The URL can be used to link to this page

4. Petition for Assistance with Rezoning Request R-4 to I-2Agenda -August 18, 1997 AGENDA ITEM 4 - PETITION FOR ASSISTANCE WITH REZONING REQUEST - R-4 TO I-2 BACKGROUND/CONSIDERATION: I have enclosed correspondence from Katrina Kiger and the neighborhood that will be impacted by a zoning request by McElroy & Wilken, Inc. The enclosure also includes the Findings of Fact by the FRDO staff that recommended against approval. A Public Hearing was held on June 101 by Planning and Zoning. At that meeting, the Planning Board and Zoning Commission denied the request on a 5-1-1 vote. The one abstention was by Jean Johnson who represents McElroy & Wilken. On July 1511, the County Commissioners held a hearing. Apparently, despite the staff and Planning and Zoning's negative recommendation, the Commissioners wanted to approve the request. They then "continued" the issue for 45 days to enable McElroy & Wilken to illustrate the mitigation plan for the area. We have received several calls/inquiries about this item. Although we have no direct authority to review this request, a change in the zoning and use of this land will impact our citizens. RECOMMENDATION: Upon review of the request for re -zoning of the il area, the Findings of Fact of FRDO staff and the action of the Agenda -August 18, 1997 Planning Board and Zoning Commission, I concur with the reviewing agencies that the impacts are adverse to our neighborhood (Item 4 of Statutory Criteria). The request does not comply with the Master Plan adopted by the City and County (Item ##1 of Statutory Criteria), and the approval will devalue the existing homes in the neighborhood (Item 10 of Statutory Criteria). RECOMMENDATION: Although we may not have formal authority for this review, I believe we need to assist our citizens in resisting this change of zoning. I recommend a formal letter from the City Council stating our opposition to the change be sent to the Commissioners immediately. Calls from Council Members may also assist their decision -making process. ACTION REQUIRED: Direction to the staff or Mayor to send a letter in opposition to the change in zoning should be authorized. AUG - V 1997 i 9�., co--tiL�84. c ia,icq� RE: PETITION FOR ZONING AMENDMENT FLATHEAD COUNTY TRACT 30I, SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 28N, RANGE 21W We, the undersigned, as registered homeowners, protest the rezoning of the above subject property from t4'wo_Family Residential to 12 Heavy Industrial. Signature Address Phone W rr. �.�.�. !s �-_.�L � EW_ �� ,■. !M -1II G-2-97 17-3 I Z,4 ,,�•�-•L � f' h, 3 e 1 t /� D /��,y,,c�,d�/•tom` � . """' �(�Gt�,�O �tECE1VED jU,y 4 07 Azm= OFF"` RECEIVE, JUN 3 799,- 465 9Th Ave E. N. FLATH&AD Kalispell, Montana 59901 06vE June 1, 1997 Ms. Norda Wilson Flathead County Developmental Office 723 5Th Avenue East Kalispell, Montana 59901 Dear Ms. Wilson: I live at 465 9Th Ave. E.N. and am writing this letter to protest the re -designation of Tract 301 between 9TH and 10TH Avenue East North to Heavy Industrial. This proposal, if passed, would greatly impact the surrounding neighborhood. The air and noise pollution would make living in this vicinity very undesirable and our property values would decrease significantly. I trust the people making this decision will consider all these factors very carefully and not allow a good `4 residential and family area to be ruined by a heavy industrial business. Sincerely, y Vifginia C. Rousselle �pVJNiqNs _-Naning MountaL-t-4 tech of keligiow Science A Center for Positive .Living ` 475 8th Avenue E.N. Kalispell, Montana 59901 (406) 257-6539 June 5,1997 Dear Kalispell City -County Planning Board and Zoning Commission, We, the below signed members of the Shining Mountains Church of Religious Science located at 475- 8th Ave E.N. Kalispell, express our opposition to the proposed Zoning change requested by the petitioners of Paul J. Stokes and Associates, Inc. on behalf of McElroy & Wilken, Inc. The property in question is described as Assessor's Tract 301 located in Section 8, Township 28 North, Range 21 West, P.M. M., Flathead County, Montana. We own three lots that lie directly west of the proposed site and feel it would significantly impact our land value, resale potential , and affect the aesthetics of the neighborhood. We urge you not to