Loading...
06. Ordinance 1405 - Text Amendment - Multi-family Dwellings in B-2 - 1st ReadingTri-City Planning Office 17 Second Street East — Suite 211 Kalispell, Montana 59901 Phone: (406) 758-1850 Fax: (406) 751-1858 tricity@centurytel.net REPORT TO: Kalispell Mayor and City Council FROM: Narda A. Wilson, Senior Planner Chris A. Kukulski, City Manager SUBJECT: Kalispell Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment - Multi -Family Dwellings as a Permitted Use in B-2, General Business MEETING DATE: November 5, 2001 BACKGROUND: This is a proposal to amend the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Section 27.14.020, Permitted Uses in the B-2, General Business, zoning district to allow multi -family dwellings as a permitted use. Any properties with a B-2, General Business, zoning designation a could potentially be effected by the proposed change. The applicant owns property near the Outlaw Inn in south Kalispell and is interested in developing a multi -family dwelling complex on the site. The property is zoned B-2, General Business District, which does not allow residential uses. Most of the B-2 zoning in Kalispell is located in the southern area and then to the east and west approximately along Idaho. This proposal would affect all of the B-2 area by allowing more uses. Currently, the only residential uses allowed in the B-2 are accessory apartments or apartments in association with a business, as a conditionally permitted use. Because the applicant was looking for the most expeditious way to approach the issue, the staff suggested there would be general support for allowing multi -family in the B-2 because it would expand mixed use opportunities to meet the growing demand for a variety of housing types; promote transportation efficiency and pedestrian circulation by placing housing, jobs, and shopping in close proximity to each other in a town center; promote efficient use of existing infrastructure and services; expand the customer base of businesses. There may be some potential problems with the amendment that relates to parking congestion and the lack of density limits on multi family housing. Housing density would be limited by the size of the property and its ability to accommodate parking. Another option would be to require conditional use review for multi -family dwellings and dwellings in mixed -use buildings, in order to provide for review of suitable location and design and potential density limitations. The Kalispell City -County Planning Board held a public hearing at their regular meeting of October 9, 2001 regarding the proposal and discussed potential problems and opportunities. A motion was made to recommend approval of the proposal to allow multi -family dwellings as a permitted use in the B-2 zoning district. An amendment to the motion to move accessory apartments from a conditional use permit category to a permitted use category passed on a vote of five in favor and two opposed. The amended motion to allow accessory apartments and multi -family Providing Community Planning Assistance To: • City of Kalispell • City of Whitefish • City of Columbia Falls Kalispell Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment October 19, 2001 Page 2 dwellings as permitted uses in the B-2 zoning district passed on a vote of five in favor and two opposed. RECOMMENDATION: A motion to adopt the ordinance on first reading to allow multi -family dwellings and accessory apartments as permitted uses in the B-2, General Business, zoning district may be in order. FISCAL EFFECTS: Potentially minor positive effects. ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the city council. L— C" [ y Narda A. Willson Chris A. Kukulski Senior Planner City Manager Report compiled: October 19, 2001 c: Theresa White, Kalispell City Clerk Attachments: Transmittal letter Staff report KZTA-01-7 and application materials Draft minutes from 10/9/01 planning board meeting H: \FRDO \TRANSMIT\KALISPEL\2001 \KZC01-7MEMO.DOC NO. 1405 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 27.14.020 AND 27.14.030 OF THE KALISPELL ZONING ORDINANCE, (ORDINANCE NO. 1175), BY AMENDING PERMITTED USES IN THE B-2, GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT TO INCLUDE ACCESSORY APARTMENTS AND MULTI -FAMILY DWELLINGS AND REMOVING ACCESSORY APARTMENTS FROM CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USES, AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Richard Dasen has submitted a written request to amend Section 27.14.020 of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, by amending Permitted Uses in the B-2, General Business District to allow multi -family dwellings, and WHEREAS, the request was forwarded to the Kalispell City -County Planning Board and Zoning Commission by the Tri-City Planning Office after having been evaluated under 27.14.030, Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, and WHEREAS, the Kalispell City -County Planning Board and Zoning Commission recommended that the text of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance be amended to allow accessory apartments and multi -family dwellings as permitted uses in the B-2, General Business Distract and removing accessory apartments as a conditional use, and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the TCPO Report and the transmittal from the Kalispell City -County Planning Board and Zoning Commission and hereby adopts the findings made in Report #KZTA-01-7 as the Findings of Fact applicable to this Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The City of Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Ordinance No. 1175, is hereby amended as follows: Section 27.14.020: Permitted Uses (1). Apartments, Accessory. (2). Appliance distributors, wholesale/repair. (36). Multi -family dwellings. (37). Music education with related performance and limited sales. Section 27.14.030: Uses Which May Be Permitted By Conditional Use Permit. (2)Apartments, Accessory. (:Fffnended eidint==e SECTION II. All parts and portions of Ordinance No. 1175 not amended hereby remain unchanged. SECTION III. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND SIGNED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL THIS _ DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2001. Wm E. Boharski Mayor ATTEST: Theresa White City Clerk Tri-City Planning Office 17 Second Street East — Suite 211 Kalispell, Montana 59901 Phone: (406) 758-1850 Fax: (406) 751-1858 tricity@centurytel.net October 19, 2001 Chris Kukulski, City Manager City of Kalispell P.O. Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 Re: Kalispell Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment - Richard A. Dasen Multi -Family Dwelling as a Permitted Use in B-2, General Business Dear Chris: The Kalispell City -County Planning Board met on October 9, 2001, and held a public hearing to consider a request by Richard A. Dasen to amend the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance to allow multi -family dwellings as a permitted use in the B-2, General Business, zoning district. The applicant owns property north of the Outlaw Inn that he would like to develop with a multi -family dwelling complex. The proposed change could potentially affect property in and around the areas zoned B-2. Narda Wilson, of the Tri-City Planning Office, presented staff report KZTA-01-7, evaluating the proposed text amendment. She noted that another available option would be to include multi -family dwellings as a conditionally permitted use rather than a permitted use and they could be evaluated on a case by case basis. At the public hearing Matt Watti, representing the applicant spoke in favor of the change stating that they felt the additional flexibility in developing commercial property would be beneficial to the property owner and the public. After the public hearing the board discussed the proposal. Some expressed concerns regarding the potential conflicts with some commercial uses and residential uses and the potential devaluation of commercial property that was next to a residential use. An amended motion was passed on a vote of five in favor and two opposed to recommend to the Kalispell City Council that multi -family dwellings and accessory apartments be allowed as permitted uses in the B-2, General Business, district. Please schedule this matter for the November 5, 2001 regular city council meeting. You may contact this board or Narda Wilson at the Tri-City Planning Office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely Kalispell City -County Planning Board r g vens Presi ent Providing Community Planning Assistance To: • City of Columbia Falls • City of Kalispell • City of Whitefish Kalispell Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment — Richard A. Dasen October 19, 2001 Page 2 GS/NW/ Attachments: Staff report KZTA-01-7 and application materials Draft minutes 10/9/01 planning board meeting c w/ Att: Theresa White, Kalispell City Clerk c w/o Att: Richard A. Dasen, 1830 Third Ave East, Kalispell, MT 59901 Jackola Engineering and Arch, P.O. Box 1134 Kalispell, MT 59903 H: \FRDO \TRANSMIT\KALISPEL\2001 \KZTA-01-7.DOC DRATcounty taxpayer and use it for who knows for what purposes, and it �► would be better to just let sleeping dogs lie on this subject. ROLL CALL VOTE The motion passed unanimously. RICIIARD DASEN ZONING An amendment to the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance proposed by TEXT AMENDMENT Richard A. Dasen to amend the B-2, General Business, to allow multi -family dwellings as a permitted use. STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson of the Tri-City Planning Office gave a presentation of staff report #KZTA-01-7 stating this was a request for a zoning text amendment to the general business district zoning regulations that would include multi -family dwellings as permitted uses