04. Resolution 4440 - Cra-Lon AnnexationRESOLUTION NO. 4440
A RESOLUTION ANNEXING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY TO THE CITY OF
KALISPELL, SAID TERRITORY BEING APPROXIMATELY 0.543 ACRES OF THE
NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 28 NORTH, RANGE 21 WEST,
P.M.M., FLATHEAD COUNTY, MONTANA, TO BE DESCRIBED AS CRA-LON
ADDITION NO. 287.
WHEREAS, the City of Kalispell has received a request from Cra-Lon
Corporation, the owner of the property, requesting
annexation into said territory and zoning by the City,
and
WHEREAS, in the judgment of the City Council of the City of
Kalispell, Montana, it is in the best interest of the
City and the inhabitants thereof that said property be
annexed to the City, and
WHEREAS, on November 6, 1995, the City Council adopted pursuant to
Section 7-2-4732, MCA, an Extension_ of Services Plan
which anticipated the development of City services for
approximately five years in the future, and
WHEREAS, the Flathead Regional Development Office in Staff Report
#KSR-98-3 indicated that sewer, roads, police, and fire
services are either available or already in service to
said property, and
WHEREAS, the Kalispell City -County Planning Board and Zoning
Commission held a hearing on November 10, 1998, pursuant
to Chapter 27.30, Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, to recom-
mend zoning for the property in accordance with the
Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, in the event the property is
annexed to the City, and
WHEREAS, the City Council intends that said territory, if annexed,
shall be zoned in accordance with the recommendations of
the Kalispell City -County Planning Board and Zoning
Commission, and
WHEREAS, Cra-Lon Addition No. 287 is included within and conforms
to the Kalispell City -County Master Plan, and
WHEREAS, the City of Kalispell desires to annex the property to
the City of Kalispell under the provisions of Title 7,
Chapter 2, Part 46, MCA.
F:\wp\res\annexation\4440cra-lon.wpd I
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
KALISPELL, AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. That all the real property as is more
particularly described in Exhibit "A",
attached hereto and thereby made a part
hereof, shall be annexed to the City of
Kalispell and the boundary of the City is
altered to so provide.
SECTION II. Upon the effective date of this Resolution,
the City Clerk of Council is directed to make
and certify, under the seal of the City a copy
of the record of these proceedings as are
entered on the minutes of the City Council and
file said documents with the Flathead County
Clerk and Recorder.
From and after the date of filing said
documents as prepared by the City Clerk of
- Council, or on the effective date hereof
whichever shall occur later, said annexed
territory and its citizens and property shall
be subject to all debts, laws and ordinances
and regulations in force in the City of
Kalispell and shall be entitled to the same
privileges and benefits as are other parts of
the City.
SECTION III. The territory annexed by this Resolution shall
be zoned according to the Zoning Ordinances of
the City of Kalispell.
SECTION IV. This Resolution shall be effective thirty (30)
days from and after its passage and approval
by the City Council.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND SIGNED BY THE MAYOR OF
THE CITY OF KALISPELL THIS DAY OF DECEMBER, 1998.
Wm. E. Boharski - Mayor
Attest:
Theresa White
Clerk of Council
F:\wp\res\annexation\4440cra-lon.wpd 2
EXHIBIT A
A tract of land in the Northwest Quarter Northeast Quarter and in the Northeast Quarter
Northwest Quarter of Section 17, Township 28 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M.,
Flathead County, Montana, described as follows:
Commencing at the one -quarter comer between Sections 8 and 17, Township 28 North,
Range 21 West, P.M.M.; thence South along the mid -section line of Section 17, 45.5.
feet to the True Point of Beginning of the tract to be described: Thence
East 229.5 feet; thence
South 27*20' West 105.0 feet; thence
West along the North boundary of Woodland Park subdivision 277.7 feet to the mid-
section line of Section 17; thence
North 93.27 feet along said mid -section line to the point of beginning.
Flathead Regional Development Office
773 5th Avenue East - Room 414
Kalispell, Montana 59901
Phone: (406) 758-5980
Fax: (406) 759-5731
November 25, 1998
Glen Neier, Interim City Manager
City of Kalispell
P.O. Box 1997
Kalispell, MT 59903
Re: Cra-Lon Corporation Request for Annexation and Initial Zoning of RA-1
Dear Glen:
The Kalispell City -County Planning Board met on November 10, 1998, and held a public
hearing to consider a request by Cra-Lon Corporation for initial zoning of RA-1, Low
Density Residential Apartment upon annexation into the city. The property proposed for
annexation contains approximately one-half acre and is located at 440 College Avenue East
of Kalispell. The property is currently zoned County R-2, One Family Limited Residential.
Steve Kountz of the Flathead Regional Development Office presented a staff report and
recommended City RA-1 zoning for Lot 3 and the proposed subdivision, and R-3 zoning for
Lot 4 upon annexation.
At the public hearing, Paul Stokes, representing the applicants, spoke in favor of the
proposal. Eleven neighbors spoke in opposition, citing their concerns regarding the
narrowness of Sylvan Drive and the s-curve, the increased traffic on an already over used
road, changing the character of the single-family neighborhood, the wildlife habitat, and
the filling in of a slough area.
After closing the public hearing, the Board discussed the staff report. A motion to adopt
staff report #KA-98-6 as findings of fact and recommend adoption of R-3 zoning upon
annexation subject to the following changes: Item #2 - delete the 2nd sentence; Item #10 -
delete "On the other hand" from the 4th sentence, and delete the last 2 sentences. The
motion passed on a vote of five in favor, and one abstention.
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 December 21, 1998.
Please contact this board or Steve Kountz at the Flathead Regional Development Office if
you have any questions regarding this matter.
Sincerely
Kalispell City -County Planning Board
Milt son
Vice President
MC/SK/sm
Providing Community Planning Assistance To:
• Flathead County • City of Columbia Falls - City of Kalispell • City of Whitefish •
Glen Neire
Re: Cra-Lon Corporation Annexation & Zoning Request
November 25, 1998
Page 2
Attachments: FRDO Report #KA-98-6/ application materials
Draft Minutes 11/20/98 Planning Board meeting
Exhibit A (legal description)
c w/o Att: Cra-Lon Corporation, P O Box 533, Bullhead City AZ 86439
Paul Stokes & Associates, 343 1 n Ave. West, Kalispell MT 59901
c w/ Att: Theresa White, Kalispell City Clerk
H: \TRANSMIT\KAL\ 1998\KA98-6
CRA-LON CORPORATION
REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND INITIAL ZONING
FLATHEAD REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT OFFICE
STAFF REPORT #KA-98-6
NOVEMBER 2,1998
A report to the Kalispell City -County Planning Board and the Kalispell City Council
regarding the annexation and initial zoning of Cra-Lon Addition. A hearing has been
scheduled before the Kalispell City -County Planning Board for November 10, 1998
beginning at 6:00 PM in the Kalispell City Council Chambers. The Planning Board will
forward a recommendation to the Kalispell City Council for final action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. Petitioner and Owners:
Technical assistance:
Cra-Lon Corporation
P.O. Box 533
Bullhead City, AZ 86439
Paul J. Stokes & Associates
343 1 st Av. W.
