Loading...
Planning Board Minutes - September 19, 2006KALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMSER 19 � 2006 CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL The regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and CALL Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Board members present were: Timothy Norton, Rick Hull, John Hinchey, and Bryan Schutt. Bob Albert, Robyn Balcom and Kari Gabriel were absent. Sean Conrad, P.J. Sorensen and Torn Jentz represented the Kalispell Planning Department. There were approximately 17 people in the audience. APPROVAL OF NUNUTES Hull moved and Hinchey seconded to approve the minutes of the August 3, 2006 regular planning board meeting with the following amendments: Page 10, paragraph 3 delete the phrase "not even a road"; Page 16 Public Hearing - first sentence by John King change "ratify' to "rectify. The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. HEAR THE PUBLIC No one wished to speak. SPRING PRAMM NIXED A request from. Goldberg Properties, LLC on behalf of the US PROFESSIONAL ONE - Forest service to lease a 5.35 acre parcel from the USFS HEADQUARTERS - Department of Natural Resources and Conversation in order PRELIMINARY PLAT to construct a US Forest Service office. The proposed lease site is south of the new high school under construction at the intersection of west Reserve Drive and Stillwater Road. STAFF REPORT KPP-06-11 Sean Conrad, representing the Kalispell Planning Department presented staff Report KPP--06--11 for the Board. Conrad oriented the board on the location of the proposed USFS headquarters. Conrad said that the high school came in for a preliminary plat for a lease site and one of the conditions was to construct 300 feet of the no name roadway from Stillwater Road and this road would then serve the high school parking lot. This developer would be required to extend that roadway an additional 120 feet to the east, which is the eastern boundary line of the lease site. Staff is recommending that the Kalispell City Planning Board adopt staff report KPP- 0 6 -11 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat of spring Prairie Mixed Professional One be approved subject to the 11 conditions listed in the staff' report. Conrad noted Condition #2 spears to the construction and development of the access roadway and the planning board might consider amending Condition #2 to state that the access road not serving but abutting the subdivision shall be Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 19, 2006 Page I of 16 designed and construction in accordance with the adopted Design and construction Standards for the city of Kalispell. Conrad said in addition he would recommend that the planning board amend condition #6 which spews to the R / w along Stillwater Road. Due to future development in the area Stillwater Road will most likely increase to some type of collector capacity therefore there is a need for additional R/W. The amendment to condition # 6 would state that 40 feet of additional R/W from the center line of Stillwater Road shall be dedicated along the road and shall be shown on the face of the final lease site map. Conrad added that the developers are fine with this amendment. Norton asked if that amendment would include the pedestrian/bicycle path R/W or just the future expansion of the road. Conrad said the 40 feet would accommodate the road expansion and a boulevard strip and a future sidewalk or bike trail. QUESTIONS BY THE Rick Hull recused himself from the discussion since his firm BOARD was involved in the appraisal of this property. Hinchey asked if the road dives down and connects with the Reserve connector. Conrad said that it does. APPLICANT/AGENCIES Mike Fraser, Thomas, Dean & Hoskins said he was speaking on behalf of the applicant. He noted that the owner is DNRC and the applicant is Goldberg Properties who are negotiating a lease for the property and will eventually build a building and lease it to the Forest Service. This subdivision is approximately a 5.5 acre parcel. R/W will be dedicated for no name road. The staff report and conditions speak for themselves. The high school will be required to build the first 300 feet of no name road and the applicant will finish the other 120 feet. The road will be finished with curb, gutter and Sidewalks to city standards. Along Stillwater Road there is a 00 foot declared R/W and to clarify its status they will dedicate 40 feet -- the existing 30 feet from the center line east plus an additional 10 feet and as they move through the project and comply with Kalispell standards they will also build an S foot bike path along that R/W so there eventually will be a bike path from Three Mile Drive north all the way to West Reserve and to serve the high school. Grant Nelson with Goldberg Properties noted he is available for questions. Nelson said that they are excited about the project and hopefully they will open a year from now. They are trying to move quickly for the Forest Service and are trying to get them moved into the facility which they hope will be an asset to the community. Hinchey asked if this building would replace the current facility south of Kalispell. Nelson said yes it will replace that Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of Septem her 19, 2006 Wage 