approve this rezoning proposal . Thank you for your time and consideration. tl� I A A J4 >,")! A we Len BeaChWoods Campground CALLEN & JOYCE MCDONALD 6/9197 12:50:24 Page 2 of 3 573-366-0320 Callen and Joyce McDonald P.O. Box 8541 Kalispell, MT 59901 (573-365-0320) June 6, 1997 Narda Wilson Flathead Regional Development Office 723 Fifth Ave. East, Room 414 Kalispell, MT 59901 RE: Request by Paul J. Stokes and Associates, Inc. on behalf of McElroy and Wilken, Inc. and Kristin Shane, Randall Kjos and Sylvia Kingsbury for a zone change from the current R-4, a Two Family Residential zoning district to I-2, a Heavy Industrial zoning district on approximately 1.86 Acres. The property is in the Evergreen and Vicinity Zoning District and is located between Ninth Avenue E.N. and Tenth Avenue E.N., north of their northernmost boundaries. The property can be described as Assessor's Tract 301 located in Section 8, Township 28 North , Range 21 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. Dear Ms. Wilson, We are the current owners of the small mobile home court located at 737 East California Street, Kalispell, MT. We were not made aware of the Notice of Public Hearing regarding this matter and I must say that a request of this magnitude and the influence it will have on our property should have wan -anted our notification. We are currently out of state and had it not been for a concerned neighbor, this matter would have slipped by us without notice. Perhaps that was the intent. Our property is identified as "23K" on the vicinity map that was attached to the Notice of Public Hearing. The subject property is no more than one block away and I can assure you that this change in zoning will not only adversely affect our property value but it will also adversely affect the quality of living to the residents of the mobile home court. We have many elderly persons residing there. Please put yourselves in our (the neighborhood's) shoes. Granted the homes in this area are not the most valuable in Kalispell, but they are just that, "Our Homes". We all worked too hard for "Our "Homes" to sit idly by and allow our neighborhood to be turned into what? A gravel pit? An Excavation and Road Construction site with heavy equipment coming and going? A Ready Mix Factory? All of the above? How would you feel if a heavy industrial corporation moved into your neighborhood How would you react? Would you be concerned about air quality? Pollution? Noise? Safety? Additional heavy industrial sites? We pay over $3,000.00 per year in property taxes for our piece of property in that neighborhood Will our taxes go down if our property is devalued by location? What about the resale value? Will we be reimbursed for our loses? BeachWoods Campground CALLEN & JOYCE MCDONALD 6M7 12:51:46 Page 3 of 3 573-365-0320 Please allow me to bring up one more item before closing. You will not even allow us to put in just "one" additional mobile home in our mobile home court even though there is room and one was there in the distant past. We understand that rules are rules and zoning restrictions were put into place to protect residential neighborhoods. But now you are considering allowing a large corporation to alter the living conditions of the whole neighborhood Could it be a matter of the "Big Guy" verses the "Little Guy"? One last plea, please do not allow this to happen! Sincerely, Callen and Joyce McDonald Home Owners, City of Kalispell ............................................................................................... We pad 3,M)AX, € er �'3s• ill our t3f p? s#�fil cj that a-isgamirfic-ed. W'_ c}U,r tue's ago drnva if 0"Ir ply3fmay is, dtnra:t:ed wutr *Qut one reM#t -valve? 'Mx- 4Se for out fose'Cn P:F.m 311011V F83w 3Q €r£3ng tip t,3.'k od'ore d03:333t_ yrsb3 i1 wt ;E*-'A -N C:S f'G €Seal is jW '"'%W WiF3ss33;s# rx'* le hv.fjfl in s32i3' i33i•bile ::COIF a L1:' m evm t?i f'--Z iti fi'-e m vrj > >uel $J s_:3?G"lli;i :.#3�� .iit F�3+:, s✓3:�,333t }?tiSi 'S3'i: tstl�#xt+i'.sfss �:2f fii:$S �6 :'i5�� ?.?t� � c ?:sril f.2`.Si? ie:'li,:;$ t+cff�' #�s�22t e:tY!•;.xrr::�#s2a2 Ycs a€>�' t€:F 3'v333ia co:t,�iiF:3335 ..f F?3:: c�t#3s?F atr�:��i2iKtc•;ss�;k;. �..o�:id fF �e s. �tFzirs� s.3f' i#sN "�;� %s4'X" 'E83"sv:'• Fi3?r' ":.3�i€�; tit9 "' f rs-� lM"% Pi4-3, pleue do T;..