Kalispell, MT 59901
B. Size and Location of Property: The 0.543-acres of land proposed for
annexation is located on the north side of the curve on Sylvan Drive where it
merges with College Avenue. The legal description of the property is attached in
Exhibit A.
C. Existing zoning: The existing zoning is R-2 One Family Limited Residential in
the Flathead County Zoning Regulations. The R-2 district provides for single-
family houses and minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet.
D. Proposed Zoning: The proposed zoning is RA-1 Low Density Residential
Apartment in the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. The RA-1 district provides for multi-
family housing and minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet and an additional
3,000 square feet for each additional unit beyond a duplex.
E. Existing Land Use:
vacant
F. Adjacent Land Uses and Zoning:
North: Single-family residential, County R-2 zoning
South: Single-family residential, Kalispell R-3 zoning
East: Single family residential, County R-1 zoning
West: Single family residential, Kalispell RA-1 zoning
G. General Land Use Character: The general land use character of the area is
single-family residential with few exceptions.
H. Availability of Utilities: City sewer and water, overhead power, and natural gas
utilities are in place within the street right-of-way abutting the subdivision.
EVALUATION EASED 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.
1. Does the requested zone comply with the Master Plan?
The proposed and existing zoning would substantially comply with the master plan.
On the master plan map, this area is designated as both high density residential
land and transition area to urban residential land. The site is along a boundary
between more intensive and less intensive land use designations. In high density
residential areas, the plan anticipates proximity to commercial area, public open
space, and collector or arterial streets, and this site is the southern edge of a
planned high -density residential area which accordingly abuts Conrad Dr.,
Woodland Park, and a neighborhood business district.
2. Is the requested zone designed to lessen congestion in the streets?
The rezoning would provide for a modest increase in residential density and traffic
generation on College Av. and Sylvan Dr. Looking at the subdivision proposal
submitted concurrent with this application, RA-1 zoning would allow a triplex on lot
3 and a four-plex on lot 4. Impact of the rezoning on traffic congestion would be
minor.
3. Will the requested zone secure safety from fire, panic, and other dangers?
The Soil Survey maps an intermittent stream across the midc9e of the property,
and the steep banks of this drainage channel are approximately eight feet high.
The channel has been blocked by streets east and west of the site, so it no longer
appears to function as a flowing drainage way for surface -water, but it does appear
to function as a drainage retention area and potentially a wetland. The area is not
mapped as 100-year or 500-year floodplain in FIRM panel 181 OD, but this channel
covering much of the north half of the site may be subject to seasonal surface
water. The FIRM panel may be in error in this area, since the floodplain boundary
is shown as a straight north/south line as if the mapping abruptly ended. The soils
on the site are mapped in the Soil Survey as Swims silty clay loam (Sr), which are
rated by the Natural Resources and Conservation Service as having severe
limitations for building sites due to flooding and ponding. Viewing the site in
October, the channel had no surface water but did have some wetlands vegetation
(horsetails) and several birch trees growing in it. Engineer Paul Stokes
representing the applicant has stated that the intention of the owner is to fill most
of the former drainage channel to create a suitable building site. Access for fire
r�
and other emergency services is adequate.
4. Will the requested zone promote the health and general welfare?
This annexation and rezoning to an urban density will promote the general welfare
of the community by improving the level of public services to the site, creating a
more efficient public service area (the other parcels along Sylvan Dr. and College
Av. are already in the city), proving for orderly urban growth, and contributing to
the CRy's tax base. Additionally, RA-1 zoning would provide additional opportunity
for development of affordable housing within the city. -On the other hand,
increasing the zoning density to RA-1 on the eastern portion of the site, i.e., Lot 4
on the proposed subdivision, poses some disadvantages: it would be inconsistent
with the surrounding single-family housing; the natural drainage covering most of
Lot 4 poses development challenges and may contain wetlands; and Lot 4 has
only 30 feet of street frontage.
S. Will the requested zone provide for adeguate light and air?
No significant impact is anticipated. Both the existing and proposed zoning
districts include building setback and height standards that provide for adequate
light and air between buildings.
6. Will the reguested zone prevent the overcrowding of land and avoid undue
concentration of people?
The proposed mufti -family residential zoning would substantially comply with the
master plan. The RA-1 rezoning, however, would also contribute to crowding the
eastern portion of the site, i.e., Lot 4 on the proposed subdivision. RA-1 zoning on
Lot 4 would be inconsistent with the three surrounding single-family houses; the
natural drainage covering most of Lot 4 poses development challenges and may
contain wetlands; and Lot 4 has only 30 feet of street frontage.
7. Will the requested zone facilitate the adequate provision of transportation,
water, sewerage, schools, parks, and other public requirements?
The proposed annexation and rezoning would improve the level of public services
to the site and create a more efficient public service area for the City, since the
other parcels along Sylvan Dr. and College Av. are already in the city. Sylvan Dr.
and College Av. are paved streets, but the adjacent pavement width of 22 feet is
substandard and no curbs, gutters, or sidewalks have been installed. Annexation
would provide for access to police, fire, and other municipal services. City sewer
and water, overhead power, and natural gas utilities are in place within the street
eight -of -way abutting the subdivision.
9. Does the requested zone give consideration to the particular suitability of the
fffoperty for particular uses?
As discussed above, the Soil Survey maps an intermittent stream across the
3
middle of the property, and the steep banks of this drainage channel are
approximately eight feet high. The channel has been blocked by streets east and
west of the site, so it no longer appears to function as a flowing drainage way for
surface -water, but it does appear to function as a drainage retention area and
potentially a wetland. The soils on the entire site are mapped in the Soil Survey as
Swims silty clay loam (Sr), which are rated by the Natural Resources and
Conservation Service as having severe limitations for building sites due to flooding
and ponding. Viewing the site in October, the channel had no surface water but did
have some wetlands vegetation (horsetails) and several birch trees growing in it.
Engineer Paul Stokes representing the applicant has stated that the intention of
the owner is to fill most of the former drainage channel to create a suitable building
site.
10. Does the requested zone dive reasonable consideration to the character of
the district?
RA-1 zoning would be inconsistent with the surrounding land uses, which are all
single-family houses, particularly in the eastern half of the site. In fact, there are
three houses within 20-feet of the 32-acre site. Moreover, the proposal would
create a finger of RA-1 zoning with single-family residential zoning on three sides.
On the other hand, the site is at the south end of an area planned and zoned for
multifamily housing, which includes a mobile home park and two four-plex
buildings along College Av. Also, the channel/wetland crossing the site, if not
filled, would provide a modest buffer between multifamily housing on this site and
the single-family houses to the north.