2 of 16 facility and combines another ranger station into one building. Steve Lorch, Montana Department of Natural resources and Conservation stated he was representing the landowner trustee. They have been working with Goldberg Properties and the Forest Service and they are excited to move this project forward. Hinchey asked how long is the lease and Nelson said that it is a 50 year lease with options taking it to 99 years. PUBLIC HEARING No one wished to spear and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Schutt moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to adopt staff report KPP-o 6 - 11 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat of Spring Prairie Mixed Professional one be approved subject to the 11 conditions listed in the staff report and with the following amendments: Amend Condition #2 to read, "The access road abutting the subdivision shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the adopted Design and Construction Standards for the City of Kalispell." Amend Condition #6 to read, Forty feet of additional R / W from the center line of Stillwater Road shall be dedicated along the road and shall be shown on the face of the final lease site map." BOARD DISCUSSION The board members liked the location and the project. Hinchey asked for clarification on the access. Conrad said Public works prohibited any additional accesses onto Stillwater Road, which is per the Section. 36 PUD which limits access to every 1I4 mile. He noted that it allows the governing body over that road to allow additional access or curb cuts but in this case the Public Works Department wanted everything funneled to this no name road. Conrad noted that the access is addressed in the conditions of approval. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. WADE - ANNEXATION his A request from Lisa wade for annexation and initial zoning of CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RA-1 (Low Density Residential Apartment) on a portion of a 0.49 acre property located at 1613 S& 1615 5th Ave East. The owner is also requesting a conditional use permit to construct a four -plea and two five-rplex units on the property in the annexation and initial zoning request and the property immediately north. The two properties are located along 5th Ave East at 1613 & 1615 5th Ave. East and total Kalispell City Planning Beard Minutes of the meeting of September 19, 2006 Page 3 of 16 approximately one -acre in size. STAFF REPORTS A.-06-09 Sean Conrad, representing the Kalispell Planning ni n g Ss I CU-06-09 Department presented Staff Report KA-06 -09 8. KCU-06-09 for the Board. Conrad reviewed the location of the property for the board. He noted that the property is currently split with a portion being County Rr-4, which is a residential zoning district. The property owners are requesting to annex the remainder of the property into the city with RA-1 zoning. Staff is recommending that the Kalispell City Plannmg Board adopt staff report I-PP-06-09 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the initial zoning for this property upon annexation be RA-1, Lover Density Residential Apartment. Conrad said if the initial zoning and annexation is approved, the applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to construct one 4-plex and two 5-plex units on the 2 lots. Access would be provided by a private driveway and would be 24 feet wide. Conrad added there are several large trees out in front of the property that staff is recommending be retained and that the applicant work the site design and sidewalk around them to maintain the character of the neighborhood and the streetscape along 5thAvenue East. He noted that staff is also recommending that they use four sided architecture to provide a better design. Conrad said there is an existing 14 unit apartment complex which has a parking lot and driveway nearby and one condition of approval requires that the applicant discuss with the owner of the apartment complex the possibility of connecting the access drive to this parking lot. The Police and Fire Departments liked that idea because it gives them better emergency access. In addition there is a condition of approval that states the owner shall provide cross easements across the northern and southern property boundaries of the project site to allow for future multi -family buildings to share the driveway and / or parking areas. Staff is recommending that the Kalispell City Planning Board adopt staff report ICU- 06-09 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the conditional use permit be approved subject to the 25 conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Norton asked if the loss of 2 parking spaces due to the location of the mail boxes has been resolved. Conrad said no and added it is addressed in the conditions. He said depending on the outcome of that situation it could result in the loss of the spaces and therefore would reduce the number of allowable units. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 19, 2006 Wage 4 of 16 APPLICAN'T`IAGENCIES Bob Erickson -- Jackola Engineering stated that he is representing Ms. Wade. The applicant does not have any problems with the majority of the conditions with the following exceptions. - Condition # 10 they have made the good faith effort by talking to the neighbor to the south and he is not willing to provide the access because he feels it would be a detriment to his development with the added traffic flow. Condition # 12, regarding the mailbox location they have not contacted the postal service but will when they get into the actual design phase. Erickson stated that the owner would life Condition # 15, which addresses the requirement of the owner to provide cross easements at the north and southern property boundary, be deleted. She does not like the idea of additional traffic corning through her property, it is a private drive and she would like it to stay that way and she is also concerned it would decrease the value of her property. There is an adequate turnaround being provided for the Fire Department which they have approved. PUBLIC FEARING Anna Mork 1601 1/2 5thAvenue East said that she had several concerns regarding the location of the units. Ms. Mork requested that a good vinyl fence be put up between her property and this development and that landscaping be added. Conrad noted the location of her house for the board. She also mentioned that she would also need access to paint her garage on the south side, which she added is located practically on the property line. She was concerned about the affects of light, noise, traffic and garbage on her property and whether this development would decrease her property value. She noted that her kitchen window faces south and asked what she would be looking at out the window. Conrad said that if her window is facing south she would be looping at some fencing, landscaping and parking. Norton agreed to touch on all of those subjects for her during the board discussion. No one else wished to spear and the public hearing was closed. MOTION - ANNEXATION Norton moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to adopt staff report IAA-06--0 3 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the initial zoning for this property upon annexation by RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment. BOARD DISCUSSION Norton noted that the fence is addressed in Condition #25 and that the fence would be a miru'mum of 5 feet and would be constructed out of solid good or vinyl. Ms. Mork felt that Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 19, 2006 Page 5 of 16 5 feet would be too low to keep the lights out. Conrad said that the zoning code would allow a fence up to 6 1 / 2 feet with a building permit. The board members suggested that the condition be amended to require a 6 foot fence. Norton added that they are required to have landscaping and the lights have to conform to the city's lighting standards where they have to be shielded downward and are not permitted to shine onto her property or house, and the garbage will be screened. He could not promise that the value of her property would increase or decrease but he said they was another complex constructed in the neighborhood and there hasn't been a decrease in property values in that location. The zoning is consistent with what is already present in the neighborhood. Norton asked why only a portion of the property was annexed into the city. Jentz said that historically when sewer was extended in this area people had large lots and assessments were based on the square footage of the lots. The homeowner only granted to serve their house so they only annexed in the house and left the remainder of the property in the county. Schutt said if they are putting both halves of the parcel into the city don't they end up with a small island of county. Conrad said yes they do. That portion is a different owner and is the same situation as this property where the house alone was annexed. Norton noted the rest of the property is RA-1 and the zoning would be consistent with other land uses in the area. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. MOTION -- CONDITIONAL Hull moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to adopt staff USE PERAUT report KCU-06-09 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell city Council that the conditional use permit be approved subject to the 25 conditions listed in the staff report, with the amendment to condition # 2 5 that the fence height be 6 feet instead of 5 feet. BOARD DISCUSSION Norton was concerned about limiting the building materials for the fence to wood or vinyl. He thought the brick fence that was used on Stillwater Road and west Reserve was nice. Conrad noted that the goal was for privacy, blocking lights from vehicles, and shielding the refuse containers. Schutt said he didn't like the condition requiring the applicant to provide cross easements. Conrad said primarily it was the emergency service providers who would like the connectivity because it gives them better access and the ability to loop around instead of getting stuck at a dead end. Another issue is if more of these multi -family residential units o in north and south on 5th Avenue East there would Kalispell City Planning Board M i nutes of the meeting of September 19, 2.006 Page 6 of 16 then be a series of access driveways, curb cuts all along the street. Hull said he is very much in favor of the easements and noted that the board has talked about interconnectivity in the past and he doesn't want this door shut. Schutt said he thought Condition # 