Loading...
08-12-14KALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 12, 2014 CALL TO ORDER AND The regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and ROLL CALL Zoning Commission was called to order at 6:00 p.m. Board members present were: Chad Graham, Charles Pesola, Rory Young, Matt Regier, and Karlene Osorio-Khor. Steve Lorch was absent. Tom Jentz, Kevin LeClair and P.J. Sorensen represented the Kalispell Planning Department. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Pesola moved and Osorio-Khor seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the June 10, 2014 meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission. VOTE BY ACCLAMATION The motion passed unanimously on a vote by acclamation. PUBLIC COMMENT No one wished to speak. BRIGHT VIEW A request from Montana Department of Natural Resources and SUBDIVISION, PHASE 2 - Conservation (DNRC) for the subdivision of 25.5 acres into twelve PRELIMINARY PLAT (12) commercial lots, a storm drainage tract, and a segment of Kalispell public right-of-way. The site is located east of Reserve Loop, west of Highway 93 Alternate (Kalispell Bypass), and south of Reserve Place (formerly West Reserve Drive). STAFF REPORT KPP-14-02 Kevin LeClair, representing the Kalispell Planning Office reviewed Staff report KPP-14-02 for the board. LeClair said Phase 2 of Bright View Subdivision is a 12 lot commercial subdivision located on Old Reserve Drive (formerly Reserve Loop Road) in Section 36, DNRC School Trust property. Most of the lots will be served by Timberwolf Parkway which will eventually connect to Reserve Place (formerly West Reserve Drive). Lots 6 & 10 will have access directly to the north onto Reserve Place. There is also a utility lot located on the far northeastern corner which is intended to be used for storm drainage and utility purposes. The property is zoned R-5 PUD which is a mixed commercial/professional office zoning and the subdivision approval would create a professional office complex. LeClair noted the applicant requested an amendment to Condition 47 that would delete the phrase: "including, but not limited to: sidewalk, curb and gutter, storm drainage, street lights, landscaped boulevard and street trees." The condition would then read as follows: "The frontage of the subdivision adjacent to Reserve Place shall be improved with a design that is consistent with Kalispell Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 12, 2014 Page 1 of 14 Design and Construction Standards." LeClair added staff is not recommending this change at this time. Staff recommends that the Kalispell Planning Board adopt staff report KPP-14-02 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat of the Resubdivision of Lot 3 — Bright View Subdivision be approved subject to the 19 conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Pesola asked for clarification on the request to amend Condition 47. LeClair said the reason for the request is DNRC would like to seek some sort of an alternative design to the southern half of Reserve Place as part of the build out of the subdivision. He noted the improvements are added to the conditions to make it clear to the applicant that they need to plan for these improvements in their design and construction as they move forward with the next phase of the subdivision design. Graham asked for further clarification which LeClair provided. PUBLIC HEARING Greg Poncin, Area Operations Manager, DNRC said he is filling in for Steve Lorch. Poncin would like the opportunity to clarify the request to amend Condition 47. It is their understanding that the Kalispell Design and Construction Standards allow Public Works the latitude to consider deviations in unique situations that meet the intended objective. Specifically the already developed residential area to the north. Ultimately they may not request the deviation but they don't want the condition to preclude the discussion. Graham asked for further clarification on the uniqueness of the neighborhood and Poncin said they have had a fair amount of ongoing discussions as to how the drainage is designed in particular and DNRC wants to have an opportunity to discuss these improvements with the city, DNRC and the homeowners group. Regier asked if they are saying they can't have that discussion without the amendment and Poncin said it is his understanding that leaving the sidewalk, curb and gutter, storm drain, street lights, landscape boulevard and street trees in the condition would make it a done deal and they are requesting flexibility based on discussion with the neighbors. Bob Stewart, 1017 Walton Drive, Stillwater Estates said there are only two things that could possibly stop this development, a nuclear blast or a whole pile of money, which won't happen. What he and his friends are concerned with is they are downwind from Costco, McDonalds and the high school, all of which produce a huge amount of trash that eventually ends up in their subdivision. They are asking that the businesses who lease these lots keep their Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 12, 2014 Page 2 of 14 property neat and their garbage controlled. He added all the buildings constructed so far look good from one side but the rear of these properties are not neat or attractive. MOTION Regier moved and Pesola seconded a motion to adopt staff report KPP-14-02 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat of the Resubdivision of Lot 3 — Bright View Subdivision be approved subject to the 19 conditions listed in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Young noted that he thinks Condition 47, as written, doesn't specifically state that they have to meet the Kalispell Design and Construction Standards. It states "the design is consistent with" which in his mind gives DNRC sufficient latitude to be able to propose to Public Works that they don't have to meet every single letter of the law. Keith Haskins, City of Kalispell Senior Engineer stated the standards are minimum standards and Public Works applies them across any development. The reason these specific items are brought to the forefront in the conditions is because often times they are not considered and they get feedback from the developers indicating they didn't know they would have to provide these improvements. There really isn't a deviation process from the minimum standards except relating to storm sewer which are adopted by council and council would have to accept any deviation. It doesn't preclude them from coming forward with different options. Graham said there are other subdivisions that come into the city and they all adhere to these standards. LeClair said the design of Reserve Place is a relatively rural standard. On the north side of the roadway is a 10 foot wide asphalt path running east and west and a shallow swale that ends at the edge of the pavement for Reserve Place. LeClair thinks what the DNRC is saying is that a curb, gutter, landscaped boulevard, sidewalk -type streetscape on the southern side of Reserve Place would not match what is already on the north side. The neighborhoods to the north are currently in Flathead County and don't have the full complement of urban improvements that are typically put into a city subdivision. LeClair said however, as Haskins mentioned, there is nothing that would preclude someone from making a request as they come through with the final plat design. