The URL can be used to link to this page

1. PH - Resolution 4515/4515A - Proposed Amendment to City-County Master PlanFlathead Regional Development Office 723 5th Avenue East - Room 414 Kalispell, Montana 59901 Phone: (406) 758-5980 Fax: (406) 758-5781 REPORT TO: Kalispell Mayor and City Council FROM: Narda A. Wilson, Senior Planner Chris A. Kukulski, City Manager SUBJECT J & F Construction / Vernon and Thelma Johnson - An Amendment to the West Valley Neighborhood Plan MEETING DATE: November 1, 1999 BACKGROUND: A public hearing has been scheduled before the city council in consideration of a proposal to amend the West Valley Neighborhood Plan by reclassifying approximately 112 acres from an Agricultural land use designation to a Suburban Residential land use designation. The purpose of plan amendment would be to allow the rezoning of this property to an R-2 designation and creating an approximately 135 lot residential subdivision. This property is located northwest of the intersection of Highway 93 and West Reserve Drive generally along the western boundary of Country Estates subdivision and is within the Kalispell planning jurisdiction. The Board of County Commissioners held a public hearing on Tuesday, October 26, 1999 to consider this plan amendment. After taking public testimony and board discussion, the commissioners continued consideration of this proposal until November 2, 1999, after the council has taken action. I believe this was primarily because of the question surrounding the extension of City sewer to the development. The developers are not proposing the extension of City services to the area, but rather are proposing the use of on -site septic systems. As you are aware, the staff is recommending denial of this proposal because of the lack of services to the area. The West Valley Land Use Advisory Committee recommended approval on a vote of three in favor, two opposed and one abstention, but had concerns regarding the use of septic systems. The Kalispell City -County Planning Board has recommended approval of the proposal and felt that the issue regarding the use of septic systems is a health department issue. Approval of the plan amendment requires approval by both the Kalispell City County and the Board of County Commissioners which would remove 112 acres from the West Valley planning jurisdiction and bring it wholly within the Kalispell planning jurisdiction. Providing Community Planning Assistance To: • Flathead County • City of Columbia Falls • City of Kalispell • City of Whitefish West Valley Neighborhood Plan Amendment Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: The City Attorney's Office has prepared two resolutions: one to adopt the plan amendment and one to reject the plan amendment. FISCAL EFFECTS: ALTERNATIVES: 14W4 A.�- Narda A. Wilson Senior Planner Unknown. As suggested by the city council. Report compiled: October 28, 1999 Attachments: none Chris A. Kukulski City Manager RESOLUTION NO. 4 15 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE KALISPELL CITY - COUNTY MASTER PLAN. WHEREAS, on April 7th, 1986, the City Council adopted the Kalispell City -County Master Plan by Resolution No. 3641, and WHEREAS, Vernon and Thelma Johnson and J&F Construction made an application on August 16, 1999 to amend said Master Plan by changing the designation of approximately 112 acres of land located northwest of the intersection of Highway 93 and West Reserve Drive generally along the western boundary of Country Estates subdivision and described as a portion of Assessor's Tract 3+ and a portion of Assessor's Tract 5+ located in Section 25, Township 29 North, Range 22 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana, from Agricultural to One Family Limited Residential, and WHEREAS, on September 14th, 1999, the Kalispell City -County Planning Board held a public hearing, after due and proper notice, received public comment upon, and received FRDO report #KMPA-99-2 which evaluated the proposal based upon the goals and objectives of the Master Plan, the purpose of zoning and current circumstances in the planning jurisdiction, and WHEREAS, at the conclusion of said public hearing and after consideration of the proposed amendment, the Kalispell City -County Planning Board, adopted report #KMPA-99-2 as the findings of fact, and recommended to the City Council of the City of Kalispell, that the proposed amendment to the Kalispell City -County Master Plan be approved, and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Kalispell, on October 4, 1999 considered it advisable that they consider the proposed Master Plan amendment and adopted a Resolution of Intention to Adopt, Revise, or Reject a Proposed Amendment to the Kalispell City -County Master Plan (Resolution No. 4512), and WHEREAS, on November 1, 1999, the City Council met, held a Public Hearing, heard public comment on said Resolution of Intention, and considered Resolution No. 4512, and WHEREAS, based upon the report (#KMPA-99-2), the Minutes and recommendations of Kalispell City -County Planning Board, and the input received at the hearing of November 1, 1999, the Council may, under § 76-1-102, MCA: 1) encourage local governments to improve the health, safety, convenience, and welfare of its citizens, 2) plan for future development of communities so that highway systems are carefully planned, 3) assure community centers grow only with adequate highway, utility, health, educational and recreational facilities, 4) observe needs of agriculture, industry, and business in providing for future growth; 5) provide for healthy surroundings for family life in residential areas, 6) promote the efficient and economical use of public funds in growth, and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby adopts the following as findings of fact: 1. Kalispell City -County Planning Board recommended to the Kalispell City Council and the Board of County Commissioners that the proposal to amend the West Valley Neighborhood Plan by removing 112 acres from the West Valley Overlay District be approved because it meets the goals and policies of the Kalispell City -County Master Plan. 2. This property shall be removed from the West Valley Neighborhood Plan area and be brought wholly under the Kalispell City -County Planning Jurisdiction. 3. The Kalispell City -County Planning Board directs the staff to prepare a resolution approving map amendments for the president's signature to be presented to the City Council and County Commissioners. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. That pursuant to § 76-1-604, MCA, the City Council of the City of Kalispell hereby adopts the findings of facts contained herein and adopts the requested amendment to the Kalispell City -County Master Plan to change the land use designation of the property described as a portion of Assessor's Tract 3+ and a portion of Assessor's Tract 5+ in Section 25, Township 29 North, Range 22 West P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana from Agricultural to One Family Limited Residential. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND SIGNED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL, THIS 1ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1999. Wm. E. Boharski Mayor Attest: Theresa White City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 4C15A A RESOLUTION REJECTING A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE KALISPELL CITY - COUNTY MASTER PLAN. WHEREAS, on April 7th, 1986, the City Council adopted the Kalispell City -County Master Plan by Resolution No. 3641, and WHEREAS, Vernon and Thelma Johnson and J&F Construction made an application on August 16, 1999 to amend said Master Plan by changing the designation of approximately 112 acres of land located northwest of the intersection of Highway 93 and West Reserve Drive generally along the western boundary of Country Estates subdivision and described as a portion of Assessor's Tract 3+ and a portion of Assessor's Tract 5+ located in Section 25, Township 29 North, Range 22 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana, from Agricultural to One Family Limited Residential, and WHEREAS, on September 14th, 1999, the Kalispell City -County Planning Board held a public hearing, after due and proper notice, received public comment upon, and received FRDO report #KMPA-99-2 which evaluated the proposal based upon the goals and objectives of the Master Plan, the purpose of zoning and current circumstances in the planning jurisdiction, and WHEREAS, at the conclusion of said public hearing and after consideration of the proposed amendment, the Kalispell City -County Planning Board, adopted report #KMPA-99-2 as the findings of fact, and recommended to the City Council of the City of Kalispell, that the proposed amendment to the Kalispell City -County Master Plan be approved, and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Kalispell, on October 4, 1999 considered it advisable that they consider the proposed Master Plan amendment and adopted a Resolution of Intention to Adopt, Revise, or Reject a Proposed Amendment to the Kalispell City -County Master Plan (Resolution No. 4512), and WHEREAS, on November 1, 1999, the City Council met, held a Public Hearing, heard public comment on said Resolution of Intention, and considered Resolution No. 4512, and WHEREAS, based upon the report (#KMPA-99-2), the Minutes and recommendations of Kalispell City -County Planning Board, and the input received at the hearing of November 1, 1999, the Council may, under § 76-1-102, MCA: 1) encourage local governments to improve the health, safety, convenience, and welfare of its citizens, 2) plan for future development of communities so that highway systems are carefully planned, 3) assure community centers grow only with adequate highway, utility, health, educational and recreational facilities, 4) observe needs of agriculture, industry, and business in providing for future growth; 5) provide for healthy surroundings for family life in residential areas, 6) promote the efficient and economical use of public funds in growth, and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby adopts as the findings of fact KMPA-99-2, as adopted by the Kalispell City -County Planning Board. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. That pursuant to § 76-1-604, MCA, the City Council of the City of Kalispell hereby adopts the findings of facts contained herein and rejects the requested amendment to the Kalispell City -County Master Plan to change the land use designation of the property described as a portion of Assessor's Tract 3+ and a portion of Assessor's Tract 5+ in Section 25, Township 29 North, Range 22 West P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana from Agricultural to One Family Limited Residential. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND SIGNED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL, THIS 1ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1999. Wm. E. Boharski Mayor Attest: Theresa White City Clerk Flathead Regional Development Office 723 5th Avenue East - Room 414 Kalispell, Montana 59901 Phone: (406) 758-5980 Fax: (406) 758-5781 REPORT TO: Kalispell Mayor and City Council FROM: Narda A. Wilson, Senior Planner Chris A. Kukulski, City Manager SUBJECT J & F Construction / Vernon and Thelma Johnson - An Amendment to the West Valley Neighborhood Plan MEETING DATE: October 4, 1999 BACKGROUND: This is a proposal to amend the West Valley Neighborhood Plan by reclassifying approximately 112 acres from an Agricultural land use designation to a Suburban Residential land use designation for the purpose of rezoning to an R-2 designation and creating an approximately 135 lot residential subdivision. This property is located northwest of the intersection of Highway 93 and West Reserve Drive generally along the western boundary of Country Estates subdivision and is within the Kalispell planning jurisdiction. This amendment would require approval by both the city council and county commissioners to be adopted. This matter went before the West Valley Land Use Advisory Committee on August 31, 1999 for hearing and consideration. The Committee recommended approval on a vote of three in favor, two opposed and one abstention. However, the Committee was concerned about the number of proposed lots being developed with on -site septic system. They thought that either City sewer should be extended to the property or that the subdivision should be designed with the ability to connect to City sewer in the future. They also wanted a "covenant" that the new subdivision would not oppose annexation to the city. This then went before the Kalispell City -County Planning Board on September 14, 1999 for public hearing. The planning board recommended approval on a vote of seven in favor and none opposed. The board felt this was a logical extension of the same type of development to the east, i.e. Country Estates, and that the on -site septic systems were an issue to be addressed by the Health Department under their review criteria. They also felt that the Johnson's were being denied their right to develop their property as they saw fit, and that if the community wanted "open space" it should be purchased rather than legislated through zoning. Staff is recommending that the proposal to amend the West Valley Neighborhood Plan from Agricultural to Suburban Residential and remove it from the West Valley Overlay District be denied. This is being recommended for denial by the staff because it does not comply with the goals and policies of the West Valley Neighborhood Plan. Specifically, the plan goals are that this area be maintained in agricultural use, that it develop in a way that creates a rural atmosphere and that density should be low. Additionally and more importantly, staff is recommending denial because the developers are proposing to place approximately 135 homes on on -site septic systems. Providing Community Planning Assistance To: • Flathead County • City of Columbia Falls • City of Kalispell • City of Whitefish • West Valley Neighborhood Plan Amendment Page 2 City sewer is anticipated to be within one half mile of the site within the coming year with the development of the "Domesite." In the opinion of the planning staff, this proposal is premature without the benefit of public sewer. Granted, this is a preliminary step to filing a zone change and subdivision and does not constitute approval of the subdivision. However, knowing that the Suburban Residential designation would allow for half acre density, a land use designation that would allow a much higher density would appear to be inappropriate without adequate public facilities. Furthermore, the West Valley Neighborhood Plan is less than three years old and took nearly two years to be formulated and adopted. This proposal is contrary to the philosophy and neighborhood planning to provide some predictability and stability to an area. Adoption of the enclosed resolution by the City and the County would remove the 112 acres from the West Valley plan jurisdiction and bring it wholly within the Kalispell planning jurisdiction. RECOMMENDATION: The resolution prepared by the City Attorney's Office is a resolution to adopt, amend or deny the proposed amendment and to set a public hearing date of November 1, 1999. Adoption of the resolution would be in order. FISCAL EFFECTS: Unknown. ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the city council. Narda A. Wilson Chris A. Kukulski Senior. Planner City Manager Report compiled: September 22, 1999 Attachments: Letter of transmittal Resolution KPMA-99-2 Staff report KPMA-99-2 and back-up materials Draft planning board minutes NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RESOLUTION NO. 4512 A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO ADOPT, REVISE OR REJECT A RECOMMENDED NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE KALISPELL CITY -COUNTY MASTER PLAN. WHEREAS, on April 7`h, 1986, the City Council adopted the Kalispell City -County Master Plan by Resolution No. 3641, and WHEREAS, J&F Construction and Vernon and Thelma Johnson made an application to amend said Master Plan by changing the designation of approximately 112 acres of land currently in the West Valley Neighborhood Plan from agricultural to suburban residential, and WHEREAS, on September 14, 1999, the Kalispell City -County Planning Board held a public hearing, after due and proper notice, received public comment upon, and received FRDO report #KMPA-99-2 which evaluated the proposal based upon the goals and objectives of the Master Plan, the purpose of zoning and current circumstances in the planning jurisdiction, and WHEREAS, at the conclusion of said public hearing and after consideration of the proposed amendment, the Kalispell City County Planning Board, adopted report #KMPA-99-2, as the findings of fact and recommended that the Kalispell City -County Master Plan be amended by changing the designation of approximately 112 acres in the West Valley Neighborhood from Agricultural to Suburban Residential, and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Kalispell considers it advisable that they consider recommendation of the Kalispell City -County Planning Board and adopt a Resolution of Intention to Adopt, Revise or Reject a Recommended Neighborhood Plan Amendment to the Kalispell City -County Master Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. That pursuant to Section 76-1-604, MCA, the City Council of the City of Kalispell intends to consider the revisions of the Kalispell City -County Master Plan, as recommended by the Kalispell City -County Planning Board, to change the plan for the area located in a portion of Assessor's Tract 3+ and a portion of Assessor's Tract 5+ located in Section 25, Township 29 North, Range 22 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana, by adopting, revising or rejecting a proposed Neighborhood Plan Amendment for said land. SECTION II. That the City Council of the City of Kalispell shall consider whether to pass a final resolution revising the Kalispell City -County Master Plan as set forth herein at a meeting to be held on November 1, 1999 at 7:00 P.M., at the Council Chambers, City Hall, Kalispell, Montana, and at the conclusion of said meeting the City Council will --consider a Resolution to revise, reject or adopt the proposed amendment. SECTION III. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to give notice of this meeting in accordance with Section 7-1-4128, MCA. