5. Resolution 4395 - White Annexation/Ordinance 1283 - Zoning - 1st ReadingKALISPELL CITY -COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MEETING
FEBRUARY 10, 1998
Master Plan Work There was a work session scheduled at 6:30 p.m. to discuss the master
Session plan update. Steve Kountz, Senior Planner, gave an overview of the
progress, for the new members. The process began about one year ago,
and is projected to be available for public review and comment by this
fall.
CALL TO ORDER The regularly scheduled meeting of the Kalispell City -County Planning
AND ROLL CALL Board and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Vice -
Chair Carlson. Board members present were Milt Carlson, Walter Bahr,
Joe Brenneman, Jean Johnson, and Greg Stevens. Don Garberg and Rob
Heinecke were recently appointed by City Council and were welcomed
on the Board. Therese Hash was absent (excused). The Flathead
Regional Development Office was represented by Narda Wilson, Senior
Planner. There were approximately 20 people in the audience.
Election of Member Next item of business was election of the member -at -large. Letters of
at Large interest were received from John Parsons, Don Hines, and Sydnee Hill.
All were present and introduced themselves. By written ballot, Don
Hines received the majority votes. His appointment must be confirmed
by both the City Council and County Commissioners.
APPROVAL OF The minutes of the meeting of January 13, 1998 were approved as
MtrTUTES written on a motion by Johnson, second by Bahr.
THOMPSON, The first public hearing was introduced on a request by Glen and Mildred
NOBLE & Thompson, Cecil and Isabel Noble and Catherine McKinley on behalf of
McKINLEY ZONE themselves and property owners in the area to rezone several parcels
CHANGE FROM from R-3, a Residential zoning district, and RA-1, a Low Density
R-3 and RA-1 TO Residential Apartment zoning district, to RA-3, Residential
RA-3 Apartment/Office zoning district on the east side of North Meridian
Road.
Don Garberg declared a conflict of interest on this matter and stepped
down from the Board
StaffReport Wilson presented an overview of report #KZC-98-1. The necessary
Kalispell City -County Planning Board
Minutes of Meeting of February 10, 1998
Page 1 of 8
criteria for a zone change was evaluated, and the recommendation was to
grant the zone change from R-3 and RA-1 to RA-3 . This conforms with
the North Meridian Neighborhood- Plan which is part of the Kalispell
Master Plan.
Questions Johnson asked if the adjacent property owner of Tract 6B had been
invited to be included in the zone change? He represented that property
owner on a zone change request about 2 years ago, and it was turned
down.
Wilson responded that he had been contacted as an adjacent propoerty
owner, however did not hear from him to include that property in the
Board's recommendation for a zone change.
Carlson noted that all the applications requested R-5. Was that to keep it
as office uses?
Wilson replied that was correct, and she had discussed staff's
recommendation with the applicants, and they agreed. The RA-3 allows
more uses, because it allows apartments.
Public Hearing The public hearing was opened to proponents of the zone change.
In Favor Jeffrey Heider, 232 South Meridian, spoke in favor of the zone change. I
have an interest in purchasing property from the Nobles. I am a
psychologist and my wife is a speech and language therapist, and we
would like to purchase that property for an office.
No one else spoke in favor. The public hearing was opened to those
opposed to the proposed zone change.
Opposition Geri Ann Robbins, West Arizona St., lives adjacent to the Meridian
Pointe apartments. In previous testimonies, protests of more than 120
people haven't gone anywhere. I ask, beg and plead of the Commission,
that if and when you do approve this, that you absolutely DO NOT allow
a through street from Meridian to Highway 93 using West Arizona. It is
such a, horrible intersection — 5�h Avenue WN; T-intersecting with West
Arizona. It is a blind corner, many people disregard it, there are many
accidents. On behalf of all the people who cannot be here, I strongly
request that a through street not be allowed.
I again, have concerns about this zone change to RA 3. The Meridian
Kalispell City -County Planning Board
Minutes of Meeting of February 10, 1998
Page 2of 8
Pointe apartment requirements were never completed. There was
supposed to be a fence with a landscaped buffer zone, and it is still not
done. We have neighbors whose fences are repeatedly ripped down,
there are repeat problems with vandalism from residents in the apartment
complex. On the north side, there is still barbed wire. Again, feeling that
our input will be defeated, I would ask that the requirements for fencing
and landscaping be done so there isn't additional traffic from the
businesses and apartments that would be generated. These issues with
Meridian Pointe have never been resolved, repeatedly promised, but
never have been. Obviously, the neighbors are concerned that the pattern
will repeat itself and request that things be addressed and completed, as
promised.
Colleen Berger, 622 West Arizona, had concern with parking and access
at the house on North Meridian adjacent to their house. We have a lot of
turn around traffic on West Arizona, which creates problems with
garbage pick-up, snow removal and the driveways. My other concern is
that if apartments are a part of this plan, Russell School is already
overcrowded. There is no room to expand, and I do not want to see my
kids bussed to another school.
Brenda Hamblin, 614 West Arizona, was opposed to the zone change for
apartments because of increased traffic, she had concerns about safety for
kids walking to school, the overcrowding of the schools where the kids
are already being bussed elsewhere, and how this would affect our
property values. She urged the Board to consider our concerns.