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. ZONING TEXT A request from John W. Flink, of J2 Office Products, for an AMENDMENT — J2 OFFICE amendment to the text of Section 27.12.020 (23) of the Kalispell PRODUCTS Zoning Ordinance. The request is to add "office supply" and Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 12, 2014 Page 3 of 14 "retail enterprises no larger than 4,000 sq ft" as bullets listed under the permitted use of "Retail, limited." The effect of this change would allow office supply retail uses larger than 4,000 square feet in the 13-1 (Neighborhood Business) land use zoning district. STAFF REPORT KZTA-14-01 Kevin LeClair, representing the Kalispell Planning Office reviewed Staff report KZTA-14-01 for the board. LeClair stated this is a zoning text amendment to add office supply as a permitted use in the B-1 Neighborhood Business zone. The current zoning ordinance standards for the B-1 zone limit retail uses to no more than 4,000 square feet of gross square footage. The change would modify Section 27.12.020(23) as well as Appendix B footnote 5 adding office supply as a permitted use in the retail limited B-1 zone. LeClair showed a graphic that illustrates the location of the B-1 Neighborhood Businesses zones throughout the city and said there is only 60 acres of 13-1 zone throughout the city and they tend to be located generally along or near arterial roads. The zone acts as somewhat of a buffer between the more intensive activity along an arterial roadway and the residential zone that it is adjacent to. LeClair addressed a couple of the criteria from the staff report that have a bearing on this amendment. #7: "Does the zoning regulation consider the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for particular uses?" LeClair said the B-1 zone limits retail so that it doesn't grow so large that is has a negative impact on the neighboring residential areas that they buffer. Office supply as a retail use tends to be a relatively low impact use. It usually operates in daytime hours, while other businesses are open because they are supplying the business community that is also open from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. LeClair continued #9: "Does the zoning regulation encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the municipality?" LeClair said looking at how office supply retail is developed, the amount of space you need in order to warehouse materials that are for sale, and display of office supplies and furniture, by necessity 4,000 square feet is unduly limiting. Staff recommends that the Kalispell Planning Board adopt staff report KZTA-14-01 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the proposed amendment be adopted as provided in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Young said he didn't find office supply listed in the definition section. He added although this amendment appears appropriate for this applicant he is concerned it would allow box stores to be Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 12, 2014 Page 4 of 14 located in B-1 zones which he didn't think would be appropriate. Osorio-Khor asked if there was another mechanism available besides a text amendment that would accommodate this applicant and Jentz said no. Jentz added they have been working with this applicant for 2-5 years and they came to the conclusion that a text amendment was the most reasonable approach. Osorio-Khor thought 2-5 years was too long and Jentz said it took so long because this is a non -conforming use which puts a cloud over any business. He reminded the board this amendment would affect all of the B-1 areas in the city. Osorio-Khor suggested there be some consideration for either a text change to limit the size of a business in the B-1 zones or another mechanism to help this small business person expand his business. Graham asked how this business got into the B-1 zone and LeClair said the business existed prior to the B-1 zoning and this business is currently oversized for the retail limited. Staff talked to the applicant/owner of the business about working with the non- conforming rules in the zoning ordinance but that would create issues all across every zoning district. The neighborhood business zones, being that they are very narrowly defined, prevent the ability of big box retailers to locate in that zone because they have bigger stores, parking lots and storm drainage facilities, all of which would be negative impacts on a residential neighborhood. LeClair said an office supply business doesn't rest solely on being a retail business but rather serves businesses at their place of business. He added the fear that maybe we are creating an opening for a larger box retail establishment is not something that staff foresees happening in the neighborhood business zone. Graham asked in order to satisfy the concerns of the board why is there no limit to the size of the office supply building and LeClair said it would become arbitrary to try and figure out exactly what the number would be. Young noted staff has addressed his concerns although a definition of office supply may help. Osorio-Khor said her concerns are also addressed. PUBLIC HEARING No one wished to speak and the hearing was closed. MOTION Pesola moved and Young seconded a motion to adopt staff report KZTA-14-01 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the proposed amendment be adopted as provided in the staff report. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 12, 2014 Page 5 of 14 BOARD DISCUSSION Pesola said in seeing the minor amount of B-1 in the city he agrees with staff that it would be extremely difficult and highly unlikely that any large business would be able to move into those areas. He is completely comfortable with the text amendment as presented. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. ZONING REGULATIONS A request from the City of Kalispell for a series of updates to the UPDATE zoning ordinance. STAFF REPORT KZTA-14-02 P.J. Sorensen, representing the Kalispell Planning Office reviewed staff report KZTA-14-02 for the board. Sorensen noted every few years staff takes a look at the zoning ordinance and determines amendments that should be made that would include rewording, clarifications, and new legal precedent or regulations at the State or Federal level that need to be incorporated as a way to keep the ordinance up-to-date. P.J. Sorensen reviewed the changes noted below: 1. ADD "RAIL INDUSTRIAL PARK" AS A PERMITTED USE IN THE I-1 (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) ZONE UNDER SECTION 27.16.020 AND APPENDIX B (TABLE OF USES ALLOWED BY ZONE), ADD A DEFINITION IN CHAPTER 27.37 FOR "RAIL INDUSTRIAL PARK," AND RENUMBER THE SECTIONS ACCORDINGLY Sorensen noted there is only one area in town that this definition would apply, the new rail industrial park. Listing the whole park as a permitted use still retains the review of its impact on surrounding properties as the overall project moves forward. 2. AMEND SECTION 27.19.020 AS IT RELATES TO PLACEHOLDER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS (PUDs) AND THE USES WHICH MAY OCCUR PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH A FULL PUD APPLICATION Sorensen stated there are two types of planned unit developments or PUD's — the full PUD, the full package and the PUD placeholder designation which assures annexation and access to city services without having to go through the full expense of engineering plans while not knowing if they were going to be able to be annexed into the city. Sorensen added this amendment would provide some clarification of what would happen in the interim between the full PUD and the placeholder PUD and only allow remodeling/repair/removal of existing structures and dealing with property maintenance and not Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 12, 2014 Page 6 of 14 allowing additional development on the property, free standing signs, new road R/W's, expansion of structures or building new structures on the property which would trigger the application for the full PUD. Young asked if the amendment affects the Captain's Marine PUD that will be discussed in the work session and Sorensen said the no because they have submitted an application for the full PUD. 3. MOVE AIRPORT AFFCTED AREA REGULATIONS FROM A STAND-ALONE ORDINANCE TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE BY ADDING NEW REFERENCES UNDER SECTIONS 27.20.025 AND 27.20.025 Sorensen said there is currently a stand-alone FAA model ordinance regulating primarily height at the city airport that was administered by the Airport Manager. Since this position has been eliminated there is a fixed -base operator doing the day-to-day operations. This amendment would bring the existing ordinance under the city's zoning ordinance so it would be administered by the planning office. It doesn't change the current regulations in place at the city airport. Osorio-Khor asked further questions that were answered by Sorensen. 4. ADDRESS RECREATIONAL VEHICLES BY ALLOWING UP TO ONE -WEEK STAYS FOR HOUSE GUESTS (FREE OF CHARGE) AND SIMILAR STAYS IN PARKS AND THE FAIRGROUNDS WHEN IN CONJUNCTION WITH A SPONSORED EVENT BY ADDING SECTION 27.20.085 AND AMENDING DEFINITIONS OF FAIRGROUNDS AND PARKS IN CHAPTER 27.37 Sorensen noted this issue comes up every summer where people are staying in RV's and campers. There are the family events where relatives are staying in the units, and the other is where people are paying rent to live in the units which has impacts on the neighborhood. In addition there are trailers at the fairgrounds during the fair and at the KidSports fields during tournaments. Currently the zoning ordinance doesn't directly address this use other than establishing true RV parks, and indirectly because if you are in a single-family neighborhood you can't have a second dwelling the property or a trailer that doesn't meet the design standards for a single-family dwelling. Sorensen continued the amendment would allow recreational vehicles in conjunction with residential uses for up to a week. The key is it has to be free of charge because if you charge rent that triggers enforcement of the subdivision regulations. That covers a Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 12, 2014 Page 7 of 14 situation where relatives and friends coming to visit. It also gives staff clarity in distinguishing this type of use from the situations where people are charging rent all summer or renting off two or more spaces in the backyard. Sorensen added they also added in a definition of fairgrounds which would allow temporary, also one week or less, RV parking/camping if it is done in conjunction with a sponsored event and at no charge and allow people to stay in their RV's at KidSports when a tournament is going on. It would not allow someone to randomly camp there. Osorio-Khor asked for examples of what would and would not be allowed in conjunction with residential uses and Sorensen responded. Osorio-Khor asked how would staff monitor the one week limit and Sorensen said staff would respond based on complaints received in the planning department but would not police the neighborhoods looking for people living in RV's. 5. ADD LANGUAGE TO EXISTING SITE REVIEW PROCEDURES IN SECTION 27.20.120 TO BETTER REFLECT RECENT FEDERAL AND STATE CASELAW RELATING TO PERMIT CONDITIONS Sorensen said this amendment has to do with Site Review procedures. The ordinance sets forth criteria for review by staff when looking at commercial building projects adding language that states they need to substantially advance legitimate public interest with the condition and the cost of the condition needs to be roughly proportionate to the public interest served. Staff thought it would be a good idea to insert that language noting it is not changing anything that hasn't been Federal law for 20 years. 6. AMEND CHAPTER 27.24 ON OFF-STREET PARKING DESIGN STANDARDS TO UTILIZE MORE CONSISTENT LANGUAGE AND CLARIFY POTENTIALLY VAGUE PROVISIONS, AND ADD A DEFINITION FOR PARKING LOT IN CHAPTER 27.37 Sorensen reported this amendment incorporated the entire chapter for off-street parking design standards and makes the language consistent when referring to parking lots, parking areas and parking facilities. Graham asked how the amendment pertains to the definition of a parking lot and the display or storage of motor vehicles and asked if there would be any uses grandfathered in under this amendment. Sorensen said anything that is legally in place when the rules change would be grandfathered in. Sorensen used the requirement to pave parking lots that was imposed by EPA in 1992 as an Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 12, 2014 Page 8 of 14 example. Graham asked if this pertains to driveways that are gravel and Sorensen said yes, paving is not required if the house and driveway was built prior to 1992. Anything new that comes through has to be paved with either asphalt or concrete or a comparable surface. 