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND SIGNED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL, THIS 4TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1999. Wm. E. Boharski Mayor Attest: Theresa White City Clerk U3 KALISPELL CITY -COUNTY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF MEETING SEPTEMBER 14, 1999 CALL TO ORDER AND Jean Johnson called the meeting to order at approximately 7:05 ROLL CALL p.m. Members present were: Rob Heinecke, Greg Stevens, Jean Johnson, Joe Brenneman, Brian Sipe, Bill Rice, Don Mann, and Donald Garberg. Don Hines was excused. Narda Wilson represented the Flathead Regional Development Office. There were approximately 22 people in the audience. It was explained that Joe Brenneman had another commitment and would be leaving the meeting by 7 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES On a motion by Stevens and seconded by Rice the minutes of the meeting of August 10, 1999 were approved unanimously as submitted on a vote by acclamation. WEST VALLEY MASTER A request by J & F Construction and Vernon and Thelma PLAN AMENDMENT Johnson for a master plan amendment to the West Valley Neighborhood Plan to amend the land use designation on approximately 112 acres from agricultural to suburban residential. STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson of the Flathead Regional Development office gave a presentation on staff report KMPA-99-2 in which staff recommends that the proposal to amend the West Valley Neighborhood Plan on 112 acres from Agricultural to Suburban Residential and remove it from the West Valley Overlay District be denied because it does not comply with the goals and policies of the West Valley Neighborhood Plan. She stated that should the planning board determine that the proposal is worthy of favorable consideration, the staff would recommend the alternate included in the staff report. This area is in both the county and city Zoning jurisdictions. The West Valley Land Use Advisory Committee reviewed this application and they recommended approval on a vote of three in favor, two opposed and one abstention. The planning board is charged with determining the appropriateness of changing this parcel from an agricultural to a suburban residential zoning jurisdiction. The primaazy goal of the West Valley Neighborhood Plan is to preserve agricultural land. Staff cannot find that this proposal complies with the plan. If this proposal had water and sewer extended to the site, staff could support the application, but due to environmental constraints the stab cannot support this plan with on -site sewer systems. Don Garberg asked about the environmental concerns and Wilson explained that she had spoken with the DEQ and they believe there will become a problem in the future if individual on -site septic is allowed. Stevens asked if on -site septic systems should be under consideration when discussing master plans or amendments. He stated that it should be under review during the subdivision review process, not now. Wilson answered that staff believes this would be a premature development without consideration of city water and sewer extension. Stevens stated that it clouds the issue of the appropriateness of the plan amendment to consider septic systems in the discussion. PUBLIC HERRING The public hearing was opened to those in favor of the petition. PROPONENTS John Parsons, 725 9th Ave. West, spoke in favor of the application for a master plan amendment. The West Valley Land Use Advisory Committee has recommended approval of this application. The area is going through changes and this amendment will fit in with those changes. He stated that the area is moving toward a more commercial use. The request is for an R-2 zoning designation and this area supports residential zoning. This will be the same type and quality of development as Country Estates. He stated that the economy doesn't support traditional farming and agricultural uses alone. He stated that this plan includes 76% open space that will be required to be kept in perpetuity. Mike Frazer of Thomas, Dean & Hoskins spoke in favor of the project stating that this is a master plan change, a first step in a long process to develop this property. He stated that a master plan change is the only consideration before the board. He noted that this is an appropriate change because it is an outgrowth of the adjacent development. He noted that the developers are environmentally concerned and will make decisions in favor of such. Jack Emerson of J & F Construction spoke in favor of the proposal stating that every home in the adjacent development has a replacement drain field, as would this property. Brent Johnson spoke in favor of the project stating that a natural extension and organized growth make this a worthwhile project. His family needs to diversify their holdings in order to maintain their family farm. Russell Crowder, representing Montanans for Property Rights, spoke in favor of the project noting that this is only a consideration on an amendment to the master plan, and that environmental concerns are premature. He recommends approval of the amendment. OPPONENTS Bill Breen, 375 Mountain Meadow Road, spoke in opposition to the plan amendment stating that the West Valley Plan was the result of an 18-month effort and is barely two years old. It Kalispell City -County Planning Board September 14, 1999 Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 8 reflects the area's desire to maintain agricultural use. He stated that the committee was well aware of the adjoining developments and they believed this is where the boundaries should be drawn. He stated concern over the impacts to the West Valley School District. He stated that amending the plan violates the goals of the plan in order to suit one property owner and would destroy the integrity of the plan. David Van Dort, 777 O'Neil Creek Road, stated that the committee's decision to recommend approval was not unanimous. He has concern over the septic system density that could harm the aquifer and that the developers have made no attempt to assist the school with the impacts from development He stated that with the future extension of water and sewer probable, individual septic systems is premature. No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. BOARD DISCUSSION Stevens asked how many acres were encompassed by the overlay district and was answered approximately 50,000. He stated that this parcel containing 112 acres, along the boundary of the district, is not of great impact to the district. Sipe questioned the relationship of the number of property owners in this 50,000-acre district to the number of people responding to the creation of the district No one had a figure to present He stated that he did not believe the creation of the district should disallow the property owners right to develop his or her land. It was explained that a protest developed and failed during the process of creating the West Valley Neighborhood Plan which only garnered about 15 percent after a door to door effort. Johnson asked .about the actions of the advisory committee and how Van Dort and Breen felt about the committee and the board. Breen answered that the committee was trying to maintain integrity to the plan. Stevens stated that as a board they have an obligation to explain their thoughts and actions to the people. He stated that he believes that the farming industry has no mechanism to preserve and protect the agricultural land; the community in essence is asking that the property owners to lose the potential income from development of their property solely for the community good. But the community is not willing to assist the property owners in doing so. He stated that 112 acres out of a 50,000 plus acre plan is not a large impact. Since this property is right next to a development and the Johnson's need the financial relief it would not be in the best interest for the board to recommend denial of the amendment. He stated that if the Kalispell City -County Planning Board September 14, 1999 Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 8 neighborhood felt such a need to preserve this as agricultural land then they should get together and pay for a conservation easement so that the owners did not lose in the process. i Heinecke stated that he sees it as the Johnson's right to withdraw from the neighborhood plan and overlay district and he believes they should be allowed to do so. MOTION Garberg moved and Heinecke seconded to recommend to the Kalispell City Council and the Board of County Commissioners that the proposal to amend the West Valley Neighborhood Plan by removing 112 acres from the West Valley Overlay District be approved because it does meet the goals and policies of the Kalispell City County Master Plan; and recommend that this property be removed from the West Valley Neighborhood Plan area and be brought wholly under the Kalispell City -County Planning jurisdiction; and direct the staff to prepare a resolution approving the map amendment for the president's signature to be presented to the City Council and the County Commissioners. On a roll call vote all members voted Aye. The motion passed unanimously. ARICO / RIVER PLACE A request by Arico for approval of a Planned Unit Development SUBDIVISION, PLANNED on property in the Evergreen and Vicinity Zoning District, which UNIT DEVELOPMENT includes a zone change from R-1 to R-2 on approximately 34 AND ZONE CHANGE acres and a Planned Unit Development overlay for approximately 54 acres planned for River Place Subdivision. STAFF REPORT Wilson gave a presentation on staff report FPP-99-8 / FPUD-99- 1 in which staff recommends that the Planned Unit Development, zone change, and preliminary plat be approved subject to 20 conditions. She stated that rezoning approximately 34 acres from R-1 to R-2 is requested, along with a PUD overlay, which will allow some flexibility to the design. Staff feels that this is a good plan and it addresses the neighborhood's concerns, although it is not as dense as staff would like to see because the infrastructure is already available in the area. The density proposed under this PUD is far less than what is possible in the zoning district Staff recommends that some of the covenants, River Place Subdivision Requirements (a-k), be required to be placed on the face of the plat She stated that the intent of a Planned Unit Development is not only to allow the developers more flexibility in their design, it is also to allow the public an assurance of how the development will be designed and what standards will be followed. This proposal is in general compliance with the Master Plan. Staff asked that condition two be amended to allow final phasing to be determined by the utility design. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those in favor of the petition. Kalispell City -County Planning Board September 14, 1999 Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 8 -r J & F OONSTAUCTIOIi / VIRIION AIM TUCUKA JO821WA i.XQUIST FOR KAWM PLAN 11 iD�liT FLATHPAD R19GIONAL DEVZWPMXT OFFICX F49POItT t RMPA-99.2 GEPTEMIM 7, 1999 A report to the Kalispell City -County Planning Board, the Kalispell City Council and the Board of County Commissioners regarding a request to amend the West Valley Neighborhood Plan map, an addendum to the Kalispell City -County Master Plan. A public hearing has been scheduled before the planning board for September 14, 1999 beginning at 6:00 PIri in the Kalispell City Council Chambers. The Planning Board will forward a recommendation to the Kalispell City Council and the County Commissioners for final, action. lA B. Petitioner. J & F Construction 690 N. Meridian Road, Suite 210 Kalispell, MT 59901 (406)752-2881 Technical Assistance: Vernon and Thelma Johnson 985 Stillwater Road Kalispell, MT 59901-6901 John Parsons 725 Ninth Avenue West Kalispell, MT 59401 Summary of the Request: This is a request is to amend the West Valley Neighborhood Plan map which is an addendum to the Kalispell City County Master Plan from Agricultural to Suburban Residential on approximately 112 acres of land. Under the eaiating roaster plaza map designation this is within the West Valley Neighborhood Plan boundaries. The plan states that 'The purpose statement of the West Valley Planning and Zoning District is `all lands both timber and farm land to be classified and maintained as food and fiber agriculture." The West Valley Neighborhood Plan was adopted in April of 1997 after approximately 18 months of consideration by the West Valley Land Use Advisory Committee and public hearings. This proposal went before the West Valley Land Use Advisory Committee on August 31, 1999 for a public hearing and a recommendation from that committee is included azth this packet. The application proposes changing the land use designation for approximately 112 acres to suburban residential for the purpose of development of the site as a residential subdivision. Shvald the plan amendment proposal be approved, the developers would follow it with a zone change application to R-2, a One Family Limited Residential, zoning designation that has a minimum lot size requirement of 20,000 square feet. The application states that the developers would apply for 1 preliminary plat approval of a subdivision under the R-2 zoning which would have an overall density of approximately one -quarter acre lots. These lots would generally be anticipated to be served by a community water system and individual on -site sewage treatment systems. The subdivision would be phased over a number of years depending on the market demands. Preliminary subdivision design has not been developed at this time. The zone change application and findings submitted by the applicants have been included as an informational item with this packet. C. Location and Legal Description of Property: The property proposed for the map amendment is located on the north side of West Reserve Drive between Highway 93 and Stillwater Road. This property is west of Country Estates subdivision and can be described as a portion of Assessor's Tract 3+ and a portion of Assessor's Tract 5+ located in Section 25, Township 29 North, Range 22 West, P.M.M, Flathead County, Montana. D. Existing Land Use and Zoning: The site is currently used for active agricultural purposes. This property is part of _ the West Valley Overlay District. This district acts as an overlay district with its ---- development standards in part of the West Side Zoning District. The underlying zoning for this property is AG-80, Agricultural, which is an agricultural district with an 80 acre minimum lot size requirement. The overlay standards of the West Valley District allow a density of one dwelling unit per five acres with clustering of lots which do not exceed one net acre in size and have a minimum of 76 percent of the property dedicated as permanent open space. The open space is intended to be preserved for agricultural use and can contain one residence. Under the current West Valley Overlay development standards this property ` - would be eligible for 22 one acre lots. E. Adjacent Land Uses and Zoning: This area can be described as being located on the fringes of the planning jurisdiction and is characterized by having a suburban residential development, County Estates subdivision, to the east, and agricultural uses to the north, south and west. North: Agricultural uses, SAG-10 with West Valley Overlay South: (School Section) Agricultural uses, AG-80 with a Neighborhood Plan for more intensive commercial and residential uses planned East:: Single family homes and agricultural uses, R-2 and SAG-10 West: Agricultural uses, AG-80 with West Valley Overlay The West Valley Neighborhood Plan was adopted as an addendum to the Kalispell City - County Master Plan. Master plans are intended to provide guidance for long-term growth in a general and comprehensive manner. The West Valley Neighborhood Plan was adopted in April of 1997 after approximately 18 months of meetings held by the West Valley Steering Committee and numerous public meetings. A copy of the text and map of this plan is included with this report 2 The proposed plan amendment should be considered in the context of the overall goals and policies of both the West Valley Neighborhood Plan and the Kalispell City County Master Plan. As the board is aware, the Kalispell plan is in the process of being updated and will likely go to the public for review before the end of the millennium. No specific evaluation criteria currently exists in the Kalispell City -County Master Plan nor under state statute for plan amendment requests. In evaluating the proposed map amendment, the proposal will be evaluated in the context of whether the overall goals and objectives of the neighborhood plan and the master plan are being served as well as the specific elements of the neighborhood plan. Consideration will also be given to several elements outlined in the state statutes for master plans which would include: growth management, land use, transportation, environmental considerations, economy, availability of public services and facilities. Consideration will also be given to the circumstances under which proposed master plan request is being made which would justify approval of the amendment. 1. Relation of the plan amendment to the neighborhood plan and master plan: The primary goals and objectives of the West Valley Neighborhood Plan is the preservation of agriculture and a rural atmosphere. There are several elements of the plan which includes a land use section, goals and policies and development standards section that was adopted as the zoning" and the "overlay" regulations for the plan area. These various elements will be used to evaluate this proposal. In addition to the map amendment, a future part of this development proposal would include the rezoning this 112 acres of property from AG-80, Agricultural, to R-2, a zoning designation that has a 20,000 square foot minimum lot size requirement. This would allow the subdivision of the 112 acres into approximately 135 lots to be filed. The subdivision would be phased over a number of years. No specific development proposal has been drafted to date that would indicate the access, lot size and lot layout because consideration must first be given to the map amendment. Some of the issues identified in the land use section dealing with agricultural and forestry sections include the passage of a right to farm / forestry ordinance,' rural cluster incentives and purchase and transfer of development rights programs. The residential section, which is most relevant to this plan amendment proposal, identifies some of the issues in the West Valley that land use densities in the five to 20 acre range are appropriate in some areas, that clustering is an important tool to min;m. sprawl and that there may be opportunities to expand existing subdivisions. The open space section recognizes that clustering is not the long term or best solution to the preservation of large contiguous areas of open space and may also be accomplished through purchase or easement agreements. The development standards have a base density of one dwelling unit per five acres with clustering. And because this plan is generally geared toward the preservation and agricultural uses through the cluster concept, it would be difficult to conclude that this proposal complies with the residential or agricultural land use element of the plan. No clustering or open space is proposed with the current proposal, therefore it would be difficult to find that the proposal furthers the goals and policies V, of the West Valley Neighborhood Plan in general. Some of the specific goals of the West Valley are as follows: to plan for wise use of land in the West Valley; to maintain the rural and scenic quality of the West Valley; to protect air quality and to protect private property rights. The overall development plan may further some of the general goals of the West Valley plan such the protection of private property rights. However, it would not comply with the basic intent to preserve the agricultural and rural character of the area, maintain low densities and encourage the use of clustering. It would difficult to state that the use of on -site septic systems under the density proposed would be a "wise use" of land or that it would maintain the rural and scenic quality of the West Valley. 2. Growth Management Considerations: The West Valley Neighborhood Plan and development standards recognize that expansion along the perimeter of existing subdivisions would be a logical extension of residential growth in the area. It is recognized that the expansion of existing platted subdivision is reasonable. However, the provisions of the plan and the adopted development standards state that all new or amended lots must have access and use the water and road system of the existing subdivision and be subject to the covenant restriction of the existing platted subdivision. These standards would not apply to this proposal. Further, it only provides for a density of one dwelling unit per five acres. The plan policies that relate to residential development stat that the new uses and subdivision of land should not conflict with the normal and customary forest or agricultural practices occurring in the vicinity and that subdivisions should maintain an overall low density of development. This proposal actually converts productive agricultural land to a relatively high density residential use without any provision for clustering. On the other hand, the proximity of this site to the urban services is approximately three miles and considered is relatively close. County Estates Subdivision lies directly to the east and is comprised of similarly sized lots as those intended under this proposal. When this proposal went to the West Valley Land Use Advisory Committee for public hearing, there were several members on the board who believed that this was a logical expansion of this type of residential development, although there were concerns regarding the use of on -site sewage treatment systems within the development. Staff would concur with this assessment of the situation. The Kalispell City County Master Plan recognizes that the suburban residential designation can provide a good transition between the urbanized areas and the more rural agricultural and timber areas of the planning jurisdiction. The developers noted that this is a logical extension of growth in the area because the Department of State Lands is proposing the intensive development and use of land directly to the south and that Pack and Co. has been given approval of a commercial development less than one mile to the east. However, both of these development proposals are contingent upon the extension of public sewer to the site to serve the proposed uses. Without the use of community sewer to this site, this proposal does not promote 4 good growth management policies. 3. Environmental considerations: One of the most important considerations that can be considered with regard to this proposal is the lots on this 112 acres would be using on -site sewage treatment systems. Water quality is one of the communities biggest concerns. Without the use of a community sewer system, this development proposal would appear to be premature. Furthermore, the Stillwater River lies to the east less than one quarter mile. Environmental impacts to the ground water and surface water cannot be quantitatively or qualitatively identified at this point. However, It would appear to be a less than prudent and responsible approach to development considering the use of on -site septic system and that sewer is in relatively close proximity and could be extended within the next several years. The proposed density exceed that which could be considered to be acceptable for on -site sewage treatment. 