Mike Stevenson, 610 West Arizona, also had concerns about making
West Arizona a through street. There is a large amount of traffic on
Arizona that is turn around. We have two boys who play in the street,
since we do not have sidewalks. One of my boys goes to Russell School,
the other one `can't get in because the school is full, so he is bussed
across town. You put more apartment complexes in there, what will
happen with those kids?
There being no others in opposition, the public hearing was closed and
turned to Board deliberation.
Board Discussion Narda addressed some of the issues that came up during the public
hearing. The major concern was the extension of West Arizona. The
zone change does not propose the extension of West Arizona. That is an
Kalispell City -County Planning Board
Minutes of Meeting of February 10, 1998
Page 3of 8
entirely different process. It could happen regardless of the zoning
designation. Apartments in this use district are a conditional use and
would require a public hearing. Any office uses would be required to
meet the parking and building standards for the City. To address the
concerns about the additional apartments going in and the impacts to the
school, an alternative zoning designation would be the R-5 that basically
allows the same uses, except for apartments.
The Board was familiar with the problems with Meridian Pointe
apartments, and asked about the the City's responsibility to enforce the
conditions for fencing.
Wilson replied that the Zoning Administrator would be the appropriate
follow through.
Ms. Robbins said she has spoken with Diana Harrison on numerous
occasions, but will complain once more about the situation.
Carlson noted- that this Board has been living with the burden of
Meridian Pointe for five years and the problems that have occurred, and I
would hope that pressure on the Kalispell building Department would
help alleviate that and get them to do what they said they were going to
do. The neighbors have come in the past to talk about it. It is something
we cannot do in a zone change, but the issues can be alleviated by having
professional -offices. We could direct fiiture boards to allow only single
family residences or professional offices.
The uses in the two zoning districts -- RA-3 and R-5 -- were compared
and discussed.
Narda pointed out that the North Meridian Neighborhood :Plan
designates this' area for high density -apartment' and was part of the
planning process. So, if this is an area the Board does not feel is
appropriately designated, that needs to be addressed in the master plan
update. Staffs opinion was that RA=3 , more closely complied with'the
neighborhood plan, than R-5. However, R-5 does allow duplexes and a
mix of uses, so would also comply. She did not anticipate apartments
going in, because the applicants propose office uses.
Brenneman asked about the potential impact from apartment
development on the property. Over 50% is already zoned RA-l. He had
concern that several years from now, when there is a new Board, if it is
Kalispell City -County Planning Board
Minutes of Meeting offebruary 10, 1-998
Page 4of 8
zoned RA-3, which allows apartment complexes, the intent to keep it as
professional offices is lost. I do not get the sense from the neighbors or
the staff that this is an area that we want high density residential.
Other, Board members agreed that R-5 was a preferable recommendation.
There was discussion on the traffic situation in that neighborhood, which
is an ongoing problem.
Motion Bahr moved to adopt 'report #KZC-98-1 as findings of fact, and
recommend that City Council grant a zone change on the subject
properties from R-3 and RA-1 to R 5 Johnson seconded.
Discussion on Motion It was felt that the R-5 designation meets the needs of the petitioners, as
well as addresses the concerns of the neighbors.
Stevens felt uncomfortable about changing the recommendation without
consulting with the applicants.
Brenneman agreed with Stevens, but pointed out that on all three
petitions, the applicants asked for R-5.' "
RbltCatl'Vote On a roll call vote Bahr, Brenneman, Carlson, Johnson, Heineke and
Stevens voted in favor of recommending a zone change from; R-3 and
RA- l to R-5 as requested by the applicants. The motion carried 6-0.
Garberg returned to the Board.
WITITE ZONE The next public hearing was introduced on a request by Edgar and
CHANGE UPON Margaret White for annexation into the city of Kalispell and initial zoning
ANNEXATION[ of R-3, a residential zoning district. The property proposed for
FROM COUNTY annexation is located on the north side of California Street between
R=I TO CITY R-3 Fourth Avenue EN and Fifth Avenue EN, and can be described as
Assessor's Tract 24A+, Section 8, T28N, R21 W, P.M.M., Flathead
County. It is currently zoned ' County R-1, Suburban Residential, which
requires a minimum lot size of one acre.
StaffReport Wilson gave a presentation of report #KA-98-1, and recommended the
property be zoned R-3 upon annexation into the City.
She pointed out the little parcel of land (Tract 24, which is part of Tract
7D in Section 7) located in the southwest corner was included in the
Kalispell City -County Planning Board
Minutes of Meeting of February 10, 1998
Page 5of 8
annexation request, by permission of the property owners.
Public Hearing The public hearing was opened to those in favor.
Edgar White, the applicant, was in favor of the zone, so that they can
build a home on the property and hook up to city services.
No one else spoke either in favor or against. The public hearing was
closed and opened to Board discussion.
Board Discussion Bahr asked if the entire parcel was to be annexed, or just the building
site? Narda noted for the Board's information, that the City is interested
in acquiring a portion of the White's property to incorporate into
Lawrence Park. Part of the site is very steep and drops into the slough.