11. Will the proposed zone conserve the value of buildings?
Since RA-1 zoning is inconsistent with the surrounding single-family houses, the
proposal could adversely affect the value of the buildings in the area. No
comments from neighbors have been received as of this writing.
12. Will the requested zone encourage the most appropriate use of the land
throughout the jurisdiction?
As discussed above, the rezoning would substantially comply with the land use
pattern recommended in the master plan. In high density residential areas, the
plan anticipates proximity to commercial area, public open space, and collector or
arterial streets, and this site is the southern edge of a planned high -density
residential area which abuts Conrad Dr., Woodland Park, and a neighborhood
business district
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Kalispell City -County Planning Board and Zoning Commission
adopt Staff Report #KA-98-6 as findings of fact and recommend that the City Council
adopt RA-1 on Lot 3 and the proposed subdivision and R-3 on Lot 4.
4
A tract of land in the Northwest Quarter Northeast Quarter and in the Northeast Quarter
Northwest Quarter of Section 17, Township 28 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M.,
Flathead County, Montana, described as follows:
Commencing at the one -quarter corner between Sections 8 and 17, Township 28 North,
Range 21 West, P.M.M.; thence South along the mid -section line of Section 17, 45.5.
feet to the True Point of Beginning of the tract to be described: Thence
East 229.5 feet; thence
South 27020' West 105.0 feet; thence
West along the North boundary of Woodland Park subdivision 277.7 feet to the mid-
section line of Section 17; thence
North 93.27 feet along said mid -section line to the point of beginning.
5
ij• :;
r
x
w
a
.
a a.
r i -•
its s
WNW
vicn4nym"
CRA—LON CORPORATION
REQUEST- FOR ANNEXATION & ZONE CHANGE
'•„ COUNTYONE FAMILYLIMITED RESIDENTIAL,•
CITY • •, DENSITY RESUDENTIAL•
FILE # •• • SCALE In = 300'
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Flathead Regional Development Oi$ce
723 5th Ave. Fast Room 414
Kalispell, MT 59901
Phone: (406)758-5980 Fa= (406)758-5781
PETITION FOR ZONING AMENDMENT
CITY OF KALISPELL
nrr tv� t tvr� n�w�r�r�,�l
OCT - 8 1998
NAME OF APPLICANT: C RA-ILN CCEPORATIT F a n n
MAIL ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 533
CITY/STATE/ZIP: SAD CITY, AZ 86439 PHONE: (520) 768-9776
INTEREST IN PROPERTY: OWNER
ZONING MAP AMENDMENT: ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT: X
• I &V20 xCin • • „i' :1 • • '. 1
A. What is the proposed zoning text amendment?
N/A
IF :E REQUEST PERTAINSTO AN AMENDMENTTO THE ZONINGM
PLEASE CONIPLETE THE FOLLOWING:
A. Address of the property: 440 CIDLLEGE AVENUE
B. Legal Description: TRACr 4CA _
(Lot and Block of Subdivision; Tract #)
14
La
E.
NW1/4, SEMON 17, T.28N., R.21W.
(Section, Township, Range) (Attach sheet for metes and bounds)
The present zoning of the above property is: C'1' R2
The proposed zoning of the above property is: RA1
State the changed or cbanging conditions that make the proposed
amendment necessary:
AVAILABUM OF CITY SEMMICES AND ID BE CCMPATIBLE TO CIW SERVICES.
HOW WILL THE PROPOSED CHANGE ACCOMPLISH THE INTENT AND PURPOSE
OF:
PromotingA. . THIS • .• -Ca9TIGLUW WITH THE
THE = AM WOULD PROWTE THEr a OF M PLAN BY r ••- -•RATING
THE PROPERTY INTO AN EXISTING ZOtE.
B. Lessening congestion in the streets and providing safe access THE cm
HAS DEVELOPED APED PAVED THE STREMS IN THE AREA. TWU ADDITICX�LAL KJLTI
FAK LY RESIDENTS WOULD NOT IMPACT THE AREA.
C. Promoting safety from fire, panic and other dangers ALL PERASTRUCIURE
AMID ARE IN PLACE. FIRE, PANIC AND DANCER WILL NOT BE A
FACTOR.
D. Promoting the public interest, health, comfort, convenience, safety and general
welfare THE DEVELOPMENT WILL PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEAR
E. Preventing the overcrowding of land THE DEVEWPMENT IS C CNTIIOUS TO
F.
i r r • •- -� it • r --• r• ►. ..••y-at •
Avoiding undue concentration of population DEVELOPMENT AND DENSITY
s 1 • :� t,, t•_,�a•„ ra . .ru4. •lMM �.N.. ter. ► s Y s
G. Facilitating the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewage, schools,
parks and other public facilities THE DEVELOPMENT WILL UTILIZE ALL
CITY SERVICES EDnINDED TO THE AREA AND CCUIRIBUTE 70 THEIR EXPENSE.
F
H. Giving reasonable consideration to the character of the district THE
RDQtm'TID ZCNING WO= BE MCISTENT WITH THE ZONED PROPERTIES
AUTAMC TO THE SUWECT SITE.
I. Giving consideration to the peculiar suitability of the property for particular
uses THE DEVEAPMANT IS LOMM IN A RESIDEN ML AREA X%jD IS NOT
CONDUCIVE TO INDUSTRIAL OR CC MERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.
J. Protecting and conserving the value of buildings THE SU&TECT SITE IS
VOID OF" BUnDINGS.
K Encouraging the most appropriate use of land by assuring orderly growth
THIS DEVELOPMa4T FOLLOWS THE MAZURAL PROGRESSION OF THE CITY.
The signing of this application signifies approval for F.R.D.O. staff to be present on
the pro pe for routine monitoring and inspection during approval process.
/Pplicant) (D te)
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
For requests for 81 - 160 acres.............................Add $3/acre
For requests covering 161 acres or more .............. Add $1 /acre
Amendment to Zoning Text.......................................................$300.00
PUD Zoning Review:
Residential....................................................................$400.00
Commercial................................................................... $500.00
MixedUse.....................................................................$650.00
D. The application must be accevted as complete by the FRDO staff thirty 1301
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 500/6 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.
Assessor's S-T-R Lot/Tract Property Owner
No. No. and Mail Address
4. A title report of the subject property.
n
01
PAIL a STXS b ASSQCIATE� ING AcrNrnr MAP
Consutthg Evwrs CRA-LON CORP.
TRACT 4CA
SECTION 17, T.28N., R21W.
FLATHEAD COUNTY, MT
CRA-LON ADDITION
FLATHEAD REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT OFFICE
STAFF REPORT #KSR-98-3
NOVEMBER 18, 1998
A report to the Kalispell City Council regarding a request for preliminary plat approval of a
four -lot residential subdivision.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. Petitioner and Owners:
Technical assistance:
Cra-Lon Corporation
P.O. Box 533
Bullhead City, AZ 86439
Paul J. Stokes & Associates
343 1 " Av. W.