4. Economy: Traditionally agriculture and timber have been an important part of the local economy. However, there has been a trend in recent years toward a more service oriented economy as well as a decline in agricultural activity. The property owners have traditionally farmed this property and need to divest themselves of a portion of their farmland for personal reasons. The economic viability of farming in the Valley has taken a tenuous turn for the worse, and the sale of this property may allow the property owners to continue farming the remaining, larger piece of farmland they own to the west. The property owners and developers believe that the proximity of this property to the Country Estates make this proposal a reasonable alternative to the clustering provision in the West Valley Overlay standards. This proposal would allow the development of approximately 135 lots as opposed to approximately 22 lots on 112 acres which would apparently be a more economically profitable alternative, but would not support the agricultural economy of the West Valley or the agricultural goals of the West Valley plan. S. Availability of public services and facilities: Consideration of public services in the area including roads, schools, fire and emergency services and water and sewer facilities_ Traffic generation as a result of this type of intensive residential development would result in significant impacts to Highway 93 and West Reserve Drive. The updated transportation element of the master plan calls for a Highway 93 Bypass which ends at West Reserve and Highway 93 to the east of this site. The bypass is intended to remove heavy truck traffic from the core area of Kalispell. The bypass would be directly to the south of this property which can be anticipated to produce noise that would be generally incompatible with the type of density proposed with this residential use. West Reserve Drive is identified as a minor arterial on the in the master plan. There are no current plans to upgrade West Reserve Drive although it receives a significant amount of traffic and should be considered for improvements. The West Valley School is currently overcrowded and using temporary classrooms in the basement to accommodate student. Attempts at approving a bond issues have been voted down twice. Although additional tax revenues generated from the new homes in the district would go toward education, additional burdens on the school district would need to be considered. Busing is not available other than through individual contracts for children who live more than three miles from the school. Fire and emergency services could be adequately accommodated by the West Valley Volunteer Fire Department and the North Valley hospital to accommodate the increase in density which could be anticipated from this proposal. Water and sewer facilities are limited to on -site septic systems and individual wells or community water systems. The lack of public sewer to this property is the single greatest element of concern by both the West Valley Land Use Advisory Committee and the staff. The use of on -site sewage treatment systems undermines the goals for the protection of water quality in the Valley. If public sewer were to be extended to the site then this project would be of greater value. However, in its absence, the conversion of this land from its current agricultural use to a suburban residential could be considered premature The West Valley Neighborhood Plan was adopted less than three years ago after significant work and many public meetings held within the local community. This plan is intended to maintain land in an agricultural and timber use and to maintain a low density of development. The plan outlines the use of the clustering mechanism for residential development that would allow a net density of one dwelling per five acres and the creation lots that do not exceed one acre in size with the remaining acreage set aside in open space. Circumstances do not appear to have changed significantly enough to warrant the reclassification of this land from agricultural to residential with half acre lots unless public sewer were available. Provisions within the plan anticipate densities ranging in size from five to 20 acres. The development standards adopted for the West Valley and the West Valley Overlay area reflects those goals. The conversion of this property to a suburban residential density does comply with the goals and policies of the West Valley Neighborhood Plan. According to the densities provided for in the plan and within the development standards, a 135 lot subdivision would require a parent tract of 675 acres. In order to find that this proposal complies with the West Valley Neighborhood Plan some type of provision would need to be made for calculating this type of residential densities. Absent that, it cannot be found that the proposal complies with the area plan. However, if the planning board and county commissioners decide that this proposal is worthy of favorable consideration, it could generally be found that this proposal would comply with the intent of the suburban residential land use designation in that it provides a transition area between the urban fringes and the rural area of the West Valley. As a further note the West Valley Land Use Advisory Committee has made a recommendation to the Kalispell City -County Planning Board, the Kalispell City Council and the Board of County Commissioners regarding this proposal. Their letter and minutes from the August 31, 1999 public meeting are attached. The committee is recommending on a vote of three in favor, two opposed and one abstention, that this proposal be approved. In closing, a dilemma presents itself to the committee and the planning board because the neighborhood plan does not have any provision for residential development of the density and intensity proposed. Substantial revisions would need to be made to both the plan document and the development standards for the West Valley is order to address this issue. Although the committee does not favor removing this property from the plan area boundaries, it cannot be found that the proposal would comply with the cluster provisions and the agricultural preservation goals and policies of the plan. Therefore, the proposal would need to be approved as an amendment to the West Valley Neighborhood Plan map by removing it from the West Valley plan area, or an amendment to the West Valley Neighborhood Plan text and development standards would need to be made in order to address the increased density. Based upon the above evaluation, the staff would recommend to the Kalispell City - County Planning Board recommend to the Kalispell City Council and the Board of County Commissioners that the proposal to amend the West Valley Neighborhood Plan on 112 acres from Agricultural to Suburban Residential and remove it from the West Valley Overlay District be denied because it does not comply with the goals and policies of the West Valley Neighborhood Plan. Alternative: Should the planning board determine that the proposal is worthy of favorable consideration, the staff would recommend the following: 1. Kalispell City -County Planning Board recommend to the Kalispell City Council and the Board of County Commissioners that the proposal to amend the West Valley Neighborhood Plan by removing 112 acres from the West Valley Overlay District be approved because it meets the goals and policies of the Kalispell City County Master Plan 2. This property be removed from the West Valley Neighborhood Plan area and be brought wholly under the Kalispell City -County Planning jurisdiction. The Kalispell City County Planning Board direct the staff to prepare a resolution approving map amendment for the president's signature to be presented to the city council and county commissioners. rA RESOLUTION KPMA-99-2 AN AMENDMENT TO THE WEST VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND THE KALISPELL CITY -COUNTY MASTER PLAN A RESOLUTION ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE WEST VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND THE KALISPELL CITY COUNTY MASTER PLAN BY REMOVING APPROXIMATELY 112 ACRES FROM THE WEST VALLEY OVERLAY DISTRICT AND BRINING IT WHOLLY WITHIN THE KALISPELL PLANNING JURISDICTION WHEREAS, the Kalispell City -County Master Plan was adopted by the Kalispell City Council on April 7, 1986 with Resolution 3641 and by the Board of County Commissioners on February 6, 1986 with Resolution 578A; and WHEREAS, the West Valley Neighborhood Plan was adopted by the Kalispell City Council on April 7, 1999 by Resolution No. 4323 and by the Board of County Commissioners on April 9, 1998 by Resolution 955AA as an addendum to the Kalispell City -County Master Plan; and WHEREAS, J & F Construction and Vernon and Thelma Johnson have petitioned for a revision to the West Valley Neighborhood Plan and the Kalispell City -County Master plan which would change the designation of an area containing approximately 112 acres indicated on the West Valley Neighborhood Plan Map and Kalispell City County Master Plan Map attached as Exhibit A, and made a part of this resolution from the current Agricultural land use designation to a Suburban Residential land use designation by enacting a plan amendment for the property; and WHEREAS, the West Valley Land Use Advisory Committee held a public meeting on August 31, 1999 at 7:00 PM in the West Valley Fire Hall and the Kalispell City -County Planning Board held a public hearing on September 14, 1998 at 6:00 PM in the Kalispell City Council Chambers after due notice to the - public and received comments upon the proposal and evaluated the proposed plan amendment in accordance with the goals and objectives of the West Valley Neighborhood Plan and the Kalispell City -County Master Plan; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment would effectively amend the West Valley Neighborhood Plan boundaries by removing this 112 acres and placing it wholly within the jurisdiction of the Kalispell City -County Master Plan with a land use designation of the area Agricultural to Suburban Residential. NOW THE REFO IT RESOLVED, that the Kalispell City -County arming Boar eco en s to the Kalispell City County and the Flathead Runty Board f �o ssners that the proposed amendment be adopted. i ,an A. Joh on, President alispell C' -County Planning Board a x i ��t a SAG- 0 ae a IF SAGl w ma ____ _au �ta , _ _ -- _ - _=` a, / a - SAS- - --_ • - _ - _ _ _ - . - - - - - AG-8_ - _- GOUNPRvi -____-__ _ _ _ / EW - - - --- --- r. - _ . ...._ s _ _. _ _- _ -_-- ..... a.. -...... ---................ __-....................... =- • - - - - i • w \ -.................--- - - - - -- AM - --- - _ • • • ___ - --- - - - � i•irsr � •` s -- -- - 1 IHC- 41 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -' N RY SATES _ ............. _- - 7 • w A - - r r i •� '� • •s r ........... _ _Irest - + _ _ i iI Y i i ii !• f SV 1111 STA� EXHIBIT A - vicnvi1Y MAP J & F CONSTRUCTION / VERNON & THELMA JOHNSON REQUEST FOR KALISPELL PLAN MAP AMENDMENT FROM AGRICULTURAL TO SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL USE WEST VALLEY OVERLAY ZONING PLAT DATE:8/25/99 FILE # KPMA-99-2 SCALE 1" = 800' x:\j�9\sfte\Epm&29-2.dw8 WEST VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE September 2, 1999 - Kalispell City -County Planning Board c/o Narda Wilson FRDO 723 Fifth Ave. East Kalispell, MT 59901 Dear Kalispell City -County Planning Board Members: SFp This letter will inform you of the action that was taken at the August 31, 1999 meeting of the West Valley Land Use Advisory Committee regarding a request by Vernon and Thelma Johnson to remove approximately 112 acres from the West Valley Planning District and amend the Master Plan map to reflect the change. The West Valley Advisory Committee voted on a motion that suburban residential was an appropriate designation for this land and the committee recommends removal of this tract from the West Valley Neighborhood Planing District and amendment of the Master Plan map to reflect this removal. The motion passed on a 3 to 2 vote with one abstention due to family involvement. The Committee also decided to forward a list of their thoughts and concerns to the Kalispell City -County Planning Board regarding the above motion. These are as follows: 1. The number of individual septic systems needed for this project where no city services are available. Perhaps the septic system should be designed to allow it to eventually be connected to city sewer. 2. The impact to the West Valley School from new students living in this area. 3. The impact on transportation from numerous vehicle trips daily. 4. Covenants to the new subdivision to reference the customary agricultural practices in the vicinity. 5. A covenant that the new subdivision would not oppose annexation to the city. Respectfully submitted, (14Wf,6vU_ # , Charlene M. O'Neil Vice Chair/Secretary West Valley Land Use Advisory Committee M[NUTES WEST VALLEY LAND USE ADtiTSORY COMMITTEE August 31. 1999 The meeting was called to order by Cliainnan Rodney Dresbach at 7:OO PM. Committee members present were Bruce Tutvedt, Clinton Grosswiler, Art Hanson, Charlene O'Neil and Dave Van Dort. Ron Buentemeier was absent due to illness. The minutes from the previous meeting. October 27. 1998, were read and approved. Under old business. Narda Wilson of FRDO handed out a copy of the final version of the West Valley Land Use Advisory Committee Policies and Procedures. She explained that the County Commissioners had signed these even though our copy was unsigned. Under new business a request was heard for an amendment to the Master Plan map and a removal from the West Valley Neighborhood Plan of approximately 112 acres owned by Vernon and Thelma Johnson. Narda Wilson gave a brief history of the West Valley overlay- on the West Side Zoning District. John Parsons, consultant_ explained the request by the Johnson and gave a description of the current development (Countryside Estates to the East) and potential development (State Section 36 to the South) adjacent to the 112 acres. Proponents included Frank Strickland of J&F Construction who had developed phase 3 of Countryside Estates and felt there existed a need for lots the size and type that are proposed Three other proponents spoke in favor of the project. Several opponents expressed concern about amending the plan, the increased school district enrollment and the number of septic systems required for the individual lots with no city services available. There were questions asked by several persons attending the meeting who did not express whether they were opponents or proponents. The public hearing portion of the request was closed and general discussion by the committee members took place. A concern expressed was how could the committee made an exception and grant a request from agricultural designation to a suburban residential designation on one parcel of land and deny another request from another land owner in the future. Narda explained that she did not see this request as being a precedent and that it would not undennine the integrity of the West Valley Neighborhood Plan. She explained that the committee would not be amending the West Valley Zoning Regulation but would be amending the Master Plan Map. A motion was made that suburban residential was an appropriate designation for this land and the committee would recommend removal of this tract from the West Valley Neighborhood Planing District and recommend amending the Master Plan map to reflect this removal. The motion passed on a 3 to 2 vote with one abstention due to family involvement. The committee also decided to forward a list of their thoughts and concerns to the Kalispell City -County Planning Board together with the action they had taken. Other new business discussion involved a question as to where the soil types designation in the zoning regulations had originated and also a query as to why the State of Montana had not included the West Valley Neighborhood Advisory Committee in any of their planning requests for State Section 36. The meeting was adjourned at 9:OOPM. Respectfully submitted, Charlene M. O'Neil _�k.. -1 lsfl i1V. vl�[Vv �t_tJvvv iJJv' i UC J4 1 [I L.IIG ntYU it�i. - •,` 155 7th Ave., W.N. • P.O. Box 73M • K . MT 59904-0338 * Ph. (406) 758-6400 + FAX (406) 756d414 August 31, 1999 Narda Wilson Flathead Regional Development Mwo 723 Fifth Avenue East Room 414 Kalispell, W 59901 Re: Request by John Parsons on behalf of J & T Construction and Vernon and Thelma Johnson for a master plan amendment to the West Valley Land Use Plan Dear Narda: We received your Notice of a Public Hearing on the proposed master plan amendment as noted above. We wanted your office to be aware that LHC, Inc. does have a 60-foot road .nnd utility casement from Reserve Drive to our Gravel Pit property. This easement appears to border the west boundary of the proposed development. It is important to us that any fixture development in this area recognizes this easement as access to and from our existing gravel pit operations, which may inchxde gravel crushing asphalt and concrete plants. Sincere / 7 Roger L. Claridge., Pr eat u o: UiC Pit Location . 1179 5111water Pd. • P,O.Box 7338 . KdN"I, MT 5990d-OW (406) 758-6420 • FAX (406) 758-6430 a 1 ' t s &AAG-10 x j SAG10u r - -- - ,�. -- - - , ---- ---- - - - Sub1 _ I--- -........- f ---- . - a - - - - - s / •' -�/ —........:: - -__ - • ICIA - - - f _ •• . M - - --____-- ........... - - - 911 _ _ �} s ■ tm- a -___ - '� 4 • f _ �.] E- s f m• s m, s f ..._.........._..... ... ; .. . ......................... __...._....._....._....._..-. ..._....._............__.._.. _... .......... . - ...... ...... N j •\ I i �. S T A / Vicnq Y MAP J & F CONSTRUCTION / VERNON & THELMA JOHNSON REQUEST FOR KALISPELL PLAN MAP AMENDMENT FROM AGRICULTURAL TO SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL USE WEST VALLEY OVERLAY ZONING Prat DAM-6/25/90 FILE # KPMA— 9 9 — 2 SCALE 1 " = Boo' &\&\dte\Xpmaff-.Zdn Flathead Regional Development Office 723 5th Avenue East - Room 414 Kalispell, Montana 59901 Phone: (406) 758-5980 Fax: (406) 758-5781 August 24, 1999 NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING WEST VALLEY LAND USE ADVISORY COMMITTEE AMENDMENT TO THE WEST VALLEY LAND USE PLAN FROM AGRICULTURAL TO SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL ON 112 ACRES The West Valley Land Use Advisory Committee will hold a public meeting on Tuesday, August 31, 1999 beginning at 7:00 PM, at the new West Valley Fire Hall located on the west side of Farm to Market Road approximately one half mile north of West Reserve Drive. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss a proposed amendment to the West Valley Land Use Plan. An application for a master plan amendment has been submitted to the Flathead Regional Development Office which proposes to amend the land use designation on approximately 112 acres from agricultural to suburban residential. The property proposed for this change is located west of the intersection of Highway 93 South and West Reserve Drive approximately one half mile. The underlying zoning is AG-80, an Agricultural zoning designation with an 80 acre minimum lot size requirement. However, this property falls under the West Valley Overlay Zoning and allows density of one dwelling per five acres with a cluster development. As proposed, the land use designation would be changed from Agricultural to Suburban Residential which allows a density of up to one dwelling per half acre. If the master plan amendment is approved the applicant would proceed with a zone change to R-2, a One Family Limited Residential The comments of the West Valley Land Use Advisory Committee will be forwarded to the Kalispell City County Planning Board who will hold a public hearing on this matter at their regularly scheduled meeting of September 14, 1999 beginning at 6:00 PM. This meeting will be held in the Kalispell City Council Chambers located at 312 First Avenue East, Kalispell. The planning board will forward a recommendation to the Kalispell City Council and Board of County Commissioners who will take final action on the proposal. For additional information regarding this matter, please contact Narda Wilson at the Flathead Regional Development Office located at 723 Fifth Avenue East, Kalispell, or by calling (406)758-5980. Providing Community Planning Assistance To: • Flathead County • City of Columbia Falls • City of Kalispell • City of Whitefish • SUBJECT PROPERTY 3 CE'/z) -rl - S CE /z ;2 -�- 'FZACT $ ASSESSOR # OWNER/ADDRESS / vl:s -4.) O ,.� ie.0 .� d Tei�st��t q �-" f s /t•v i J � f 3 n ! / D T % % % 25 09 '1d -7339 0 a D 9 7 zs-z4-z ;z 1 3 $ D yJ ? (o Sa 25-12-9 -a z VA v¢ 3 of aJl j/2cj 400l&,23 3ti9 ycA�-"�, iZ.�►�� -S. S /L4,-, s 6 r, - T S 4 O 1 Qllayl/leul DDOIlo�� J.S �idd,s� S�jur,re Sv kS .o T A 9 y 3 t cl pt� 0 ii�Sh St,t3; pd - / fa.1/c� 000I%�� Y��r V,�� Co.�y��v-r��,��,o�+s l✓T�.�-ss�s o� 1 OF a,tle-j t/,'r pg7Sg .23 43 O� C% ! 7 /Syy Ni.L ASS ✓ J d :..) ,L ��2 LU . oil /0 0 D 9? 9 S y s rr v c- err .2/S3iS7Jy, -7 O 4Ga- Oq-79 SY3 s OQ L�F�� .�l� a06 � f' l0 O r / , y • �� IL [.�o ✓ � 'O l- .� Tom! /`."�'0 Q^IIJ c 'i. � l G. ! TG id' / F f 6 0 F ;^=�iiS !Y . �M8tiC lLtisC v, / g Sr lJj L f `1'� �z 2 �G tJ mr fF 3 of /",Ally r940 P 4 J 731 �z p g 7116 3 � � of �Q t, c.. -o,✓ �' G G �.� ;Zv y x L ip - `- % " / j1 Y .A / (v T'D a C. ()` A p979537 o , 8 �97453� 43 D 9 7.2 -7 9S 03 7'Lo.3 j ca - e- ` f 5 3,1 of p 9 7,2 7 g3 . Z4ysy olSo ��/3v�� D� � e, Ca. 0-6 13- ,p- ,� rt . Lois y9 5 a 3 y A—z tjvu R- D,2. "1-7 J� �!T s� 5O a �d k.41,1 s!J :>tc 1 o� o� ,qU.v o17a�g i 23 T2- afL v t 5 . tots !9 - 1� 3- llvx. 6 "e p o 'y o� tt14 y A, ,Z-4 L.i. p t % of.�..�. ?�,.