Motion Bahr moved to adopt findings of fact in report #KA-98-1, and forward a
recommendation to City Council that the property be zoned R-3 upon
annexation into the city. Brenneman seconded. On a roll call vote Bahr,
Stevens, Heineke, Carlson, Johnson, Garberg, and Brenneman voted aye.
The motion carried 7-0.
JUNGE The next public hearing was introduced on a request by Peggy and
CONDITIONAL Charles Junge for a conditional use permit to allow a community
USE PERMIT / residential facility for six seniors, who do not require skilled nursing care,
COMMUNITY in an existing residence in a RA-2, High Density, Residential Apartment,
RESIDENTIAL zoning district which lists community residential facilities as a
FACILITY- conditionally permitted'use. The property address is 230 Fourth Avenue
West, Kalispell.
StaffReport Wilson gave a detailed presentation of report #KCU 99-2. The
application was reviewed in accordance with all the necessary criteria and
staff recommended the conditional use permit be granted subject to five
(5) conditions.
Public Hearing The public hearing was opened to those in favor.
In Favor Peggy Junge, spoke in favor. Her and her husband selected this house
after looking at many, because of the size of the home and the
neighborhood. It was repossessed by the bank which is why it is in the
condition it is in. We have started to address the problems of neglect and
have no problem with any of the conditions.
Kalispell City -County Planning Board
Minutes of Meeting of February 10, 1998
Page 6of g
No one else spoke either in favor or in opposition to the proposal. The
public hearing was closed and it was opened to Board discussion.
Board Discussion There was discussion on the parking requirements. Mr. Junge explained
their parking plan. The Board had no other concerns with the proposal.
Motion Brenneman moved to adopt staff report #KCU-98-2 as findings of fact
and forward a favorable recommendation to City Council to grant the
conditional use permit to allow the operation of Harmony House subject
to the five conditions. Bahr seconded. On a roll call vote, the motion
carried 7-0 in favor.
ARMSTRONG The next public hearing was introduced on a request by David Armstrong
CONDITIONAL. for a conditional use permit to allow the conversion of the First Avenue
USE PERMIT / West restaurant and bar, to a casino, to be known as First Avenue Casino
CASINO- in a B-4 zoning district, the Central Business District, which lists casinos
as a conditionally permitted use. The property address is 127 First
Avenue West, Kalispell.
Staff Report Wilson gave a detailed presentation of report #KCU-98-1. After
evaluation of the application, staff recommended four conditions of
approval upon granting the conditional use permit.
Public Hearing The public hearing was opened to proponents of the proposal.
In Favor Dave Armstrong, 2390 Dillon Road, Whitefish, the applicant, stated that
over the last four years, 1"' Avenue West Restaurant has operated in the
red, partly due to the cost of a liquor license because of gaming. The
only way we feel that we can afford to do this project is to have the 20
gaming machines. We will preserve the integrity of the building, both
inside and outside. There won't be a lot of lights, just a strip of neon
around the top of the building. The restaurant will serve nice meals.
Brian Godimus, 127 Waverly Place, Whitefish, director of operations,
said we want to make it a fun establishment that will be a nice addition to
the Kalispell business community.
Kim Larsen, the architect on this project, explained the minor changes
they plan.
No one else spoke either in favor or in opposition. The public hearing
was closed, and opened it to Board discussion.
Kalispell City -County Planning Board
Minutes of Meeting of February 10, 1998
Page Tof 8
Board Discussion There was discussion on the signage and parking. No comments were
received from any of the adjacent property owners.
Motion Bahr moved to adopt report #KCU-98-1 as findings of fact and
recommend the City Council grant the conditional use permit to allow a
casino in the B-4 district, subject to the four conditions. Johnson
seconded. On a roll call vote Johnson, Heineke, Brenneman, Stevens,
Bahr, Carlson, and Garberg voted aye.
NEW BUSINESS Wilson gave an update on the progress made on rewriting the Kalispell
Zoning Ordinance. She proposed putting several chapters that have been
fine-tuned under new business for Board review, discussion and revision,
for subsequent public hearing.
An orientation meeting for the new Planning Board members was
suggested.
Carlson shared information on a Land Use Conference in Denver on
March 12-13 sponsored by the University of Denver's School of Law
and Rocky Mountain Land Use Institute.
OLD BUSINESS Under old business was consideration of rezoning in the Foys Lake area.
Wilson reviewed her memo to the Board.
The Board discussed the proposal as part of the master plan update.
The master plan study committees are in need of volunteers. Greg
Stevens and Don Hines (member at large) volunteered to be on the
Neighborhoods and Environment committee. Don Garberg and Rob
Heineke volunteered to be on the Business and Development committee.
ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:27 p.m.
