Loading...
08. Ordinance 1244 - Samaritan House - Zoning Text Amendment - 1st ReadingJune 20, 1996 Al Thelen, Interim City Manager City of Kalispell P.O. Drawer 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 y 723 5th Avenue East - Room 414 Kalispell, Montana 59901 Phone: (406) 758-5780 RE: Kalispell Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment - Samaritan House Request "Shelters" as Conditionally Permitted Uses in the RA-1 District and Parking Requirements for "Shelters" Dear Al: The Kalispell City -County Planning Board and Zoning Commission met in regular session on Tuesday, June 11, 1996, and held a public hearing on the following request by Samaritan House, Inc. to amend the text of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance as follows: To allow "Shelters" as a conditionally permitted use in the RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment zoning district, and would be listed under Section 27.09.010 of the ordinance. The Samaritan House has also proposed amending the parking requirements for "Shelters" from the current "one per two beds" to "one per five occupancy units" as stated under Section 27.26.050(47) of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. Narda Wilson with FRDO discussed the background of the request by the Samaritan House, who are seeking to expand their facilities to meet a need in the community for transitional housing, low rent accommodations, housing for transients, and longer term housing for people who are homeless for a temporary period of time. The Samaritan House provides a mixed use to the public, and are defined as a "shelter". Considerable research was involved during the review of the requested text amendment, and staff found there was limited information available on "homeless shelters". However, the information she found did support the request to reduce the parking requirements for "shelters". Staff reviewed the necessary statutory criteria for a zoning text amendment, and based on the evaluation, recommended that the request to allow "Shelters" as a conditional permitted use in the RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment District be denied; and the request to change the parking requirements from "one space per two beds" to "one space per five units" be approved. Two representatives for Samaritan House explained the mixed service that the facility provides, and agreed that it was difficult to define. It was pointed out that it was unlikely that the proposed text amendment would result in "homeless shelters" being built throughout the RA-1 districts, as the cost would be prohibitive, and are not built for profit. Providing Community Planning Assistance To: • Flathead County • City of Columbia Falls • City of Kalispell 9 City of Whitefish o Al Thelan, Interim City Manager Kalispell Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Page 2 There was testimony stating that the overflow from the other community residential facilities are served by the Samaritan House, as well as those in need of transient, temporary, or low cost housing. The facility is well run, clean, and residents must adhere to very strict rules, or they are out. There are absolutely no complaints from the neighbors. Three other persons spoke of the need in the community for the many fine services that Samaritan House provides, and concurred that the majority of the people in need of temporary, transitional or low cost housing, did not drive cars and therefore the reduction of the parking requirements was commensurate with the use. No one spoke in opposition. During Board discussion, possible options were reviewed and how to work with Samaritan Houses' non -conforming use status to best accommodate their needs. Language that better defined their use, along with performance standards, was discussed, at length, however the time required to go through the process for a text amendment would not accommodate the urgency for obtaining grant funds for the expansion of their facility. There was considerable discussion that the greater good of the community was served by granting this request. The impacts of a shelter, as a conditionally permitted use, was felt to be minimal in the RA-1 district, and could, therefore, reasonably be anticipated in the RA-2 and RA-3 districts, as well. The Board made findings to support a recommendation to City Council for approval of the requested text amendment to allow shelters as a conditionally permitted use in the RA-1, RA-2, and RA-3 zoning districts; and to approve the proposed amendment to change the parking requirements from"one space per two beds" to "one space per five units". The motion was made and passed on a vote of 5-0 to recommend that City Council adopt the findings as amended by the Planning Board in FRDO report #KZTA-96-2, and approve the requested text amendments to the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. The findings of fact, as adopted by the Kalispell City -County Planning Board, acting as the Zoning Commission are attached as "Attachment A". This recommendation for the text amendment is forwarded to the City Council for the June 24, 1996 work session and subsequent July 1, 1996 regular City Council meeting for consideration of the request. 1!3 Al Thelan, Interim City Manager Kalispell Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Page 3 Please contact the Commission or Narda Wilson of FRDO, if you have any questions. Respectfully Submitted, �--. KALISPELL CI '�-' (VTY PLANNING BOARD AND ZONING COMMISSION Th e Hash Pres TFH/NW/eo Attachments: FRDO Report #KZTA-96-2 Minutes June 11, 1996 Planning Board meeting c: Diana Roche, City of Kalispell P. 0. Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59901 Samaritan House, Inc. P.O. Box 592 Kalispell, MT 59903 Bruce Measure P.O. Box 918 Kalispell, MT 59903 ... TRANS MIT\1996\KZTA96-2.SAM ATTACHMENT A SAMARITAN HOUSE, INC. TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE KALISPELL ZONING ORDINANCE FINDINGS ADOPTED BY THE KALISPELL CITY -COUNTY PLANNING BOARD AND ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 11, 196 1. Does the requested zone comply with the Master Plan? In general, the proposed amendment furthers the goals of the Master Plan by providing transitional housing to disadvantages people within the community. The document does recognize that "Shelter is one of man's basic needs. Providing shelter to adequately house the present and future population of an area is one of the community's greatest concerns." 2. Is the requested zone designed to lessen congestion in the streets? No significant impact could be anticipated on congestion in the streets since many of the people who find themselves in a transient, indigent situation do not own cars. 3. Does the requested zone give reasonable consideration to the character of the district? A low density multi -family residential district is a district that is intended to provide areas for multi -family dwellings and compatible non-residential uses which would generally result in low traffic volumes and non -intrusive impacts. A shelter functions similarly to a community residential facility or boarding house, and would be compatible with other uses that would be allowed within the district. 4. Will the requested zone secure safety from fire. panic and other dangers? No obvious impacts to security from fire or other emergencies can be directly associated with this proposal. However, residents within an neighborhood may feel that their personal safety could be compromised because of the indigent situation of some people who might use a shelter. 5. Will the requested change promote the health and zeneral welfare? The proposed change would promote the health and welfare of a segment of the community, by providing a public service, filling a need in the community to provide adequate shelter, for those seeking temporary, transitional and low cost housing. 6. Will the requested zone provide for adequate light and air? The proposed amendment would not affect development standards relating to light and air. These are generally addressed with setbacks, density limits, height limitation and lot coverage standards. 7. Will the requested zone prevent the overcrowding of land? It does not appear that the proposed use would have a specific effect on the intensity of land uses since the apartment district in which this change is proposed would anticipate multi -family residences. 8. Will the requested zone avoid undue concentration of people? Again, this amendment does appear to affect density or the intensity of land use which would be addressed by the underlying district. 9. Will the requested zone facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage_,_ schools, parks, and other public requirements? Generally, a residential apartment district would be located in an area that is close to public services and transportation. It does appear that the zone would provide the necessary infrastructure to accommodate the use. 10. Does the requested zone give consideration to the particular suitability of the property for particular uses? It does appear that the requested zone gives adequate consideration for the particular suitability of the residential apartment district for shelters. Within the residential districts there are currently allowances for community residential facilities which can accommodate many sectors of the community which have special needs such as the disabled, the elderly, youth foster homes, homes for unwed mothers, safe homes and group homes for battered women and halfway houses. This facility would add another dimension with the district to accommodate people with special needs: those who are homeless or in need of transitional housing. 11. Will the proposed zone conserve the value of buildings? Properly constructed and managed, a shelter facility would be able to conserve the value of the buildings. 12. Will the requested zone encourage the most appropriate use of the land throughout the jurisdiction? The most appropriate use of land results in situations where conflicts between uses are minimized. Minimal conflicts can be anticipated with appropriate conditions of approval attached to the construction of a shelter facility. H:\...\TRANS MIT\1996\KZTA96-2.SAN SAIMARMN HOUSE, INC. TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE FRDO STAFF REPORT #KZTA-%70 MAY }6 A report to the Kalispell City -County Planning Board and Zoning Commission and the Kalispell City Council regardinga requestfor # amendment to the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. A public hearing has been scheduled before the Kalispell City -County Planning Board on June 11, 1996 beginning 00 t.#1 A recommendation 1l11 the Planning Board .1':f1'r.,.