� O 9� fir r i�o �� 3 ✓ 3� -a4-� �, A/12 /Vo �f2fe of YYlGxficwccL ------------------- ............. i NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING KALISPELL CITY -COUNTY PLANNING BOARD AND ZONING COMMISSION Master Plan Amendment from Agricultural to Suburban Residential in the West Valley Planned Unit Development and Zone Change from R-1 to R-2 for River Place Subdivision Preliminary Plat Approval for River Place Subdivision - A 72 Lot Subdivision in Evergreen The regular meeting of the Kalispell City -County Planning Board and Zoning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, September 14, 1999, beginning at 6:00 PM in the Kalispell City Council Chambers, Kalispell City Hall, 312 First Avenue East, Kalispell. Additionally, the West Valley Land Use Advisory Committee will hold a public meeting on the proposed West Valley Master Plan amendment on Tuesday, August 31, 1999, beginning at 7:00 PM in the new West Valley Fire - Hall located on the west side of Farm to Market Road approximately one half mile north of West Reserve Drive. The comments from this meeting will be forwarded to the planning board for consideration. During the regularly scheduled meeting of the planning board, the board will hold public hearings and take public comments on the following agenda items. The board will make recommendations to the City Council and / or the Board of County Commissioners, who will take final action: To the Kalispell City Council and the Board of County Commissioners: A request by John Parsons on behalf of J & F Construction and Vernon and Thelma Johnson for a master plan amendment to the West Valley Land Use Plan. The proposal is to amend the land use designation on approximately 112 acres from agricultural to suburban residential. The underlying zoning is AG-80, an Agricultural zoning designation with an 80 acre minimum lot size requirement. This property falls under the West Valley Overlay Zoning and allows density of one dwelling per five acres with a cluster development. As proposed, the land use designation would be changed from Agricultural to Suburban Residential which allows a density of up to one dwelling per half acre. If the master plan amendment is' approved the applicant would proceed with a zone change to R-2, a One Family Limited, which has a minimum lot size requirement of 20,000 square feet. The property proposed for this master plan amendment is located west of the intersection of Highway 93 South and West Reserve Drive approximately one half mile. The properties can be described as a portion of Assessor's Tract 3+ and a portion of Assessor's Tract 5+ located in Section 25, Township 29 North, Range 22 West, P.M.M;-Flathead County, Montana. To the Board of County Commissioners: 2. A request by Al Sylling d.b.a. Arico for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay and zone change on property in the Evergreen and Vicinity Zoning District. River Place Subdivision preliminary plat, a 72 lot single family residential subdivision, has been filed concurrently with this PUD and zone change request. This proposal includes a zone change from R-1, Suburban Residential, a residential zone requiring a minimum one acre lot size, to R-2, One Family Limited Residential zone requiring a minimum 20,000 square foot lots (approximately one half acre) on approximately 34 acres and a PUD overlay for the entire project which contains approximately 54.4 acres. Both residential zones allow double -wide manufactured homes on a permanent foundation, but do not allow single -wide manufactured homes. The area proposed for the PUD contains approximately 54.4 acres. The property is located on the east side of River Road approximately 1,200 feet north of Highway 2 West in Evergreen. The property can be described as Assessor's Tracts 11, 11AA, 11AB, 1AD, 11BA, 11B, 11AC, 11AAA, 3A and 3RE located in Section 4, Township 28 North, Range 21 West, P.M. M., Flathead County, Montana. The property is more specifically described in attached Exhibit A. 3. A request by Al Selling d.b.a. Arico for preliminary plat approval of River Place Subdivision, a 72 lot residential subdivision located in the Evergreen and Vicinity Zoning District. A Planned Unit Development (PUD) and zone change from R-1, Suburban Residential, a residential zone requiring a minimum one acre lot size, to R-2, One Family Limited Residential zone requiring a minimum 20,000 square foot lot size, has been filed in conjunction with the subdivision. The area proposed for subdivision contains approximately 54.4 acres. The lots within the subdivision vary in size from over two acres to approximately 10,000 square feet. The PUD has been used to cluster the higher density lots near the center of the property with the Iarger lots being located on the perimeter of the site. There are two community parks within the subdivision. The overall density of the subdivision is approximately one dwelling per three quarters of an acre. The property is located on the east side of River Road approximately 1,200 feet north of Highway 2 West in Evergreen. The property can be described as Assessor's Tracts 11, 11AA, 11AB, 1AD, I IBA, 11B, 1 IAC, I1AAA, 3A and 3RE located in Section 4, Township 28 North, Range 21 West, P.M. M., Flathead County, Montana. Documents pertaining to these agenda items are -Qn file for public inspection in the Flathead Regional Development Office, 723 Fifth Avenue East, Room 414, Kalispell, MT 59901, and are available for public review during regular office hours. Interested persons are encouraged to attend the hearings and make their views and concerns known to the Board. Comments in writing may be submitted to the Flathead Regional Development Office at the above address prior to the date of the hearing. Thomas R. Jentz Planning Director August 16,1999 Tom Jentz, Director, FRDO Room 414 723 — 5`h Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 AUG 1. - F. R. O. 0. X.4. ew, . In various discussions with FRDO, it has been indicated to my clients and me the time frame for processing these applications through the Planning Board is as follows: August 16, 1999 — deadline to submit projects -for the September 14 Planning Board Hearing; West Valley Advisory Committee meeting on the 4`h Tuesday of the month at the Fire Hall, August 24, 1999 (from committee member list); September 14 Planning Board Hearing. If there is a misunderstanding or change regarding these dates please call me ASAP. The time frame for the Committee meeting appears to be short. However, if we do not hear from you we will expect to see you there. Sincerely John Parsons, AICP 755-3152 Open Space section: Within the Open Space section of the Plan it is acknowledged that "Permanent open space on private lands, while difficult to achieve, may be accomplished through purchase or easement agreements." The zoning regulations do not afford the opportunity to discuss open space, it is flat-out required at a ratio of 3 to 1, hardly affording flexibility. In essence for every acre lot the farmer is required to have 3 acres of open space at the 5-acre density. This is an involuntary and exorbitant amount of area required by the regulations, especially for an area that is adjacent to an existing 1/2+ acre lot subdivision. DISCUSSION AND REQUEST Given the above, it was our opinion that a Master Plan amendment is not necessary, however in discussions with the Planning Office they indicated it was. We have filed this request only to satisfy FRDO'_s concerns, to facilitate alternative zoning for the property, and to clarify and reinforce the options available in the West Valley. This request to amend the West Valley Neighborhood Plan is to allow 1/2+ acre residential development without the requirement of clustering. It is being made so that farmers in general, specifically the Johnson, may be permitted to develop there private land holdings in a manner that the individual farmer (the true expert) feels is in the best interest of the family farm. Currently, a maximum of one unit for every five acres is permitted with a cluster proviso. The cluster concept does not function well for farmers in the long term. It does not allow for any resolution of future problems a farmer might have. It requires "permanent open space" regardless of productivity and return on investment with no safety net for the family farming the site. Cluster is a short-term attempt at fixing a long-term global problem. Senator Max Baucus and 3 members of the International Trade Commission (ITC), in a meeting with various members of the farming community and the public, indicated that it is a costly ($700,000+) and lengthy appeal process to limit "dumping" of products in the US. This dumping significant and negatively affects products in the US. In addition they indicated that farmers were a very small part of what the ITC is required to look at The mere indication of a property as. prime agriculture does not recognize the productivity of the land, the nutritional content of the product, the value of the product after the costs of production are deducted, or the import/export market demand. Those factors are the true measure of prime agricultural land. It is easy to look at a piece of paper and say you have prime agricultural land and you are required (regardless of return) to maintain it in agriculture. It is more difficult to JPWJ&HCONS T8/13 2 get the fair return that makes a piece of property truly prime- for agriculture in our global economy. In discussions with the MSU Agricultural center in Creston, it's very difficult to determine prime agricultural land. It not only depends on soil type (currently the only thing the Planning Office looks at) but the available moisture and how much one needs to irrigate and fertilize to get prime yields. It has been indicated that this property has yielded approximately 60 bushels of wheat or barley per acre and in potatoes its yielding approximately 300 sacs per acre with irrigation. For comparison, truly prime agricultural land like that in the Creston area yields approximately 80-85 bushels per acre of Barley/wheat unirrigated and 400+ sacs per acre of potatoes. With irrigation, Creston gets into to 100 bushels per acre range, of course that then increases your cost of production. In discussion with a number of farmers it is believed that the artificial requirement to maintain a quantity of land in agriculture regardless of productivity is counter to the best interest of the property owner and society in the long term. If the land cannot be subdivided economically, then the land will go fallow and or the topsoil mined The worse case would be that anew owner/farmer would enter into bankruptcy after the topsoil has been removed because the government would not let them subdivide their property. This bankruptcy process has begun in the valley. The Grosswiler's Dairy in the West Valley recently filed for protection from creditors under Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Farmers, including the 3ohnsons are trying to sell off the less productive lands to increase cash flow to save the balance of the farm. Other farmers may have to do the same or face bankruptcy. Selling some assets is what all businesses must do to stay in business through the hard times. The maximum five -acre density requirement to subdivide (Zoning Regulations) also requires, in the overlay zoning regulations, that "A minimum of 76% of the eligible property shall be dedicated as permanent open space on the subdivision plat". This massive amount of open space may work for areas such as wetlands, streams, rivers, and steep slopes where there is no economic return or development potential. However, to tell a farmer he is required to farm regardless of economics seems to be ludicrous, and certainly will not promote the future of agricultural lands. The request for amendment to allow residential development in this area is for a lot size that would be generally in the 3/4 to 1-1/4 acre range. This is consistent with and ai logical extension of the type of development occurring to the east in Country Estates where 1/2 to one acre lots occur. In order to provide for this type of expansion of development a zone change would need to occur. The only zoning district that would allow this range in lot size is the R-2. On 112 gross acres and JP eAHCON3T8/13 3 given that approximately 209% of the land would be in roads this would leave approximately 90 acres developable as lots. A lot size of 3/4 acre would yield approximately 135 lots. Most likely the subdivision would be developed in 6-8 phases. With 3 years to develop each phase, the final phase lots are anticipated to go on the market in about 18 to 21 years. Depending on market conditions this time frame may be shortened. West Reserve Drive provides excellent access both east and west. To the east is Highway 93, which has been upgraded to S lanes with a traffic signal. In addition, the Highway 93 bypass for Kalispell is proposed to be located approximately 1/3 mile south of this property, north of the BPA transmission line in the State section. To the south is the 340-acre State school section. This acreage has an approved neighborhood plan, which includes residential, commercial, and sports fields. Immediately across West Reserve Drive from this project, within the State Section, is classified as Mixed Professional, which includes light commercial uses. This designation allows such uses as beverage shops, car washes, churches, meeting halls, convenience stores, offices, and theme parks. Also, in this Section of land is Cnosswiler's dairy, which has filed for bankruptcy under Chapter 11. The southeast 1/4 of the section has been annexed into the City of Kalispell and is being utilized for ball fields. It is for these reasons that we request that you support the Residential category with a 1/z acre minimum lot size with no riders for permanent open space. Let the future decisions to subdivide farmland stand on there own merit. JPWJ&HCONSTV13 4 Flathead Regional Development Office 723 5tb Ave. East Room 414 Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406)758-5980 Fam (406)758-5781 Tic PETITION FOR ZONING AMENDMENT AUG 1 f9Qg 1 FLATHEAD COUNTY 1. NAME OF APPLICANT: F. R p 2. MAIL ADDRESS: 61 9 D =a 'i fin, n i,e 2 0 a in 3. CITY/ STATE/ZIP:_kdti 5,,,, Mr 5'79 0 / PHONE: IS-2 Sa Q 9 / 4. INTEREST IN PROPERTY: 5. ZONING MAP AMENDMENT:_ C ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT: • a i OR • c 1 •) 0) ylovj 1 A. What is the proposed zoning text amendment? 4) A - i • • T 1 !111 111!! 0:13W140MV1. • 1' : • I•klAVE A. Address of the property: iUnaz c- B. Legal Description: S- ,4 7rr e cr.►-CPi (Lot and Block of Subdivision; Tract #) (Section, Township, Range) (Attach sheet for metes and bounds) C. The present zoning of the above property isAca$O zu) D. The proposed zoning of the above property is: IZ -Oz E. State the changed or changing conditions that make the proposed amendment necessary: _ S tsE -,e c t, n 1-/ .v t2j—�—t HOW WILL THE PROPOSED CHANGE ACCOMPLISH THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF: A. Promoting the Master Plan B. Lessening congestion in the streets and providing safe access C. Promoting safety from fire, panic and other dangers D. Promoting the public interest, health, comfort, convenience, safety and general welfare E. Pr -venting the overcrowding of land F. Avoiding undue concentration of population �J G Facilitating the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewage, schools, parks and other public facilities ry V� H Giving reasonable consideration to the character of the district r C- 1iI 7-0-4 c, tr--M I. Giving consideration to the peculiar suitability of the property for particular uses J. Protecting and conserving the value of buildings K. Encouraging the most appropriate use of land by assuring orderly growth The ing this application signifies approval for F.R.D.O. staff to be present on the pr e or routine monitoring and inspection during approval process. (Applicant) (Date) 3 APPLICATION PROCESS APPLICABLE TO ALL ZONING APPLICATIONS: A. Pre -Application Meeting: A discussion with the Planning Director or designated member of staff must precede filing of this application. Among topics to be discussed are: Master Plan compatibility with the application, compatibility of proposed zone change with surrounding zoning classifications, and the application procedure. B. Completed application form. C. Application fee per schedule, made payable to the Flathead Regional Development Office. Fee Schedule Zone Change: Base fee $400.00 For first 80 acres of area of the request add $5/acre Plus for next 81 - 160 acres add $3/acre Plus for next 161 acres or more add $1 / acre Amendment to Zoning Text PUD Zoning Review: Residential Commercial Mixed Use $300.00 $400.00 + $5 / acre $500.00 + $5/acre $650.00 + $5/acre D. The application must be accepted as complete by the FRDO staff thirty (30) days prior to the date of the meeting at which it will be heard in order that requirements of state statutes and the zoning regulations may be fulfilled. APPLICABLE TO APPLICATIONS FOR ZONE CHANGE: A. Application Contents: -- 1. Petition for zone change signed by at least 50% of the property owners in the area for which the change in zoning classification is sought. .2. A map showing the location and boundaries of the property. 3. A list of the names and mail addresses of all property owners within 150 feet of the subject property as shown on the Assessor's roll. Example Assessor's S-T-R Lot/Tract Property Owner No. No. and Mail Address 4. A title report of the subject property. As approved by the CAB on S/25/99 Revised 6/30/99 sm 4 FINDINGS OUTLINED IN THE COUNTY'S REGULATIONS FOR A ZONE CHANGE FROM AG-80 TO R-2 AND REMOVAL OF THE OVERLAY DISTRICT 1. WHETHER THE NEW ZONING WAS DESIGNED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MASTER PLAN? The proposed site is located on the north side of West Reserve Drive approximately 2/3 mile west of Highway 93. This site, shown on the attached map, contains approximately 112 acres and is generally discussed under the West Valley Neighborhood Plan. The topography of the site is gently rolling with a general increase in elevation to the north. Currently the southern 1 /3 of the property is being cultivated with potatoes and the northern portion is wheat. Historically, barley and hay have also been grown onsite. The specifics of the request for this property are discussed later in this section. The existing West Valley Neighborhood Plan indicates and recognizes the fallibility of instituting a single zone or land use classification on the area. It also recognizes the need "to identify land use options based on physical, biological, social, and public service features of the area." The issues identified in the Plan for the agricultural industry include increasing real estate values, rural development, nuisance complaints, high taxes and the "general absence of flexibility in zoning regulations." This general absence of flexibility to some degree still exists in this area. The cluster provision the way it is written, is very inflexible. Specific discussion relating to clustering and farming is included later. Residential section: The Residential section of the Master Plan concludes that "Sub - neighborhoods" exist within the larger West Valley Plan. This is also supported by the statement "opportunities probably exist for expansion of existing subdivisions" and that "the residential character should be single family ... " This would indicate that areas of residential development would be permitted to exist and expand. The conclusions go on to indicate "Land Use densities in the 5-20 acre range are appropriate in some areas." What are the other areas appropriate for? JPR-:7NGFDJ&FC0NnGW13 I of 7 This conclusion in the Plan infers that under certain circumstances some areas should be maintained at a density less than 1 dwelling per 20 acres and that some areas are more appropriate for densities greater than 1 dwelling per 5 acres. Finally, it says "Target new residential subdivisions away from prime agricultural soils and forest lands." Prime agricultural soils are targeted because the are supposed to be the best soils for producing the highest yields and nutritional content bringing, the best return on investment. Open Space section: Within the Open Space section of the Plan it is acknowledged that "Permanent open space on private lands, while difficult to achieve, may be accomplished through purchase or easement agreements." The zoning regulations do not afford the opportunity to discuss open space, it is flat-out required at a ratio of 3 to 1, hardly flexible. In essence for every acre of lot the farmer is required to have 3 acres of open space at the 5-acre density. This is an involuntary and exorbitant exaction required by the Regulations, especially for an area that is adjacent to an existing 12+ acre lot subdivision. Discussion: Given the above information in the Plan, it was our opinion that a Master Plan amendment is not necessary, however in discussions with the Planning Office they insisted it is. We have filed this request only to satisfy FRDO's< concerns, to facilitate alternative zoning for the property, and to clarify and reinforce the options available in the West Valley Neighborhood Plan and West Side Zoning District. This request to amend the West Valley Neighborhood Plan is to allow 1/z+ acre residential development without the requirement of clustering. It is being made so that farmers in general, specifically the Johnsons, may be permitted to develop there private land holdings in a manner that the individual farmer (the true expert) feels is in the best interest of the family farm. Currently, a maximum of one unit for every five acres is permitted with a chaster proviso. The cluster concept does not function well for farmers in the long term. It does not allow for any resolution of future problems a farmer might have. It requires "permanent open space" regardless of productivity and return on investment with no safety net for the family farming the site. Cluster is a short-term attempt at fixing a long-term global problem. The mere indication of a property as prime agriculture on a piece of paper does not recognize the productivity of the land, the nutritional content of the RR-MGMAKONST038113 2 of 7 product, the value of the product after the costs of production are deducted, or the import/export market demand. Those factors are the true measure of prime agricultural land. It is easy to look at a piece of paper and say you have prime agricultural land and you have to maintain it in agriculture, it's a lot harder to get a fair return that makes a piece of property truly prime for agriculture in our global economy. Senator Max Baucus and 3 members of the International Trade Commission (ITC), in a meeting with various members of the farming community and the public, indicated that