Milton J. Carlson, Vice -Chair
APPROVED:
Elizabeth Ontko, Recording Secretary
Kalispell City -County Planning Board
Minutes of Meeting of February 10, 1998
Page uo 8
Flathead Regional Development Office
723 5th Avenue East - Room 414
Kalispell, Montana 59901
Phone: (406) 758-5980
Fax: (406) 758-5781
February 18, 1998
Clarence Krepps, City Manager
City of Kalispell
P.O. Box 1997
Kalispell, MT 59903
Re: Edgar and Margaret White Request for Annexation and Initial Zoning of R-3
Dear Clarence:
The Kalispell City -County Planning Board met on February 10, 1998, and held a public
hearing to consider a request by Edgar and Margaret White for initial zoning of R-3,
Residential upon annexation into the city. The property proposed for annexation the
contains approximately 1.87 acres and is located on the north side of California Street
between Fourth Avenue East North and Fifth Avenue East North. It can be described as
Assessor's Tract 24A in Section 8, Township 28 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M., Flathead
County, Montana.
Narda Wilson of the Flathead Regional Development Office presented a staff report and
recommended City R-3 zoning for this parcel upon annexation. The property owner
spoke in favor of the R-3 zoning, and stated they need City water and sewer in order to
build their house. No one spoke in opposition.
A motion to adopt staff report #KA-98-1 as findings of fact and recommend approval of
the proposed R-3 zoning upon annexation passed unanimously on a vote of seven in
favor ardnone opposed.
A recommendation for the proposed R-3 zoning upon annexation of this property is
being forwarded to City Council for consideration at their regular meeting on March 2,
1998. Please contact this board or Narda Wilson at the Flathead Regional Development
Office if you have any questions regarding this matter.
Sincerely
Kalispell City -County Planning Board
Milton J. Carlson
Vice -Chair
Providing Community Planning Assistance To:
• Flathead County • City of Columbia Falls • City of Kalispell • City of Whitefish •
Edgar and Margaret White Annexation
February 18, 1998
Page 2
MJC/NW/eo
Attachments: FRDO Report #KA-98-1 w/ application materials
Draft Minutes 2/ 10/98 Planning Board meeting
Exhibit A (legal description)
c w/o Att: Edgar Ss Margaret White, 135 Birch Dr., Whitefish MT 59937
Debbie Gifford, Kalispell City Clerk
H: \TRANSMIT\KAL\ 1998 \KA98-1
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
EDGAR AND MARGARET WHITE
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
-.. �.,:.
TRACT : (including Parcel --A-) r
A tract of land, situate, 1%ina and being in the Sh'4 N'4 of
Section 8, T6ccnship 28 North, Range 21 hest, P.M.M. Flat-
�"`;+•�.
head Count• Montana, and more particularl% described as
follows:
Beginning at the North, 1/16 Corner common to Sections 7 and
I
8: thence S 8.8' 59' 5 6 " E, 145.55 feet: thence
S 00a 48'. 31" h, 571.35 feet to a point on the northerly R/h
SE
of California Street: thence S 761 4 9 ' 03" 1: along said R/jN,
100.68 feet to a point: thence N 120 29' 33" h, 90.79 feet:
1I/4
thence N 25' 38' 53" h, 60.65 feet to a point on the line
='
common to Sections 7 and 8:'thence N 00' 48' 31" E along said
OCEt
i
Section line. 453.5' feet to the point of beginning and con-'
Jt
t a i n i n a 1.871 acres of land.
I0
FAO'
TRACT 2
A tract of land, situate, 1ing and being in the SE=4 \F'- of
t_ SE
Section 7 and the Shr� \h of- Section 8, Township 28 North,
ST
Range 1-1 hest, P.`I.`I. , Flathead County, Montana, and more
particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the North 1/16 Corner common to Sections 7 and
8 : thence S 00'. i48' ..31 "W. along said Sect ion 1 ine ,
CERTIFICAT
z
453.52•feet to -the true point of beginning of the tract beinc,
described: thence S 76' 49' 03" h, 87.37 Feet: thence
S 13' 10' 57" E, 150.00 feet `to a point on the northerly R/t�
Z
of California Street; thence.` 760 49' 03" E along said R/h,
'REGISTRAT.
99.37 feet to a point: thence:N_12' 29' 33" h, 90.79 feet;
-�
thence \ 25' 38.' 53". h, 60.65' feet to the point of beginning
APPR VED• j
and containing 0.336,acres of land.
EXAMININ Si
STATE 0 MOI
COUNTY OF
FILED. THI!
= .
t 1r0CIO(
CLERK LAND E
BY
/r7V D.
INSTRUI
SHEET
CERTIF=DATE
OF
.. J
EDGAR AND MARGARET WHITE
REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND INITIAL ZONING
FLATHEAD REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT OFFICE
STAFF REPORT #KA-98-1
FEBRUARY 2, 1998
A report to the Kalispell City -County Planning Board and the Kalispell City Council
regarding a request by Edgar and Margaret White for annexation and initial zoning. A
hearing has been scheduled before the Kalispell City -County Planning Board for
February 10, 1998 beginning at 7:00 PM in the Kalispell City Council Chamber. The
Planning Board will forward a recommendation to the Kalispell City Council for final
action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
This report evaluates the appropriate assignment of a City zoning classification in
accordance with Section 27.03.010(4) of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. The petitioners
have owned the property proposed for annexation for many years and are now ready to
build a home. Because of the topographical constraints of the property and its
proximity to City sewer, City sewer is required to develop the site.