7. CLARIFY STANDARDS FOR "ANIMAL HOSPITALS, POUNDS, KENNELS, ANIMAL SHELTERS, AND VETERINARY CLINICS" LISTED AS SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN SECTION 27.34.010 This section was for clarifying standards for animal hospitals, pounds, kennels, animal shelters and veterinary clinics which comes up with doggy day care facilities. The amendment deals with soundproof buildings and fully enclosed structures or open areas that would not be soundproofed. It also includes setbacks. 8. ADD CROSS-REFERENCES TO THE DEFINITION OF "RESIDENTIAL" FROM THE DEFINITIONS OF VARIOUS DWELLING TYPES IN CHAPTER 27.37 The final section adds cross-references to the definition of residential as it was confusing to the users of the ordinance primarily relating to renting or leasing residences. Graham asked if this conflicts with the section on RV's and Sorensen said no because this refers to the home not an RV. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board adopt the findings in staff report KZTA-14-02 and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the proposed amendments be adopted as provided in the staff report. PUBLIC HEARING Todd Gardner, 3065 Airport Road, Kalispell stated there are two issues he would like to address the placeholder PUD and the interim use and the clarification and more consistent language under the off-street parking design. Gardner provided the board with a history of the purchase of 12 acres behind their RV center which is within the City of Kalispell and his discussions with city staff regarding the use of that property. He indicated that the city is not working with the business owners on creating jobs and developing businesses, especially on the south end of Kalispell. His attorney believes that their use of this 12 acres to park trailers and recreational vehicles should be considered grandfathered in and requested that the amendments to the off-street parking ordinance be either denied or tabled. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 12, 2014 Page 9 of 14 MOTION Osorio-Khor moved and Graham seconded a motion to table the amendments to the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance and schedule a work session to discuss the amendments. VOTE BY ACCLAMATION The motion failed on a vote by acclamation of 2 in favor and 3 opposed. MOTION Pesola moved and Regier seconded a motion to adopt staff report KZTA-14-02 as finding of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the proposed amendments be adopted as provided in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Osorio-Khor suggested that the existing language be kept intact for the Off -Street Parking Design Standards. MOTION Pesola moved Osorio-Khor seconded a motion to remove amendment 46 Off -Street Parking Design Standards from the amendments and schedule a work session to discuss them further. ROLL CALL The motion passed on a roll call vote of 4 in favor and 1 opposed. BOARD DISCUSSION Osorio-Khor noted that she doesn't know how the city will enforce the time limit on the residential RV use and the one week limit bothers her. Graham agreed. Jentz said we receive 3-5 complaints a year and although we don't go looking for them we respond to complaints. The limit gives the city a tool when the occupancy of the RV becomes obvious and a problem for the neighbors. So when there is a problem we can have the time limit to enforce the regulations. Currently there is no provision for the occupancy of RV's on residential property and staff is attempting to provide and define a provision. Pesola noted staff won't respond until there is a complaint and he can't imagine that there are grounds for a complaint for several days but the limit can help staff verify how long someone has been living there. Pesola doesn't think that anyone will run into a situation where their 7 days are up unless it is a truly problematic or recurring situation. Graham agreed. Osorio-Khor still didn't think one week was reasonable. MOTION — AMEND THE Osorio-Khor moved and Graham seconded a motion to change the TIME LIMIT FOR RV STAYS language regarding the one week limit to two weeks. BOARD DISCUSSION Jentz said put on the shoes of the neighbor who we have to tell we will check on the situation but there would be two more weeks that they can live there; after the letter is sent we give them 10 days to abate, then they haven't abated and the next step is a 30 day notice before they see the judge. Now this situation has taken up most of Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 12, 2014 Page 10 of 14 the summer with an RV parked on a driveway next to the neighbor's kitchen window. The one week limit speeds up the process when there is a problem. Jentz added by the time we receive the complaint the situation is usually heated and the parties are frustrated. VOT BY ACCLAMATION — The motion to amend the time limit failed on a roll call vote of 2 in AMEND THE TIME LIMIT favor and 3 opposed. FOR RV STAYS ROLL CALL — ORIGINAL The original motion, as amended passed unanimously on a roll call MOTION vote. GROWTH POLICY UPDATE Growth Policy Update - The Kalispell City Planning Board has spent past year drafting an update to the text of the Kalispell Growth Policy. The updated draft addresses a number of key topics that affect the future growth and development of the City of Kalispell. Each chapter presents a brief introduction of the particular topic, lists a number of issues surrounding the topic, establishes goals and priorities, lays out the policies that will guide the city, and finishes with a number of recommended actions. The Growth Policy's Future Land Use Map has remained unchanged. STAFF REPORT Kevin LeClair, representing the Kalispell Planning Office reviewed the amendments to the Kalispell Growth Policy for the board. LeClair noted the Kalispell Growth Policy was last updated in 2003. Over the last couple years the board and staff have been working on an update to the policy and there has been a significant amount of public outreach along with several work sessions with the board. The draft of the growth policy has been posted on the city's website through a majority of this process. A lengthy comment letter was received today from Citizens for a Better Flathead and there are roughly 30 comments for the board to consider after the public hearing. A resolution has been prepared for adoption and for the board president's signature should the board decide to move the draft policy forward to the Kalispell City Council. Staff recommends that the Kalispell Planning Board adopt Resolution KGPA-14-01 and recommend approval of the amendments to the City of Kalispell Growth Policy Plan -IT 2030 to the Kalispell City Council. Osorio-Khor asked if on page 45 where it refers to the lack of water mains on the west side of Main Street it means that the city is considering putting them in or is it just stating a fact and LeClair Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 12, 2014 Page 11 of 14 said it is stating a fact. Osorio-Khor asked if there is anywhere on the city's website where the historic building codes are posted and LeClair said no. There are special provisions in the IBC dealing with historic buildings that staff can rely upon when reviewing projects for reuse of historic buildings so they still meet safety requirements. He added if anyone has questions they can contact the Building Official for further information. Osorio-Khor asked about the questionnaire the planning department is working on with the downtown business owners and whether the questionnaire results will become a part of the growth policy. LeClair said it is standard practice for staff to conduct studies prior to developing a full downtown plan and once the plan is in development the planning board will have a chance to review at it and then the city council will decide whether they want to adopt the downtown plan as an amendment to the growth policy. PUBLIC HEARING Patrick Malone, Citizens for a Better Flathead thanked the planning board and staff for their hard work in developing the draft growth policy update. Malone highlighted several areas they felt would strengthen the document which are all included in the letter they submitted (copy attached). BOARD DISCUSSION At staff s suggestion the board reviewed each of the points listed in the letter from Citizens for a Better Flathead. The board made several amendments to the draft policy based on those recommendations which will be incorporated into the draft copy that will be forwarded to the city council. MOTION Pesola moved and Regier seconded a motion to adopt staff Resolution KGPA-14-01 and recommend approval of the amendments to the Growth Policy, as presented in the Draft — City of Kalispell Growth Policy Plan -IT 2030, and as amended by the planning board to the Kalispell City Council. BOARD DISCUSSION None. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. OLD BUSINESS: Flathead High School Parking District LeClair described that a residential parking district is a tool used where non-resident commuter parking on city streets is having an impact on the health, safety and general welfare of a neighborhood, the residents of that neighborhood get together and ask for parking restrictions to be placed on the city streets that would require residents and visitors to display a permit on their vehicle in order to Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 12, 2014 Page 12 of 14 legally park on the street. This would prevent commuters from parking on the street during certain designated times or hours and violators would be ticketed so they would be discouraged from parking in the district in the future. LeClair reviewed the study area, the amount of rental properties within the area, and the parking needs for both Flathead High School and Elrod Elementary School. LeClair noted a group of neighbors in this area have been working with city staff over the last year and have contacted their neighbors to determine their acceptance of instituting a parking district in the neighborhood. Of the 207 properties in the boundary area 182 contacts were made which constitutes 88% of the properties. Of those 182 contacts 97% were in support of instituting a parking restriction on the streets. Five were opposed to the restrictions and 23 of the properties were either vacant or they were unable to make a contact. Staff recommendation at this point is that the Kalispell Planning Board hold a public hearing at their next regular meeting regarding the establishment of a residential parking district in Kalispell's historic west side neighborhood. BOARD DISCUSSION Osorio-Khor said based on the board's policy on ethics and since she lives in this neighborhood and has actively participated in contacting the neighbors regarding the parking district she should recuse herself from discussions and votes on this issue. The other board members thought that was appropriate. LeClair responded to some concerns brought up by the board at the previous meeting regarding what is the high school going to do and LeClair noted he did have a long conversation with Mark Flatau, School District 45 Superintendent, and they are not sure but they are looking into their options. They are not necessarily supportive of the idea that would restrict their staff or students from being able to park close to the school but they also understand that the parking situation is having an impact on the neighborhood. The school district will participate in the public hearing and would like to work with the planning board on solutions that would allow them to have access to some nearby parking. Flatau noted the school district does not have the resources to buy more land or develop more parking lots at this time. There was also the question about private commercial contractors that are in unmarked vehicles that might need to park in the area and LeClair did some research with the cities of Missoula and Bozeman about their practices. The City of Bozeman issues a contractor permit so they can register when they are working at a Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 12, 2014 Page 13 of 14 home in a parking district. Missoula asks the contractors to contact the parking commission office and let them know that they will be working in the neighborhood so they have a record that they have been contacted. The board members directed staff to schedule the public hearing. NEW BUSINESS: Next month the meetings will begin at 7:00 p.m. through May of 2015. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at approximately 9:20 p.m. WORK SESSION — A request from APEC Engineering, on behalf of Captain's Marine CAPTAIN'S MARINA (Somers Bay Trading Co. LLC), for a Planned Unit Development PLANNED UNIT for the development of a boat and trailer sales and service facility DEVELOPMENT consisting of 14,900 square feet of sales, offices, and service areas on the main floor and 1,800 square feet of offices on the second level. The PUD proposal also includes associated parking, landscaping, and public utility connections and extensions as needed or required. The property is located at 3215 Highway 93 South. NEXT MEETING The next regular planning board meeting is scheduled for September 9, 2014 beginning at 7:00 p.m. and located in the Kalispell City Council Chambers, 201 lst Avenue East, Kalispell. Chad Graham President APPROVED as submitted/corrected: / /14 Michelle Anderson Recording Secretary Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of August 12, 2014 Page 14 of 14 PO Box 771 035 4th Street West ( I T: 406.756.8993 • F: 406.756.8991 Kalispell, Montana 59903 www.tiatiieacteltizens.org citizens@flatheadcitizens.org Citizens for a Better Flathead's Comments on Kalispell Draft Growth Policy Update Public Hearing, August 12, 2014 Citizens for a Better Flathead appreciates this opportunity to comment on the proposed updates to the current Kalispell Growth Policy before you tonight. Our organization was founded in 1992 and we represent some 1500 supporters throughout the county including many Kalispell residents. We have participated in the public process of the drafting of updates to the Kalispell Growth Policy since 1992. We have reviewed the entire draft and want to compliment you on a job well done and to provide you with a series of comments for your additional consideration. But let me first add that we particularly appreciate that: Your planning staff provided direct outreach to groups in the planning area to both explain the proposed update and to seek input to the plan. We also appreciate that planning staff made themselves available to answer questions for us as they arose. • We appreciate that you provided us, and the public, a copy of both the strike -through version showing what was being changed and a final draft that incorporated all changes. The strike through version was vital to our understanding the nature of the changes being proposed and where no change was needed. • We think you have provided a good balance between background text and a bulleted lay out of easy to read issues, goals, and policies. Numerous maps included are well done and valuable. Our comments are organized by chapter and the page numbers sited are those of the proposed growth policy, which does not show changes made with strike-throughs. We hope this layout helps you to review and consider our comments. Where we felt it was important in addition to a suggested change we have included a reason for why we think the change is important. INTRODUCTION Page 1, top Suggested revision "The Kalispell Growth Policy is an official public document created and adopted by the City of Kalispell as a plan for future growth in and around the City." 1 Reason Kalispell Growth Policy address future growth outside the current city limits as well as within. Page 1, bullet #1 Suggested revision "The future land use designations indicated on the map provide guidance for the county when it considers rezoning around the city and indicate standards that are e44y applicable as the city grows and when a property is proposed for annexation. and- de nept have any , Reason In 2009 the Montana Legislature added to the statutory criteria for county zoning a mandate that county zoning regulations must, as nearly as possible, be made compatible with zoning ordinances of nearby municipalities. In fast growing areas this statue supports and recognizes that as municipalities grow they will be annexing adjoining lands. Compatible County zoning supports predictable and compatible uses when annexation is requested. The future land use map the city has developed supports such compatible uses. Chapter 1: Growth Policy Administration Page 9, Policy 8 Needs Revision "8. Statements on how the public will be informed regarding development projects can ensure the integrity of the public review process. " Reason Consider revising to provide a clearer policy statement: Public involvement and outreach to inform the public regarding development projects in a timely manner and to encourage public participation will be provided to ensure the integrity of the public review process. Page 9, Policy 9 Needs Revision "9. Provide a mechanism to address large-scale projects that have not been anticipated in the growth policy. " Reason Consider revising to provide a clearer policy statement : Criteria will be developed to address large-scale projects that have not been anticipated in the growth policy. Page 9, Recommendation Needs Revision "2. Find ways to provide greater exposure for the public to the planning process, such as the local media, to encourage greater improved public involvement and interest." 2 Reason Consider being more specific by stating: Encourage public involvement by providing greater exposure for the public to the planning process through the active use of the media, the City web site, televised meetings, a list serve set up for those requesting email notifications, use of signs identifying changes in use requested on properties proposed for development and provided as part of the applicant's application �o requirements, and through work sessions and proactive outreach activities by the planning staff. Page 9, Recommendation Needs Revision #4. Use the general growth policy amendment process to address large-scale and / or complex projects that have not been anticipated in the growth policy. Revise this recommendation to provide more specific criteria for large-scale and / or complex projects such as: Develop criteria to address large-scale proiects that have not been anticipated in the growth policy. Chapter 2: Community Growth and Design Page 12, Issues Clarify #6. Finding ways of making infill growth more attractive and economical is necessary to equalize the trend toward low -density rural scale development typical on the City's fringes. Suggested Revision "replace equalize with overcome" Page 12, Goal 4: Add strategy "4. TARGET THE DOWNTOWN AND CORE AREA FOR REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES BY PROVIDING UPDATED INFRASTRUCTURE AND FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO DEVELOPERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS." Suggested Revision "add development incentives or incentive zoning" Page 14 Recommendations "5. All zoning district designations should be reviewed for conformance with this Growth Policy. The City or neighborhoods may initiate zone changes in order to bring zoning into compliance." Question How and where would it be best to let the public know where the staff feels zoning districts are not in conformance with the Growth Policy. Has a map been prepared to show this? This seems to be information the public should have in reviewing this plan. Chapter 3: Housing 3 Page 16 Suggested Revision to Policy "9. New residential subdivisions and multi- family developments should provide a full set of urban improvements, including paved streets, curbs, sidewalks, landscaping, street lighting, public water and sewer, well connected street linkage with a network of existing or planned streets, and other public services. When possible, neighborhoods should connect to and complement the community's trail system." Reason Encouraging a network on streets moves