*t abet?tet u r T.0 it;2pper. aTEDsAeJO OZEO-59£-El9 Z so Z a6ed 09:L5:Z1 L61619 Q7b'NOflOW 30),or 8 N311VO puno:6dweo spooMyoeaB June 9, 1997 Flathead Regional Development Office Kalispell, Montana To whom it may concern: In response to the following: A request by Paul J. Stokes and Associates, Inc. on behalf of McElroy and Wilken, Inc. and Kristin Shane, Randall Kjos and Slyvia Kingsbury for a zone change from the current R-4, a Two Family Residential zoning district to I 2, a Heavy Industrial zoning district on approximately 1.86 acres. The property is in the Evergreen and Vicinity Zoning District and is located between Ninth Avenue and Tenth Avenue E.N., north of their northernmost boundaries. The property can be described as Assessors Tract 30I located in Section 8, Township 28 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M., of Flathead County, Montana. As a property owner two blocks away, I have several issues with the zone change requested. Depending on the exact use of the land in the future, it would have a moderate to extreme effect on property value (lower unfortunately). I have hopes that local government has interest in protecting the local residents investments in their homes. As the continued encroachment of industrial toward residential continues, the hazard presented to the children in the neighborhood increases. A hazard exists at the present, and this is a case where more is not better. To compromise the local residents for the convenience of business is not what I had hoped that zoning would accomplish. I see no benefit to the community that would allow this zoning change_ A change made against the wishes of those residents impacted, would show government not working as intended. The zoning needs to remain R4. , 9— �4 0-6 *� �01h� Bernhardt C. Petersen 393 8th Avenue E.N. Kalispell, Montana i NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING KALISPELL CITY -COUNTY PLANNING BOARD AND ZONING COMIUSSION { 1 The regular meeting of the Kalispell City -County Planning Board and Zoning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, June 10 1997, beginning at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers, Kalispell City Ball, 213 First Avenue East, Kalispell. During this regularly scheduled meeting, the Board will hold public hearings to consider the following agenda items and make a recommendation to the Kalispell City Council and / or the Board of County Commissioners: To the Kalispell City Council: 1. A request by Jackola Engineering on behalf of City Service Inc./NW Investments Partnership and the City of Kalispell on behalf of Montana Gold Bullet, Inc. for annexation into the city of Kalispell and initial zoning of I-1, a Light. Industrial zoning district. - The properties are currently located in the County jurisdiction and _ are zoned -I- Y, -a --- Light- - Indus*: ial - district. The- properties_ are- 1ocated. -orr - approximately the southeast corner of Third Ave. East and Eighteenth Street East in Kalispell. The property addresses are 1841 Third Avenue East and .400 Eighteenth Street East and can be described as Assessor's Tracts 81A, 8IAA., 8N, 8NC, 8PA, 8PC and 8PBA located in Section 20, Township 28 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. 2. A request by Jackola Engineering on behalf of City. Service, Inc. / NW Investments Partnership for a conditional use permit to allow the storage, packaging and sales of bulk fuel and petroleum products in the I-1, Light Industrial zoning district as provided under Section 27.18.030(17) of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. This request has been filed concurrently with and is contingent upon the request for annexation and initial zoning of I-1, Light Industrial. The property is located approximately 200 feet south of the southeast corner of Third Avenue East and Eighteenth Street East in Kalispell and can be described as Assessor's Tracts 8IA.A, 8PA, 8PC and 8PBA in Section 20, Township 28 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. 