A. Petitioner and Owners: Edgar and Margaret White
135 Birch Drive
Whitefish, MT 59937
(406)862-4722
B. Location and Legal Description of Property: The property proposed for
annexation is located on the north side of California Street between Fourth
Avenue E.N. and Fifth Avenue E.N. The property can be described as Assessor's
Tract 24A located in Section 8, Township 28 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M.,
Flathead County, Montana.
C. Existing zoning: Currently this property is located in the County zoning
jurisdiction and is zoned R-1, a Suburban Residential zoning district requires a
minimum of one acre and is usually in an area which is not served by
community sewer. The subject property could not be developed in the R-1
zoning district with an on -site sewage treatment system because of the
topography. There is a small building site along the southern boundary of the
property and then a sharp drop down to a slough of the Stillwater River.
D. Proposed Zoning: The applicants are proposing City R-3 zoning, a Residential
zoning district which has a minimum lot size requirement of 7,000 square feet
and would be required to be served by all public facilities and services. This
district is primarily single family residential. All of the surrounding residential
properties in the area are zoned R-3 and the proposed zoning would be
consistent with that which is in the area.
1
E. Size: The area proposed for annexation and zoning contains approximately 1.87
acres.
F. Existing Land Use: Currently this property is undeveloped. The property
owners plan to building a single family residence on the property and require
City water and sewer to do so, hence the request for annexation into the city.
G. Adjacent Land Uses and Zoning: The character of the immediate area is
residential. This property bounded on the south and west by property within the
city limits. The property to the east and north is in the county.
North: Lawrence Park, City P-1 zoning
South: Single family homes, City R-3 zoning
East:: Undeveloped except for an old ice house, County R-1 zoning
West: Single family homes and Lawrence Park, City P-1 and
City R-3 zoning
H. General Land Use Character: The general land use character of the area is
single family residential to the south and open space to the north and east. This
property adjoins Lawrence Park on the north and west and then an undeveloped
parcel which also adjoins Lawrence Park to the east. There are single family
homes to the south and to the west.
I. Availability of Public Services: Public services are available in the immediate
area which include fire and police service, street maintenance as well and public
water and sewer. The reason for this annexation request is so that the property
owners can connect to the City of Kalispell water and sewer and thereby
construct a new single family home
EVALUATION BASED ON STATUTORY CRITERIA
The statutory basis for reviewing a change in zoning is set forth by 76-2-205, M.C.A.
Findings of fact for the zone change request are discussed relative to the itemized
criteria described by 76-2-203, M.C.A.
SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION
Does the requested zone comply with the Master Plan?
This property is indicated on the Kalispell City County Master Plan Map as urban
residential. The proposed R-3 zoning district complies with that master plan
map designation, as well as the goals and policies of the document.
2. Is the requested zone descriied to lessen congestion in the streets?
Rezoning this property may result in a potentially ten vehicle trips per day
associated with a single family home. No significant impact on traffic congestion
will result from bringing this property into the city and assigning it an R-3 zoning
designation.
2
3. Will the requested zone secure safety from fire, panic, and other dangers?
There would be no obvious increase in risk related to this zone designation
request. Access for fire and other emergency services are adequate.
4. Will the requested zone promote the health and eeneral welfare?
Because this annexation will enable the property owners to connect to public
sewer and construct a new home on full public services, the public health and
welfare of the community will be served by encouraging compact development
within the city core.
S. Will the requested zone provide for adequate light and air?
The proposed use, a single family residence, will be required to comply with the
development standards of the district which assures that there is adequate light
and air.
6. Will the requested zone prevent the overcrowding of land?
The requested zoning designation is consistent with other zoning in the area and
the type of development which would be anticipated under the master plan. The
requested zone will prevent the overcrowding of land.
7. Will the requested zone avoid undue concentration of people?
No significant increase in the population in the area will result under the
proposed zoning. Technically, one additional dwelling would be constructed
under this zoning. The lot size requirements for the district avoid the undue
concentration of people in the area.
8. Will the requested zone facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water,
sewerage, schools, parks, and other public requirements?
Public service, facilities and infrastructure are currently in place to accommodate
the use(s) in the area. No significant impacts to these services can be anticipated
as a result of this zoning proposal.
9. Does the requested zone give consideration to the particular suitability of the
property for particular uses?
The proposed zoning is consistent with the zoning in the surrounding area and
the uses in the area. The proposed zoning is consistent with the master plan
map designation and anticipated development. The requested zone gives
appropriate consideration for the suitability of this area for the uses allowed
under the R -3 zone.
3
10. Does the requested zone give reasonable consideration to the character of the
district?
The general character of the area is residential. The use proposed on the
property is residential and will be consistent and compatible with other uses in
the area. The requested zone gives reasonable consideration to the character of
the area.
11. Will the proposed zone conserve the value of buildings?
Value of the buildings in the area will be conserved because they are consistent
with the uses allowed under the zoning and compatible with other uses in the
immediate area.
12. Will the requested zone encourage the most appropriate use of the land
throughout the jurisdiction?
The most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdiction appears to
currently be residential. This is consistent with the master plan designation and
promotes the stability and neighborhood character of the immediate area.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Kalispell City -County Planning Board and Zoning
Commission adopt Staff Report #KA-98-1 as fmdings of fact and forward a
recommendation to City Council that the initial zoning for this property should be R-3,
Residential, upon annexation.