it is a - costly ($700,000+) and lengthy appeal process to limit "dumping" of products in the US by foreign producers. This dumping significantly and negatively affects the ability to sell products in the US. In addition, they also indicated that farming is a very small part of what the ITC is required to look at. In discussions with the MSU :agricultural center in Creston they indicated it's difficult to determine prime agricultural land and is more than just a designation on a piece of paper. It not only depends on soil _type (currently the only thing the Planning Office looks at) but the available moisture and how much one needs to irrigate and fertilize to get prime yields. It has been indicated that this property has yielded approximately 60 bushels of wheat or barley per acre and in potatoes its yielding approximately 300 sacs per acre with irrigation. For comparison, truly prime agricultural land like that in the Creston area, yields approximately 80-85 bushels per acre of Barley/wheat unirrigated and 400+ sacs per acre of potatoes. With irrigation in Creston, it gets into to 100 bushels per acre range, of course that then increases your cost of production. In discussion with a number of farmers it is believed that the artificial requirement to maintain a quantity of land in agriculture regardless of productivity is counter to the best interest of the property owner and society in the long term If the land cannot be subdivided or farmed economically, then the land will go fallow and or the topsoil mined. The worse case would be that a future buyer or farmer would enter into bankruptcy after the topsoil has been mined because the government would not let them economically subdivide their property. The bankruptcy process has begun in the valley. The Grosswiler's Dairy in the West Valley recently filed for protection from creditors under Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Farmers, including the Johnson's are trying to sell off the less productive lands to increase cash flow to save the balance of the farm. Other farmers may have to do the same or face bankruptcy. Selling assets is what JM-22NC3;W&FC0NSTG=13 3 of 7 all businesses must do to stay in business through the hard times. The artificial requirement to maintain uneconomical land in farming, when it can be utilized for debt relief is contrary to our way of life and makes no business sense. The maximum five -acre density requirement to subdivide (Zoning Regulations) also requires, --in the overlay zoning regulations, that "A minimum of 76% of the eligible property shall be dedicated as permanent open space on the subdivision plat". This massive amount of open space may work for areas such as wetlands, streams, rivers, and steep slopes where there is no economic return or development potential. However, for the government to tell a farmer he is required to farm regardless of economics seems to be ludicrous, and certainly will not promote maintenance and the future of agricultural lands. The request for amendment to allow residential development in this area is fora lot size that would be generally in the 3/, to 1-1/4 acre range. This is consistent with and a logical extension of the type of development occurring to the east in Country Estates where 1A�+ acre lots exist. In order to provide for this type of expansion of development a zone change would need to occur. The only zoning district that would allow this range in lot size is the R-2. On 112 gross acres, approximately 20% of the land would be in roads this would leave approximately 90 acres developable as lots. An average lot size of 344 acre would yield approximately 13 5 lots. Most likely the subdivision would be developed in 6-8 phases. With 3 years to develop each phase, the final phase lots are anticipated to go on the market in about 18 and 21 years. Depending on market conditions this time frame may be shortened. West Reserve Drive provides excellent access both east and west. To the east is Highway 93, which has been upgraded to 5 lanes with a traffic signal. In addition, the Highway 93 bypass for Kalispell is proposed to be located approximately 1 /3 mile south of this property, north of the BPA transmission line in the State section. To the south is the 340-acre State school section. This property has amended the West Valley Plan to allow its own Plan, which includes residential, commercial, and sports fields. Immediately across West Reserve Drive JPR-ZZNGFDJ&FCONSTGWI3 4 of 7 within the States PIan, is classified as Mixed Professional, this includes light commercial uses. This designation allows such uses as beverage shops, car washes, churches, meeting halls, convenience stores, offices. and theme parks. Also, in this Section of land (not in the States Plan) is Grosswiler's dairy, which has filed for bankruptcy under Chapter 11. The southeast i44 of the section has been annexed into the City of Kalispell and is being utilized for sports complex fields. The request is in conformance with the Master Plan 2. WHETHER THE NEW ZONING WAS DESIGNED TO LESSON CONGESTION IN THE STREETS? - West Reserve Drive is not a congested road it is a two lane minor arterial with a traffic signal at its intersection with Highway 93. In addition, the western loop of the Highway 93 bypass is included with the State's Neighborhood Plan on Section 36 to the south. This by is designed o alleviate additional traffic on Highway 93 making it easier to travel/commute. Most traffic generated by development of this property would travel east to Highway 93 and go north or south or continue eastbound to Evergreen on Reserve Drive (a State Secondary Highway). 3. WHETHER THE NEW ZONING GIVES REASONABLE CONSIDERATION TO THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT? The area the proposed zone change is in has a developed R-2 zoned subdivision immediately to the east (Country Estates). The proposed zone would extend the existing zone approximately 1/a mile west and afford development of a subdivision in a manor that is commensurate with that zone and development in the area. The R-2 zone requires that no lot be less that 1/2 acre, development of the subdivision is anticipated to be developed with an average lot size of 3/4 acre. 4. WHETHER THE NEW ZONING WILL SECURE SAFETY FROM FIRE, PANIC, AND OTHER DANGERS? The site has excellent access to roads, is approximately 3 miles from the major medical center for NW Montana, and will reduce wildland fire potential from drying agricultural fields against Country Estates. JPR•ZZNGMJ&FC0N3TG=13 5 of 7 5. WHETHER THE NEW ZONING WILL PROMOTE HEALTH AND GENERAL WELFARE? The new zone would provide for the expansion of an existing subdivision design. An increase in the number of water supply wells for fire protection would be incorporated into the design of the subdivision. It would also provide for housing opportunities close to town including medical, education, shopping, and recreation facilities. 6. WHETHER THE NEW ZONING WILL PREVENT THE OVERCROWDING OF LAND AND AVOID THE UNDUE CONCENTRATIONS OF PEOPLE? - Over crowding of land the undue concentrations of people happen when the ability of the land to support development is exceeded. The sanitation and zoning regulations are designed to prevent the overcrowding of land and avoid undue concentrations of people by the use of setbacks and non - degradation regulations. 7. WHETHER THE NEW ZONING WILL PROVIDE ADEQUATE LIGHT AND AIR? Any development of the property will be required to comply with the R-2 zone, which has setbacks, lot coverage, and height limitations that provide for adequate light and air. 8. WHETHER THE NEW ZONING WILL FACILITATE THE ADEQUATE PROVISION OF TRANSPORTATION, WATER, SEWERAGE, SCHOOLS, PARKS, AND OTHER PUBLIC REQUIREMENTS? With the location of the site close to a major highway and on a secondary arterial transportation will be satisfied Water will be provided by community wells with sewerage provided by onsite systems, the city has those services but has adopted.a policy of not extending those services outside of their City limits. Those limits and services are approximately 3/a mile to the south, beyond the ability of the City to annex and provide the services. The site is within the West Valley School District, as with all school districts they are at or over enrolled. The site is located approximately 3/4 mile from the new Kalispell recreation fields, in addition, parkland or in -lieu fee must be committed to when subdividing land. West Valley Volunteer Fire and County Sheriff Department supply JM-2Z4GFDJ&FC0NS"rCM/13 6 of 7 other public services. 9. WHETHER THE NEW ZONING GIVES CONSIDERATION TO THE PARTICULAR SUITABILITY OF THE PROPERTY FOR PARTICULAR USES? The site is ideally suited for residential uses due to its gently rolling terrain and gravel sub -surface. 10. WHETHER THE NEW ZONING WAS ADOPTED WITH A VIEW OF CONSERVING THE VALUE OF PROPERTY? The change would conserve the value of the property probably increasing it by removing a source of dust while cultivation and harvest occurs. Pesticides, herbicides, and low flying aircraft applying the aforementioned can negatively affect property immediately adjacent to agriculture. Noise and dust due to aircraft and tractors can also negatively affect adjoining properties. Converting this site too residential should reduce any negative impact agriculture would have on adjacent property. 11. WHETHER THE NEW ZONING WILL ENCOURAGE THE MOST APPROPRIATE USE OF LAND THROUGHOUT THE JURISDICTION? Development of this site as residential provides the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdiction by providing housing opportunities close to a service area, Kalispell. Development of properties further away from transportation corridors increases cost of services. This site is close to an existing and proposed major transportation corridor, Highway 93. JPR-2ZNGFW&FC0NSTGS8/13 7 of 7 SECTION 36 tlBm".;i:&la.aj�.�:i.�ia MASTER PLANNED FOR MIXED PROFESSIONAL Adopted by the Flathead County Board of Commissioners April 9, 1937 Resolution No. 955AA and Adopted by the Kalispell City Council April 7,1997 Resolution No. 4323 Adopted by the Flathead County Board of Commissioners April 9, 1997 Resolution No. 955AA ... Adopted by the Kalispell City Council April 7, 1997 Resolution No. 4323 TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROL,ID .............................. PROCESS............................................................................................. WEST VALLEY STEERING COMMITTEE......................................................... TECHMC .L ASSISTANCE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.....................................................................................4 PLAINNINGAREA.............................................................................................................7 EXISTINGREGULATIONS..............................................................................................7 PLANELELLENTS...........................................................................................................10 LANDUSE........................................................................................................................1 I AGRICULTURE ................................... FOREST................................................................................................................1, RESIDENTIAL.....................................................................................................16 COM IERCI AL'Iiti'DUSTRIAL...........................................................................18 OPENSPACE.......................................................................................................18 WEST VALLEY LAND USE GOALS.............................................................................23 AGRICULTURE.'FORESTRY POLICIES...........................................................23 RESIDENTIALPOLICIES...................................................................................23 COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL POLICIES.........................................................24 OPENSPACE.......................................................................................................24 PUBLICSERVICES........................................................................................................25 UTILITIES............................................................................................................25 NaturalGas ................................................................................................25 Telephone..................................................................................................25 Electricity...................................................................................................26 EMERGENCYSERVICES...................................................................................28 POLICEPROTECTION...........................................................................28 FIREPROTECTION.................................................................................28 EMERGENCY NIEDICAL.......................................................................31 HAZARDOUS IL-kTERIAL RESPONSE................................................31 TRANSPORTATION............................................................................................34 SCHOOLS.............................................................................................................36 PUBLIC SERVICES GOALS...........................................................................................40 EMERGENCY SERVICES...................................................................................40 MRNSPORT ATION............................................................................................40 SCHOOLS.............................................................................................................40 IMPLEMENTATION........................................................................................................ 41 IMPLEMENTATION GOALS.........................................................................................42 IMPLEMENTATION POLICIES.........................................................................42 WEST VALLEY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS........................................................44 WEST VALLEY OVERLAY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS....................................53 12 Nest V filer Newhborhood Plan The West Valley Neighborhood Planning process really began during the mid 1970s when the community adopted zoning regulations and estabiished a West Valley Land Owners Association. However, over the years the role and identity of the "Owners association" has become less defined and the legal stability of the zoning district has increasingly been in question. The need to update the West Valley Planning And Zoning Regulations to reflect the more traditional zoning statutes of 76-2-201 et seq., MCA, has been a long standing objective of the County Commissioners. _ The original intent of the West Valley Planning and Zoning District was to minimize conflict with agricultural and timber practices in the area. With this as an objective, minimum lot sizes were set at 40 acres. But over the past 20 years. the liberal use of "occasional sale" and "family transfer" exemptions and the granting of variances has transformed many areas of West Valley into rural residential neighborhoods. The preparation of Neighborhood Plans has been gaining increased interest amongst local communities in recent years. Example plans includes those prepared for Bigfork, Lakeside, Little Bitterroot Lake, and the Canyon. The Flathead Regional Development Office (FRDO) has offered to assist any "neighborhoods" wishing to pursue a planning process and the County Commissioners reserved funding to hire a planning consultant to help facilitate the neighborhood planning process. The impetus to pursue a formal review of the West Valley Planning and Zoning District evolved from a proposal to establish a neighborhood convenience store in the area of the West Valley School. Reaction to this proposal lead to a series of citizen -initiated meetings during the fall of 1995 to discuss this and other issues pertaining to the West Valley Planning and Zoning District. A citizen steering committee formally requested assistance from the County Commissioners to help prepare a neighborhood plan for West Valley. A vicinity map of the West Valley area is included on the following page. The planning process was designed to be flexible and to pace the interests of the community. Every effort was made to invite all landowners to participate in the process. Mailings of a survey and newsletter to all landowners in the planning area were utilized to enhance public awareness and to give everyone an opportunity to express ideas and concerns. Monthly meetings were held to solicit input from community members and to provide routine updates on progress. A steering committee of local land owners offered overall guidance to the process. WeSt Valley Neighborhood Plan *cin ,tp crap 5 0 5 Scale in miles e a "pia Falls -- - -- - - 8- vK _ West Valley Ne,Itborhootl Plan 'ICIEST VALLEY STEERING COMMITTEE The decision to develop a neighborhood plan for West Valley emerged over a period of several months following discussions at the neighborhood level with technical advise from the Flathead Regional Development Office. Following the initial meeting of "interested" citizens on August 14, 1995, Bonny Ogle commented in a follow-up letter to all attendees that it may be time to update the existing plan. "after you are brought into the world there is a need for at least an occasional check-up even ifyou feel just fine. Otherwise, you may end up going to a doctor when you don't feel well only to find out you have an incurable disease which could have been :dealt with at an early stage. Our land and community are facing these same problems now. " Bonny Ogle (911/9:) It was agreed by those attending the meeting in September 1995 to formally organize as a "Steering Committee" to help define and guide a planning process for F West Valley. Judy Hepper was approved as "Chairperson" of the Steering a Committee. A monthly meeting schedule was approved and membership and/or participation on the Committee was determined to be open to anyone owning land or living in the community. The initial meetings held by the Steering Committee between September 1995 and January 1996 largely focused on efforts of "education" and community awareness. Various speakers were invited to address such topics as -schools", "police protection", "roads", and "taxes". An important product of those early meetings included a preliminary listing of those aspects of the community that are "positive" and "negative" and a listing of "concerns" relative to regulations. The school district boundary was selected as the planning boundary. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE The FRDO advised the Committee in October 1995 that the County may hire a planning consultant to assist the planning efforts of two "neighborhoods" in the coming year and that it might be appropriate to request this type of assistance. The Steering Committee determined that some technical advise and/or facilitation may be appropriate to the process and made the request to the County Commissioners. The request was granted and Montana Planning Consultants of Kalispell was assigned by the County Commissioners to assist with the preparation of a West Valley Neighborhood Plan. West Valley .Veighborhood Plan The primary role of the Planner was that of a facilitator and information gatherer. The collected information was presented in mapped and written formats for consideration by the Steering Committee, who had the ultimate responsibility for approving the final language of the Plan. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Public participation and involvement was encouraged throughout the process. The Steering Committee evolved out of a small group of interested citizens and expanded to anyone interested in ttie process. Meeting sign-up sheets were used to establish a meeting notification list. Other efforts to involve citizen involvement included the mailing of a newsletter and land use surveys to all land owners in the planning area. The newsletter helped to explain the intentions of the planning process and invited public participation. The survey offered every landowner an opportunity to express personal viewpoints and to "vote" on various issues. Both of these documents and the survey results are included in the Appendix. Monthly meetings were held at the West Valley School in an effort to actively encourage citizen participation. Hands-on exercises were conducted to identify and rank community issues. Major agenda topics for each public meeting are listed below: SEPTEMBER 14, 1995 ► Formalize a Steering Committee ► Agree on Study Area ► Planning Process and ID Community Concerns ► Establish meeting Dates ► Public Notification OCTOBER 18, 1995 ► Presentation by School District ► Presentation by Sheriffs Office NOVEMBER 15, 1995 ► Strengths & Weaknesses of Present West Valley Plan & Regulations DECEMBER 6, 1995 ► Discussion/review of issues identified in November 1,1"est t allcv Neighborhood Plat ► Community outreach ideas ► Representation/membership of Steering Committee ► Designation as a county Neighborhood Plan area JANUARY 24, 1996 ► Presentation by Flathead County Road Superintendent ► Presentation by FRDO staff on Consolidated Mill Levy ► Introduction of planning consultant - FEBRUARY 7, 1996 ► Presentation of Draft Maps ► Meeting'Schedule Draft Survey ► Draft Newsletter MARCH 20. 