3. A request by Buffalo Chip Partner and the City of Kalispell on behalf of Edgerton School and School District #5 for annexation into the city of Kalispell and initial zoning of RA-1, a Low Density Residential Apartment District zoning district and P- 1, Public. The properties proposed for annexation are currently located in the County and are zoned RA-1, a Residential Apartment District. The properties are located approximately 1,000 feet west of Whitefish Stage Road, south of Granrud Lane. The properties to be annexed are known as Buffalo Stage Phase II and Edgerton School. There are various addresses within Buffalo Stage Phase 11. Edgerton School is located at 1400 Whitefish Stage Road. The properties can be described as Buffalo Stage Phase Il and Assessor's Tract lA located in Section 31 and Assessor's Tract 5E located in Section 32, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. To the Board of County Commissioners: 4. A request by Robert and Terri Quirk and Donald and Jeannie Nelson for a zone change from AG-80, an Agricultural zoning district, to SAG-5, a Suburban Agricultural zoning district on approximately 26 acres. The property is in the East Side Zoning District and is located on the north side of Montana Highway 35 approximately one half mile east of the Flathead River. The property can be described as Assessor's Tracts 2 and 2A located in Section 2, Township 28 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. S. A request by Paul J. Stokes and Associates, Inc. on behalf of McElroy and Wilken, Inc. and Kristin Shane, Randall Kjos and Syria Kingsbury for a zone change from the current R-4, a Two Family Residential zoning district to I-2, a Heavy Industrial zoning district on approximately 1.86 acres. The property is in the Evergreen and Vicinity Zoning District and is located between Ninth Avenue E.N. and Tenth Avenue E.N., north of their northernmost boundaries. The property can be described as Assessor's Tract 30I located in Section 8, Township 28 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. Development Office, 723 Fifth Avenue East, Room 414, Kalispell, MT 59901, and are available for public review during regular office hours. Interested persons are encouraged to attend the hearings and make their views and concerns know to the Board. Comments in writing may be submitted to Narda Wilson of the Flathead Regional Development Office at the above address prior to the date of the hearing. Thomas R. Jentz- Planning Director 1 i •t NOW McELROY : WILKEN, INC. ZONE CHANGE REQUEST FROM R-4, TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO ' - • : : ZONINGDISTRICT- 'FILE #FZC-97-5 00 rKUU rile NO. f r. Date Accepted Receipt /4J'Pt r I PETITION FOR ZONING FLATHEAD MAY 13 1997 hiCELROY & WILKEN INC. 1. NAME OF APPLICANT: des '�,:.• "�' ;..� F. R. D. 0, 2. MAIL ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 35 3. CITYISTATE: KALISPELL, MONTANA 59903 PHONE: (406) 755-5775 4. INTEREST IN PROPERTY: PURCHASE OPTION 5. ZONING MAR AMENDMENT: X ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT: PLEASEIF THE REQUEST PERTAINS TO AN AMENDMENT'M THE TEXT OF THE ZONING REGULATIONS, COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: A. What is the proposed zoning text amendment? N/A IF THE REQUEST PERTAINS TO AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING MAP, PLEASE COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: A. Address of the property: 555 10TH AVENUE EN, KALISPELL, MONTANA B. Legal description: TRACT 30I, SECTION 8, T.28N., R.21W. (Lot and Block of Subdivision; Tract NR) (Section, Township, Range) (Attach sheet for metes and bounds) C. The present zoning of the above property is: R4 (COUNTY) D. The proposed zoning of the above property is: 12 E. State the changed or changing conditions that make the proposed amendment necessary: THE APPLICANT HAS OWNED AND OPERATED A SAND AND GRAVEL OPERATION FOR 25+ YEARS ON THE AJACENT PROPERTY TO THE NORTH. THE TOPOGRAPHY AND THE NORMAL ExTRACI'ION OF AGGREGATE HAS CREATED AN AESTHETICALLY UNPLEASING AND POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS CONDITION FOR THE RESIDENTS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. A MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REtZ.AMATION PERMIT IS ON FILE FOR THE EXISTING GRAVEL PIT AND THE APPLICANT IS PREPARED TO INCORPORATE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IN HIS EXISTING PLAN. 1 HOW WILL THE PROPOSED (MANGE ACCOMPLISH THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF: A. Promoting the Kaster Plan THE SUBJECT PROPfFM IS CURRENMY IN R4 �Y f 4: r! w�►11 • • f • �Cf4 i►!?/ i 4.l. • Sf : ' ' r1 • ff !