H: \... \REPORTS \KA\98 \KA98-1
M
Jan. 7, 1998
From: Ed & Margaret White
135 Birch Drive
Whitefish, Mont. 59937
To: City of Kalispell
Subject: Request for Annexation on the following tract of land for the purpose
of building a retirement home. We request zoning classification to be
the same as other single family homes adjoing the property.
Thank You,
OFT —^TON iTO.
3EFORE THE CITY COUNCIL RECEIVED
OF THE
CITY OF KALISP ELL JAN 8 1998
PETITION FOR ANNEXATION TO CITY FLATHEAD 0evREGON
COME NOW the undersigned and respectfully petition the City
Councij. of the City of Kaiispeii requesting city annexation of the
following real property into the City of Kalispell and to remove
the following real property from the �' ��72G �L Rural
Fire District.
The petitioner(s) requesting Cite of Kalispell annexation of
the property described herein hereby mutually agree with the City
of Kalispell that immediately upon annexation of the land all City
of Kalispell municipal services will be provided to the property
described herein on substantially the same basis and in the same
manner as such services are provided or made available within the
rest of the municipality prior to annexation. Petitioner(s) hereby
state that there is no need to prepare a Municipal Annexation
Service Plan for this annexation pursuant to Section 7-2-4610,
M.C.A. since the parties are in agreement as to the provision of
municipal services to the property requested to be annexed.
Dated this 8 day of Tj9 ti� , 19 M.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE ANNEXED:
PROPERTY ADDRESS:
0 :—
OWNER
OWNER
PLEASE RETURN THIS PETITION TO CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
Citizen's Title 91182 //yZI
CT-25428
girder No.
t
WARRANTY DEED Co 00y
(JOINT TENANCY)
l..
For Value Received ALBE;RT M. JOHNSON and LORETTA J. JOHNSON
the grantors, do hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey unto
EDGAR A. WHITE and MUCARET L. WHITE
135 Birch Drive, Whitefish, MT 59937
the grantees , as joint tenants (and not as tenants in common), and to the survivor of said named joint tenants,
and to the heirs and assigns of such survivor, the following described premises, in
FLATHEAD County, Montana, to -wit:
SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE; A PART HE;RL410
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises, with their appurtenances unto the said Grantees , as joint
tenants with right. of survivorship (and not as tenants in common) and to the heirs and assigns of the survivor
of said named joint tenants forever. And the said Grantors do hereby covenant to and with the said
Grantees , that t he ythe owner in fee simple of said premises; that they are free from all incumbrances
and that they will warrant and defend the same from all lawful claims whatsoever.
,Q rh
C
STATE OF MONTANA, COUNTY OF FLATHEAD
On this Z P 'C�17 day of June , 19 91
before me, aonmury.,,public in and for said State, personally
app a`,A"' O t�iL��2Zf'f�. JOHNSON and
`� tAk • LORE`i'� G � JOHNSON
r . Q n
krr�3:iir► wme '•ter -;e, tpC ..���o% :vi:ose name -arc--,
-a
subscrir>ed�to ! ie.,it%fn instrinent, and acknowledged to me
th'ai� ' ;/ ;,0`1` '� r r executed the same.
Notary Public
Residing at _ e. Montana
Comm. Expires?^
TE OF MONTANA, COUNTY OF
I her certify that this instrument was filed for rec rd at
the request o
at utes past o'clock m.,
this day
'9 in :^.y )frlfP• and duly rec ed in Book
of Deeds at page
By
Fees $
Mail to:
Ex-Officio Recorder
y
9118211k17,1
EXHIBIT A
A tract of land situated, lying and being in the SWjNWj of
Section 8, Township 28 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M., Flathead
County, Montana, and more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the North 1/16 Corner common to Sections 7 and 8;
thence
South 88°•59'56" East, 145.55 feet; thence
South 00°48'31" West 571.35 feet to a point on the Northerly R/W
of California Street; thence
South 76°49'03" West along said R/W, 100.63 feet to a point_; thence
North 12°29'33" West, 90.79 feet; thence
North 25°38'53" West, 60.65 feet to a point on the line common to
Section 7 and 8; thence
North 00°48'31" East along said Section line, 453.52 feet to the
Point of Beginning.
SUBJECT TO The effect of restrictions contained in Certificate of
Subdivision Plat Approval recorded with Certificate of Survey No.
7945, records of Flathead County, Montana.