Kalispell, MT 59901
B. Location of Property: The site is located on the north side Sylvan Drive where it
merges with College Avenue. The property is described as Assessor's Tracts 4CA
and 2BA in Section 17, Township 28 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M., Flathead
County, Montana.
C. Size:
Total area: 0.909 acres
Minimum lot area: - 5,662 square feet, 0.132 acres
Maximum lot area: 14,078 square feet, 0.323 acres
D. Existing land use and zoning: Lot 1 is developed with a duplex, Lot 2 with a
single family house, and lots 3 and 4 are vacant. The existing zoning on lots 1 and
2 is RA-1 Low Density Residential Apartment in the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance.
The RA-1 district provides for multi -family housing and minimum lot size of 6,000
square feet and an additional 3,000 square feet for each additional unit beyond a
duplex. The existing zoning on lots 3 and 4 is R-2 One Family Limited Residential
in the Flathead County Zoning Regulations, which is proposed to be annexed
and amended to city zoning. The planning board recommended that city R-3
zoning be adopted on lots 3 and 4.
E. Adjacent Land Uses and Zoning:
North: Single-family residential, County R-2 and City RA-1 zoning
South: Single-family residential, Kalispell R-3 zoning
East: Single family residential, County R-1 zoning
West: Single family residential, Kalispell RA-1 zoning
F. Availability of Utilities: City sewer and water, overhead power, and natural gas
utilities are in place within the street right-of-way abutting the subdivision.
Water.
City of Kalispell
Sewer
City of Kalispell
Electricity:
Pacific Power
Telephone:
Centurytel
Solid Waste:
City of Kalispell
Fire:
City of Kalispell
Schools:
School District #5
Police.
City of Kalispell
REVIEW AND FINDINGS OF FACT
This application is reviewed as a minor subdivision in accordance with State statutory
review criteria and the Kalispell Subdivision Regulations.
A. Compliance with the Flathead County Zoning Regulations:
As noted above. RA-1 zoning currently exdsts on lots 1 and 2 and is proposed on
lots 3 and 4. The subdivision would not comply with zoning in three respects.
First, lot 1 would not meet the minimum lot size requirement of 6,000 square feet.
The plat proposes a lot size of 5,662 square feet, which could become even less if
additional street right-of-way dedication is required (see discussion below on
streets). A duplex already exists on lot 1. Second, lot 1 would not meet the
minimum lot width requirement of 60 feet. The plat proposes a lot width of 48 feet,
which could become even less if additional right-of-way dedication is required.
Third, the proposed lot boundary between lots 1 and 2 does not meet the 10-foot
side yard setback requirement of the RA-1 district. One option for compliance
would be to combine lots i and 2 into a single lot. Another option would be to
obtain a variance from the board of adjustment for creating these three non-
conforming circumstances. Staff recommends a condition requiring compliance
with zoning, which would provide for either option.
B. Conformance with the Master Plan
The subdivision substantially complies with the Kalispell City County Master Plan.
On the master plan map, this area is designated as both high density residential
land and transition area to urban residential land. The site is along a boundary
between more intensive and less intensive land use designations. In high density
residential areas, the plan anticipates proximity to commercial area, public open
space, and collector or arterial streets, and this site is the southern edge of a
planned high -density residential area which accordingly abuts Conrad Dr.,
Woodland Park, and a neighborhood business district. An applicable master plan
policy which would also support the subdivision is 8.a, to designate areas for
development where urban services already exist or can be economically extended.
C. Effects on Health and Safety:
Flooding and soils: The Soil Survey maps an intermittent stream across the middle
of the property, and the steep banks of this drainage channel are approximately
eight feet high. The channel has been filled west of the site at College Av. and
east of the site at Zimmerman Rd, so it no longer appears to function as a flowing
drainage way for surface -water, but it does appear to function as a drainage
retention area and potentially a wetland. At the public hearing on the zone
change, adjacent neighbors referred to this area as the slough and said that it
typically has surface water and waterfowl in it each spring. Viewing the site in
October, the channel had no surface water but did have some wetlands vegetation
(horsetails) and several birch trees growing in it. The area is not mapped as 100-
year or 500-year floodplain in FIRM panel 1810D, but the FIRM panel may be in
error in this area, since the floodplain boundary is shown as a straight north/south
line as if the floodplain mapping abruptly ended. The soils on the site are mapped
in the Soil Survey as Swims silty clay loam (Sr), which are rated by the Natural
Resources and Conservation Service as having severe limitations for building sites
due to flooding and ponding. Engineer Paul Stokes representing the applicant has
stated that, upon preliminary inspection, the site does not appear to qualify as a
wetland protected under the Clean Water Act; and the intention of the owner is
that most of the channel area on lot 4 would be filled to create a suitable building
site.
Subdivision regulations require the following: that the design and development of
subdivisions contain suitable building sites which are property related to
topography and shall preserve the natural terrain, natural drainage, existing topsoil,
trees, natural vegetation, and wildlife and fish habitats to the greatest extent
feasible (3.02); and that a drainage easement be placed along a watercourse
drainage way, channel, ditch, or stream, at a sufficient width to allow for
maintenance and stream bank preservation (3.18.1)). Such a drainage easement
would keep building sites outside of this channel area and mitigate potential
flooding and environmental impacts. With such an easement extending to the top
of the bank, the building site area on lot 4 would be only 16 feet deep at the most;
because the area between the bank and the front property boundary ranges from
approximately 16-36 feet deep and the front setback requirement is 20 feet.
To implement these subdivision requirements, staff recommends the following: a
qualified engineer, hydrologist, or agency shall delineate any part of the site which
qualifies as a wetland under the Clean Water Act, and such land shall be
designated on the final plat as a drainage easement and shall not be used as a
building site. If lot 4 does not contain a 40'x40' building site outside of such
drainage easement and required zoning setbacks, then lots 3 and 4 shall be
combined into one lot.
ToMraphy: The steep bank of the drainage channel across the site is
approximately eight feet high and 100% slope. Subdivision regulations (3.06.E)
require that each lot have a suitable building site (40' x 40' square pad) on existing
undisturbed terrain of 30% or less slope. Lot 4 does not meet this requirement but
a variance is considered below, since the slope is only 8 feet high, and a building
site with a daylight basement or moderate fill appears feasible.
Fire and emprgency access: The site is in an urbanized area and would be served.
by the Kalispell Fire Department. The subdivision is approximately 0.8 miles from
the fire station and police station. A hydrant is in place, which the Fire Chief
commented is adequate to serve the subdivision. Access for fire and other
emergency services is adequate.