15 was toothless. He also thought the streets would be slower and quieter with one way in and one moray out. Norton said they have discussed interconnectivity not only for emergency services but for convenience. However this is a residential neighborhood and there already are several driveways. He added it is private property and what would prevent Ms. Mork from building a fence that would block the easement. MOTION -- DELETE Schutt moved and Norton seconded a motion to delete CONDTION 15 Condition 15. ROLL CALL The motion failed on a 2--2 roll call vote. BOARD DISCUSSION Hinchey said he agrees that the street would be nicer with fewer curb cuts. His concern with the previous motion is if you strike motions that ask for efforts that would provide connectivity you will eliminate any possibility for it. Hinchey agrees that they cannot force property owners to accept this infringement on their private property rights but he sees it as a benefit for emergency services. Hinchey added that barriers have been used in the past to prevent through traffic. Further discussion was held. ROLL CALL - ORIGINAL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. MOTION COTTAGE GARDENS - A request from Appex 1, LLC, for annexation, initial zoning, ANNEXATION, planned unit development (PUD) and preliminary plat PRELIMINARY PLAT & approval of cottage Gardens on a 10.75 acre property. The PLANNED UNIT owner is requesting annexation into the city of Kalispell with DEVELOPhIENT the R-2 (Single Family Residential) zoning district. The owner is also requesting a PUD zoning district on the property to allover reduced lot sizes in the R-2 zoning district and a preliminary plat to create 44 lots ranging in size from 2,900 net square feet to 4,600 net square feet. The property is located on the north side of Three Mile Drive approximately 1,000 feet west of the intersection of Meadows Lane and Three Mile Drive. STAFF REPORTS - KA-06- Tom Jentz, representing the Kalispell Planning Department 05, KPP-06-08 & KCU-06- presented Staff Reports KA-06 -05, I PP-06-08 & KPUD-06--02 02 for the Board. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 19, ?006 Page 7 of 16 Jentz reviewed the project location and the adjacent land uses for the board. Jentz noted that staff reviewed the proposal and talked with the applicants but continues to struggle with the design. The concept has real viability in this community but he questioned whether this location was the appropriate place for a project of this type. Jentz said they are proposing a parking space behind the garages of about 15 feet. The city's standard is 20 feet. Jentz felt this would create a situation where vehicles would stick out into the travel surface. The applicants plan to restrict parking in front of the garages but the homeowner's association would have to enforce this restriction. Human nature says that when a visitor would come they would want to park along the street and not walk from. a Pod back to the house. Jentz noted that emergency services and Public Works were concerned with the 20 foot roadway. He added the Fire Department said that they need a 24 foot wide roadway and they were not willing to negotiate. Jentz reminded the board about the recent Growth. Policy amendment which requires a 50 foot setback with berrning, landscaping and a trail system along whitefish Stage Road. This proposal is proposing an S foot trail with a 5 foot drainage area with a fence and staff is recommending that the setback be larger and the trail be constructed inside the development. Jentz added that when you take the requirements imposed by the conditions the applicant would have to redesign the project to make it work. Staff is recommending that the Kalispell City Planning Board adopt staff report KA-06-05 / KPUD -o6- 02 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the request for initial zoning for R-2 be approved but that the PUD request be tabled pending a re -design of the plat to accommodate concerns expressed above or, denied as it fails to meet all required statutory criteria. Staff is recommending that the .Kalispell City Planning Board adopt staff report KPP- 06- 08 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat approval with a PUD overlay be tabled pending a re- design of the plat to accommodate concerns expressed above. In lieu of a motion to table, staff recommends that the project be denied as it fails to meet all required statutory criteria. BOARD DISCUSSION I Hull asked where does Cottage Gardens Lane go? Jentz said Kalispell City Punning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 19, 22006 Page 8 of 16 that it extends to the north end of the property and their have been discussions with the property owner to the north regarding the future connection of that road for a similar project. Al PLICANTS/AGENCIES Dave Hofstad, 2545 Farm to Market Road stated that he is the builder and developer of this project. regarding the alley width, Hofstad noted that they decided to make them 20 feet wide to make it more convenient for the homeowners, public works and the fire department. They also redesigned the median area to make the radius bigger for the fire department to get around. He added the 24 foot width was something new in the last 3 weeks but is not insurmountable. They have a 30 foot