Return & Taxes:
Edgar A. & Margaret L. White
135 Birch Drive
Whitefish, MT. 59937
STATE OF MONTANA,
ss
County of Flathead
Recorded at the request of
this J day of 19 %/ at //: yz o'cl.ockCL M and recorded in
the records of Flathead dunty, State of Montana
Fee $ Q,, 0-0 Pd . Y V Z./,
RECEPTION NO. 91.182 11 q21
RETURN TO uty
1
1 LEGAL DESCRIPTIO`
tT,
s
o l
TRACT includin„ Pareel--A_l
A tract of land, situate, lving and being in the S[<4 NW-4of
Section 8, Township 28 North, Range 21 test, P.M.M. Flat-.
head County Montana, and more particularl%- described as
follows
Beginning at the North 1/16 Corner common to Sections 7 and
LEI
8: thence S 8$' 59' 56" E, 145.55 feet: thence
S 00' 48'. 31" W, 571.35 feet to a point on the northerIv RN``
®S,
of California Street: thence S- 76' 49' 03" [\- along said R/[:,
4 100.6,5 feet to a point: thence N 12' 29' 33" [<, 90.79 feet:
�Ik
thence N 2 5 ' 38' 53" t\', 60.65 feet to a point on the line
++'
common to Sections 7 and 8: thence N 00' 48' 31 E along said'.
OCE
i Section line. 453.52 feet to the point of beginning and con-
taining 1.871 acres of land.
V I.
F (
TRACT
_'
A tract of land; situate, lving and being in the SE' NE' of*
k:
O S'I
Section 7 and the N[N_4 .of - Section 8, Tovnship 28 North,
S
0
C
m
7-1
O
M
Range ' I [pest, P.M*M., Flathead County, Montana, and more
particularly- described as follows:
Commencing at the North 1/16 Corner common to Sections 7 and
8: thence S 00' 48'..31"W. along said Section line,
453. 521' feet to- the true point of beginning of the t ract be i.ny,
described: thence S 76' 49'"03" V, 87.37 feet: thence
S 13' 10' 57" E, 150.00 feet :to a point on the northerly R/W
of California Street; thence N' 76' 49' 03" E along said RN
99.37 feet to a point: thence,N.12' 29' 33" V, 90.79 feet;
thence N ='5' 38.' 53.".1%, 60.65'feet to the point of beginning
and contaiDing 0:336 acres of 'land .
n
m
o Aj
Z' D
Cn J z
� o
v rn
rn D C
m
z
.rm
rn
0 CD
O
Z O
O
I
CERTIFICAI
REGISTRAI
APPR VED•O
t.
EXAMINIV
STATE M(
COUNTY OF.
FILED_ TH
4 Mt-i..lJO,cI(
CLERKGAND R
ov
Df
y-� INSTRI
1-7j( )(I
SHEE
FI1 ATE 01
D
0
c
O
(n
X
D
.0
Z
3
M
boo
�OZ
m
o__
0•Q'0B®r-
��-4
=
O
rn
K
cn
�`
D
D
—i
cn cn
rn
rn
rn z
<n
G
\o
O
rn
D
D
<
Z
3 cr
-n
p
n rn
c� -i
Z
j
,
rn �
��
O ;0
o
o
y
D
<
O
(S
Z
O
o _
x
Z W
m rn
Z p
rn
O
—
C
A
D O
rn
c�
cn =
x
cn z
ADJUSTMENT PARCEL
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
PARCEL A
f land, situate, Iving and be i' g.-
n
f Section 8, Township 28 North, . Rm ah-1
.M.. Flathead County, Montana, and"J�
rlv described as follows:
at the Southwest Corner of Tract:
45; thence N 130 10, 57" W 9 6
350 30* 11" W, 57-92 f4et; th'enc'e,,,`,'
53".E, 60.65 feet: thence
E,, 90.79 .,f e e t to 'a .point. o
R/1\' of California Street; thence
_h
03" E along said R/W., 10-00 fee't
of beginning and containing
0
0
-3 Tao -5 -6 E.
�A:l
0.
TRACT I
NCI U D I N 6 PliRCE L I)
1. 871. ict c-
".99
E ost 2626.85' (Norquarr'
9 E E 1/4 1/4 NAP ,
East 2630.10 iG.L.O.)
TRACY J6
JB19r
STILL'vVATER \ se T.
ROAC 8 BRIDGE_
n C. s. 1939 a 5261
C \ ! IA f T J TRACT SA
V O ,
TRACT
o
7 --
r'� TRAC 1' 5 TRACT
J
N N
e 1 T. a 9A _
N N
T- 31
238 _ TRACT Sol
c �
j0 Z %
0 (Jos W T•301CA ►-JOICJ?
S
2 t$JAGT 3 T-= t ZIA ..CTG T thl i
1.24 � f. by
s 6 - r Oi
1 7 ♦ 3 2 0 IM [80N y/
LA• ,� P
A 579.!S8 0
1' ^., ` t I N 12 Ill = ►- ��-9 ``r u p t N e A Y Al's
9 4 < a - 30y A bofi t �f T.
I N 4 _• 1
6 �.o T By�E E j0 �SrN-
j .5 W� ! A= 30 oxt y�.108
-A 0 H w -'-•''•"''1� 2 ► +! C
1 T �fw y0A
TRACT 30J
t\ I�'`•..BJ,. ti 4 0 1 O µ ( .. jl lJ.•'�•b �o.i
11 3! j4 j = Y T 3r,.1 A1_ /
g. x - —
z �- IT '3 J
z.f,Z Z1S0.► 0 '•� .6A a W 3pli..