D. Effects on Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat
The site is in an urbanized area and is not mapped by the Montana Department of
Fish, Wildlife and Parks as significant riparian or big game habitat. The
channel/wetland area across the site may provide habitat for a variety of birds and
other species. At the public hearing before the planning board on the zone
change, neighbors commented that a variety of wildlife use this area. Retaining
any qualified wetlands in the slough area as a natural drainage easement would
mitigate potential impacts on wildlife (see further discussion above on flooding and
soils).
E. Effects on the Natural Environment:
Channel/Wetland: As noted above, a natural drainage way crosses the site, which
appears to function as a drainage retention area and potentially a wetland. At the
public hearing on the zone change, adjacent neighbors referred to this area as the
slough and said that it typically has surface water and waterfowl in it each spring.
Engineer Paul Stokes representing the applicant has stated that, upon preliminary
inspection, the site does not appear to quaTrfy as a wetland protected under the
Clean Water Act; and the intention of the owner is that most of the channel area
on lot 4 would be filled to create a suitable building site. Based on subdivision
requirements to conserve natural drainages within drainage easements, staff
recommends that a qualified professional shall delineate any part of the site which
qualifies as a wetland under the Clean Water Act, and such land shall be
designated on the final plat as a drainage easement. See further discussion
above on flooding and soils.
4
Other effects: The building site portion of the site is relatively flat, requiring
minimal grading except for lot 4 on which a variance from slope standards is
discussed below. The road is paved, preventing potential road dust impacts on air
quality.
F. Effects on Local Services:
Annexation: Annexation to the city would improve the overall level of public
services to the subdivision, including municipal utilities, a staffed fire department,
substantially more police staffing per capita and size of service area, and more
extensive street infrastructure.
Water and sewer: Municipal water and sewer lines are already in place in the
street right-of-way abutting each lot.
Streets: The subdivision would provide for 7-12 dwelling units, depending on the
zoning approved on lots 3 and 4. The Institute of Transportation Engineers
estimates average daily traffic for a single-family house at 10 daily trips and for a
low-rise apartment unit at 6.6 daily trips, or 53-79 daily trips with full buildout of
the subdivision. College Av. and Sylvan Dr. abutting the site are city streets with
approximately 22-foot paved width and street lights but no curbs, gutters,
sidewalks, or street trees. At the public hearing before the planning board on the
zone change, neighbors commented that the two comers abutting the site form
an S-curve which is a significant traffic hazard. Kalispell subdivision regulations
require minimum road width of 28 feet and installation of curb, gutter, and
sidewalk on the subdivision side of the street, but also provide that city council
can require waiver of protest to an SID in lieu of street improvements where
minor subdivisions front on existing streets. The public works director and
planning staff recommend completion of the street improvements in this case,
due to the additional traffic impact of mufti -family housing and that street
improvements would significantly enhance the comer of College Av. and Sylvan
Dr. which neighbors have objected is unsafe.
Subdivision regulations also require minimum right-of-way width of 60 feet and
that utilities be placed within right-of-way/easement at least 20 feet wide unless
specified otherwise by the utility company. A portion of College Av. has right-of-
way only 40 feet wide and the existing power line is outside the right-of-way,
approximately six feet into the site. Although extending right-of-way width 20 feet
on the other side of the street would better match the 60-foot right-of-way on the
curve of Sylvan Dr., such dedication would burden that neighboring lot owner to
the south by placing the right-of-way only 13 feet from the house there, and such
right-of-way configuration would not be consistent with the existing location of the
pavement and power line. Tim Hunt at Pacific Power commented that extending
the right-of-way north to include the power line and an additional two -foot beyond
5
that point would be adequate for utility maintenance in this case. Accordingly,
the Public Works Director recommends that additional College AvJSylvan Dr.
right-of-way be dedicated from the subdivision to include and extend two feet
beyond the power line from the corner to the east end of the subdivision's Sylvan
Dr. street frontage. East of this point, subdivision regulations would require
dedication of additional easement to accommodate utilities in accordance with
plans approved by the applicable utility companies.
Schools: Staff estimates that 5-6 additional school -age children would reside at
the site with full build -out of the subdivision. The property is located within the
Kalispell School District. Gary Rose of the district commented that the
subdivision would not have a significant effect on schools.
Parks: Subdivision regulations do not require parkland dedication for minor
subdivisions. The site is within walking distance, approximately 1,100 feet, of
Woodland Park.
Police Protection: The site would be served by the Kalispell Police Department.
The subdivision is approximately 0.8 miles from the police station.
Fire Protection: The site would be served by the Kalispell Fire Department. The
subdivision is approximately 0.8 miles from the fire station. A hydrant is in place,
which the Fire Chief commented is adequate to serve the subdivision.
Refuse Disposal: Refuse disposal would be provided by the City of Kalispell.
The County Landfill has adequate capacity to accommodate the additional
refuse generated from this subdivision.
Medical Services: Medical services are available at Kalispell Regional Hospital
approximately 2.5 road miles from the site.
G. Effects on Agriculture and Agricultural Water User Facilities:
The 0.9-acre site is in urbanized area abutting the city. No significant impact on
agriculture or water user facilities is anticipated.
H. Compliance with the Flathead County Subdivision Regulations:
The proposal complies with subdivision requirements, subject to meeting _
conditions that address improvements and design, except that a variance would be
required from slope standards for lot 4. Subdivision regulations (3.06.E) require
that each lot have a suitable building site (40' x 40' square pad) on existing
undisturbed terrain of 30% or less slope. Lot 4 does not meet this requirement.
6
Subdivision regulations provide for granting of variances subject to adoption of
findings that the following criteria are met, each of which is discussed below.
1. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to public health, safety, or
general welfare or injurious to other adjoining properties.
The steep bank of the drainage channel across the site is approximately
eight feet high and 100% slope. It crosses the middle of lot 4. The slope
standard addresses potential impacts of steep slope development from
slope instability, erosion and siltation, reduced ability to suppress fires on
steeper slopes, and hillside scarring. The slope standard is intended to
address larger, continuous steep slopes although the standard does not
specify a minimum height. Since the slope is only 8 feet high, a building
site with a daylight basement or placed on suitable fill appears feasible
without undue impacts on slope stability, erosion, fire safety, or scarring.
Staff recommends that a professional engineer certify that the slope poses
no significant geological hazard for the development of lot 4 or for
neighboring properties, and that any recommendations for mitigation be
noted on the final plat.
2. The conditions on which the variance is based are unique to the property on
which the variance is sought and are not applicable generally to other property.
The condition on which the variance is based is that the slope is only 8 feet
high, which is unique to the property and not applicable generally to other
property.
3. Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical
conditions of the specific property, a particular hardship would result as
distinguished by a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulations is
enforced.
The physical condition on which the variance is based is that the slope is
only 8 feet high. The particular hardship is that lot 4 would not be
developable if the standard is applied.
4. The variance will not cause a substantial increase in public costs.
Substantial increases in public costs as a result of the variance are not
apparent.
5. The variance will not, in any manner, vary the provisions of any adopted Zoning
regulations or master plan.