easement and could mare that alley 24 feet wide, however, they wanted to keep the alleys private because the alleys do not go anywhere. They service the lots and there is no reason for the public to be running around the alleys. Hofstad wanted to address Public Works concern with the gravel shoulders. If they don't have enough room for a swale and gravel then they can put an asphalt curb on the downhill side and direct the water into their storm drainage system. Hofstad said he has assisted with the design of Stratford Village where they have alleys, and for the last 5 years the setback on the garage has been 10 feet from the alley. This is hover they laid this project out and determined their setbacks for the garages. Code requires 2 off-street parking spaces per unit and they knew that wouldn't be enough so they have provided one extra spot for each unit within each Pod area. Hofstad added they don't have enough land to come upwith a 20 foot setback for a each garage so they are proposing adding a parking strip next to each garage. That would then provide 3 parking spaces on site and a total of 4 per unit. Hofstad reviewed the buffer that is proposed for this project and noted that he had always thought that the fence was important because it delineates this neighborhood and it serves the purpose of defining this area for the homeowners. They propose a vinyl fence with a lattice top which will always be attractive and uniform.. This fence as laid out is roughly 60 feet away from Three Mile Drive right now. Then there will be the bike path and 8-1 o feet of landscaping and trees. Hofstad said that he understands that staff is recommending a buffer that could be as wide as 50 feet and asked the board to consider the fact that all the other properties already being developed along Three Mile Drive have a buffer much less than what they are proposing for this project. Their design for the buffer will prevent the traveling public from seeing fences made of different materials all along the project. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 19, ?006 Page 9 of 16 Hofstad concluded by saying that with all of the development along Three Mile Drive he felt that this was infill. He noted there is only 6.5 or 7 acres of usable land on this piece of property and he thinks their design fits into it very nicely. Bryan Long, Long Engineering stated he is representing the applicant and provided the board with the background of the project. He noted they originally submitted the applications on dune 30th for the August meeting. on duly 24th they received a letter from staff with 15 items requesting a response by July 26thtwo days later. Long reviewed the items individually for the board. He noted that they felt that these were the major concerns of the staff and they felt that those concerns had been adequately addressed. Long continued they then received another letter with copies of emails from the Public Works Department and the Fire Department on August 25th. Long noted he had a conversation with the Fire Department and their concern wasn't necessarily the width it was more a concern of vehicles parking on the streets. Long sent the Fire Department a copy of the plat early on and opened up some areas to make. sure that the equipment could get through. The Department mentioned that the road would be tight and a one way may be necessary and if parking along the streets was excluded they could get through. Long said with the zoning designation they are requesting they could build duplex/ townhouse lots that would eventually have the same appearance as Empire Estates. They have approximately 400 feet fronting Three Mile Drive and Long felt they have gone above and beyond what everyone else has done and it will be attractive. Long said it is important to note that you are climbing a hill along Three Mile Drive and will be looking up a hill where you will see a fence the walk path and trees. Long said that he was contacted by 5- neighbors regarding this project and they felt that it was a nice change to everything else that is going on in the neighborhood. PUBLIC HEARING Sharon DeMeester - 415 Chestnut Drive stated she had an interest in this type of development and provided the board with information she obtained on the Internet. She built a small house in West Glacier after reading many of the books written on small housing and how they can be very efficient and attractive. DeMeester noted that the people who buy these cottage units are empty nesters who no longer want to maintain a big house or yard. She thinks the board needs to change how they look at the community and this project is a very attractive alternative. It doesn't eat up a lot of space and -arovides a lot of o-Den s-oace. MOTION (Schutt moved and Norton seconded a motion to adopt staff Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 19, 2006 Page 10 of 16 report I�,A-o6-o5/KPUD-o6-o2 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the project be denied. BOARD DISCUSSION Hull said it was an unusual subdivision with the courtyard in between and he suggested they may be shoveling snow out of the courtyard in April. Norton said there could be a need which would be fflled by this type of project as the population ages or downsizes. Norton added they are calling this an alley