more traffic, reduces congestion, and improves safety. Chapter 4: Business Page 21, Issues Clarify "1. Although the main advantages of commercial corridors for businesses, such as highway visibility and high vehicle traffic, present design problems, because they lack secondary street access, bike and pedestrian access, and general aesthetic appeal." Needs revision ---Incomplete statement ---delete the word "Although" Page 22 Add new issue 7. The Kalispell Downtown planning area has significant capacity for future growth and infill. This current capacity has not been measured for a number of years. Knowing this capacity can help in planning for downtown revitalization and in economic development efforts. Add new issue 8. A growing body of research is showing that In terms of dollars per -acre, mixed -use, downtown parcels bring in, on average, significantly more property tax revenue than conventional single -use commercial establishments on the outskirts of town. Strengthen goal "2. EN9961RAGE GIVE PRIOITIY TO PLANNING FOR AND SECURING DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT IN THE DOWNTOWN AND TO IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CORE AREA NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN." Add Goal 7. IDENTIFY THE INFILL AND REDEVELOPMENT CAPACITY OF THE DOWNTOWN CORE AREA AND POTENTIAL RATE OF BUILD OUT AND USE THIS INFORMATION TO PROMOTE AND SECURE DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION AND INVESTMENT. N Page 26 Add Recommendation 11. Give priority to completing a study of the infill and redevelopment capacity of the downtown core area and its potential rate of build out. Chapter 5: Industry Page 27 Remove extra word "2. Traditional higher paying construction and manufacturing jobs aye have declined steeply since 2008, while lower - paying retail, service and tourist oriented jobs have held steady or increased somewhat." Page 27 Add Issue Add an issue statement that addresses the current (over?) supply of business parks in the plan area and the need to encourage infill in these business parks before adding additional capacity. Page 28 Add goal "Seek quantifiable information that assesses market conditions, absorption potential and vacancy rates for lite industrial uses within the Growth Policy area." Page 28 Add Recommendation Gather quantifiable information that assesses market conditions, absorption potential and vacancy rates for lite industrial uses within the Growth Policy area. Chapter 6: Agriculture Page 29 Complete last sentence "The last several decades have seen the emergence of "urban agriculture" as a concept that seeks to foster and maintain local food systems where all aspects of food production and processing are carried out in relatively close proximity to the consumers. The belief is that when local food systems are supported it enhances the health, economy, society and environment of that area. Maintaining agricultural areas adjacent to the City of Kalispell" Page 30 Revise Goal "1. MAINTAIN A SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY BASED PRIMARILY ON SMALL SPECIALITY CROPS INTENDED FOR n LOCAL MARKET. " , Rationale In today's economy many small specialty crops are developed for national and regional markets. Kettle Care Herbs on Hwy 93 North would be an example of this as well as some of the work on new crop development being done by the Flathead County Extension Service and the new Flathead Valley Community College Sustainable Agricultural Program. 5 Page 30 Add new goal Where feasible, work with the Flathead County Extension Service and the Flathead Valley Community College Sustainable Agricultural Program to support the growth and economic development potential of a sustainable agricultural industry within the plan area. Page 30 Add new policy Encourage the connectivity of agricultural lands and open space with similar features on adjoining parcels of land as development occurs. Page 30 Add new policy As development occurs, ensure and facilitate producers' access to agricultural land. Page 31 Add new recommendation Develop incentives to encourage and reward conservation of agricultural, ecologically important, and open space lands . Chapter 7: Economy Page 34 Clarify Goal "5. NEW BUSINESS SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED TO LOCATE IN TH.E DOWNTOWN AND CORE AREA NEIGH 99RH99PS." Rationale Elsewhere in the plan as in the description at the beginning of the Chapter 9 the Core Area is described as a geographical area and the term neighborhoods is not use. Use of this term should be consistent. Chapter 8: Natural Environment Page 37 Add new issue Aquatic Invasive Species are being introduced to Montana unintentionally as they hitchhike on and in boats, recreational equipment, aquariums and backyard ponds. In Montana, Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS) are a serious problem. There are currently over 70 aquatic invasive species reported in the State. Current state activities and statutes address AIS prevention and control. However, there is a need to combat AIS at the local watershed level to assist with these efforts, and minimize the harmful economic, ecological and social impacts of AIS. Reason To help prevent the spread of aquatic invasive species Montana is inspecting boats at boat ramps, on highways and at the Montana borders. Most of these inspection stations are mandatory. The City of Whitefish recently donated to support an inspection station that inspects boats traveling to their area. Efforts are being ramped up in the Flathead Basin since it encompasses some of the state's most intact ecosystems and blue ribbon fishing. In order to protect these ecologically and economically valuable resources, inspections stations have been N. added at Ronan, Clearwater Junction, Eureka, and Highway. Additionally, it is mandatory to have your watercraft inspected before launching in Glacier National Park. Page 37 Add Issue Endocrine disrupter compounds, pharmaceuticals, and personal care products were detected in 13 or 14 shallow ground -water wells that were sampled in the fall of 2010 by the Flathead Lake Biological Station in the Flathead River Drainage. Page 38 Add Goal Support local efforts as appropriate to prevent, control and/or eliminate Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS) within the Flathead Basin. Page 40 Add Policy Encourage residents not to flush or pore unwanted pharmaceutical and personal care products down the drain. Promote the use of a free and secure drop-off box for unwanted medications located in the Flathead County Justice Center in Kalispell. Page 39 Retain former policy "New commercial and industrial development and residential subdivisions should be accessible by paved roadways to protect air quality. " Rationale