# will be forwarded to the Kalispell City Council for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 4 t .t - 464 A. Petitioner: Samaritan House, Inc. P.O. Box 592 Kalispell, MT 59901 (406)257-5801 B. Proposed Amendment: A request has been made by the Samaritan House, Inc. for an amendment to the text of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Section 27.09.030, Conditionall Permitted Uses in the RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment District to allow "S�elters." Additionally, a request for an amendment to Section 27.26.050(47), parking requirements for shelters, from the current "one per two beds" to the proposed "one per five occupancy units." B. Effected Zoning Districts: All of the RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment Districts, within the City of Kalispell would be affected by the proposed amendment to the district regulations, and all districts which allow "Shelters" as a permitted or conditionally permitted use would be affected by this change. Currently, the following districts allow shelters as a conditionally permitted use: B-5, Industrial -Commercial; B-4, Central Business District and the B-2, General Business District. I C.. Staff Consideration and Discussion of the Proposal: Backaround: The Samaritan House has applied for an amendment to the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance to allow shelters in the RA-1, a Low Density Residential Apartment District. Currently, to the adoption of the current zoning ordinance in 1992. Formal consideration was given to this issue by the City staff and the Kalispell City - County Planning Board in June of 1990 when the matter arose with a proposal to place shelterin an i 4 zoning district. o:• •' the minutes fromthatmeeting included as back-up information with this staff report. In brief, the City Attorney responded to an inquiry from Mayor Roger Hopkins regarding the definition of a homeless shelter under the zoning regulations. A letter from the Attorney's Office dated May 7, 1990 to Mayor Hopkins stated that a shelter would more closely fall into the category of "rooming house" or "boarding house" since the category of "shelters" was not included in the zoning regulations. This matter moved forward for a formal interpretation by the Planning Board. As you know after reading the minutes, the current Kalispell Zoning Ordinance was in the process of being updated and included shelters in several business districts. The Board made a motion that was based unanimously on a roll call vote that a shelter was most similar to a boarding house and as such would be allowed in the RA-1, RA-2 and RA-3 zoning districts. Since that time, the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance has been amended and specifically defines a "shelter" and places them in speck zoning districts as a conditionally permitted use. The current regulations define a "Shelter" as "A facility operated by a public or private party wherein the temporary boarding of the transient, homeless or indigent is provided as a public service to satisfy a demonstrated public need. See also Boarding House, Incidental." In referencing Incidental Boarding House, this is defined as "Incidental keeping of non - transient boarders by a resident family, provided not more than fifteen percent of the total floor area in one dwelling unit is used for living purposes and is devoted to such occupancy. This definition shall also apply to shelters for battered women or other individuals affected by domestic abuse provided no more than three adults other than the resident family are residing in the house at any one time." In referencing Boarding (Lodging or Rooming) House, this is defined as "A building, or portion thereof, other than a hotel, rest hoarse, or home for the aged where lodging and/or meals exclusive of the operator's immediate family are provided for compensation." A clear distinction is made between a boarding house, which is operated for compensation in a non -transient situation, and a shelter, which provides a public service to transient or homeless individuals. 2 Discussion of the Proposed Amendment: In considering the appropriate location for certain specific uses, the first task is to define exactly in what use category it can be placed. In seeking to find similar uses, to assess their appropriate location and potential impacts it is helpful to examine how specific uses are defined. Shelters and boarding houses have been defined above. Another use which could be considered somewhat similar and about which there has been significant discussion and some case law are "community residential facilities." The Kalispell Zoning Ordinance refers to Section 76-2-411, M.C.A. in the definition section of the ordinance. This section defines "community residential facility" as follows: 1. A community group home for developmentally, mentally or severely disabled persons which does not provide skilled or intermediate nursing care; 2. A youth foster home or youth group home as defined in 41-3-1102; 3. A halfway house operated in accordance with regulations of the Department of Health and Environmental Sciences for the rehabilitation of alcoholics or drug dependent persons; or 4. A licensed adult foster family care home. Section 76-2-412 states that a foster or youth group home or a community residential facility serving eight or fewer persons is considered a residential use of property for zoning purposes if the home provides care on a 24 hour basis. This section also states a city or county may require a conditional use permit in order to maintain a home. Community residential facilities, group homes and foster family care homes can provide services to many sectors of the community which need social services such as a battered women's home, a home for unwed mothers, recovering substance abusers and neglected / abused children. Under the current zoning regulations, community residential facilities serving eight or more persons is a conditionally permitted use in the RA-1, RA-2 and RA-3 zoning districts. Community residential facilities serving eight or fewer persons are conditionally permitted in the R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, R-5, RA-1, RA-2 and RA-3 zoning districts. Essentially, all of the residential zoning districts. 