but it is not a secondary access it is the primary access. He said this is a street and needs to be designed as a street and follow the city's criteria for a street. Norton said not providing parking at the site is a negative as people will want to park as close as they can to the home they are visiting. Schutt stated he likes that they are trying something new and different and are fostering a sense of community. He added the design of Mountain view with allowing the back sides of 70 houses with back yards fronting on the long swooping curve of Three Mile Drive doesn't do anything for a sense of community. However, Schutt agreed that these are not alleys in the sense of a secondary access they are the primary access to these units. He thinks that this basic scheme can be made to work and can be massaged to fit this property. Hinchey noted he could see himself living in one of these cottage units because he wouldn't want to live in an apartment building or any big complex. However, he has to agree with staff that it has some serious problems that need to be worked out namely the roadway and the driveways with autos extending into the R/W. He thinks it is a great concept but they are trying to fit too much into too little. He is hopeful that this project could be redesigned with fewer units. Hofstad asked for an answer on the question of the buffer. Jentz clarified what was requested was an S foot ]pike path and a construction easement on both sides for a total of 15 feet. He reminded the board that they have recognized that the pattern of development the last 2-3 years does not show well as it comes on line and asked if they wanted to perpetuate that or not. Norton asked if this was the standard for the other developments nearby. Jentz said yes but the staff is saying raising the question,. "is this consistent with where we want to be in the future?" Past mistakes should not be perpetuated. Norton said that they should go for consistency since this is one of the last projects on this part of the road. Schutt said that it is a little tou h. raising_the bar at this Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 19, 2006 Page l l of 16 stage. Hinchey said that he agrees and wishes that they would have done things differently but he doesn't feel that it is right at this point in time to stick the last guy to the party with a different requirement. Hull said he sees several problems with this proposal. Hofstad said that he doesn't want to trash this whole project either. He doesn't know if they can work the streets and still get the bind of configuration that they are trying to achieve but they will tape a look at it. Hinchey suggested there is a lot of redundancy in roadway going north/ south on Cottage Gardens Lane and parallel to it and perhaps some of that could be eliminated and some real estate regained to reconfigure this layout. There was further discussion. MOTION - TO TABLE Norton moved. and Hinchey seconded a motion to table all aspects of the proposal to enable the developer to revise the plan and the board will reconsider it within 90 days. ROLL CALL - TO TABLE The motion was approved unanimously on a roll call vote. ROLL CALL - ORIGINAL The original motion failed due to the motion that was made MOTION and approved to table the proposal as noted above. TEXT AMENDMENT - A request from Sharon D eM eester, Paper Chase Copy Center KALISPEL CITE'' ZONING to amend section 27.24.070 through 27.24.100 of the ORDINANCE R.E. Kalispell Zoning Ordinance specifically to amend the sign CALCULATING MAXIMUM area allowance and allocation of signs in the B-1 SIGN AREA FOR R, RA, B-1 Neighborhood Buffer Zone by allowing signage to be assessed P-1 ZONES on the front footage basis of a building as used in other B zones as opposed to a set square footage for each use or group of uses regardless of the size or intensity of the use. In addition, this same allocation concept is proposed for other non--B (Business) zones as well. STAFF REPORT - I.ZTA-06- P.J. Sorensen, representing the Kalispell Plan g 04 Department presented Staff Report KZTA- 0 6 - 04 for the Board. Sorensen noted that Paper Chase had a situation where they were attempting to replace some of their sigrnage that was in need of repair. Based on recent changes to the sign ordinance they had non -conforming signs and when replacing sign face you are required to bring it into compliance. This created some problems for Paper Chase particularly because they are located in a B--1 zone. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 1.9, 2006 Page 12 of 16 Sorensen reviewed the B- 1 zone and the discussions with Paper Chase that led to the proposed text amendments listed in the staff report. Staff is recommending that the Kalispell City Planning Board adopt staff report KZTA-06-04 as findings of fact and recommend to the City Council that the calculation of the maximum sign area allowance be modified as set forth in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION General discussion was held. APPLICANT/AGENCIES Sharon DeMeester, Paper Chase, 7 Bast Oregon Street provided a history on this issue for the board. DeMeester said by putting Paper Chase in the awning it looked nice. She noted she hasn't kept track of all of the sign changes and when the awning started to come apart and they