1996 Recap of Past Meetings & General Overview of Planning Process ► Progress Report on Mapping Efforts & Technical Reports ► Survey Results - Sub -Neighborhood Identification Exercise APRIL 17, 1996 ► Recap of Last Meeting ► Break-out Groups to List Community Issues MAY 15, 1996 ► Recap of Last Meeting ► Ranking of Community Goals & Objectives JUNE 19, 1996 ► Review of Draft Goals & Policies Plan JULY 17, 1996 ► Final Plan -- Approval of Amendments ► Regulator, Concepts — Clustering. Convenience Store JULY 31, 1996 West Vallev .Neighborhood P!an ► Committee Discussions on Clustering & Home Occupations AUGUST 21, 1996 ► Discussion of Home Occupations & Clustering Performance Standards ► Discussion of Performance Standards for Convenience Store AUGUST 29, 1996 ► Release and Mailing of Draft Regulations Together with Survey SEPTEMBER 18, 1996 ► Overview of Draft Zoning Regulations ► Results from Zoning Survey SEPTEMBER 25, 1996 ► Zoning Subcommittee Meeting on Citizen Advisory Group Provisions & Home Occupations OCTOBER 2, 1996 ► Zoning Subcommittee Meeting on Density Provisions (Part 1) OCTOBER 14, 1996 ► Zoning Subcommittee Meeting on Density Provisions (Part 11) OCTOBER 21, 1996 ► Zoning Subcommittee Meeting on Convenience Store Criteria OCTOBER 23, 1996 ► Zoning Subcommittee Meeting on List of Permitted Uses OCTOBER 30, 1996 ► Zoning Subcommittee Meeting on Expansion Provisions for Existing Subdivisions OCTOBER 30, 1996 ► Presentation by Zoning Committee on Recommended Changes to Proposed Zoning Regulations ► Recommendation by Community to Forward Regulations to Planning Board West Vallev Nev'ahborhood Plan [SWAI�iN2 mike A :l The boundaries of the planning area coincide to the boundaries of the West Valley School District. Said boundaries overlap into the planning jurisdiction of the Kalispell City -County Master Plan. Approval of the West Valley Neighborhood Plan will require an amendment to both the Flathead County Master Plan and_ Kalispell City County Master Plan. Refer to the Basemap of the planning area on the following page. EXISTING REGULATIONS State law requires zoning to be in conformance with an adopted Master Plan or "Development Plan". The West Valley Zoning District is considered to be an "Agricultural and Timber" district that requires large minimum lot sizes. An amendment to 'the 1978 West Valley Planning & Zoning District would be necessary to recognize "other' land use opportunities in the area. The purpose of the West Valley Neighborhood Plan is to identify land use options based on the various physical, biological, social, and public services features of the area. The findings of the Plan establish the framework and justification for updating the regulations. The purpose statement of the West Valley Planning & Zoning District is: "all lands both timber & farm land to be classified and maintained as food and fiber agriculture." The accompanying regulations generally apply to all lands in the area of School District 1, with a few exceptions. Portions of the original district have been abandoned and replaced with more traditional zoning classifications, including all that area lying within the planning jurisdiction of the Kalispell City -County Master Plan. A change of zoning to Suburban Agriculture SAG-10 has also been approved in the area of Saddlewood Subdivision. Refer to the Zoning Map at the end of this Section. The uniform application of a single zoning district to such a large area fails to recognize the variability of land features throughout the district. Not all the land can easily be classified as either "timber" or "agriculture", especially when considering how the land use character of the area has changed dramatically, even with zoning in place. The liberal use of subdivision exemptions (family transfers, occasional sales) over the past 17+ years has created a suburban development pattern in many locations. Other changes occurring in the area and vicinity, including changing public attitudes, combine to create the rationale for amending the West Valley Planning & Zoning District. West Vullev Neighborhood Plan LAND USE The land use character of West Valley is primarily a mixture of "Residential", "Agriculture", and "Forest'. Agricultural lands are generally located to the east, forest to the west, and residential in between. _. It is difficult to determine the actual amount of agricultural lands in the planning area since even casual agricultural practices, such as the keeping of livestock, is occurring on small acreages throughout the area. However, in simplified terms, most of the prime agricultural soils and actual farming practices occur in an area extending from West Valley Drive on the west to the Stillwater River and Highway 93 on the east. (Refer to the Soils Map on the following page.) The total land area within that general boundary is nearly 9,000 acres. Agricultural pursuits in West Valley are extremely diverse. Important crops include cereal grains (wheat, barley), hay, potatoes, and peppermint. One of the largest dairies in Montana is also located within the planning area. ISSUES: The general issues facing all agriculture in the county have been extensively discussed. The dilemma faced by the agricultural community has been clearly identified as a result of increasing real estate values, rural development pressures, increasing nuisance complaints, high tax burdens, and general absence of flexibility in zoning regulations. Suggested solutions to resolve some of the agricultural issues include: ► passage of a "Right to Farm Ordinance"; ► enable the formation of Agricultural Districts; ► establish an Agricultural Lands Protection Committee; ► rural cluster incentive; ► transfer development rights (TDR); ► encourage conservation easements and limited development; and ► purchase of development rights program (PDR) West Vidler Neighborhood Plan A substantial portion of the West Valle; Planning area is forest covered and exhibits variable to mountainous terrain. (Refer to the Topography Map at the end of this Section.) Forestry practices are routinely pursued on many of these lands. The ownership pattern of the lands lying west of Farm -to -Market Road is dominated by large tract ownership (see attached Ownership Map) as outlined below. OWNERSHIP TOTAL ACRES Montana Forest Products 2,223 acres Stoltze Lumber Co 7,397 acres USDA Forest Service 3,705 acres State 1,887 acres ISSUES: The timber industry shares many of the same concerns as identified for "agriculture". Many people view corporate timber lands as being "public" so trespassing is a major concern. Nuisance complaints concerning dust and logging traffic are increasing as people move deeper into the woods. The forest landowners worry about the high cost of taxes that could result with the creation of Rural Special Improvement Districts to pay for road improvements in rural areas. A substantial portion of the forested areas are located on steep topography. Steep slopes, remote access, together with dense forest vegetation combine to create high fire hazard situations in some locations. Forest -related issues were identified during the process and the recommendations include the following: ► Flathead County should pass a "right to Forestry" ordinance; ► Flathead County should encourage forestry through tax incentives and land trades that result in consolidated forest ownership; ► Flathead County should work with cities, other public agencies, and private landowners to encourage continued productive resource management; ► As a matter of policy, Flathead County should recognize the multiple use opportunities on private and public forests, while affirming the primary economic function of private forests, ► Resource industries should use management practices :hat protect the environment and maintain the long-term productivity of the resource base. ► As a matter of equity, forest owners should be allowed to realize other, non - forest related land values through well -planned, environmentally sensitive development. 13 West Vailev .`'eq hborhood Plan RESIDENTIAL Residential dwellings and small lots comprise a third major land use component of the West Valley area. Although not calculated, the number of dwellings and residential lots has increased significantly over the past 17 years, despite the 40 acre minimum lot size requirements of the West Valley Planning & Zoning District. Lot numbers have increased via the liberal use of subdivision exemptions, such as the occasional sale and family transfer exemptions. It is estimated that approximately 1,420 separate tracts of land now occur in the West Valley planning area. A windshield survey indicates up to 700 dwelling units. (Refer to the Land Use Map on the following page.) The 1990 Census for the area of School District 1 estimated 828 dwelling units and a total population of 2,135 persons. Major population clusters in the planning area include: • McMannamy Draw • Rhodes Draw • West Valley Pines • Pleasant Hills • Coclet Lane * Grand Vista Drive • Sunday Lane • Church Drive by Stillwater Lutheran Church ISSUES: Residential land use issues were determined from survey results and group work sessions. Residential densities are expected to remain sparse while recognizing opportunities to divide lands where justified based on criteria related to the availability of services, topography, soil type, etc. Generalized conclusions are listed below. ► "Sub -neighborhoods" exist within the larger West Valley area; ► Land use densities in the 5-20 acre range are appropriate in some areas; ► Clustering is an important tool to minimize sprawl and the loss of farmland; ► Opportunities probably exist for expansion of existing subdivisions; ► Control the spread of noxious weeds; ► The residential character should be single family — multi -family dwelling units and mobile home parks are to be discouraged; and ► Target new residential subdivisions away from prime agricultural soils and forest lands. 1' 16 West Valley .Neighborhood Plan COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL Few freestanding commercial or industrial uses are bated within the planning area. Although the existing regulations for West Valley have considerable flexibility for the creation of residential lots, few allowances are permitted for commercial or industrial uses. "Cottage Industries" are permitted by the existing regulations and many of these home based businesses do exist in the planning area. Existing Industrial uses include a saw mill, gravel operations, and various agricultural -dependent uses, such as mint stills. ISSUES: Public opinion on this subject appears to oppose any dramatic change from the philosophy of the existing regulations pertaining to these uses. In general, new industrial uses are not to be encouraged but some allowance for limited retail commercial may be OK, with restrictions. Issue statements concerning industrial uses and commercial uses are listed below. ► Prevent strip commercial development; Permit home occupations; Continue to prohibit commercial uses but allow consideration of a neighborhood convenience store (mini -mart); ► Allow opportunities for gravel extraction; and * Industrial uses should not be permitted except those accessory to normal farm operations. Open space is a description of land that is either natural or "open" in the sense that it is undeveloped. General perceptions of open space include forest land and farm land. The traditional use of the phrase, "open space", is normally associated with public lands or protected natural resources. In West Valley, the ratio of public lands to private lands is (1:8). The general landscape of West Valley appears to be very open due to the abundance of farm and forest land. However, the owners of the farm land and private forest lands are quick to point out the distinctions between public versus private lands. Permanent open space on private lands, while difficult to achieve, may be accomplished through purchase or easement agreements. Large minimum lot size requirements is not the long term or best solution to the preservation of large contiguous areas of open space. Significant natural features can be identified for special consideration when development is proposed. Important local natural features include the Stillwater x' River corridor, small lakes & streams, and wetlands. Slopes in excess of 25% often pose as limitations to development and should be protected to the extent possible. Is West Vallcw Neighborhood Plan Prime agricultural soils are also considered to be a significant local resource. A "school" section of State land (Section 36, Twn 29N, Rng 22) is located just north of Kalispell along U.S. Hwy 93. Historically, the land has been farmed with a small area reserved for a DNRC office. In recent months, the city of Kalispell has been pursuing a lease option for the southerly 160 acres of the 640 acre section to establish a large recreation complex, consisting of ball fields and other similar uses. Accordingly, a "public designation" is being suggested for the affected area of land. West Valley also provides suitable habitat for elk and deer (refer to the Elk & White-tailed Deer Distribution Maps).: Some of the more significant habitat features, such as riparian habitat, should also be protected to the extent possible (refer to the Water Features & Floodplain Map). "Incentives" was cited as an important philosophy to help maintain open space in West Valley. Other stated issues are as follows. ► Protect water quality; ► Protect air quality; ► Sustainable use of forests; ► Preserve agricultural areas; ► Discourage clearcuts except in extraordinary circumstances deemed appropriate and necessary by accepted silvicultural practices, ► Maintain recreation access to public forest lands and seek to maintain an open lands policy on private forest lands in cooperation with the affected landowners; and ► Better enforcement of game laws. R West V dev Neighborhood (,. w TO PLAN FOR THE WISE USE OF LAND IN WEST VALLEY TO !MAINTAIN THE RURAL AND SCENIC QUALITY OF WEST VALLEY TO PROTECT AIR AND WATER QUALITY TO PROTECT PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS AGRICULTURE/FORESTRY POLICIES ► Encourage the use of conservation easements, transfer of development rights, and other such tools to help maintain farm and forest land ► Provide incentives, such as density bonuses, in exchange for permanent open space ► Support right to farm and timber legislation ► Discourage conversion of prime agricultural soils to non-ag uses ► Recognize opportunity to develop residential uses on inclusions of "poor soils" within a larger agricultural district, farm, or forest land or when public -- pressures no longer make farming or forestry feasible. RESIDENTIAL POLICIES ► Promote the use of clustering to offer flexible lot sizes and to maintain open space 10. Establish residential land use densities based on such considerations as soil type, existing development patterns, fire hazards, distance to services, and topography Consider fiscal and service impacts of new development ► Development of new uses and subdivision of land should not conflict with normal and customary forest or agricultural practices occurring in the vicinity and covenants of new subdivisions should reference that such activities may be occurring in the vicinity :'3 West Vailev Neighynrhvod Plan ► Encourage control of noxious weeds b. Maintain an overall low density of development COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL POLICIES A neighborhood convenience store may be an acceptable use in West Valley P. Provide opportunities for home -based businesses in West Valley I. Legally existing commercial or industrial uses shall be "grandfathered" OPEN SPACE ► Maintain/enhance opportunities to access State and Forest Service lands within the planning jurisdiction in cooperation with other intervening landowners, as appropriate Discourage alteration of river banks and wetlands ► Provide incentives, such as density bonuses, to establish large contiguous areas of permanent open space Steep slopes, wildlife habitat, water features, and other such criteria should be used to help identify and prioritize lands for long-term protection 24 West Vrlllry Nei; hboriwvd Plum PUBLIC SERVICES Opportunities and/or constraints to development are often affected by the adequacy and type of available services. Public sewer and water systems are absent from West Valley. Treatment of sewage is generally provided by individual septic systems. Most residential dwellings are served by individual wells with the exception of several subdivisions that have community water systems. Other public services available to the West Valley area are described below. wm* Four major utility companies service the West Valley area. The Montana Power Company supplies natural gas, PTI Communications supplies telephone service, and Pacific Power and Light Company and the Flathead Electric Cooperative provide electrical service. In addition, AT&T has a fiber optic cable which runs through the southeastern portion of the District along West Springcreek Road, Farm -to -Market Road, Stillwater Road and West Reserve Drive. Refer to the Utilities Map at the end of this Section. Natural Gas: Natural gas service is supplied to only a few residences in the West Valley District. Gas pipelines run down Three Mile Drive as far as Meadow's Lane and to the end of Meadow's Lane. Lines also run along West Reserve to the western edge of Country Estates. Montana Power Company's (MPC) general policy for extending new gas lines to an area is that there needs to be approximately 30 customers/mile. If the density is less than this, installation is not cost-effective. In certain situations, MPC will provide gas service to remotely located customers if the customer is willing to pay for installation of the pipe line. — Over the past five years MPC has assessed the possibility of bringing gas to the Pines Development and the West Valley School off Farm -to -Market Road, and to the Pleasant Hill development off West Valley Road. At the time, there were not enough customers to make installation of the lines cost-effective. Gas lines will be installed to a new subdivision planned for the intersection of Four Mile Drive and Highway 93, with service possibly extended further down Four Mile Drive. At this time, there are no other plans for extension of gas service into the West Valley District. If development continues to grow in this area, MPC will continue to reassess extension of their existing gas lines. Telephone: Telephone service is provided throughout the West Valley District by PTI Communications. PTI does not report any particular service problem areas in the District nor do they anticipate problems with servicing additional developments or homes. 2; West Virllev Neighborhood Plan PTi has six wire centers located throughout West Valley at the following intersections: West Springcreek Road and Three Mile Drive (128 lines), Coclet Lane and Farm -to -Market Road (640 lines), Lost Creek Drive and Farm -to -Market Road (256 lines), McMannamy Draw Road and Saddlewood Drive (64 lines), Rhodes Draw Road and Mountain Meadow Road (481 lines), and up Mountain Meadow_ Road (128 lines). Transmission lines are located both underground and overhead, although over 90% of the new or replacement lines now going in are underground. Presently, only voice service is provided in the area, but PTI hopes to upgrade the system over the next few years to also provide Broad Band Service. Broad Band Service has a wider signal and fastef digital signaling which will enhance digital (computer) access through the phone lines. The Kalispell center is being upgraded in 1996 to access the Integrated Service Digital Network (ISDN), and plans are to upgrade outlying wire centers, such as those in West Valley, in 1997. Electricity: Flathead Electric Cooperative, Inc. (FEC) provides electrical service to the majority of the West Valley District. Pacific Power and Light Company (PPL) provides service in the south-eastern comer of the District, generally in the area south of West Reserve Drive and east of West Valley Drive. PPL also has transmission lines running up Farm -to -Market Road, stopping just south of the West Valley School. Electricity is provided to the West Valley District through a network of single, double and triple phased lines. Triple phase lines run primarily along well -traveled and populated routes, such as Farm -to -Market Road and Church Drive. These lines split into double and single phase lines as they move into less populated areas, such as up McMannamy Draw or Rhodes Draw. Neither FEC or PPL report any particular problems in the West Valley District nor do they anticipate any problems servicing additional developments. At most, a new development might require increasing the phasing of adjacent lines. Over the next year, FEC is planning to do construction at their substation located at the intersection of West Valley Drive and West Reserve Road to increase visibility at the intersection. This substation services the West Valley area. FEC also indicated that general maintenance is needed throughout their distribution system, including West Valley. PPL is planning to spend approximately $40,000 over the next few years to replace transmission poles along Three Mile Drive and Farm -to -Market Road. ISSUES: No particular issues were identified by the landowners in West Valley concerning these services. 