• • ! �- e• . . • •a. B. Lessening congestion in the streets and providing safe access WITH THE � r � • ! r,- • � • • �• • • s• el�.pol • • r r air C. Promoting safety fron fire, panic, and other dangers THE PROPOSED ZOD%ING CHANGE WILL NOT HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON FIRE, PANIC & OTHER DANGERS. THE ABSENCE OF THE RESIDENTS AND PMLAMATION OF THE LAND WILL PRCMDTE SAME. D. Promoting the public interest, health, comfort, convenience, safety aT e� general welfare THE PUBLIC WILL BE BEST SERVED WITH A UNIFORM DELINIATION �a ! • • rs. E. Providing adequate light and air THE R4 ZONE TO THE SOUIii OF THE SUBJECT SITE IS ESTABLISHED WITH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES & A CHURCH. THE F. Preventing' }t,�he, �overcrowding of land THE PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE IS CONSISTANT WITH THE, ,APROPERTY` PROPERTY AND WILL THE OVERCROWDING. S. Avoiding undue concentration of population NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT' +�� •• r -••-• a• • i w ►• er •• o • • a• • OF POPULATION MAY ••CM A= MINING OPERATIONS. H. Facilitating the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewage, schools parks, and other public facilities ALL PUBLIC SERVICES & INFRASTRUCTURE ARE IN PLACE AND NO IMPACT FOR THESE SERVICES ARE ANTICIPATED. 2 • I. Giving reasonable consideration to the character of the district THE F PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE WILL CREATE A TOPOGRAPHIC UNIFORMITY TO THE DI=CT WHICH WILL LEND ITSELF TO THE LONG RANGE QUALITY OF THE AREA. J. Giving consideration to the peculiar suitability of the property for particular uses THE SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE OF THE SUBJECT SITE IS WELL SUITED FOR THIS SPECIFIC APPLICATION WITH POST MINING RESULTS CREATING A DESIRABLE SITE. K. protecting and conserving the value of buildings THE EXESMG BUIMING WILL BE MOVED TO ANC7I'M LOCATION FINAL SITE. FINAL SITE PREPARATION WILL, OFFER AN IDEAL LOCATION. L. Encouraging the most appropriate use of land by assuring orderly growth THE I2 ZONE TO THE NORTH WOULD INCORPORATE THE SUBJECr SITE WITHOUT ANY PHYSICAL BARRIERS. e e f t f e f e e e} e e t e +► f e e e e#* �► e f e t e f e f e e e u• e f m f e e s t The signing of this application signifies approval for F.R.D.G. staff to be present on the r. property for routine monitoring and inspection during the approval process. 1fcant) 1Pa.v 1 1 4y': Revised 7/27/13 dh 3 .S ,C3 ate) ... :a f'Mf:•: . r o. = l OWNERSHIP a ASSESSOMS SECTION - i LOT OR TRACT TOWNSHIP - RANGE 1 0787850 5 8-28-21 'McELROY 8 WILKEN, INC. 3P.O. BOX 35 ? { f I XAUSPELL, MT 59W3-0035 { i 1 i !0782575 20 8-28-21 ! IJOSEPH C. & SHARON S. COPELAND 360 9TH AVE. EN i I ! �KAUSPELL, MT 59901-3250 j '0670850 301CA 8 28 21 I IMcELROY & WILKEN, INC. , P.O. BOX 35 KAUSPELL, MT 59903-0035 ( i 3 (^287635 30J 8-28-21 (GREENWOOD 11 CORP. 210 RHODES DRAW f �KALISPELL, MT 59901-7055 i f {0287635 I 32 8-28-21 iGREENWOOD 11 CORP. I ( '210 RHODES DRAW I l ( 1 KALISPELL, MT 59901-7055 0982987 { 33A 8-28-21 DAWN MARQUARDT 1 635 E. OREGON ST. 1 IKALISPELL, MT 59901-3260 I i 3 f XJOS ADDFTIONI 8-28-21 I !0525575 1 !DONALD D. & KATRINA B. KIGER 1496 9TH AVE. EN �^ ( !KALISPELL, MT 59901-5459 ,NORTHEAST A ITION 8-28-21 ! 'E032250 f N 100' OF E 147 ! !SEVENTH DAYADVENTIST {1425 W. MAIN STREET LOT 1, BLOCK 1 ! 0OZEMAN, MT 59715-3257 1 Y; ASSESSORS I SECTION - I LOT OR TRACT I TOWNSHIP - RANGE ' � Me5„INr. ADDIaFcc I rMILAM AMMON 8-28-21 I 10452352 NORTH PART OF ' i I IKRISTEN A SHANE 1159 SHELTER VIEW DRIVE LOT 1 BLOCK t I SYLVIA S. KINGSBURY iKALSWELL, MT 59901-7573 r !! � I 10577500 SOUTH PART OF r !GLADYS MILAM, DARLENE B. ALUK 1045 E. OREGON LOT 1 BLOCK 1 rROBERT G. STAHLBERG, MANE G. BARR iKAUSPELL -MT 59901-3262 !GERALD D.STAHLBERG I `` I j !004WW LOT 2, BLOCK 1 WAMES M. & CLARA MAE BAUER :955 E_ OREGON i IKALISPELL, MT 59901-3260 I � i :0694075 LOT 3, BLOCK 1 I ;DAWN MARQUARDT 935 E OREGON ST. i ' I rKAUSPELL, MT 59901-3260 I I ,0027700 LOT 6, BLOCK 1 IWILLIAM H. & BARBARA ARTHUR 1475 9TH AVE. EN KAUSPELL MT 59901-3247 .