1 When considering the appropriate location of "shelters" it would appear that this is a specific sector of society that has special needs which are different from group homes, community residential facilities and foster homes. It would appear that a "shelter" is less residential in nature than would be some of the other uses discussed because it would serve a short-term housing need which is not intended to become permanent. Boarding houses, group homes and community residential facilities generally function as a permanent residence for most of the residents. 3 In attempting to research how to best handle this social and planning issue, staff researched what limited written material was available. Most publications deal wift. group homes, community residential facilities and half -way houses for recovering alcoholics and drug abusers, which as previously discussed, are generally treated as a residential use. Very little information was available on "homeless shelter" either from the American Planning Association or from the Technical Division in Helena. Hence, by contacting other communities in Montana and elsewhere in the area, staff was able to obtain some idea how this issue has been addressed. Findings are as follows: Missoula - Does not address shelters at all. There is an existing shelter in the downtown area which operates as a non -conforming use. Other temporary roo facilities are available for battered women. RUIjW - Not specifically listed, but would be allowed in the CBD, highway commercial and industrial zones. Bozeman - A shelter is not specifically listed, the information which was received indicated that they would be treated the same as a group home, permitted in the multi- family and conditionally permitted in single-family districts. , Butte - Recently examined their zoning regulations to address this issue. One and two family residential - not allowed. Multi -family - allow a transitional facility with counseling as a conditional use. Missions and philanthropic uses are permitted in the CBD. 4 k" GreatFalls- Shelters are not specifically listed, but may be able to fall under the category of rooming houses and boarding houses. Spokane - Allows shelters in the CBD and less restrictive zones. No off-street parking is required. Battered women's shelters, the Salvation Army and alcoholic treatment facilities are treated as a group home. Parking is based on staffing. Boise - Shelters would be allowed in the CBD subject to design review. Also would be allowed in other commercial, office/neighborhood zones with a conditional use permit. Not permitted in single family or multi -family residential disi I tricts. It appears that most other jurisdictions are slightly more accommodating for the use of shelters in that many allow them as a permitted use in the central business districts or other business districts, whereas, Kalispell requires a conditional use permit. Other jurisdictions are much more accommodating than Kalispell in that shelters would be considered as a rooming house or boarding house and would be allowed in more multi -family and even some single-family zoning districts as a conditionally permitted use. 9 Many of the people who find themselves at a homeless shelter are indigent, destitute and penniless. Most would not own a vehicle. In examining the current requirements under the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance of one space per two beds, this seems by any analysis that the current need for one vehicle parking space per bed seems excessive and unreasonable. I #r�il_�t1iEwn.I r Y 11 !fmaj "I I1 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. This analysis will cover both proposed amendments, allowing shelters in the RA-1 district and a reduction in parking requirements. 1. Does the requested zone comply with the Master Plan? Although the Master Plan has devoted a large section to "Housing," no specific mention regarding people with special housing needs appears to exist. The document does recognize that "Shelter is one of our man's basic needs. Providing shelter to adequately house the present and future population of an area is one of the community's greatest concerns." 2. Is the requested zone designed_to lessen congestion in the streets? No significant impact could be anticipated on congestion in the streets since many of the people who find themselves in a transient, indigent situation do not own cars. 3. Does the requested zone give reasonable consideration to the character of the district? A low density multi -family residential district is a district that is intended to provide areas for multi -family dwellings and compatible non-residential uses which would generally result in low traffic volumes and non -intrusive impacts. The transient nature of a shelter in relation to a community residential facility, group home or multi -family housing unit could create conflicts because the facility itself does not promote a "permanent residence. " Allowing shelters in a residential district has the potential to create conflicts because of the transient nature of the occupants. 4. Will the requested zone secure safety from fire, panic and other dangers? No obvious impacts to security from fire or other emergencies can be directly associated with this proposal. However, residents within an neighborhood may feel that their personal safety could be compromised because of the indigent situation of some people who might use a shelter. 