in the B-2 zoning district. Wilson stated the applicants own property near the Outlaw Inn in south Kalispell and are interested in developing a multi -family dwelling complex. Wilson said the property is zoned B-2, General Business District, which does not allow residential uses other than accessory apartments or apartments in association with a business as a conditionally permitted use. Wilson said staff advised the applicant that there would be general support for the proposed amendment because it provides an opportunity for a variety of housing types, it uses existing transportation and pedestrian infrastructure and it expands the customer base of businesses in the B-2 zone. Wilson said there are no density limits so housing density would be limited by the square footage on the parking requirements. Wilson said another option would be to require a conditional use permit for multi -family and for dwellings in mixed -use buildings in order to provide for suitable review of design, potential density limits and compatibility with adjoining properties. Wilson said that multi -family dwellings would generally be consistent with other high -intensity uses associated in the B-2 zone, and that there would be certain economics that would dictate whether or not a commercial property was suitable for residential development. Wilson said there were a few concerns among City staff that perhaps by requiring a conditional use permit for multi -family or dwellings in a mixed -use B-2, it would allow for review on a case -by -case basis, but there was no clear consensus on the issue. Wilson said staff was recommending approval of the request. APPLICANT/AGENCIES Matt Watti, Peak Development, spoke in favor of the proposal, saying they wanted to purchase the land from Dick Dasen, also a partner in Peak Development, and that the property was more suitable for an apartment complex because it was on Third Avenue East almost in a residential area. Watti said the development would provide a nice, affordable housing. Stevens asked how big the property was. Watty said about one acre on the east side of Third Avenue East and approximately one half acre on the west side. Kalispell City -County Planning Board Minutes of the October 9, 2001 Meeting Page 12 of 16 Stevens asked why they hadn't asked for a zone change. Wilson said the applicant was given several options. This route was more expeditious and this was the course of action the applicant chose to pursue. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak on the proposal. PROPONENTS There was no one who wished to speak in favor of the proposal. OPPONENTS There was no one who wished to speak in opposition to the proposal and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Rice said at the last meeting they had discussed the issue of conflicts of interest, and said he was the owner of property in a B-2 zone, and asked the board if this project would be a conflict of interest. Hines said he also owned property in a B-2 zone. Wilson said they would only need to declare a conflict of interest if there was a direct financial gain from the outcome of the request. Rice moved that the Kalispell City -County Planning Board adopt staff report KZTA-01-7 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that they approve the proposal to allow multi- family dwellings as a permitted use in the B-2, General Business District. Garberg seconded the motion. BOARD DISCUSSION Van Natta said he was not in favor of approving the request as a permitted use in all of the B-2 zones. Hines asked what the time frame was if they went with the zone change and conditional use permit. Wilson said it would be another 60-90 days. Wilson said she didn't like to use buzz words like "smart growth," but one of the basic concepts of smart growth was the integration of mix -use commercial areas because it brought vitality to areas that may not otherwise have the occupancy during off hours, and because makes use of the existing urban infrastructure in high -density areas. Wilson said there would be very few times when an apartment complex is built in residential areas that the neighbors do not complain, and that where higher density uses are intended there may be less opposition. Garberg said there could be cases where an apartment in a B-2 zone would be totally unfitting and cause property devaluation to other commercial property, he would like to have a review process, and was uncomfortable with the issue as it was proposed. Kalispell City -County Planning Board Minutes of the October 9, 2001 Meeting Page 13 of 16 Stevens said they now had mixed -uses in the growth policy and any time they could make affordable housing he was in favor of it. Garberg said he would like to go on record that he didn't have a problem with this particular project but he did have a problem with how it was presented. Sipe said he also had a problem with the request because when he