241> EMERGENCY SERVICES Emergency services in the West Valley School District are provided by numerous organizations and are dispatched through the Flathead County Sheriff's Department (9-1-1). In most instances, the West Valley Volunteer Fire and Rescue Department is automatically dispatched in any emergency situation. Other organizations are dispatched as needed depending on the nature of the emergency. POLICE PROTECTION: Police protection in the West Valley School District is provided by the Flathead County Sheriffs Department, which is stationed in Kalispell. Five uniformed officers are scheduled to be on duty in the County at any given time. Two of these officers are assigned to cover the Kalispell area, which includes West Valley. Generally, one officer covers the northern part of the Kalispell area and the other covers the southern part, although their position and availability may vary depending on other County -wide needs. The Sheriffs office indicates that there are no particular problems or concerns which are specific to the West Valley area. They do have a County -wide concern, however, about their ability to provide adequate services, particularly during the summer, due to the lack of personnel. During the summer months, the office basically only has the resources to respond to emergency calls; routine preventative patrols are very limited. Because of the shortage of officers, the response -time to a call can vary considerably and is a factor of where the officers are located, where the call is coming from, and what else is going on in the County. During busy times, calls are prioritized and officers respond to calls as they are able. The Department has received some complaints from people living in remote locations who expect the same type of service as they might get living in a city. FIRE PROTECTION: The West Valley Fire and Rescue Department, the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC, formerly the Department of State Lands), and the United States Forest Service (USFS) are all involved with fire suppression efforts in West Valley. The West Valley Fire and Rescue Department and the DNRC have overlapping jurisdictional areas within the West Valley School District (Refer to Fire Protection Map at the end of this Section). In general, the West Valley Fire and Rescue Department responds to all fire calls within the West Valley School District, while the DNRC and the USFS only respond when there are wildland fires. DNRC crews are automatically dispatched to wildland 2S West Vidley Neighborhood Platt fires located within their Fire Protection Zone (Map 1). DNRC and USFS crews assist the West Valley Department if their assistance is requested, or if a structural fire shows signs of raging out of control. In the event of large structural fires, Fire Districts from around Flathead Valley would cooperate in fire suppression efforts. ► West Valley Volunteer Fire and Rescue Department: This Department has served the West Valley community since 1968. The Department considers its number one priority to be providing rescue to ensure human safety. Fighting fires and protecting property is the number two priority. The types and numbers of calls responded to over the past three years are shown below. The majority of fire calls received are brush or grass fires. Calls Received at the West Valley Fire and Rescue Department Year Fire Rescue False Alarms 1993 - 25 5 8 1994 65 19 18 1995 40 38 10 The West Valley Fire District encompasses the majority of the School District and also extends further east and north roughly bounded by Whitefish Stage Road and Hodgson Road. The most western sections of the School District are not included in the Fire District (Map 1). For the most part, the lands in these areas are owned by the State of Montana, the United States Forest Service, or the Stoltze Lumber Company. There are also some privately - owned lands and homes outside of the Fire District, however, such as along O'Neil Creek Road. The West Valley Fire and Rescue Department will respond to an emergency in these areas, but the homeowner's insurance company would then be billed for the service. There are 28 volunteer fire fighters in the Department. Most of the volunteers have in excess of 100 hours of training per year in addition to the 30 hours required by the state. Training may include training in fire fighting, wildiand fire suppression, the handling of hazardous material incidents, vehicle extrications, helicopter safety, low level rope rescues, and medical treatment. The Fire and Rescue Department operates out of two stations. Station #1 is located on West Valley Drive and Station #2 is located on Whitefish Stage Road. Station #1 houses three trucks: a four-wheel drive Brush Truck which holds 300 gallons of water and is used for fighting wildiand fires; a Class One Engine which holds 1,000 gallons of water; and a Type Three Tender which holds 4,000 gallons of water. Station #2 houses three trucks: a Class One 21) West Watley Neighborhood Plan Engine which holds 1,000 gallons of water; a Type Four Tender which holds 3,500 gallons of water; and a 1959 Tender. The department plans to sell the 1959 Tender in 1996. Response time to an emergency situation varies depending on the type of call, the location of the call, and the time of day. In general, the farther the call is from the fire station, the longer the response time will be. Response time may also be slower during the work -day since many of the volunteers work in Kalispell or other areas away from West Valley. Many of the volunteers do carry emergency gear in their personal vehicles, however, so they can respond directly to a call if they don't need to report to the station. As one example of the Department's response time, it would take approximately 10 minutes for the first fire engine to be on the scene at a fire in Pleasant Hill Estates. The West Valley Fire and Rescue Department receives funding from -- Flathead County, private fund-raising efforts, and private donations. For the 1995/1996 fiscal year, tax revenues from the County total $67,000 and the total projected budget is $188,000. The projected budget includes construction of a new fire station using $80,000 in Reserve Funds set aside for capitol expenditures. Private fund-raising efforts in 1996 include a fund- raising dance held in March to raise money to purchase a semi -automatic defibrillator. The Department is also supported by the West Valley Volunteer Fire and Rescue Department Auxiliary which provides physical and emotional support to the fire fighters. The Auxiliary conducts its own fund- raising efforts. The West Valley Volunteer Fire and Rescue Department is planning to build a new, larger station in 1996 which will replace Station #1. The department has purchased a three -acre piece of property on Farm -to -Market Road just north of the West Valley School and hopes to break ground on the new building in June or July, 1996. In addition to the Reserve Funds, the Department will probably also need to take out a loan to cover all building expenses. The Department is not sure what they will do with the existing Station #1. There has been talk of either selling the building to raise money for the Department or of using it in its existing location as a training facility. The land is under a lease agreement with Mr. Grosswiler. DNRC and USFS: These agencies are dispatched out of the Flathead Interagency Dispatch Center in Kalispell for wildland fire control. This Dispatch Center is primarily operational during the fire season, which runs from April to September. In the West Valley area, response would either be out of the DNRC's Kalispell Fire Unit based on Route 93 in Kalispell or out 9E West Vail"- Neighborhood Plan of the USFS Tally Lake Ranger District. The two agencies operate under a "Closest Forces Concept", where the closest or most accessible units of either agency are dispatched to an emergency situation. These government agencies can provide fire suppression equipment above that provided by the West Valley Department, including two airplanes, two helicopters, two trucks from the Tally Lake District, eight trucks from the Kalispell Fire Unit, and access to a 20 person hotshot crew. EMERGENCY MEDICAL: As mentioned above, the West Valley Volunteer Fire and Rescue Department provides emergency medical care within West Valley and is automatically dispatched on all calls. All of the Department's engines are equipped to provide Basic Life Support and all carry full trauma bags. Six of the volunteers are trained as Emergency Medical Technicians (EMT), five are First Responders, and five are trained to use defibrillators. A number of the volunteers carry personal medical emergency gear in their personal vehicles so they can respond more quickly to a call. The volunteers work in conjunction with medical personnel on the Kalispell Ambulance and the ALERT Air Ambulance if patient transport is required. Transport of medical emergency victims is provided by the Kalispell Ambulance and the ALERT Air Ambulance. The Kalispell Ambulance is dispatched on all medical calls and is able to provide Basic Life Support and ground transport to Kalispell Regional Hospital. Based on the severity of the injury and the accessibility of the location, the ALERT Air Ambulance may also be dispatched. ALERT can be in the air generally within seven minutes of a call and can provide Advanced Life Support. Flathead Search and Rescue is dispatched through the Flathead County Sheriff's__ Department and is primarily used in situations involving lost or missing individuals. Historically, search and rescue operations in the West Valley area have usually involved finding lost hunters or children. Present membership is 40-50 people and includes some with specialized training and/or experience in the operation or use of equipment for land and water searches. Equipment includes a response truck, boats, snowmobiles, search dogs, avalanche rescue equipment, ropes and technical equipment. HAZARDOUS MATERIAL RESPONSE: Response to the sp'llage of hazardous materials is coordinated through the County Disaster and Emergency Services Office, working closely with the County Environmental Health Department. The majority of incidents requiring a response either involve spillage of fuels from cars and trucks or spillage of farming chemicals. These are usually small spills and can be cleaned up by the Disaster and Emergency Services Office and the West Valley Fire and Rescue Department. In the rare situations where the severity of the spill makes cleanup beyond the capability of the local response team, the Disaster and Emergency Services Office contracts with the Olympus Environmental Company out 31 West Vallry .Neighborhood Plan of Helena and Spokane. ISSUES- Presently the West Valley Rescue and Fire Department obtains water from local agricultural irrigation systems during the summer and from hydrants, such as in Country Estates, during the winter. This system is satisfactory in the summer, but is not very convenient during the winter. As a replacement for -this current system, the Department is presently negotiating access to a private well near the Fox Farm Road/ West Valley Road intersection. The Department is helping to develop the pump system with hookups for their tanks already plumbed into the system so they can have easy, year-round access to a reliable water source. They are also hoping to develop a water storage system at the site. Because of the large number of calls received that are brush or grass fires, there are some concerns about subdivision in the valley. As farrr-lands are subdivided and sold to homeowners in lots of 40 acres or less, grass fires seem to have become an increasing concern. Many of these newer homeowners do not cultivate or graze their land, and rather allow grasses and brush to grow to the point that they become a serious fire hazard. HN West Vallev Neighborhood Man TRANSPORTATION West Valley has an abundance of roads -- both private and public. There are no rail facilities or air fields. Designated public bike paths are also absent from the area. General access to West Valley is conveniently provided by major road systems. U.S. Highway 93 is located adjacent to West Valley on the east. Primary east/west routes include Three Mile Drive, West Reserve Drive, and Church Drive. Major north/south roads include Stillwater Road, West Springcreek Road, West Valley Drive, and Farm -to -Market Road. A "West -Side" by-pass to Kalispell is also being proposed, which could have a significant affect on local and regional traffic circulation patterns and land use in general. Other major road systems include Lost Creek Drive, Mountain Meadow Road, Bald Rock Road, Clark Drive, Coclet Lane, Brown's Road, Rhodes Draw Road, and McMannamy Draw Road. Those roads classified as Minor Arterials or Collectors are listed below. All other roads are considered to be "local" roads. Refer to the Transportation Map on the following page. I MINOR ARTERIAL I COLLECTOR I West Reserve Drive I McMannamy below Brown's Road I Three Mile Drive I Rhodes below Bald Rock Road Farm -to -Market Road The classification of roads is mostly determined by traffic volume. In most cases, traffic counts are not routinely monitored in the area so these listings may not be current. ISSUES: Most of the issues related to "roads" pertain to maintenance and dust. However, it was noted in the January 1996 meeting of the West Valley Steering Committee that snow removal had been exceptional on the county roads for the current year. Road washouts on McMannamy Draw Road were particularly troublesome during the spring of 1996. Road reconstruction was cited as being necessary for most of the gravel surfaced roads in the hilly portion of the planning area. -The Steering Committee was advised by the Road Superintendent that money was gene -rally not available for road reconstruction or paving. Other issues noted by the farming community was the difficulty created by road weight limits during spring break-up. 3= West Volley Neighborhood Man a it The area to the west of Kalispell is one of the most rapidly growing parts of Flathead County. The area has a reputation for lower taxes, land values and rental costs, and has thus attracted many people, including many young families. School enrollment in the West Valley area has increased steadily since the creation of West Valley Elementary School District #1 in 1962 (See Figure). This School District was created from five pre-existing School Districts and serves grades K-8. The District is surrounded by the following other School Districts: Olney -Bissell District #58 to the west and north, Marion District #54 and Smith Valley District #89 to the south, Kalispell District #5 to the east, and Whitefish District #44 to the WWV EST VALLEY SCHOOL ENROLLMENT 300 -- - -- — --- �azn TT i . 250 .. -- — --- ---- -- - -- - ---- -- — - 240 Z i # W200 ._--_—___-.-____--. _-----._—.—_--t%isszoo L ! L I f W 1!i a 150 — --- - ----- — — "° - 146 127 T III W •�� T771_ to',i tt7 itf 1 1 1 i ,a iaa i i —T I 1 so I o� 1967 1977 1987 1962 1972 1982 1992 YEAR northeast. After completing elementary school, West Valley students attend Junior 3t, West vallev .`'�c;icboriwvd Plcut High and High School in Kalispell. Between 1985 and 1994. enrollment in the West Valley School District increased 48%, as compared to 24% for the rest of the County K-8 School Districts combined. During this same time, the enrollment at Kalispell Regional High School only increased 2%. The tremendous increase in the number of students in West Valley has put serious pressures on the School District. It has struggled, and continues to struggle, with ways to come up with the resources necessary to support the growing number of students at a time when voters are not likely to support tax increases. The good news is that enrollment has appeared to stabilize to 300± children over the past 4 years. The costs of operating the school since 1962 are shown below. Year General Fund Budget Cost Per Pupil Salaries of Staff Number of Teachers 1962/1963 $ 15,637 $ 289 $ 12,000 3 1969/1970 $ 55,480 $ 491 $ 36,012 5 1974/1975 S 84,956 $ 639 $ 61,641 7 1979/1980 $ 177,967 $ 1,141 $ 107,685 10 1984/1985 $ 320,866 $ 1,945 $ 242,698 13 1989/1990 $ 398,089 $ 2,028 $ 369,669 14 1994/1995 S 990,568 S 3.381 $ 860,055 23 The voters have approved four more Building Bonds for improvements to the school building since 1962 (see below). Funds for smaller projects have come from the General Fund Budget. Year Retired Amount Purpose Enrollment 1962 Yes $42,000 North 1 57 1966 Yes $20,000 North 2 88 1966 Yes $10,000 Gymnasium 88 1973 Yes $90,000 South 114 1980 Yes $304,000 Connects 140 1990 February, 2005 $480,000 West 240 The design capacity of the existing 30,000 sq. ft. school is 275 students. As of February 1, 1996, there were 308 students enrolled in the school, with 23 members of the teaching staff. To accommodate these additional students, two rooms in the basement have been converted to temporary classrooms, but these rooms are not adequate. Including these basement rooms, the present building has: 18 3_ bVrst Vidlev Nei,-hborhood Plan classrooms, a library, a fine arts room, a gymnasium which also serves as the lunch room, boys and girls locker rooms, a counseling room, several offices, four sets of bathrooms, two support rooms, a work room, and a janitor's room. The school does not have a separate lunchroom or kitchen for preparing hot lunches. ISSUES: As mentioned above, the population growth in West Valley and increased student enrollment is currently a major issue for the School District. The present school is already exceeding its design capacity and two make -shift classrooms have been set up in the basement to accommodate the increased number of students. Relaxed zoning regulations that permit higher densities of development could again accelerate school enrollment in the District. Funding: To raise money for enlarging the school, a bond Issue for $760,000 and a Building Reserve for $321,000 over five years were put to the voters in April, 1995 and June, 1995, respectively. In both cases, the voters were unwilling to accept the additional tax burden of expansion. The School Board is presently discussing alternative solutions, including putting another school bond before the voters, or using the nearby Grange building as a possible satellite site. The present bonding capacity is $910,348, with a current outstanding bond balance of $400,000. The bonding capacity is 45% of the taxable value. Transportation: The West Valley School District has never been able to afford to operate a bus system. The insurance costs and number of buses that would be needed to cover the large district make bussing cost - prohibitive. In addition, many students live up "draws" where the roads are too narrow and dangerous for buses to navigate safely. Instead, students are transported to school by their parents and individual transportation contracts are developed for those students who live greater than three miles from the school. Transportation contracts are calculated at a rate of 21.25 cents per mile for each mile over three for each day the parent drives a child to school. In the 1995/1996 school year, the parents of 88 students entered into transportation contracts with the School District. Hot lunch program: The West Valley School District does not provide hot lunches for its students because of spatial and cost constraints. At present, the school does not have a separate lunchroom or kitchen in which to prepare hot meals. Children eat lunch in the gymnasium, which means that both lunch time and gym classes are impacted. Back in the 1970's, hot lunches were shipped to West Valley from the Evergreen School District, but this program was dropped in the early 1980's because of the expense. A survey was sent to the parents asking for support of the Evergreen lunch program and the majority indicated they did not want to continue paying for 3-S West Vallee Nei;lzborhoocl Man it. One of the existing classrooms is slated as the future kitchen, but that space is still needed as a classroom. Septic system: The West Valley School is presently operating using a gravity -fed septic system which was originally installed in 1962. When plans for a new addition to the school were developed in 1993, the Flathead County Environmental Health Department informed the School Board that the existing septic system would need to be replaced by a new pumped system because of the increased size of the school. At that time, cost estimates for the new septic -system were over $30,000. Facility space: The school site already exceeds the property boundaries and has limited opportunities for expansion without acquiring additional land. 39 West Valley Neighborhood Plan PUBLIC SERVICES GOALS TO EVALUATE THE PUBLIC COSTS OF NEW DEVELOPMENT TO MAINTAIN THE CURRENT LEVEL OF PUBLIC SERVICES IN THE WEST VALLEY AREA TO BALANCE GROWTH WITH THE PROVISIONIAVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC SERVICES — n .w ► New residential developments should be located within the jurisdictional boundaries of the West Valley Fire & Rescue Department ► State wildfire prevention guidelines should be implemented for all dwellings located within wooded areas ► Recognize the limitations of police, fire, and emergency medical services to remote locations and to West Valley, in general • y .....