The variance would not be contrary to specific provisions of the zoning and
master plan.
Staff recommends approval of the variance from 3.06.E for lot 4, subject to the
condition that a professional engineer certify that the slope poses no significant
geological hazard for the development of lot 4 or for_neighboring properties, and
that any recommendations for mitigation be noted on the final plat.
RECOMMENDATION
The Flathead Regional Development Office would recommend that Kalispell City Council
adopt the Staff Report ;KSR 98-3 as findings of fact and grant preliminary plat approval
for this subdivision subject to the following conditions:
1. The subdivision shall comply with the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. Either combine
lots 1 and 2 into a single lot, or obtain zoning variances for lot width on lot 1, lot
size on lot 2, and the side yard setback on lot 2.
2. The subdivision shall comply with the Kalispell Design and Construction
Standards, as approved by the Public Works Department.
a) Install street improvements including curb, gutter, and detached sidewalk on
one side where the subdivision abuts the street.
b) Dedicate additional College Av_/Sylvan Dr. right-of-way from the subdivision
to include and extend two feet north of the power line from the street
intersection to the east end of the subdivision's Sylvan Dr. street frontage.
c) Prepare and implement an engineered drainage plan.
d) Sewer and water facilities shall meet design and improvements standards.
3. A variance is granted from 3.06.E for lot 4, subject to the conditions that a
professional engineer certify that the slope poses no significant geological hazard
for the development of lot 4 or for neighboring properties, and that any
recommendations for mitigation be noted on the final plat.
4. A qualified engineer, hydrologist, or agency shall delineate any part of the site
which qualifies as a wetland under the Clean Water Act, and such land shall be
designated on the final plat as a drainage easement in accordance with Section
3.18.D of the Kalispell Subdivision Regulations and shall not be used as a building
site. _ If lot 4 does not contain a 40'x40' building site outside of such drainage
easement and required zoning setbacks, then lots 3 and 4 shall be combined into
one lot.
a
5. Dedicate utility easement to accommodate the existing utilities east of the
subdivision's Sylvan Dr. street frontage in accordance with plans approved by
the applicable utility companies.
6. Install street trees on one side of the subdivision street frontage in accordance with
a plan approved by the Kalispell Parks Department.
7. Obtain approach permits from the Public Works Department for driveway
approaches onto College Av. and Sylvan Dr. The requirements of the permit shall
be met prior to final plat approval.
8. The following notes shall be placed on the final plat:
a. All house numbers shall be placed to be visible from the road, either at the
driveway entrance or on the building.
b. New utilities shall be installed underground.
9. The preliminary plat shall be valid for a period of three years from the date of
approval.
HA ... \98\KSR98-3
9
APPLICATION FOR KMOR SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL
This application shill be submitted, along with an information required by the applicable
Subdivision Regulatloas and the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act, and the
appropriate fee to:
Flathead Regional Development Office, 723 Fifth Avenue East, Room 414
Kalispell, Montana S9901 - Phone: (406)75S-5980 Fam (406)75S-5781
Fix R� _ a ��lfaA
Minor Subdivision......................................................$250 + 10/lot
(S or fewer lots)
Condorainiu=s..........................................................$250 + 10/unit
(5 or fewer lots - land is not subdivided
Mobile Horne Paris & Caapgrounds ...........................S250 : 10/space
(5 or fewer spaces - land is not subdivided)
Amended PreH-^�inary Plat..........................................S200
SUBDIVISION NAi.)=E: CQA-LCN AODIi'Z'CN TO THE =- OF KAaLISc 1L
OWNERS) OF RECORD:
IN=e (MA--rZN CCRIOCRAXICN Phcne (520) 768-9 776
Mailing Ciry/State &
Address: P.O. SOX 533, BULUMAD CITY, AZ. Zip 86439-0533
TECHNICAL/PROFESSIONAL PARTICIPANTS (Surveyor/Designer/Engineer, etc):
Name & Address PAUL J. SMKES A ASSOC. IX., 343 1ST AVE W. KALISI EIaL
Name & Address KMSMAN SURVEYMC, P.O. BOX 160, SOMERS MT
Name & Address
LEGAL DISCRIPTION OF PROPERTY:
City/ County
Street Address 440 C OLLFx"" AVE UE
Assessor's Tract No.(s) 0925928 Lot No.(s ) 4CA S 2BA
1/4 Section NW 17 Township 28N. fig. 21W
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF SUBDIVISION: THE SUEi?MSION IDS BEEN
DESICNED TO ACC CMIDATE MULTI FAMILY DWEI LINGS
Number of Lots or Rental Spaces 4 Total Acreage in Subdivision 1.09
Total Acreage in Lots 1 -09 Minimum Size of Lots or Spaces .13
Total Acreage in Streets or Roads NSA Ma --.:mum Size of Lots or Spaces .30
Total Acreage in Parks, Open Spaces and/or Common Areas
PLEASE ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS IN THE SPACES PROVIDED
BELOW:
Will the granting of the variance be detrimental to the public health, safeer cr
general welfare or injurious to other adjoirdr.g properties?
2. Will the va_7 a^_ce cause a substantial increase in public costs?
3. Will the va* ar_ce affect, in a-_y Wanner, &-e provisions of ar__v adopted
regulations or Master Plan?
4. Are there sperm al circumstances related to the physical character:sacs of the
site (topography, shape, etc.) that create the hardship?
S. What other conditions are unict+e to this property that create the new for a
variance?
91
Superintendent
756-5000
Business Office
756
Transport/Maintenance
756-5075
Special Serma-S
756-5017
Flathead High School
756-5075
Junior High School
756-5030
Urdermm School
756-5024
Russell School
756-5052
Peter" SdWW
56-5067
Hedges School
756-5048
Elrod School
756-5043
Edgerton School
756-5058
phone: 406-756-5015 -233 FIRST AVENUE EAST - KALISPELL, MONTANA 59901 fa)c 406-756-4510
October 20, 1998
Steve Kountz
Senior Planner
Flathead Regional Development Office
723 5th Avenue East -Room 414
Kalispell, Mt. 59901
Re: Proposed CRA-LON Annexation
Dear Mr. Kountz,
A development of this size will not have a significant impact on our school district. As of
this date, we are experiencing declining enrollment. Therefore, we would be able to
accommodate additional students in our schools.
Sincerely,
Gary Rose
�`irec or of Maintenance and Transportation
cc: Superintendent Joe McCracken
4
F. R. 0. O.
21 w.
Pd .K ' _ (Joint :h"I 17)
• KO es _
• w / i fj,�`y A
. ., Kai
.r g
Kd KC
4
sti
RC
TC " •,
• _ .c Kd 1 �+ 3�- /1; l Bch • '
Kd
Kza
Aft
sa
?f - `.•St - -� .1 - _ - Env KC . N
Q i
> .A _ • Ku
KU
o
p}
• -� _ NQRTNER Iio�land N /
Park
GRE nT _ R LISPELL"
Ka —
KZ Q T J : /` i.s 'r 3-� �.v -i _ `�,`'' ; - :. '^C�C4• jS 1�•aie�.-•
^g - • -- • �' � t' � r •l^� i• � ~•.t� .sue 'Lt►' . !. _ � r .h:' . kaae3r-
N.
