening their small independent business, is that their property needs a to be re -zoned. Currently the property is zoned AG 20 and in order to open their coffee shop it needs to have a zone change.This is the reason why the farnhams have requested to be annexed into city. (11). Proposed maintenance of common areas and open space; (12). Property boundary locations and setback lines (13). Special design standards, materials and / or colors; (14). Proposed schedule of completions and phasing of the development, if applicable; (15). Covenants, conditions and restrictions; (16). Any other information that may be deemed relevant and appropriate to allow for adequate review. If the PUD involves the division of land for the purpose of conveyance, a preliminary plat shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements of the subdivision regulations. Please note that the approved final plan, together with the conditions and restrictions imposed, shall constitute the zoning for the district. No building permit shall be issued for any structure within the district unless such structure conforms to the provisions of the approved plan. The signing of this application signifies that the aforementioned information is true and correct and grants approval for Kalispell Planning staff to be present on the property for routine monitoring and inspection during review process. (A*licant Signature) (Date) 3 CERTIFICATION APPLICANT: •Joshua & Shelby Farnham FILE NO: KA- 11-04 I, the undersigned certify that I did this date mail via First Class Mail a cop of the attached notice to the following list • landowners ad joinin t property lines of the property where an annexation & initial zoning has beeJ7 requested. Date: Tract/ Lot: Tract IDA Joshua & Shelby Farnham 735 West • Street Kalispell, MT 59901 Joshua & Shelby Farnham Trillium, LLC Duane & Nancy Nelson 735 West Center Street P.O. Box 7667 880 Three Mile Drive Kalispell, MT 59901 Kalispell, MT 59904 Kalispell, MT 59901 Judith Schumacher Jason B. Hatton Larry Martin 2546 E Halcyon William R. Schottlekorb Connie Preston Tucson, AZ 85716 3216 Lower Valley Road 135 West Idaho, Ste B Kalispell, MT 59901 Kalispell, MT 59901 Daniel Rinta Michael & Heather Meyer Daniel & Mary Nelson P.O. Box 7131 172 Jackson Peak Drive 176 Jackson Peak Drive Kalispell, MT 59904 Kalispell, MT 59901 Kalispell, MT 59901 Touchstone, LLC Ron Terry Construction Fairview Properties, LLC 135 West Idaho, Ste B 7 Meridian Court 221 Fairview Lane Kalispell, MT 59901 Kalispell, MT 59901 Columbia Falls, MT 59912 Tamra Landwehr Raphael & Jonna Russell, Sr. Brenon & Dianna Kintzler 206 Jackson Peak Drive 1340 Willow Glen Drive, #3 218 Jackson Peak Drive Kalispell, MT 59901 Kalispell, MT 59901 Kalispell, MT 59901 Christopher Van Orden Michaela Franchini Derek Price 165 Jackson Peak Drive Levi White 175 Jackson Peak Drive Kalispell, MT 59901 171 Jackson Peak Drive Kalispell, MT 59901 Kalispell, MT 59901 Thomas & Heather Neumann Bilynda Anderson Jeffrey Loveless 181 Jackson Peak Drive 1123 Blacktail Road 191 Jackson Peak Drive Kalispell, MT 59901 Lakeside, MT 59922 Kalispell, MT 59901 Christopher & Daisy Handford Douglas & Lynn Whyte Michelle Pellett 195 Jackson Peak Drive P.O. Box 8763 203 Jackson Peak Drive Kalispell, MT 59901 Kalispell, MT 59904 Kalispell, MT 59901 Matthew & Holly Desch David, Mark, Rexann & Stephen Nobach Flathead County 207 Jackson Peak Drive AD% Stephen R. Nobach Attn: Commissioners Kalispell, MT 59901 8365 SW 891h Ave 800 South Main Street Portland, OR 97223 Kalispell, MT 59901 City of Kalispell Attn: City Clerk P.O. Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59901 'P.IANNING' POR;THE FUTURE MONTANA , Planning Department 201 1" Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Fax: (406) 758-7739 www.kalispell.com/planning You are being sent this notice because you are a property owner within 150 feet of the proposed project noted below and will be most directly affected by its development. You have an opportunity to present your comments and concerns at the meeting noted below. You may contact this office at (406) 758-7940 for additional information or visit our website at www.kalispell.com/planning under "Planning Board Projects". Interested persons are encouraged to attend the hearing and make their views and concerns known to the Board. Written comments may be submitted to the Kalispell Planning Department at the above address prior to the date of the hearing, or email us at planning4ka lisp ell. com. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING KALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD AND ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 13, 2012 The regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, March 13, 2012, beginning at 7:00 PM in the Kalispell City Council Chambers, Kalispell City Hall, 201 First Avenue East, Kalispell. The planning board will hold a public hearing and take public comments on the following agenda items. The Board will make recommendations to the Kalispell City Council who will take final action. 1. A request from the Joshua and Shelby Farnham to annex 3.5 acres of land and zone the land B- l/PUD (Neighborhood Business/Planned Unit Development) upon annexation. The property is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Three Mile Drive and West Spring Creek Road. The property is surrounded by existing roads with Three Mile Drive on its south boundary, West Spring Creek Road on its west boundary and Farm to Market Road on its east boundary. The property is currently developed with a single family home addressed as 610 W. Spring Creek Road and is zoned AG-20 (Agricultural). A small drive through coffee stand is located north of the existing home and the owners intend to operate the coffee stand once annexed into the city. The 3.5 acre site can be legally described as Parcel A as shown on Certificate of Survey No. 15268 located in Section 2, Township 28 North, Range 22 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. 2. A request from North Star Associates to annex 1.35 acres of land and zone the land R-2 (Residential) upon annexation. In addition to the annexation the applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to convert and expand an existing building on the property into a residential care facility. The residential care facility will offer counseling and therapy for patients with eating disorders. The residential care facility will be approximately 18,500 square feet in size and will be operated on a 24 hour/7 days a week basis. The 1.35 acre property is located at 3201 Highway 93 North and can be legally described as Tract A as shown on Certificate of Survey No. 17674 located in Section 19, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. Documents pertaining to the agenda items are on file for public inspection at the Kalispell Planning Department, 201 First Avenue East, Kalispell, MT 59901, and are available for public review during regular office hours. In addition, information on the agenda items is posted on our website at www.kalispell.coin/planning under "Planning Board Agenda & Staff Reports". INING fNING STATE OF MONTANA FLATHEAD COUNTY AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION � ►rg RICHELLE ROONEY BEING DULY y�; , SWORN, DEPOSES AND SAYS: THAT ,the. ;r:wjlf LEGAL CLERK OF TIIE DAILY INTEI is DAILY NEWSPAPER OF GENERAL C'11 ha., PRINTED AND PUBLISHED IN THE CI infix KALISPELL, IN THE COUNTY OF FLA �ghe+ odd, STATE OF MONTANA, AND THAT NCB (.UhIr LEGAL ADVERTISMENT WAS PRINTED AND PUBLISHED IN THE REGULAR AND ENTIRE ISSUE OF SAID PAPER, AND IN EACH AND EVERY COPY THEREOF ON THE DATES Of Feb. 26, 2012. AND THE RATE CHARGED FOR THE ABOVE PRINTING DOES NOT EXCEED TIIE MINIMUM GOING RATE CHARGED TO ANY OTHER ADVERTISER FOR TIIE SAME PUBLICATION, SET IN TIIE SAME SIZE TYPE AND PUBLISHED FOR THE SAME NUMBER OF INSERTIONS. Subscribed and sworn to Before me this February 27, 012 Dorothy I. GI Toss Notary Public for the State of Montana Residing in Kalispell My commission expires 9/1.1/201 t oN° DOROTHY L GLENCROSS NOTARY PUBLIC for the 4 z N State of Montana * SEAL * Residing at Kalispell, Montana �� cm My Commission Expires �feofNlon�� September 11, 2013 County 1 E AG-20 County AG-80 WVO Three Mile Dr iz{ i 0 `°. 4e31 j33 4 1 /33 134 /35 ,- I Dr Au b Counttyy CounX0 SAG 10 VUVO - _ 0 F VICINITY MAP SCALE 1" = 250' JOSHUA & SHELBY FARNHAM REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION & INITIAL ZONING OF B-1 (NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS) AND A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ON 3.5 ACRES CURRENTLY ZONED COUNTY AG-20 (AGRICULTURAL) PLOT DATE 12/29/11 FILE # KA —11— 0 4 & KP U D —12 — 01 H:\gis\site\ka11_04 Farnham.dwg