wanted to fax it they started talking with the city who told her they couldn't have any signs down there at all. They were also told that part of the names of the other businesses on the awning had to also be taken down because it was too much. The 2 businesses that she rents to said, how can they be in business there if they don't have any signage and she told them that she had zero signage under the city's rules. DeMeester said they have decided to construct the awning in metal and do the faceplate in something that would be translucent that the light would shine through with the names of the businesses. She added these discussions have been going on for months and have finally come to something that they can all live with. DeMeester said that she really appreciates the city taking the time to do this amendment. PUBLIC H G No one wished to spear and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Hinchey moved and Schutt seconded a motion to adopt staff report KZTA- 06-04 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the calculation of the maximum sign area allowance be modified as set forth in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Hull said if the city is happy he is happy. Hinchey agreed. Schutt said he is heartened that they could get signage rules that respond to real life situations. Norton said that they all understand that when they worked toward updating the sign regulations that there would be some tweaking needed down the road. He added that this amendment is a logical change. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 19, 2006 Page 13 of 16 TEXT AMENDMENT - A request by the City of Kalispell to amend sections KA..L ISPELL CITY ZONING 27.14.030(5)7 27.15.030(3), 27.16.030(5)7 27.17.030(4) and ORDINANCE RE; 300 FOOT 27.15.030 (7) of the Kalispell Zoning ordinance. The SETBACK FOR CASINOS amendment is intended to review the 300 foot setback for FROM CHURCHES, casinos from churches, schools, parks, residential zones, SCHOOLS, ETC, and other casinos. The current text requires the 300 foot setback for casinos from churches, schools, parks, residential zones, and other casinos as measured from property line to property line. The City is considering amending the zoning code to maintain the requirement for a conditional use permit but either decrease or eliminate the 300 foot setback requirement. STAFF REPORT KZTA-06- Tom Jen.tz reviewed staff report KZTA-06--02A for the Board. 02A Jen.tz noted that the planning board had a hearing in April at the request of the city council, work sessions in April and July and the amendment was sent to city council with no recommendation because the board thought that the PUD provision was in place in the event any unusual situations came about. Several members of the city council said that they didn't want to use the PUD in that fashion and are now asking the board to address it one more time. Jentz reviewed the changes made to the amendment since the last time the board discussed it. Staff is recommending that the planning g board adopt the findings in staff report KZTA--06-2A and recommend to the City Council that the 300 foot buffer for casinos from parks, schools, churches, residential zones and other casinos be waived in special circumstances where topographic or physical barriers exist that would otherwise screen or separate a casino, or where they are a minor or accessory use to a primary restaurant use all as provided for in Exhibit A in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION None. APPLICANT/ AGENCIES None. PUBLIC HEARING No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Hinchey moved and Norton seconded a motion to adopt the findings in staff report KZTA-06-2A and recommend to the City Council that the 300 foot buffer for casinos from parrs, schools, churches, residential zones and other casinos be waived in special circumstances where topographic or physical barriers exist that would otherwise screen or separate a casino, or where they are a minor or accessory use to a primary restaurant use all as provided for in Exhibit A in the staff report. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 19, 2006 Page 14 of 16 BOARD DISCUSSION Hull noted that he would like the 300 foot restriction for other casinos to remain in place. He doesn't life casinos because he doesn't think that they are good for the community. Hull said he is concerned about the topographical or physical barrier section because he thinks the board would continually be looking at further tweaking. Hinchey said the board has already made a provision for special circumstances where topographical area existed with the highway at the Hilton site. Hinchey added he didn't make that decision because there was a PUD in place but because the 5 lane highway separated the park from the facility. Hinchey said that he doesn't have a problem with the section about the topographical or physical barrier. Norton agreed. Schutt noted that he pointed out at that time that the board was using the PUD as a tool to address the situation of the 300 foot rule and the Hilton Garden Inn. Schutt said staff stated in the report that there are 24 casinos in Kalispell and the majority have been in operation for years and are therefore within 300 feet of parrs, schools, churches, residential zones and other casinos. It is already there and. 1s already happening. Schutt suggested throwing out the entire section that refers to topographical barriers and leave in the section that would play down the appearance of a casino. There was lengthy discussion. MOTION TO AMEND Schutt moved and Norton seconded a motion to amend Exhibit A as follows: Delete Item 1A; Item 1D add the phrase "provided for in Section 3 "& 4" below; delete all references to restaurant and replace it with primary use; delete Item 2 ; in Item 4 delete "If a casino complies with sections 2 and 3 above and is proposed to be located....... pursuant to Section 2 7. 