Sr
17
S. ��::. .i
fir IL
PC Pb-
XU
S. _ — Sa
Ku
fe_ _ _
ti _I.1..... _ . _../
............i:.
1We �� 1 Survey
Scale 1:20000 `' "ee:
Bahr said he lives in Northridge which has medical offices, and the
residences cause more traffic. Bahr also said the lot is unique and is
not suitable for residence; the clinic would be it's best use and would
be less obtrusive than a 4-plex or medical office.
Motion Bahr moved to adopt staff report KZC-98-4 as findings of fact and
recommend approval of the zone change from RA-1 to RA-3;
Johnson second the motion. On a roll call vote Carlson, Heinecke,
Bahr, Stevens, Johnson, and Hines voted aye. The motion passed on
a 6-0 vote.
CRA-LON The second public hearing was introduced by Carlson on a request by
ANNEXATION Cra-Lon Corporation for initial zoning of RA-1, Low Density
ZONING Residential Apartment, upon annexation of approximately one acre
located at 440 College Avenue east of Kalispell.
Johnson excused himself due to a conflict of interest.
Staff Report Kountz gave a detailed overview of Staff Report #KA-98-6. Kountz
said a 4-lot subdivision was also being proposed, with a 3-plex on one
lot and_a 4-plex on the other, which will go to City Council. Staff
recommended approval and that the City Council adopt RA-1 on Lot 3
and the proposed subdivision and R-3 on Lot 4. Kountz said the
applicant had no objection to the compromise in the zoning request.
Kountz also said two letters in opposition were received.
Public Hearing:
Proponents Paul Stokes, representing the applicant, spoke in favor of the project
and said he had no problem with the staff report and recommended
conditions.
Opposition _ Lolla Pauli, 404 Sylvan Drive, stated her opposition to the zoning.
Floyd Pauli, 404 Sylvan Drive, said there was water on part of the
property and that if it's filled the bank on the north would get small.
He stated the property was not large enough for the project.
Thomas Marks, 401 Sylvan Drive, spoke in opposition. He submitted
letters from the Johnsons', at 504 Sylvan Drive, stating than
opposition. He read letters from Diane Lamers, 33 East Wyoming,
and Melody Haines, 429 College Avenue who also expressed their
opposition to the project.
Bonnie Sponger, 345 College Avenue, said she was concerned that
her property will be flooded if the project goes through. She also
stated the s-curve is dangerous, and there was no visibility or
parking. She said the zoning will ruin the character of the
neighborhood.
Tony Loiacono said it was a very private and unique area. He
expressed his concerns regarding the pillaging that is starting to
Kalispell City -County Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 998
Page 5 of 10
happen, and said additional traffic will escalate the crime. He said
the road was being used as a shortcut to Conrad Drive. He said
Montessori School had told their visitors that Sylvan could be used to
go up to Woodland and it has now turned into a freeway
A question was asked if the property is in the floodplain. Kountz said
FEMA does not map the area in the 100-year floodplain and that the
maps were probably wrong.
Edna Green stated there were approximately 20 families in the area
and the project would lower the property value of the other homes if
the zoning was allowed. She said flooding does occur on her property,
and her property is higher than the subject property.
Ann Ingram, Sylvan Court, expressed her concerns about the wildlife,
the danger of children walking on the s-curve. She said property
values were typically over $200,000 and a multi -family project will
bring down their property values. -
Dave Lawrence, Lawrence Lane, said he was concerned about the
water and wildlife. He also expressed his concern that filling would
diminish surface area and would ruin his property; and expressed
concern on the traffic issue.
Fran Olendyke, 556 Sylvan Drive, said she previously served on the
board and that this property should remain single family residential.
Christine Curtis, 530 Sylvan Drive, state the wildlife is treasured and
the atmosphere is good. She also said a lower income tri-plex will
cause further degradation of her home and that the traffic is already
bad.
Judy Lawrence said this is an aquifer or wetland and if the slough is
filled the character will be changed.
The Board received two letters in opposition from Dr. Delores Taylor
and Carol Granger.
Board Discussion Stevens asked Kountz about streets ending at the slough. Stokes
said there would be a problem if there was flooding but he would only
fill far enough to build; he said it is not classified as a wetland.
Heinecke asked if lot 3 was 10,000 sq. ft., what would be the RA-1
minimum lot size for a tri-plex or duplex. Kountz said 9,000 sq. ft.
would be the minimum lot size for RA-1 in the city regulations.
Stevens said his dilemma was infdl if properties were serviced by
water and sewer, and that people needed to have places to live and
wondered whether this was appropriate infill for affordable housing.
Bahr asked if there were any multi -family residences near. Kountz
said there was the trailer park and 4-plexes on College Avenue.
Kalispell City -County Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 998
Page 6 of 10
Motion Heinecke moved to adopt Staff Report #KA-98-6 as finding of fact and
recommend R-3 upon annexation with the following changes to the
findings of fact as follows: # 10 - Delete `On the other hand,' from the
4th sentence and strike the last 2 sentences; # 11 - Strike the last
sentence, and add that substantial public comment has been received
in objection to the plan; and #2 - Strike the 2nd sentence. Bahr
seconded the motion.
On a roll call vote, Carlson, Heinecke, Bahr, Stevens and Hines voted
aye. The motion passed on a 5-0 vote.
Recess A recess was called at 7:40 p.m. The meeting was called back to
order at 7:50 p.m.
ANDREW HALL ZONE The third public hearing was introduced by Carlson on a request by
CHANGE Andrew A. Hall, et al, for zone change from R-1, Suburban
Residential, to R-3, One Family Residential, for property located on
the west side of Mountain View Drive in Evergreen.
_Staff Report Kountz gave a detailed overview of Staff Report #FZC-98-11. Staff
recommends that the Board recommend approval of the requested
zone change from R-1 to R-3 with the zone change area expanded one
lot in each direction to include Lots 5 and 13 of Block 2 and Lots 5
and 13 of Block 3.
Public Hearing:
In Favor Andrew Hall, petitioner, and Christine Wilkonski, petitioner, spoke in
favor of the change in zoning.
Opposition John Herschfelder, 420 Mountain View Drive, introduced a letter of
opposition from his neighbors, the Christiansens. He expressed his
concern about the traffic and wanted the zoning to continue as R-1 in
order to keep things the way they are which allowed horses and
chickens, etc.
Dennis Savrud, 540 Ash Rd., said he had the same complaints about
traffic and wants the zoning to stay the same.