-T r081730Q & LOT 7 BLOCK t ,E KITS SMITH 285 N. MAIN r '0440280 KAUSPELL, MT 59901-3901 f f I i I r j r I I I ! MC ELROY AND WILREN,INC. REQUESTR" ZONE CHANGE FROM TO 1-2 FLATHEAD REGIONAL DEVELOPBEM OFFICE STAFF REPORT #FZC-97-5 A report to the Kalispell City -County Planning Board and the Board of County Commissioners regarding a zone change request from R-4, Two Family Residential, to I- 2, Heavy Industrial. A public hearing has been scheduled before the Kalispell City - County Planning Board for June 10, 1997 beginning at 7:00 PM in the Kalispell City Council Chambers. The Planning Board will forward a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners for final action. F': ;! a 0yoxil aL+fit The applicants are proposing to amend the Evergreen and Vicinity Zoning Map for a single parcel from the existing R-4, a Two Family Residential use district, to I-2, a Heavy Industrial use district for the purpose of gravel extraction. A. Petitioner and Owners: Technical Assistance: McElroy and Wilken, Inc. P.O. Box 35 Kalispell, MT 59903 (406)755-5775 Kristin A. Shane Randall L. Kjos Sylvia S. Kingsbury 169 Shelter View Drive Kalispell, MT 59901 Paul J. Stokes & Associates, Inc. 343 First Ave. West Kalispell, MT 59901 (406)755-8707 B. Location and Legal Description of Property: The property proposed for rezoning is located north of the northern most terminus of Ninth Avenue E.N. and Tenth Avenue E.N. and is located in the county. The property address is 555 Tenth Avenue E.N. and can be described as Assessor's Tract 30I located in Section 8, Township 28 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M., Flathead County. C. Existing zoning: Currently this property is zoned R-4, a Two Family Residential use district which allows duplexes on a minimum of 7,500 square feet and single family dwellings on a minimum of 6,000 square feet. Currently on the site is a single family home containing approximately 3,000 square feet and a 520 square foot detached garage. 1 D. Nature of Request and Proposed Zoning: The applicants are requesting the rezoning of this property with the intent to purchase it from the current property owners for the purpose of gavel extraction, a conditionally permitted use in the I-2, Heavy Industrial zoning district. g E. Size: The area proposed for rezoning contains approximately ifsacres of land. F. Ebtisting Land Use: As previously noted, there is currently a 3,000 square foot single family home on the property along with a 520 square foot detached garage. G. Adjacent Land Uses and Za North: McElroy and Wilken gravel pit and batch plant, County I-2 zoning East: McElroy and Wilken gravel pit and batch plant, County I-2 zoning South: Manufactured home park and campground, County R-5 zoning Single family residences, City R-3 zoning West: Single family residences, City R-3 zoning H. General Land Use Character: The general land use character of the immediate area where the zone change is proposed is single family residential. The northernmost boundary of the property proposed for rezoning is at the top of a knoll where a line of trees has been planted. The knoll and the trees act as a buffer separating the industrial and residential uses. To the east lies the gravel ` pit which is also separated topographically from the residential areas to the west because of a moderate slope. I. Utilities and Public Services: Sewer: On -site sewage treatment Water: Shared private well Refuse: Private hauler Electricity: Pacific Power and Light Telephone: PTI service area Schools: School District #5 Fire: Evergreen Volunteer Fire Department Police: Flathead County Sheriffs Office J. Relation to zoning requirements: With regard to lot size, the 1.86 acre parcel which is proposed for rezoning is far in excess of the minimum lot size requirement of 7,500 square feet and the mini um 75 foot lot width requirement for the I-2 zoning district. Reaction of Nearby Proyerty Owners A notice of public hearing was mailed to property owners within 150 feet of the subject property approximately 15 days prior to the hearing. At the writing of the staff report, two people in the immediate area have contacted the FRDO stating their opposition. 0 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. and Section 2.08.040 of the Flathead County Zoning Regulations. 