-� y rl Ov tx p• �p.oAA �^ E E = l ;x 51•, 101 30Ho—
' .. Y`n. 'A . so
6 T 9
n 'A30:1 =" 30: 16 i.fl ° SOH
yH .:..a 2+ 16 A c \
5 (- 6 l • p�0 30.,8r T. 30.'.\'30'�i1 �o ro r
'•6� 1.r BONA ;o.215 —.1-.. 1 B"4� ,p• - bo \
I 3 0 0' 0•.;
l2 ?•GB 1 I T.3 0 l.. . i.,--it1 r�� � yto Jp• I e 1 �o. ii , 1.3 lI ; . .;
117 / 1 o c a o
o
N.41� tom" �.:, J.•r. 1�� OTC% 4
t a_3 0 �� e� S H A
1 it i so
30 G
b 30CA � � �'�- ; I • 17
ice.._----,, - - ' --•'- __... � __ _------�, ' � _
it 1 F• ape S ^•+' �, ,l ,` 3L l 1 O u 16 �r J
l ` y0 3p•51 f
Z r W \ N
IZ � W 4 • i,i 3 �` I I p �� / I � � � I A
910
2vM8
___T� E i' b .�•-\ ( ` /1 f/ 1 , '- I 2 6 A: 1
1�✓�[ 2
? d A8 N
^iv , ~r 9)G.;F 1 16
6 TOV ousF3
Y�E 2gAAAA 2IAE I
I v r .�---"� 0 N D ` J AI�rn.
y
t Sc+ Rc6q•�a;
�• � S 8 8' S'7 •s�-E
0 .0 14S•SS
J O
amp �
u
q4
_ n
41 h
uW h v
``a
SCALE100'
100 50 0
100 200
� Z
Ofd BOv 77pi,
Ile
cl
1 od -5�
O
1, '� ,,.. i• 0 9 0.
5 9 • v ,
_ .. ...._._. ..... 1,.) t
03" E OK,
ik
a
41
0 c K s
%CIO
CONSENT TO ANNEX AGREEMENT
AND
NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL FROM
RURAL FIRE DISTRICT
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this
day of ,A N . ,199i?,, by and between /-
hereinafter PARTY(S) OF INTEREST [ INCLUDES OWNER(S), LIENHOLDER(S), OR
CONTRACT SELLERS(S) ] and the CITY OF KALISPELL, Flathead County, Montana,
hereinafter CITY, WITNESSETH:
That for and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar and/or other good and valuable
consideration to us in hand paid, and certain promises, mutual terms, covenants, provisions,
conditions and agreements, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the
PARTY(S) OF INTEREST, do(es) hereby consent to, and hereby do waive any and all right to
protest, which we may have or hereafter acquire in regard thereto, any attempt or proceedings
made or to be made by or with the consent of the City of Kalispell, Montana, to annex to and
make a part of said City of Kalispell, more particularly described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto
and which, by this reference, is made a part hereof.
The PARTY(S) OF INTEREST do(es) further herein express an intent to have the
property as herein described withdrawn from the r�`�c.;r���'f: -- Fire District
under the provisions of Section 7-33-2127, Montana C(Ae Annotated; and that incorporated into
this Consent to Annex Agreement is the Notice requirement pursuant to said Section; and that -
upon proper adoption of an ordinance or resolution of annexation by the City Council of the City
of Kalispell, the property shall be detracted from said district.
The PARTY(S) OF INTEREST further agree(s) that this covenant shall run to, with, and
be binding upon the title of the said real property, and shall be binding upon our heirs, assigns,
successors in interest, purchasers, and any and all subsequent holders or owners of the above
described real property.
This City hereby agrees to allow PARTY(S) OF INTEREST to hook onto the City of
Kalispell sewer system.
IN TESTIMONY AND WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and
affixed our seals this '�— day of w , 199?
PARTY(S) OF INTEREST
CITY OF KALISPELL
City Manager
ATTEST:
Vinance Director
STATE OF MONTANA }
ss
County of Flathead )
On this day of 199 , before me,
the undersigned, a Notary Public for the State of Montana, personally appeared
, known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the
foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my Notarial Seal the
day and year in this certificate first above written.
STATE OF MONTANA )
County of Flathead )
On this _
the undersigned,
appeared
the
ss
a Notary
Notary Public, State of Montana
Residing at
My Commission expires
_ day of
Public for the
and
and
, 199 , before me,
State of Montana personally
respectively, of , the corporation that
executed the foregoing instrument, and the persons who executed said instrument on behalf of
said corporation, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my Notarial Seal the
day and year in this certificate first above written.
Notary Public, State of Montana
Residing at
My Commission expires
STATE OF MONTANA )
ss
County of Flathead )
On this day of 199 , before me, a Notary
Public in and for the State of Montana, personally appeared CLARENCE W. KREPPS and
AMY H. ROERTSON, known to me to be the City Manager and Finance Director of the City
of Kalispell, a municipality, that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged that such
City Manager and Finance Director respectively subscribed, sealed and delivered said
instrument as the free and voluntary act of said municipality, for the uses and purposed
therein setforth, and that they! iere Lu!y authorized to e wcute the same on beha�': of said
municipality.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my Notarial Seal, the
day and year first above written.
Notary Public, State of Montana
Residing at
My Commission expires