3 S .110(l), then" and leave in "The following design standards as appropriate may be placed on the casino:". Exhibit A. as amended is attached to these minutes. BOARD DISCUSSION Further discussion was held. ROLL CALL ON The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. AMENDMENT ROLL CALL The original motion passed unanimously as amended on a roll call vote. OLD BUSINESS: Norton again requested that city council minutes be included in the packets. NEW BUSINESS; Norton thanked staff for sending them copies of the Transportation Plan newsletter. Hull attended the meeting and made a few points that included the planning board's Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 191, 2006 Page 15 of 16 ADJOURNMENT Timothy Norton President interest in maintaining interconnectivity with the road behind Home Depot and Hutton. Ranch. Norton mentioned that the board had tallied about the need to update the city's Design and Construction Standards. Hull asked what happened to the October deadline for the amended. Subdivision Regulations. Jentz said the public hearing will be scheduled to address the administrative legislative changes for the meeting next month. Jentz said that the amendments to the Resign Standards will probably be postponed until after the west Kalispell Growth Policy Amendment is in place. Jentz added that the Design Standards will be a significant project and will require a lot of staff time. Schutt said that now that summer is over he would be available to start meeting twice a month. The board members present agreed. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:15 p.m. The next regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and zoning Commission will be held on Tuesday, October 10, 2006. The scheduled work session was postponed. Michelle Anderson Recording Secretary APPROVED as submitted/corrected: /-/06 Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of September 19, 2406 Page 16 of 16 IT A PROPOSED AMENDMENTS CASINO SETBACK PROVISION Replace Sections 27.14.030(5), 27.1.5.030(3), 27.16.030(5), 27.17.030(4) and 27.15.030(7) which state: ■ Casino if 300 feet or more from churches, schools, parks, residential zones, and other casinos, measured from property Line to property line. With.e fvll�rwing: ■ Casino (see 27. 3 5.110 Additional Requirements for Specific Conditional Uses) Under Chapter 27.35 of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance add the following section: Section 27.35.110: Casino 1. Casinos shall be a minimum of 300 feet from churches, schools, parks, city residential zones, and other casinos, measured from property line to property line. a. L.1yoziea La I of b-. 2. Casino's may be located closer than 300 feet from churches, schools, parrs, city residential zones, and other casinos, measured from property line to property line a-.-G if the casino is considered a or accessory use and meets the parameters of both Sections 3 & 4 below. � A� ■i w w � � w 1 wr t A w �.w w w w rww A A � w w w! .� r w w w M A w A 1gli r/ / wwM/ i Rrr ! 1 ► ► w •. w .wi A / / r w A w ww r r i w A w r■ONw A !ffl w ! www ! r r ` t w r w w ► w r r i/ ! R w w ► w w ► w r rr r w■ rw w A i w w! r w rr "Al A w A w i w m rw av w i w r A N w w pii���Il r i r w i i wM / pi� w w ■ i w ! w r /■ ! ! m! A w w s r ti w! i !r w r/ 7 •r r GK At r/ r w ■ A � w f � w w w --w r w w r i rr w i r � w � A � F '� f P I i w wr ww � ,F w 1A rr r/ r■ ! / r r r i _'02 r�r ww w r i !r r/ji 11114 w ! wr i a w f w -a w ! w WM 41 wAL4Pw 10 or •wR 4L=1v lip I& mI TV MI r ar!r+ !11110 ■ rww ! w QLuI AMLwp 41 qLwjp• If ! R& wift MILWX r IM i AL§F It r/ MW4P A w AN 40 11K AILOF F II rw 3. A casino is considered a minor accessory use to a primary use if the rimaa use of the building and its associated facilities constitutes at least 80% of the proposed floor space and the casino constitutes no more than 10% of the proposed use. In addition, the casino is generally shielded or screened from vier of the r primgx use aril restaurant patrons. f 1 f aG '1 7 �� �. n r A. The following design standards as appropriate may be placed on the casino: a. Limiting or prohibiting the on -premise signage or building design from using the following: • Any terms such as gaing, gambling, cards, dice, chance, etc. • Any reference to any associated activity or any symbols or words commonly associated with gaming. • Any words, terms, figures, art work, or features intended or designed to attract attention to the fact that a casing is on site. i Neon lighting b. Limiting the number and location of entrances into the casino. c. In.creasing landscaping requirements M order to create a buffer between the casino and adjacent land uses.