1. Does the requested zone comply with the masterplan? The Kalispell City -County Master Plan map designates this area as Urban Residential. This proposal is not in compliance with the land use designation for this area. Additionally, Goal 6 of the master plan, the Land Use Element, addresses heavy industrial development and states that "... Such areas should have access to rail and highway, be of sufficient size to allow for future expansion, be generally level and well drained, and be adequately buffeted from residential and commercial uses.' The area proposed for the expansion of the I-2 zoning and gravel extraction operation encroaches into the area that currently acts as a buffer between the residential and industrial use. The proposed zone change does not comply with the master plan. 2. Is the requested zone designed to lessen congestion in the streets? There is currently a single family residence on the property which would generate generally low levels of traffic. If heavy trucks use Ninth Avenue E.N. and / or Tenth Avenue E.N. for access to or from the site, there would be an increase in truck traffic in the area. This area was not intended to accommodate this type of traffic and would be inappropriate and unanticipated in this generally residential area. The zone change would not lessen congestion in the street. 3. Will the requested zone secure safety from fire, panic, and other dangers? The close proximity of a heavy industrial operation in a residential area would increase potential risks to residents in the area which could be associated with heavy equipment operation, truck traffic and conflicts between the heavy industrial and residential uses in the area. 4. Will the requested change promote the health and general welfare? The general health and welfare of the immediate area would be threatened as a result of the expansion of the I-2 zoning and the gravel pit into a residential area. The residents of the area would experience more noise, dust, and odor from equipment and traffic than is currently in the area or anticipated with a residential use. This zone change does not promote the general health and welfare of the community. 5. Will the requested zone provide for adequate light and air? Light would not be generally effected by this zone change. It can be anticipated that air quality in the immediate area would be reduced because of the dust and 3 exhaust fumes associated with a gavel extraction onR4ii! 6. Will the requested zone orevent the overcrowding of sand or undue concentration of neo2le? An industrial zone does not generally generate large volumes of traffic or a concentration of people. The proposed zone change would not prevent or increase crowding of land or people in the area. If the gravel extraction operation were to ud ze Ninth Avenue E.N. or Tenth Avenue E.N. on even an occasional basis, the roads would be inadequate to accommodate large trucks. Both of the roadways near the site are basically gravel roads and are not intended to handle heavy equipment. The operation would not require the use of water, sewer, schools or parks to operate. There would not be impacts on these public services. 8. Does the requested zone give consideration to the Barticular suitability of the prgpg= for particular uses? This zone change does not give adequate consideration to the suitability of this property for a heavy industrial use. The area proposed for rezoning currently provides a buffer between the residential uses to the south and the industrial use to the north. An encroachment into this residential area would not be in the best interest of the residents of the area or the community at large. 9. Does the requested zone give reasonable consideration to the character of the district? Most of the uses in the immediate area are residential. An encroachment of an industrial use into this area is not reasonable or consistent with anticipated land uses in this neighborhood. The zone change does not give reasonable consideration to the character of the area 10. Will the proposed zone egnserve the value of buildings? Heavy industrial uses in this area would devalue existing homes in the area and the investment that the property owners have made in their property. An industrial use in the proposed area would not conserve the value and investments that these homeowners have made. 11. Will the requested zone encourage the most arwrovriate use of the land throughout the jurisdiction? The master plan designates this area as urban residential on the master plan map and encourages the compatibility of adjacent land uses. This proposal does not meet the goals of the master plan because it would allow the