5 S. Will !be reguested change promote the b_qglth and, generAl wel ? The proposed change may promote the health and welfare of a small segment of the community, i.e. those in need of a shelter. However, it would appear that some of the needs of people who would use a shelter could be met in another way, such as a group home for battered women, a community residential facility for unwed mother or a half- way house for recovering alcoholic or drug abusers in a residential area. The needs of the transient and indigent appear that they would best be met through a traditional homeless shelter in an area that is close to public services and transportation. S. Will the reguested zone provide fQr adequate light and air? The proposed amendment would not affect development standards relating to light and air. These are generally addressed with setbacks, density limits, height limitation and lot coverage standards. 7. Will the requested zone prevent the overcrowding of Ian It does not appear that the proposed use would have a specific effect on the intensity of land uses since the apartment district in which this change is proposed would anticipate multi -family residences. 8. Will the requested zone avoid undue concentration of pea lie? Again, this amendment does appear to affect density or the intensity of land use which would be addressed by the underlying district. 9. Will the requested zone facilitate the adeguate provision of Mml2grtation, water. sewerage, schools. Darks, and other public requirements? Generally, a residential apartment district would be located in an area that is close to public services and transportation. It does appear that the zone would provide the necessary infrastructure to accommodate the use. 10. Does the reauested zone eive consideration to the particular suitability of the Rroperty for particular uses? It does not appear that the requested zone gives adequate consideration for the particular suitability of the residential apartment district for homeless shelters. Within the residential districts there are currently allowances for community residential facilities which can accommodate many sectors of the community which have special needs such as the disabled, the elderly, youth foster homes, homes for unwed mothers, safe homes and group homes for battered women and halfway houses. The special needs of the 0 "homeless" would appear to be better able to be accommodated in an area which would anticipate a transient rather than permanent residency. 11. Will the proposed zone conserve the value of buildings? There is a potential that some buildings may be considered less desirable in a residential area if there was a shelter in the neighborhood. Whether the actual value of a building would actually be depreciated by allowing a shelter in a residential apartment district would depend on how the facility was operated and maintained, as with any other use. 1.2. Will the requested zone encourage the most appropriate use of the land throughout the jurisdiction? The most appropriate use of land results in situations where conflicts between uses are minimized. A shelter does not appear to be most appropriately placed in a residential district specifically because of the transient nature of the people occupying the facility. A more permanent residential setting would be appropriate such as halfway houses, boarding houses, group homes, etc. which are permitted. The transient nature of a shelter is more rightly located in an area that would allow hotels and motels as well as public and social services. This issue of how to accommodate a person who needs shelter for a day, a week or a month is a social issue that we struggle with as a nation and as a community. It is a reflection of the social values of a culture. As we seek to accommodate special needs, we find ways which work in some situations and ways which do not work in others. As a staff member researching and writing this report, it has been a constant struggle in balancing compassion for those less fortunate with the "public interest. " In researching this matter, it appears that there are many other ways that those unfortunates in our community can be accommodated besides a shelter. It appears that group homes and community residential facilities sponsored through many of the fine social service groups in this community can provide a more long term solution to someone needing shelter. A shelter, by definition, provides temporary board to the transient, homeless or indigent. Although the current applicant may provide a broader range of services, consideration has to be given to how the amendment would affect the zoning within the city as a whole. Hence, it does not appear appropriate to allow shelters in residential districts. On the other hand, with regard to the proposal to amend the parking, requiring one space per two beds seems truly excessive. As proposed and as has been demonstrated through practice, a ratio of one space per five units appears more reasonable. Note that in other jurisdictions that have dealt specifically with shelters, they do not require parking or would only require parking for staff. 