hears the words "smart growth" he thinks of Citizens for a Better Flathead and he has learned to be cautious of anything they are involved in because they have an agenda that is not of the best interests of the citizens or the valley. Sipe said he would like to see the amendment approved for this particular applicant, but didn't see changing the whole city for one or two parcels. . Stevens said there may be a few parcels that are appropriate for some type of housing in a commercial zone, but the only time that would occur would be when the value as a commercial use wasn't very high, and this would allow the property owners the flexibility to make that determination without going through the conditional use permit process. Hines asked if they could amend the reports by keeping it south of 14th Street. Wilson said there was a process for creating an overlay zone, but it wouldn't be by amending the staff report, and asked why he would want to do that. Hines said it was to protect the rest of the business community in the B-2 zone. Stevens said then they should recommend denial of the request and rezone the property. Wilson said the board was looking at a philosophical question as to whether or not multi -family dwellings are an appropriate use either as a permitted use or as a conditionally permitted use in a general business district. Garberg asked if the applicant had paid a fee, and if he had then why shouldn't the board consider his specific project. Wilson said that was not the question before the board. Rice said if they looked at the permitted uses in the B-2 zone that multi -family uses would fit well, but wondered by they would leave accessory apartments as a conditional use instead of a permitted use. P J Sorensen, Kalispell Zoning Administrator, said there are provisions in the other business zones that specifically call for multi -family above the first floor, and the accessory apartment is usually tied to the primary use of the property. Kalispell City -County Planning Board Minutes of the October 9, 2001 Meeting Page 14 of 16 Sipe said he didn't like the way this had been done, he didn't want to see it happen again, and he would vote for it only because it provides affordable housing. Wilson asked what he meant. Stevens said the normal procedure would have been for Mr. Watti to have applied for a zone change, rather than ask for a text amendment that affected everybody. Stevens said there was merit in this request, because it could provide the means of keeping a business going and also provide affordable housing. Rice said over the past few years the board had reviewed similar requests by applicants for a text amendment who wanted to do something in particular, and this request was no different. Van Natta said if they weren't in favor of smart growth then they are apparently in favor of dumb growth. He noted that Citizens for a Better Flathead at least took the time to review and comment on proposals before the board and city council. Stevens questioned the value of the lobbying the group did before the various boards and judges. MOTION (AMENDMENT) Hines moved that the Kalispell City -County Planning Board adopt staff report #KZTA-01-7 as findings of fact and recommend that the Kalispell City Council approve the proposal to allow multi -family dwellings as a permitted use in the B-2, General Business District and to delete accessory apartments from a conditionally permitted use and add it as a permitted use. Sipe seconded the motion. ROLL CALL VOTE On a roll call vote Stevens, Pierce, Rice, Hines and Sipe voted aye and Garberg and Van Natta voted no. The motion passed with five in favor and two in opposition. ROLL CALL VOTE (MAIN On a roll call vote Pierce, Stevens, Rice, Hines, and Sipe voted aye MOTION) and Garberg and Van Natta voted no. 'The motion passed with five in favor and two in opposition. CITY OF KALISPELL An amendment to the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance proposed by the ZONING TEXT City of Kalispell that would amend the building height limits in AMENDMENT several of the zoning use districts that are intended to provide greater consistency among the regulations. STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson of the Tri-City Planning Office gave a presentation of staff report #KZTA-01-8 saying building height limits in the B-2 zone began a broader review of the building height limits in the city. This was a proposal to amend various sections of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance that would generally bring all of the residential districts into sync by increasing the height limit to 35 feet. Wilson said all of the residential zones in Columbia Falls, Whitefish and Flathead County have a 35-foot building height limit. Within the commercial, industrial and public zones the height Kalispell City -County Planning Board Minutes of the October 9, 2001 Meeting Page 15 of 16 RICHARD A. DASEN