Judy Hollis, 546 Ash Rd., questioned whether their property was
included in the zone change. Kountz answered that it would be
included. Hollis said she is against the proposed change.
Board Discussion Johnson commented that traffic control is not a function of the board.
Stevens commented that this was classic infill and that affordable
housing was definitely needed. Carlson commented that the
increased density would be desirable because of the availability of
sewer.
Motion Stevens moved that the Board adopt Staff Report #FZC-98-11 as
findings of fact and recommend approval of the zone change from R-1
Kalispell City -County Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 998
Page 7 of 10
Dolores Taylor, M.D.
40 Big Pine Road, Woodside, CA. 94062
Thomas R. Jentz
Planning Director
Flathead Regional Development Office
723 Fifth Avenue East - Room 414
Kalispell, MT 59901
October 31, 1998
Dear Kalispell City -County Planning Board:
Since I will be unable to attend the Tuesday, November 10, 1998 meeting of the
Kalispell City -County Planning Board, I would like to voice my obiec i n to
agenda item # 1, a petition by Cra-Lon Corporation for annexation of 0.909 acres
at 440 College Ave. and a zoning map amendment from R-2 One Family Limited
Residential in the Flathead County Zoning regulations to RA-1 Low Density
Residential Apartment in the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance.
I am the owner of the property located at 435 College Ave. The property has
been held in the family for over 50 years. Unfortunately, the neighborhood has
undergone a transition from only single family dwellings to a mixture of single
family and multi -family housing. All one has to do is drive down College Avenue
to see the deterioration of the appearance of the neighborhood when multi -family
housing is allowed.
Please do not vote to let this beautiful part of Kalispell near Woodland Park
deteriorate any further. The property at 440 College Avenue is located on a
boundary of the City and County line. I recommend to the Board that the
annexation and zoning map amendment be denied. •f `�
Thank you very much. -3
Sincere)
n , tn �.
Dolores Taor, M.D.
//•
,M 7%k. 7,,,� ,D.
r -cS i.r5, IV C, ! 96
� pro" A-JjCLcer,t- 4-0 " 6 �le-c�,,o
Ay�-- us in 1'� p roctss air try ' -
r�u�r�ed to apt lew a.-trt�l�n ��ew-per -
b,�Qi- on 3a_icl frop"
r r�5 �ck� cf- Cc�, I v
S Cam g'r,�L311awu�
�uc,h c�r� -}n �� ��.c.e. wrr��cl rn.�st �--
_ Cer-tu.Cr,ly dev2x1 u.e. Ai-e, 5wrrec,�d.�� propee'�-.�
CC l ( .�iu�.. ij one �- �e� d.e� �-6cc��,
1�1�0c� cltLCac. � �2.5 �Fa/e,r'�
w;cY�
�i�perr� dro�pe� � t,h ru> -h=rrw--, trau�
mdcwon C. e-A-/e� ci.
dz:) 4-t�-5 -
November 10, / 1 !0
MEMORANDUM TO: Kalispell City -County Planning Board
Kalispell City Councfl
FROM: Thomas H Marx
401 Sylvan Drive
Kalispell Mt 59901
7550096
Dear Elected Representatives
It appears there are a number of issues buried in this one request.
Should the land be annexed?
Should the creek be filled?
Should the zoning be changed?
How many living units can be stuffed onto .5 acres of land?
1.I understand a land owner would want to get the most return on investment for a property
he.'she owns. However it should not have come as any surprise that this area has had an
intermittent creek running through it for all of recent history. The reason it had not been
developed or built upon for all these years when there has been houses built all around it is
because it is not a very good idea -Should the land be annexed? Sure, if the land is developed like
the houses to the south of it. Annexation would increase the tax base of the city and it would
allow for a home to be built that would have city water and sewer and other city services. This
would enable the owner to realize some return on the property without towering the property
values and quality of life of the neighbors.
?. Should we allow the filling of a wet land? Every spring the creek fills with water. There are
ducks and other water foul who nest and use the wetlands. There are deer, skunk and an
occasional black bear who use it. As this waterway, both above ground and below ground,
drains this part of the neighborhood, what will be the impact to the homes upstream in terms of
flooding should this damming or filling be allowed?
3.The neighbor hood is a single family per dwelling neighborhood. The staff report mentions
multifamily dwellings to the east and north of the site. ( that would be on the other side of the
creek) I would invite you to view the trailer park and the fourplex in the area. That visit would
speak volumes. There are unpaved gravel roads around the trailers, one or two Iawns and the rest
is cement and gravel. It is a typical low end trailer park. This is not the character of the
neighborhood where this property is located.. To the south of this property there is nothing but
nice well kept single family homes. These home owners could have bought their homes any
where. They did not choose to buy in a neighborhood of low density residential apartments. The
staff report mentions a transition zone from one type of housing to another. Let the existing
fourplex be the termination not the transition of multi family, owner absent, housing.
4 Most of the homes that house one family in this neighborhood are on lots of .S acre or more.
This proposal would put up to'seven families (I don't know how many people) and (assuming
two working people per living unit) potentially 14 or more cares and trucks on the same size lot.
This is inconsistent with the present use of the surrounding land.
S. The road is hazardous in this area under best of conditions. The corner to the east of the
property is a blind comer because of the trees and bushes. The road is hardly wide enough for
two cars to pass each other in the corner. In winter the road becomes even more narrow. My
wife's car was hit there while stopped to allow another car through the corner.
��ll0/98
So Yva. Qr
l� t i 5 (xe t f 111- s5 m
-Dec, �erSahS�
W )' 4G G. re C i res I deK f5 O(d)n ("Ai
G1 Ao ►► - 0-- ' s04 S l uam Or; Je . l
�11....__ Y L�' e' Q ��
o P P o s e d " I U Q h N �n i Y�.G� t J GC S( NeG� 0, 6 4 4�st4 C.
WO U. a IN ry luau /�-i — f 'o- l �� d Well '. �� S
Go ^.5vu-C4 to ou ✓ Sin yle 4—17
19 o ►� a oQ . Oj e U K d G✓ 5 / d 'f" -�t �' - f ..c.
Q A4 it X o c J v! or C
O �Q•`^- .t 5 o kale+- d i s Gu S S� c vt a n k Q ►r
Sf"
-te- deveIo -{a ne/C v's /of
C7 C P O tou.v-� (mac 15 �e
K a -�-��f u vq e__ p -t' 0 U_ v Q ✓Gct . ��
Pew-
G a v se -t�
4-0 7k
a'�
� ��'��
v
is v� olce�
um,.� --el wlf_+b.,2. bra P,., Adj-.
p lase-
4v, Y-� i'SC
vo 4-e t,, ,
"edd-AS.
-�-t S � ►'o�oS¢
"Z %4 .
Clt . czvv,
k o k Vggg
a aZ
�•n crests c� `�'c•�-�-� c, `,1 ov
�c-
�sa�-
-
Dtq hq 4-.c�w.Q.k-s