7 rw The Flathead Regional Development Office would recommend that the Kalispeell City -County Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report KZTA-96-5 as fmdings of fact and recommend to the City Council the following: 1. Deny the proposed zoning text amendment to allow shelters as a conditionally permitted use in the RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment District; and 2. Approve the proposed amendment of the proposed zoning text amendment to change the parking requirements from "one space per bed" to "one space per five units." H : \ ... \KZTA\96\KZTA96-2.RPT 0 2 K.ALISPELL CITY -COUNTY PLANNING BOARD AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING JUNE 12, 1990 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Therese Fox. -Hash, President, at AND ROLL CALL 7:02 p.m. Those present were Hash, Manning, Sloan, Carothers, Fraser, Furlong, and Gould. Hall was absent and Stephens had an excused absence. David Greer, Senior Planner, represented the Flathead Regional Development Office. APPROVAL OF MIN- Carothers moved to approve the minutes as submitted of the joint UTES MAY 8, 1990 meeting held with the Flathead County Planning Board on May 8, 1990 & JOINT MEETING and the regular meeting of the Board on May 81 1990. Sloan seconded MAY S, 1990 the motion and it passed unanimously. INTERPRETATION Hash introduced the agenda item covering status of "Shelter for the ZONING ORDINANE Homeless" relative to a permitted or conditional use:t n the Kalispell CONCERNING A Zoning Ordinance. Interpretation under the provisions of Section SHELTER FOR THE 3.04, Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. Hash called on a report from Greer. HOMELESS Greer gave a little background on the subject. Recently a group wishing to establish a "Shelter for the Homeless" in an R-4 district approached the Zoning Administrator for consent. His determination was that there is not a specific listing for shelters in the ordinance and that it would most closely fit with a boarding house. The particular location desired was not zoned for a boarding house. The group desiring a location for a "Shelter" have asked that the Zoning Commission make a determination as to which use specified in the Ordinance is similar to a "Shelter for the Homeless." This would either uphold or change the determination of the Zoning Administrator. Glen Neier was asked for an'opinion on this matter. He felt that the closest use permitted in an R-4 zone classification was a Community Residential Facility. His determination according to state law was that the "Shelter" was not a similar use to a "Community Residential Facility." The Flathead Regional Development Office went through the various uses that are referenced in the zoning ordinance and tried to pick out similar uses as those of a Shelter. Some of the uses that appear to be similar are: Bed and Breakfast, Boarding House, Faster or Group Homes, Hotel, and Orphan/Charity Institution. Greer explained how each was similar and what each use was and how they might be different from a Shelter. The conclusion of the Flathead Regional Development Office is that a boarding house is the most similar to a shelter. A boarding house is permitted only in the residential apartment zones and therefore would not be allowed in the R-4 zone. Currently the staff has been proceeding through the rewrite of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. Pursuant to that rewrite a shelter is included as a specific use in the rewrite and there it is proposed that such use be located in a business district where you might find a bus depot etc. Hash clarified the duties of the Commission on this matter and noted that this was not a noticed public hearing. 1 Carothers asked that Neier's statement regarding the jursidiction of the Kalispell City my Planning Board and Zoning Commission be clarified. Greer stated that Neiers letter was made prior to the Zoning Administrator issuing an opinion. The group wishing to start the Shelter has written a letter to appeal to the Zoning Commission as per Section 3.04. A member of the audience stated that this meeting was represented to him that the public would be allowed to speak and he would like to give some input. Hash stated that the meeting was not stated as a public hearing and that comment would not be taken but questions could be asked of Mr. Greer or the Board Chairman. Furlong stated that he has had some calls from people concerning this issue and he admitted that he told them that they would be given a chance to be heard. Hash opened the meeting to public comment. Y Public Comment Bill Davison, individual looking for a location fbt dlShetter, stated that the problem that he has appears to be solved by the report given by Mr. Greer. He did not know what zones it would be permitted in and what was needed was a zone to locate in so that the correct property could be sought. He strongly requested that the Board make a determination as to what zone a Shelter would be allowed in. Hash explained that the process is to determine what type of use is substantially similar to the Shelter and then whatever type zone that determined use is allowed in would be a zone that a Shelter could locate. Hershall Rigsby, 416 Sixth Avenue West, litated that the proposed shelter home would be in the wrong neighborhood if it were located in our R-4 zone. The house being considered �1,�s a seven bedroom house. Mr. Davison has said that anywhere from one to five homeless families come to the food bank every week. He felt that this seven bedroom house would be too small. He cited the failure of a home of this nature in Whitefish because of the type of people (transients), inadequate supervision, and complaints from the neighbors. Ellen Reedl 425 Sixth Avenue West, stated that there are several homes in that neighborhood that are lived in by elderly people. The neighborhood is quite. There is a group home in our neighborhood. She also did not feel this was the right neighborhood for a shelter home. i Hash requested that the group make their comments in light of the fact that the determination will decide what type of zone this type of use will be located, not which neighborhood. Currently the staff is recommending that the closest use is "Boarding House"l which would only allow the shelter to be located in a RA Residential Apartment zones and in the future depending on the outcome of