REQUEST FOR ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO B-2 DISTRICT TRI-CITY PLANNING OFFICE STAFF REPORT #KZTA-01-7 OCTOBER 2, 2001 A report to the Kalispell City -County Planning Board and the Kalispell City Council regarding a request for a text amendment. A public hearing has been scheduled before the Kalispell City -County Planning Board for October 9, 2001 beginning at 7:00 PM in the Kalispell City Council Chambers. The Planning Board will forward a recommendation to the Kalispell City Council for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The applicants are proposing to amend Section 27.14.020 of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, permitted uses in the B-2, General Business District by including multi- family dwellings as a permitted use. A. Petitioners: Richard A. Dasen 1830 Third Ave East Kalispell, MT 59901 (406) 756-7325 Technical Assistance: Jackola Engineering and Architecture P.O. Box 1134 Kalispell, MT 59903 (406) 755-3208 B. Area Effected by the Proposed Changes: Any area within the Kalispell city limits which might be zoned B-2, General Business, would potentially be effected by the proposed change. The current B-2 regulations are attached on Exhibit A. C. Proposed Amendments: The applicants are proposing a text amendment to the general business district zoning regulations which would include multi- family dwellings as permitted uses in the B-2 zoning district. D. Staff Discussion: The applicants own property near the Outlaw Inn in south Kalispell and are interested in developing a multi -family dwelling complex. The property is zoned B-2, General Business District, which does not allow residential uses. Most of the B-2 zoning in Kalispell is located in the southern area and then to the east and west approximately along Idaho. This proposal would affect all of the B-2 area by allowing more uses. Currently, the only residential uses allowed in the B-2 are accessory apartments or apartments in association with a business, as a conditionally permitted use. The staff advised the applicant that there would be general support for the proposed amendment for the following reasons: 1 • expand opportunities to meet the growing demand for a variety of housing types; • promote transportation efficiency and pedestrian circulation by placing housing, jobs, and shopping in close proximity to each other in a town center; • promote efficient use of existing infrastructure and services; • expand the customer base of businesses in the B-2 district. One potential problem with the amendments could be parking congestion and there area no density limits on multi family housing. Housing density would be limited by the square footage of the property and its ability to accommodate parking. Another option would be to require conditional use review for multi- family dwellings and dwellings in mixed -use buildings, in order to provide for review of suitable design and potential density limitations. The B-2 district places limits on building mass limiting height and requiring setbacks. EVALUATION BASED ON STATUTORY CRITERIA The statutory basis for reviewing a change in zoning is set forth by 76-2-205, M.C.A. Findings of Fact for the zone change request are discussed relative to the itemized criteria described by 76-2-203, M.C.A. Does the new zoning requested in accordance with the master Ulan? The Kalispell City -County Master Plan does not specifically address residential uses in the commercial areas. It does note that there is a shortage of new multi- family dwellings in the planning jurisdiction and this could potentially provide additional housing opportunities and options for development.. Is the requested zone designed to lessen congestion in the streets? The proposed zoning would lessen community -wide congestion in the streets by facilitating pedestrian access. The proposed amendment would concentrate housing, jobs, and shopping within walking distance of each other, thus increasing pedestrian and bicycle access and reducing vehicle trips. The amendments regarding retaining walls would have no significant effect on congestion in the streets. Does the requested zone give reasonable consideration to the character of the district? Multi -family dwellings would generally compatible and consistent with the high - intensity uses associated with the character of the B-2 district. The residential uses in the commercial areas give residential easy access to shopping, offices, and other uses without the use of vehicles and motorized transportation. There is usually objection to multi -family in residential areas because of impacts. Impacts are anticipated in the B-2 zone and may be more acceptable for housing. 2 4. Will the reauested zone secure safety from fire panic and other dangers? The requested change would secure safety from fire, panic and other dangers. The B-2 district is generally located for convenient access to emergency services. Furthermore, the addition of housing in town centers has been supported in many communities for improving security and safety, essentially by putting more eyes on the street during evenings and weekends. 