New development should not contribute to air quality issues, which remain a concern in the area. Page 40 Retain need for noise standards in former policy "Limit and mitigate impacts related to outdoor lighting and noise by developing measurable standards for noise impacts and by enforcing dark sky compliant lighting regulations. " (see original wording in 2020 KGP page 28) Rationale Noise is an on -going concern for many. It is an issue that deserves review and consideration of best practices to address this concern. A good job was done addressing lighting issues, the same kind of effort needs to be given to noise issues. Page 127 Example of one place that noise is addressed in the KGP Update "22. Advocate the design and site layout of new residential development adjacent to industrial zoned property, Highway 93 and the future bypass to incorporate noise reduction techniques so that the new development will not be affected by noise that exceeds 60 dBA at the property line." Page 128 "23. Encourage the use of setbacks and earth berms as noise reduction techniques in residential development to mitigate noise impacts and discourage the use of sound walls." 7 Chapter 9: Downtown and Core Area No additional comments Chapter 10: Historic and Cultural Conservation No additional comment Chapter 11: Parks and Recreation Page 55 Add new text to this section to give recognition of and future collaboration opportunities with the trail systems that have been developed through and around Kalispell by Rails to Trails with the Somers to Kila trail, and with Foy's to Blacktail trail and open space that are an asset to the City of Kalispell. Development of parks and trails should be recognized as an important factor in the Kalispell economy. The Institute for Tourism and Recreation Research (ITRR) at the University of Montana's School of Forestry conducted a study entitled, "Analysis of Touring Cyclists: Impacts, Needs and Opportunities for Montana,"(PDF) which found that multi -day cyclists spend $75 per day while in Montana, and stay an average of eight or more nights. Researchers queried cyclists who had visited Adventure Cycling headquarters in 2013, or who had purchased Montana section maps between 2010-2013. Cyclists hailed from 48 states and 18 countries. http://www.adventurecycling.org/default/assets/File/USBRS/Research/ Multi-dayCyclingStudyWeb.pdf https://outdoorindustry.org/images/ore reports/MT-montana- outdoorrecreationeconomy-oia.pdf Finally, develop issue and policy statements that recognize the message that Transportation Planner Mark Fenton recently delivered in his recent visit to Kalispell that there is a direct connection between community design and community health. He cited research showing that community design was the or one the most important tools for improving community health by encouraging active living through community design for walkability and recreation. Chapter 12: Transportation Page 61 Add issues, goals, recommendations for public transportation including, bus, van pooling, or private taxi service and identifying the need and 0 incentives for growing this resource. Page 64 does include one policy on this topic but more specific identification of issues, goals, and policies we believe are needed. "7. Support the expansion of public transit services to meet the mobility needs of seniors, disabled persons, and the general public." Some of the new issue areas identified above for the Parks and Recreation section may also be appropriate in the transportation section. We find no mention of parking and parking issue in this chapter. This section should provide guidance on the need for parking on public streets and the need to provide off street parking adequate for each type of development in terms of quantity, location and design. It should also address parking needs and issues in the downtown and adjacent neighborhoods. We would also recommend the city add a policy prohibiting gated communities within the planning area. Chapter 13: Sand and Gravel Resources No additional comments. Chapter 14: Public Infrastructure and Services Identification of issues, goals and policies for intern et/broadband or such telecommunications facilities should be included as these are important issues for future economic development. Chapter.15: Annexation Policy No additional comments. Chapter 16: Implementation Strategies Page 96 Expand Growth Policy Amendment Criteria The current growth policy criteria states: Growth Policy Update Implementation Strategy "e. Evaluation criteria should include: 1. Consistency with the goals and policies of the growth policy, state law, and other established policies adopted by the city council; 2. Demonstration of the public need and support for the change; 3. The proposed change is the most effective means of meeting the need; and 4. The public, as a whole, benefits, rather than one or a few property owners at the expense of others." I7 Expand the evaluation criteria by adapting the current criteria wording and adding the following additional criteria to make the amendment process more predictable, less subject to challenge, and comprehensive. Growth Policy Update and Amendment Implementation Strategy e. Growth Policy Amendment Criteria includes the following: 1. Is the proposed amendment Consistency with the goals and policies of the growth policy, state law, and other established policies adopted by the city council? 2. Is their demonstration of the public need and support for the change? 3. Is the proposed change is the most effective means of meeting the need? 4. Will the public, as a whole, benefit, rather than one or a few property owners at the expense of others 5. is the amendment based on existing characteristics and/or projected trends that are substantially different from those presented in the most recent update? 6. Does the amendment create inconsistencies within the document? 7. Has the proposed amendment undergone a sufficient process of citywide public participation and review? Page.107 Revise "f. Information regarding public hearings, development proposals and staff recommendations should be available consistent with the date of notice time which triggers the time period for public notice established by state law with adequate tine fA-r r,,,,;,,,., .,r,] -�n Si,1 ti e R. Rationale Notice provisions for state law are not met if the public does not have access to the development proposal and staff report for the entire notice period. Page 126 Question is the following policy needed given the rejection of expansion of the city airport by city voters? How would properties be compensated for such easement requirement? "13. Aviation easements should be required for all new development or redevelopment in the Highway 93 South Corridor area." 10