the rewrite possibly only business zones. Mr. Hamill, 505 Seventh Avenue West, stated that he is against any change that would allow the shelter to be in the residential district. R-A Don Swanberg, 516 Fifth Street West, stated that the definition of homeless could take in a lot of different types of people. There is no doubt that they need to be helped but this is not the right area. There needs to be more supervision and police protection in that area. He also felt that the parking and traffic problems would be - more than the current streets could handle. Mr. Schneider, 342 Sixth Avenue West, stated that he felt that there are more homeless people in the Kalispell area than is estimated. He felt that a samaritan home is a business. He also felt that the specific location is too small for the needs. What would prevent them from adding to the home and making more room for more beds. He felt that it should be located in a business area since it is a business. Sharon Berry, 448 Sixth Avenue Westn asked Mr. Davison if the Board declares the use to be similar to a boarding house would he then be looking for another location or would he attempt to change the zoning or whatever in order to locate in the huase��under current consideration. David Greer stated that tonight the determination is to decide what use the shelter is most similar to and not what specific property it would be located on. If this Board determines that it is a Boarding House, the only place that a Boarding House can go is in the Residential Apartment zones. The particular property that was inquired about is not in a Residential Apartment zone* therefore the shelter use could not be located there. Ms. Berry asked if they could change the zoning. Greer stated that if they were to pursue that avenue or any other avenue to locate in that particular property it would be subject to public hearings. Mr. Davison stated that currently there is no zone in which /to locate. He added that this Board determination will give them a zone and whatever it is we will abide by it. ( Gene Thompson stated that he owns property in the area. He felt that fire safety and parking would be concerns. He did not feel that the property itself could provide adequate parking. Helen Clark, 420 Fifth Avenue West, stated that she is happy with the existing Group Home but parking is a real problem. Ram Kennedy, 1036 Sixth Avenue West, suggested that the Boarding House requirements do not fit the definition of a shelter. She felt that a text amendment should be done to put the word "shelter" into the zoning ordinance and to put it in/business zones where these people would have access to the services they would need. Board Discussion There being not further public comment° Hash opened the meeting for Board discussion. Gould stated that in 1987 there was a amendment to the definition of "Community Residential Facility" that substituted the word "severly disabled" for "physically disabled". He also believed that 76- 2-411 MCA intended to include something like a shelter for the homeless in the definition of "Community Residential Facility". 3 Fraser clarified that tonight the Board could make a determination that the use is similar to Boarding house but then later in the rewrite the use might be allowed only in the business zones. By that time a shelter could conceivably be established in an RA zone thus creating a non --conforming use. Greer stated that they would be a legal non -conforming use. Furlong asked if the Board were to sustain the decision of Craig Kerzman could this non-profit group then seek a location for their shelter. Greer stated that to sustain Craig`s decision would tell then that the shelter would be appropriate in the RA zones. Furlong moved to sustain the decision of the City Zoning Administrator Craig Kerzman. Greer noted that the Staff report may be "clearer" than Craig`s letter since it also specified the zoned appropriate to a Boarding House. The zoning district RA-i is residential- apartment, RA-2 is residential apartment with higher density, and RA-3 is residential apartment/office zone. Fraser asked if the Board were to disregard the current recommendation and just ask where should a shelter be located what would the answer be? Greer stated that the answer would be as proposed in the rewrite of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, a business area. Fraser asked if that step could be taken tonight so that one of these shelters is appropriately located. Greer stated that it would require an amendment to the Ordinance which would take about 90 days. Greer added that, according to the curre t ordinance, it is the responsibility of the Planning Board to interpret the uses that are closest to this use as currently listed. �He felt that the Board is going to have to deal with the question�in terms of the current zoning ordinance. Furlong asked for clarification regarding the rewrite position. He asked if the Boarding House use were decided upon that would permit a shelter to be located in the RA zones but that would not appear to be the desire since the rewrite proposes the use to be in commercial zones. Greer stated that the zoning ordinance rewrite which would suggest business zones for a shelter use has not been adopted by the Planning Board or the City Council. The Board may choose to extend that use into other zones when they begin their review. i Fraser asked if the Board could determine that the shelter is closer to a hotel rather than a boarding house thereby placing the use in a business zone rather than an RA zone. Greer said yes. Manning asked Mr. Davison if his group would be willing to wait until the new zoning ordinance was in place before they located a shelter somewhere. He felt that potential problems could be created by moving ahead now. Mr. Davison stated that he would not be willing to wait for an undetermined amount of time to find out where they could locate a shelter. 