5. Will the requested change promote public health and general welfare? The B-2 amendments would generally promote the welfare of the community by expanding housing opportunities to meet market demand, promoting efficiency of transportation and public services, and expanding the customer base of town - center business districts. No significant impacts on public health are anticipated. 6. Will the requested zone provide for adequate light and air? The amendments would not significantly affect the adequacy of light and air between buildings. The B-2 has setback requirements, building height limits and lot the uses would be subject to parking and landscaping standards. 7. Will the requested zoning prevent the overcrowding of land and undue concentration of people? The requested zoning would prevent the overcrowding of land, since B-2 district is already anticipated to have a high -intensity character and adequate access and services for high -density development, thereby reducing potential development impacts of housing construction on less developable lands elsewhere. The B-2 district anticipates a high concentration of people, and therefore the amendment would generally avoid undue concentration. As discussed above, consideration may be given to requiring a conditional use permit for multi -family housing and dwelling in mixed use buildings in the B-2 district, which would allow for review of density on a case -by -case basis. See discussion above on overcrowding of land. 8. Will the requested zone facilitate the adequate provision of transportation water, sewerage, schools, parks, and other public requirements? The B-2 district generally anticipates adequate infrastructure and services to accommodate medium to high density urban development, and therefore the B-2 amendment would generally meet this objective. Schools and parks are located within walking distance of the B-2 district. Public sewer and water are available in the B-2 district. 9. Does the requested zone 2ive consideration to the particular suitability of the Property for particular uses? The B-2 amendments would allow for residential uses in the commercial area that anticipate high levels of intensity in the uses and the availability of public services and infrastructure. These seems to give adequate considerate to the suitability of the property for proposed use. As discussed above, consideration may be given to 3 requiring a conditional use permit for multi -family housing and dwelling in mixed use buildings in the B-2 district, which would allow for review of site suitability on a case -by -case basis. 10. Will the proposed zone conserve the value of buildings? The proposed B-2 amendments would conserve the value of buildings by providing for traditionally compatible land uses (housing) in town centers and allowing expansion of existing residential dwellings by right. 11. Will the requested zone encourage the most appropriate use of the land throughout the iurisdiction? The proposed B-2 amendments would encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdiction by general compatibility with the high -intensity character of town centers, promoting efficiency of transportation and public services, expanding housing opportunities to meet market demand, expanding the customer base of businesses in the B-2 district, and reinforcing the vitality of the town center area. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City County Planning Board adopt staff report KZTA-01-7 as findings of fact and recommend that the Kalispell City Council that they approve the proposal to allow multi -family dwellings as a permitted use in the B-2, General Business District. El EXHIBIT A CHAPTER 27.14 B-2 GENERAL BUSINESS Sections: 27.14.010 Intent 27.14.020 Permitted Uses 27.14.030 Uses Which May Be Permitted By Conditional Use Permit 27.14.040 Property Development Standards 27.14.010: Intent. A business district to provide areas for those retail sales and service functions and businesses whose operations are typically characterized by outdoor display, storage and/or sale of merchandise, by major repair of motor vehicles, and by outdoor commercial amusement and recreational activities. This district would also serve the general needs of the tourist and traveler. This district depends on the proximity to major streets and arterials. This district should be located in business corridors or in islands. 