� • • • ► Coordinate with the County Road Department to help prioritize improvements to local roads ► Consider opportunities for bike paths along Farm -to -Market Road and West Reserve Drive to separate vehicles and bikes ► Consider the adequacy of existing roads when reviewing new development proposals SCHOOLS ► Seek solutions to the existing building and classroom crowding at the School ► Secure additional land area for expansion of the existing school ► Evaluate new development proposals in consideration to impacts to the school 40 VVest Valle- .Vri;hborhovd P.'un The Neighborhood Plan is a compilation of useful information concerning all aspects of the West Valley Neighborhood. The Plan examines the various physical, biological, and social elements of the area to establish a benchmark from which all future land use proposals can be measured. More importantly, the Plan presents a future vision for West Valley. The identified goal and policy statements compliment the findings of the land use survey. Based on the survey results, the top 4 reasons for choosing to live or own property in West Valley are: ► rural setting; ► lots of open space; ► low crime rate; and ► easy commute. The most frequently listed problems with living in West Valley were: ► high property taxes, - uncontrolled development; and ► poor quality of roads. Implementation of the Plan is necessary to address the identified local issues and to achieve community goals. Subdivision and zoning regulations are the primary tools of plan implementation. Subdivision regulations can assess compliance of proposed land divisions with the Neighborhood Plan and zoning regulations and require mitigation measures as appropriate. Review of subdivision proposals also offers an opportunity for public review and comment. Zoning regulations offer the most efficient means for plan implementation. Land use regulations generally establish allowable uses, set minimum lot sizes, and identify performance standards for new development. ISSUES: Feedback from the public participation process indicated that regulations are considered necessary to protect the quality of life in West Valley. General consensus was that the regulations should be simple to understand and offer flexibility in application. For example, the regulations should recognize opportunities for residential development in areas having "poor" soils when services are readily available. Lot sizes should not necessarily be "fixed" but, instead, be based on a density allocation that may vary from one location to the next. Protection of private property rights is also considered to be an important element of consideration when drafting the regulations. From this perspective, regulations must offer protection of existing uses and recognize differences in land use opportunities throughout the planning jurisdiction. A local citizen's review panel is necessary to provide local input into the decision -making process. Based on the land use composition of the planning area, it would be appropriate to include representatives of the timber 41 N West Vailev .Neighborhood Plan industry and farming community as members of the panel. TO ESTABLISH A SET -OF REGULATIONS THAT ADDRESS AND IMPLEMENT THE SPECIFIC GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE WEST VALLEY AREA TO INCORPORATE LOCAL PARTICIPATION IN THE REGULATORY REVIEW PROCESS it9ig, "T. 0i1,11t90141al � ► Establish a flexible regulatory system to guide and review development proposals ► Provide regulatory incentives to promote the protection of ag land, forest land, and other significant natural resources I. Provide for a regulatory system that is easy to understand and administer ► Establish a citizen's review panel to advise the Planning Board and Board of County Commissioners on land use activities subject to review ► Freestanding commercial signage should be prohibited ► Coordinate the rate, amount, and location of new development with the available level of services. 4' WEST VALLEY DEVELOPMENT C`�111_\►�17\7171 Excerpted from the Flathead County Zoning Regulations WV West Valley Zoning District Resolution No. 955A Adopted 4/9/97 44 Section 3.34 W-V W-EST VALLEY 3.34.010 3.34.020 3.34.030 Definition: A district to promote orderly growth and development in the West Valley area consistent with the ccmmunity vision statements as expressed by the text and map exhibits of the West- Valley Neighborhood Plan, County. Resolution 4 1226-A. Permitted uses 1. Agriculturallhortie_ ultural uses, practices, and related accessory uses 2. Cemeteries 3. Churches 4. Class A or B manufactured homes (See definitions) 5. Community meeting centers, publicly owned and operated 6:- Dairy products processing, bottling, and distribution 7. Day care 8. Dwelling, single family 9. Dwelling, family hardship 10. Farmiranch/caretaker employee housing 11. Feed and seed processing and cleaning 12. Feed lots: cattle, swine, poultry 13. Granee 14. Home -based business (See related performance standards) 15. Livestock (See performance standards applicable on lots 10 acres or less in size) 16. Nurseries, landscaping materials 17. Parks 18. Post office 19. Produce stands 20. Public transportation shelter stations 21. Recreational facilities, publicly owned and operated 22. Schools 23. Silvicultural and related forest management practices 24. Temporary buildings or structures, occupied less than one year 25. Public utility installation, minor (limited to neighborhood service area) Conditional uses I . Animal hospitals/veterinary clinics 2. RV parks with no tent camping 3. Camp and retreat center 4. Communication towers. masts 45 5. Gulf course and related facilities (dwelling lots must be approved through the cluster provisions of these regulations) 6. Gravel extraction 7. Gun clubs. shooting ranges 8. Commercial hunting ranch for small game 9. Kenr.els 10. Neig_:borhood convenience store (See related performance standards) 11. Commercial stables/riding academies I2. Temporary buildings or structures, occupied one year or longer 13. Public utility installation, major (service area beyond neighborhood) 3.34.040 Bulk and dimensional requirements 1. Minimum lot size: 1 acre. 2. Maximum density: See density performance standards. 3. Minimum yard requirements: A 20-foot setback is required from any property line, road easement, or intermittent stream. A 50-foot setback is required from any perennial water body. 4. Maximum height: 35 feet (agricultural buildings exempt). 3.34.050 Density performance standards. 1. 20-acre density. All property within the District is eligible for a residential density of one dwelling per 20 acres. 2. 15-acre density. Maximum residential density shall be one dwelling per 15 acres if the following criterion is met: A. No more than 10% of the lot area shall have soils with Capability Classes I, II, III, or IV as identified by the 1960 Soil Survey for the Upper Flathead Valley Area. 3. 10-acre density. Maximum residential density- shall be one dwelling�per 10 acres if the following criteria are met: A. The average slope of any proposed lot shall be less than 25%. B. No more than 35% of the lot area shall have soils with Capability Classes I, I1, 1II, or IV as identified by the 1960 Soil Survey for the Upper Flathead Valley Area. 46 C. All lots shall be located within a rural fire district. D. A portion of each lot shall be located within 1.500 feet of a road maintained by the county and have access to and use of said road. 4. 5-acre density. Maximum residential density shall be one dwelling per 5 acres if the following criteria are met: A. The average slope of any proposed lot shall be less than 15%. B. All lots shall be located within a rural fire district. C. No more than 20% of the lot area shall have soils with Capability Classes I, II, III, or IV as identified by the 1960 Soil Survey for the Upper Flathead Valley Area. D. No more than 25% of the area of any lot shall be within the 100 year floodplain, wetlands, river, lake, or any combination thereof. E. A portion of each lot must be within 300 feet a road maintained by the county and have access to and use of said road. 5. Clustering. A bonus density of up to I dwelling unit per 5 acres on average is permitted by clustering (see Residential Clustering Standards). 6. Expansion of existing platted subdivisions. Lands located within the perimeter of existing platted subdivisions where lots average 2 acres or less are eligible for additional subdivision. All new or amended lots must have access and use of the water and road systems of the existing subdivision and be subject to the covenant restrictions of the existing platted subdivision. 7. Lot area and average slope determination. Compliance with lot area and average slope requirements shall be certified by a registered land surveyor on any certificate of survey or subdivision plat. To determine the area of lakes or rivers, use the average high water line as the perimeter of the water body. To determine the area of wetlands, the Zoning Administrator may require wetland delineation by a professional hydrologist. 47 8. Average slope calculation. The average slope (S%) of a parcel shall be calculated as follows: S% = .0023 x I x L / A. To use this formula, a contour map of the parcel is necessary, and the contour interval (vertical distance between adjacent contour lines on the map) must be no more than 10 feet for a subdivision and 40 feet for a certificate of survey. I is the contour interval in feet. L is the total length in feet of all contour lines within the parcel. A is the area in acres of the parcel. 3.34.060 Land Use Advisory Committee. A citizen land use advisory committee of 7 individuals shall be established by the Board of County Commissioners to advise the Flathead County Planning Board, Kalispell City -County Planning Board, Flathead County Board of Adjustment, and Board of County Commissioners, as appropriate, on all subdivision and conditional use applications. Said Committee should include representation from both the timber and agricultural industries. All members must be land owners within the District. In the instance where a landowner holds title to real property through a corporate or business name, the duly appointed representative of the business or corporation will be eligible to be a member of the district. 3.34.070 Home -based business performance standards. 1. General. A. Home -based businesses are permitted throughout the District. B. Within the West Valley district, a home -based business is defined as any occupation, profession, activity or use which is clearly a customary, incidental and secondary use of a residential lot and which does not affect the residential or agricultural character of the property or area. 2. Specific Standards. A. Home -based businesses are permitted in accessory buildings as well as residential buildings. B. A home -based business must be operated by the individual(s) who own and live on the property. C. Home -based business shall be architecturally compatible with the buildings in the immediate vicinity. 48 D. All parking shall be maintained on site. E. A conditional use permit must be obtained for a home -based -- business generating more than 10 daily vehicle trips. F. Any outdoor storage of materials shall be shielded from public view. G. Signs for business identification are permitted. not to exceed a total sign area of ten square feet and a height of eight feet. Signs shall not be lighted and shall not rotate, move, flash, change or blink. H. A conditional use permit must be obtained for a home -based business having more than 5 employees. 3.34.080 Residential clustering standards. 1. General A. The minimum size of the tract of land subject to the cluster development shall be 20 acres. B. Clustering is not mandatory but may be used as an option to subdivide property. C. All subdivided lots or multiple dwellings on a single tract of land shall be clustered so as to prevent a scattered development pattern. -- D. A cluster development must obtain approval as a subdivision under the Flathead County Subdivision Regulations or as a conditional use if multiple dwellings are being placed on property without subdivision into lots. E. The required open space shall be exterior to the created lots and, if applicable, not be segregated from a larger remaining tract of land. The open space must remain as a single contiguous tract or a portion of a larger parent tract of land. Road and utility easements shall not be counted as open space. F. The property owner shall either grant in perpetuity an irrevocable conservation easement or file with the Flathead County Clerk and Recorder a deed restriction runnin-with the land. which shall dedicate the land as permanent open space and require that it shall not be further divided. 49 G. The preferred use of the required open space is agriculture or silviculture. Any open space 20 acres or larger in size is eligible for a single residential building site of no larger than 2 acres in size, but residential development is not permitted on smaller open space tracts. The open space and associated building site can be sold as a single tract of land but is not eligible for further subdivision. 2. 10-acre cluster provision. Maximum residential density in a cluster development shall be one dwelling per 10 acres, if the following criterion is met: A. A minimum. of 50% of the eligible property shall be dedicated as permanent open space on the subdivision plat. 3. 5-acre cluster provision. Maximum residential density in a cluster development shall be one dwelling per 5 acres, if the following criteria are met: A. Individual lot sizes shall not exceed 1 net acre. B. A minimum of 76% of the eligible property shall be dedicated as permanent open space on the subdivision plat. 3.34.090 Neighborhood convenience store performance standards. 1. General A. A neighborhood convenience store in the Nest Valley District is permitted in accordance with strict architectural, size, use, and locational criteria. B. It is not the intent of these regulations to promote, encourage, or permit general retail commercial uses within the District. C. Within the West Valley District, neighborhood convenience store is defined as a retail establishment having a trade area that does not extend beyond the neighborhood and offering for sale a variety of convenience items, typically including prepackaged food and beverages, household items, and motor fuel. D. Building architecture shall be compatible to a rural residential setting by emphasizing log or wood exterior with a pitched roof line and asphalt composition, tile, or wood shingles in natural colors, and limited commercial signage. M E. Compliance with the requirements set forth herein shall be determined by the Zoning Administrator. A site plan. elevation drawing, and other applicable materials demonstrating compliance with these performance standards shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator, and approval shall be obtained prior to commencement of cons: ction. Appeal of any decision by the Zoning Administrator shall follow the process set forth in the Flathead County Zoning Regulations as applicable to Conditional Uses. 2. Specific standards A. The footprint of --the commercial structure shall not exceed 2000 square feet. B. Nfinimum tot size shall be 3 acres. C. A maximum of 4 fueling pumps shall be permitted. D. The store dumpster site shall be provided to the rear of the building and be screened from public view. Any mechanical/refrigeration equipment or propane tanks located exterior to the building shall be appropriately screened from public view. E. All structures shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet from any lot line adjoining a public road and 35 feet from all other lot lines. Parking and other paved surfaces shall not extend into the required landscape areas. F. Fencing and weed control shall be provided on all commercial lot lines having frontage with a public road. G. Signage shall be limited to a single -faced wall identification sign not to exceed 36 square feet, except that gas price signage having maximum letter height of 8 inches may be placed below the roof line of the gas island canopy. Outside security lighting is mandatory during hours of darkness. Lighting shall be directed downward and shielded to prevent light from shining onto adjacent roads or properties. Lighting shall not blink, flash, or rotate. H. Parking shall be provided at a ratio of I space (9'X20') per 150 square feet of gross floor area. All parking, circulation, and approaches shall be either be asphaltic or Portland cement concrete and appropriately striped to designate traffic flow- direction and parking spaces. 51 J. Landscaping consisting of grass. shrubs. and tree species shall be provided along any tot line adjoining a public road. Said Iandscaping shall extend the entire length of the developed frontage. except for the driveway entrances. and have a depth of at least 35 feet as measured inward from the public road right-of- way. Said Indscaping shall be irrigated with an underground sprinkling system and be maintained throughout the growing _ . season. IC No liquor shall be sold from the premises nor shall gaming (gambling) machines be permitted. A single upstairs apartment unit shall be permitted if architecturally incorporated into the overall building design. L. Exterior wall finishes shall emphasize natural wood features such as Iog or beveled cedar siding, stained to natural wood tones. Windows shall not have mirrored glazina. The roof shall have a minimum 6:12 pitch, utilizing Class 'A' roofing material. The fueling island canopy shall have a visual expression of log or timber flaming (or as otherwise modified for reasons of fire safety) with a sloped roof of a 4:12 minimum pitch in a gable shape. M. Fire protection measures shall be incorporated as recommended by the West Valley Volunteer Fire Department. N. The store shall not be open for business between the hours of 10:00 PNI and 6:00 ATM. O. Outside PA (public address) systems are prohibited. P. Prior to the development of a store, the landowner shall submit and implement a traffic mitigation study prepared by a professional transportation engineer. 52 WEST VALLEY OVERLAY DEVELOPMENT f.�s\►`I l�f 717.E Excerpted from the Flathead County Zoning Regulations WV West Valley Overlay Resolution No. 955A Adopted 4/9/97 53 { Section 3.35 WVO WEST VALLEY OVERL.-kY 3.35.010 Definition: A district to extend the provisions relating to the Land Use Advisory Committee and Residential Clustering of the WV West Vallev Zoning District to other properties outside that district but within the jurisdiction of the West Valley Neighborhood Plan, County Resolution # 1226-A. 3.35.020 Land Use Advisory Committee. A citizen land use advisory committee of 7 individuals shall be established by the Board of County Commissioners to advise the Flathead County Planning Board, Kalispell City -County Planning Board, Flathead County Board of Adjustment, and Board of County Commissioners, as appropriate, on all subdivision and conditional use applications. Said Committee should include representation from both the timber and agricultural industries. All members must be land owners within the District. In the instance where a landowner holds title to real property through a corporate or business name, the duly appointed representative of the business or corporation will be eligible to be a member of the district. 3.35.030 Residential clustering standards. 1. General A. The minimum size of the tract of land subject to the cluster development shall be 20 acres. B. Clustering is not mandatory but may be used as an option to subdivide property. C. All subdivided lots or multiple dwellings on a single tract of land shall be clustered so as to prevent a scattered development pattern. D. A cluster development must obtain approval as a subdivision under the Flathead County Subdivision Regulations or as a conditional use if multiple dwellings are being placed on property without subdivision into lots. E. The required open space shall be exterior to the created lots and, if applicable, not be segregated from a larger remaining tract of land. The open space must remain as a single contiguous tract or a portion of a larger parent tract of land. Road and utility 54 easements shall not be counted as open space. F. The property owner shall either grant in perpetuity- an irrevocable conservation easement or file with the Flathead County Clerk and Recorder a deed restriction running with the land. which shall dedicate the land as permanent open space and require that it shall not be further divided G. The preferred use of the required open space is agriculture or silviculture. Any open space 20 acres or larger in size is eligible for a single residential building site of no Iarger than 2 acres in size, but residential development is not permitted on smaller open space tracts. The open space and associated building site can be sold as a single tract of Iand but is not eligible for further subdivision. 2. 10-acre cluster provision_ Maximum residential density in a cluster development shall be one dwelling per 10 acres, if the following criterion is met: A. A minimum of 50° o of the eligible property shall be dedicated as permanent open space on the subdivision plat. ;. 5-acre cluster provision. Maximum residential density in a cluster development shall be one dwelling per 5 acres, if the following criteria are met: A. Individual lot sizes shall not exceed I net acre. B. A minimum of 7601'0 of the eligible property shall be dedicated as permanent open space on the subdivision plat. 55 "'nSt Valley Neigbborbood Plan plan Area Bagemap _- _ �"J-0,G_ se 31 =— October 30, 1996 _ T30N --� 729N �T6— -- 4- — —� IIx Rcod Drive _ 10— i o 12 _ 8 _ --' i G• _Give _ Rhodes Drnw Rood - -v 17 1B • _ _� 4 . 3— - 181 17 _ - 14-- 13 — /"1nr{ give �• LCt— 19 21— 22 23 24 9 — y— 23 30 —29 8— — °-- 30- - �� r Lone - —1 — 29 _ — _ -- 27- 26 . McNann CM West eserve On-ve �_ n• _= --- Gh ' 34 3� 38 —31 __ - --- _ 'Neil — - — _ — —� / 36 _ H-NI. ?24 — Form To +d; ' Rd Drive cur �W: e Dr.: - � T29NT28N Graphic Scale ,—>_ 2500 5CC^ 7� 1 -- r-- - -- -o NVA fj Ji-Fgrrn rp Mcrkei 'Thkee 'Wi;e r;y _d 1 inch = 5000 ft- b ((Opt -- - - - — = =may - = Yi:\AA -:l1•w .r\i.: SM1: � ^Y G, �0-- V".♦. —_ _ � 1 -1.�. n p o, •sn/ Ka.:o.., yr s»,. -- ---� - - - - •9 _ ... 3 . -t _ 12 - -