4 Carothers felt that most of those present would agree that there is a need for a facility of this type~ He felt that what Manning and Fraser were aiming at was if this was placed in the proper location it would be better received. He felt that if a shelter were placed in the RA zones there would be the same concerns that the R-4 neighborhood has. If we could allow for the planning office to come with their suggestions, then it would be placed appropriately. A member of the audience felt that the question needs to be addressed today. Mr. Davison stated that they have been offered some assistance from an apartment building in an RA-2 zoning district. Their plan is to keep most of those units as rentals and then change three or four into shelter units. He felt restricted by just a business zone. Greer - read the various types of uses currently allowed in RA zoning districts. Gould asked how many homes would be needed in the future. Mr. Davison said there are four kinds of homeless people. Jhey are families, transients, alcoholic and drug abusers and mentally\i��. One out of 8 or 9 are mentally ill. Generally the Food Bank sees between one and five families per week and generally it is closer to one. There were approximately 252 to 500 people that needed temporary housing lest year. Gould asked if they had a preference for one type of zone over another? Mr. Davison felt that any zone would do. Motion Gould moved to adopt the recommendation of the FRDO staff which designates a "shelter" to be most similar -to a boarding house and as such would be allowed in RA-1, RA-2, and RA-3 zoning districts. Carothers asked if Furlong's motion had dieo. Furlong felt it had for lack of a second. Furlong then seconded Gould's motion. Furlong asked Greer how long of time Will be involved in the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance rewrite. Greer felt that there is always a possibility that the rewrite might never get adopted. Based on this, Furlong felt that the motion would be an immediate answer whereas the other answer might be a long time coming. Manning asked if the Board could review each of the three RA zones as far as their permitted uses and select which one that would be most closely related to business uses. Greer stated that if the determination is that the shelter use is most similar to a boarding house then the use would allowed anypihere a boarding house is allowed~ Otherwise any limitations would/be an amendment process. Fraser called for the question. The motion was passed unanimously in a roll call vote. WORK PROGRAM FOR Hash introduced the need to decide on a work program for the 19901990-1991 1991 fiscal year. - Greer presented three proposed items for the work program. Those items were: (1) Complete the rewrite of the Kalispell Zoning _t 'I #J* I V A The proposed text change promotes the master plan by accommodating shelters where they presently exist and encouraging their orderly growth in areas where they are needed in Flathead County. B. The proposal probably has very little impact on congestion in the street and providing safe access, as informal studies have been done throughout the State of Montana to determine average automobile ownership of shelter clients. That study shows that at the maximum, one parking space is necessary for every five shelter units which may be an individual and may be a family. Ratios at Samaritan House in Kalispell are generally between one car per seven occupancy units and one car for ten occupancy units. It certainly is the case that concentrating shelter clientele at a single facility reduces the number of individuals parking their automobiles on the streets or roadways in Flathead County, thus congesting traffic ways, prohibiting late night clean up and maintenance crews and substantially reducing the safety risks to others on the road, as well as the affectedlladiiiduals. C. Providing for shelters promotes safety from fire and random acts of violence as the shelters are designed to protect the individuals and to provide safe transitional shelter and protection from street crime. D. Flathead County Master Plan provides for low income housing and shelters. Providing transitional shelter is in the public interest, promotes health interests of the community, certainly comforts those who are homeless, conveniently centralizes housing for those people and provides a safe place for them to reside. I E. Inapplicable. F. Only marginally applicable. G. As noted, some homeless populations insert themselves in inner city environments occupying commercial buildings after normal commercial hours. By offering a residential facility, the shelters would remediate that phenomena. H. Centralizing shelter facilities allows immediate access to schools, utilization of city water and sewage facilities and parks. The concentration in the R1 zone of Kalispell's urban center allows individuals to walk to facilities, schools, churches, public agencies, jobs, parks and public facilities that they would be unable to reach from outside an urban area without an automobile. As noted, few of these individuals own automobiles. I. Samaritan House has existed in this location for approximately six years and has drawn support of the community, including the neighbors. J. The four lots Samaritan House holds particularly suited for shelter purposes is central to numerous other related facilities. K. Not applicable. L. See all of above.