27.14.020: Permitted Uses. (1). Appliance distributors, wholesale/repair. (2). Athletic club. (3). Automobile parking, commercial or public. (4). Automobile sales. (5). Automobile rental agency. (6). Automobile repair garages, excluding body shops. (7). Automobile service station (see definition). (8). Bakery/deli, wholesale and retail, less than 1,500 square feet manufacturing area. (9). Banks, savings and loans, finance companies. (10). Barber and beauty services. (11). Boat sales, new and used. (12). Building materials, storage/sale including lumber yards. (13). Bus passenger terminal buildings, transit terminals. (14). Car wash, automobile detailing shop. (15). Catering establishments. (16). Church/worship/parish/Sunday school buildings. (17). Dairy bar/ice cream manufacturing, retail on premise. (18). Electrical sales and contracting companies. (19). Food processing/retail on premises -no killing or dressing of flesh or fowl. 5 (20). Food store/supermarket, etc. - no slaughtering of flesh/fowl. (21). Food stores, retail/under 3,000 square feet. (22). Garden supplies, retail sales. (23). Glazier. (24). Heating, ventilating, air conditioning (HVAC)/sheet metal shop, sales/service. (25). Hotel, motel. (26). Janitor supplies/services/contracting. (27). Launderette/dry cleaning, customer self-service. (28). Laundries/dry cleaning plants. (29). Liquor store. (30). Locksmiths or gunsmiths. (31). Lube station. (32). Manufactured home sales lot. (33). Massage parlor. (34). Motorcycle sales/repair. (35). Music education with related performance and limited sales. (36). Newspaper office. (37). Nursery, landscape materials. (38). Office, professional/governmental. (39). Parks. (40). Pawn shops (no outside storage/display). (41). Plumbing/heating materials, retail/service only. (42). Plumbing shop and yard. (43). Post office - main distribution center. (44). Post office - satellite or neighborhood. (45). Prepared food delivery facilities. (46). Printing/pub/reproduction/blueprinting/photostating establishment. (47). Produce stand. (48). Radiator repair. (49). Real estate sales offices. (50). Recreational area, commercial and non-commercial (see definition). (51). Rental service stores and yards. (52). Repair/service-office/household equipment. (53). Restaurants. (54). Retail business (see definition). (55). Riding academy and stables. (56). RV sales. (57). Second hand stores (see definition). (58). Shoe repair. (59). Ski rental shop. (60). Small engine sales, service and repair (lawn mowers, saws). (61). Take and bake prepared food facility. (62). Taxidermist. (63). Telecommunication companies and/or radio common carriers. (64). Theaters in permanent indoor structure. rl 27.14.030: 27.14.040: (65). Tire dealer, alignment center. (66). Trailer sales areas. (67). Travel agency. (68). Truck rentals, single axle, less than 20,100 pounds gvw. (69). Upholstery shop. (70). Veterinary clinic, small animals. Uses Which May Be Permitted By Conditional Use Permit. (1). Amusement park or zoo and similar out-of-doors activities. (2). Apartments, Accessory. (3). Assembly halls/coliseums/stadiums/convention hall facilities. (4). Bars, taverns, cocktail lounges, and clubs. (Administrative CUP) (5). Campground/RV Park. (6). Casino if 300 feet or more from churches, schools, parks, residential zones, and other casinos, measured from property line to property line. (7). Community residential facilities for eight or fewer persons. (8). Drive-in theaters. (9). Electrical distribution station. (10). Fish sales stand, temporary. (11). Golf courses. (12). Golf driving range/putting course. (13). Hangars (aircraft) when abutting/contiguous to an airport. (14). Heliports. (15). Hostel, youth. (16). Law enforcement/fire stations. (17). Libraries, museums, and similar cultural facilities. (18). Mini -storage / recreational vehicle storage. (19). Mobile restaurant/vendor facilities. (20). Quasi -public buildings, non-profit in character. (21). Railroad rights -of -way. (22). Recycling center. (23). Restaurants, as an incidental use. (24). Rifle range, indoor. (25). Schools, commercial (see definition). (26). Shelter, public or private. (27). Temporary building/structure. (28). Transmission towers and accessory facilities. (29). Water storage facilities. Property Development Standards. 7 (1). Minimum Lot Area: 7000 square feet (2). Minimum Lot Width (FT): 70 (3). Minimum Yards (FT): Front Yard - 20 Side Yard - 5 Rear Yard - 10 Side Corner - 15 (4). Maximum Building Height (FT): 40 (5). Permitted Lot Coverage (%): N/A (6). Off -Street Parking: Refer to Sections 27.26 and 27.27 (7). Maximum Fence Heights (FT): Front - 0 Side - 6.5 Rear - 6.5 rl Tri-City Planning Office 17 Second St East, Suite 211 Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 751-1850 Fax: (406) 751-1858 PETITION FOR ZONING AMENDMENT CITY OF KALISPELL 1. NAME OF APPLICANT: Richard A. Dasen 2. MAIL ADDRESS: 1830 3rd. Ave. East 3. CITY/STATE/ZIP: Kalispell, Montana 59901 PHONE: 756-7325 4. INTEREST IN PROPERTY: Owner 5. ZONING MAP AMENDMENT: ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT: X IF THE REQUEST PERTAINS TO AN AMENDMENT TO THE TEXT OF THE ZONING REGULATIONS, PLEASE COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: A. What is the proposed zoning text amendment? To allow Apartments, in section 27.14.020: Permitted uses. (B-2 General Business) IF THE REQUEST PERTAINS TO AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING MAP, PLEASE COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: A. Address of the property: B. Legal Description: (Lot and Block of Subdivision; Tract #) C. 0 (Section, Township, Range) (Attach sheet for metes and bounds) The present zoning of the above property is: _ The proposed zoning of the above property is: E. State the changed or changing conditions that make the proposed amendment necessary: SEP 10 2001 1 HOW WILL THE PROPOSED CHANGE ACCOMPLISH THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF: A. Promoting the Master This text amendment is in substantial compliance with the goals and policies of the Master Plan by updating, streamlining, and enhancing the complimentary mix of uses found in B-2 districts to include residential apartments. Concentrating medium and high density residential in close proximity to commercial is a stated goal of the Master Plan. B. Lessening congestion in the streets and providing safe access Neighborhood services with walldng convenience are facilitated by improving a complimentary mix of apartment residential and commercial uses. The Integration of these uses can be coordinated for safety and convenience purposes. C. Promoting safety from fire, panic and other Designing with complimentary mixed use in mind within a single zoning district is the most effective way to promote safety from all dangers. All buildings in every Zoning district must meet the stringent requirements of fire and building codes. D. Promoting the public interest, health, comfort, convenience, safety and general welfare Providing a housing supply that meets the needs of present and future residents in terms of supply, choice, and location is the premier objective of the housing section of the Master Plan. E. Preventing the overcrowding of land The integration of Apartments and Commercial has been found to be an efficient land use strategy. F. Avoiding undue concentration of population Density is infrastructure dependent. Business districts have well -developed infrastructure and therefore are planned with density uses in mind. G. Facilitating the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewage, schools, parks and other public facilities Full public services and facilities are expected in areas with a B-2 designation. So facilitation of public services is not expected to be affected. H. Giving reasonable consideration to the character of the district The commercial districts of a City service the needs of residents. Not all residents use or can use cars to access services. Creating neighborhood convenience is a reasonable accommodation to the character of such districts. I. Giving consideration to the peculiar suitability of the property for particular uses Creating neighborhood convenience with accessibility benefits both Residents and Commercial service provides. J. Protecting and conserving the value of buildings Convenience and proximity of customer base is a key ingredient for commercial viability. These proposed changes provide for both. K. Encouraging the most appropriate use of land by assuring orderly growth The extensive infrastructure found in Commercial areas allows density uses. The efficiencies and compatibility afforded by Commercial /Apartment blended uses has proved its worth. Neighborhood stability and enhancement is the foundation of orderly growth. M The signing of this application signifies approval for Tri-City Planning staff to be present on the property for routine monitoring and inspection during approval process. Z (Applicant) (Dat M OTHER DISCUSSION: Western Montana Mental Health Center - in Buffalo Commons - Wrapping up zoning issues. They forgot the parking and loading issues. Small changes will need to be made. Jackola Apartments - North of the Outlaw Inn in the B-2 zone on Third Avenue East and Fourteenth Street. 29 unit apartment buildings. They, are pursuing a tent change to allow residential use in a commercial zone. They need to get through the Planning Board and Council processes. This plan is here for preliminary review only to get some feedback. We will put this on the agenda for next week. Mike suggested it be multi-family/apartment and site specific. P.J. said that a text amendment applies throughout the city, and had some reservations about apartments being a permitted as opposed to a conditionally permitted use. Whitefish Stage Condo - On the preliminary plan, the is a lot of common area - 22 acres. Common area is not necessarily park space. Where is the piayground equipment? Do they fall under the criteria of cash in lieu? Mike will call Tom Jentz. The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 a m cc: Chris Police Craig Fire 3CPO Parks Pi Public Works Darryl Comm Dev.