encroachment of an extremely intrusive and incompatible use into a primarily residential area. This zone change does not encourage the most appropriate use of land in this area or throughout the jurisdiction. U1JA11AAz-4' As this area is currently situated, there is a.knoll which rises from the south to the north which provides a good separation between the residential uses in the area and the industrial use to the north. There is a tree lined buffer at the top of the knoll which also helps to contain the dust from the gravel pit on -site. This zone change would allow an extremely intrusive operation into a residential area Furthermore, this zone change does not comply with the residential land use designation as indicated on the master plan map nor does it comply with the goals and objectives of the master plan to ensure that there is compatibility between adjacent land uses. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City -County Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt FRDO staff report #FZC-97-5 as findings of fact and, based on these findings, recommend to the Board of County Commissioners the requested zone change from R-4 to I-2 be DENIED. H: \... \KZC\97 \KZC97-3 5 484 8th Avenue East North Kalispell, Montana 59901 June 23, 1997 County Commissioner Howard Gipe Flathead County Commissioners' Office 800 South Main Kalispell, Montana 59901 RE: McElroy and Wilkin, etal, zone change request from R-4 to I-2 Dear Commissioner Gipe: This letter is written to you specifically requesting that you vote against the above referenced zone change requested by McElroy and Wilkin and the heirs of Les Kjos. I would also ask that you and the other commissioners visit the proposed site before you make your decision. In the Kalispell City -County Planning Board and Zoning Commission meeting June 10, a large number of neighboring property owners stated very valid reasons why the above referenced zone request should be denied. Narda Wilson presented a comprehensive summary stating that the zone request did not comply with the Master Plan. The moderator, Therese Hash, following all of the comments by neighbors and planning members, also voiced her feelings that the zone request was not in the best interest of this neighborhood. Members of the Planning Board and Zoning Commis- sion then voted, and the request was denied, five to one: there were two absent members and one who excused himself from the vote due to conflict of interest. We have resided at the above address since February of 1966, and we have lived through all these years bearing with the McElroy and Wilkin operation because we had no other choice. We have "swallowed" their dust and lay sleepless at night due to the noise of the crusher. We have smelled their exhaust and listened to the noise of their brakes at the four-way East Oregon/Whitefish Stage intersection. We have never complained; however, now is the time to speak out. We feel threat- ened by this proposal, and if granted, we feel it will have a negative impact on every residence in this neighborhood. Unless one lives in our neighborhood, the density of traffic (heavy trucks as well as automobiles) is totally beyond comprehension on Oregon and Whitefish Stage streets. Oregon traffic is a shortcut from Highway 2, and Whitefish Stage is a thoroughfare to all points north (the only throughway east of Highway 93 and west of Highway 2. There really are no streets to access this land proposed for the zone change other than Ninth and Tenth Avenues East North. These two avenues are en- tirely residential. Contrary to what the proponents say, traffic would be increased, dust would be intensified, and noise would be contrary to the residential neighborhood code. We cannot afford increased traffic for another reason, and this is of utmost concern to neighborhood residents; we are the only neighborhood in the city of Kalispell without a city park/playground. Children play in the streets: skateboarding, roller blading, and bicycling. The situation is "an accident waiting to happen". Ages of the children range from preschool to junior high/high school. We waited in excess of twenty years to get 8th Avenue East North and California Street rebuilt, including new water main and sewer line. These streets were in the plans prior to my husband Jerry's death in 1971. (He was Street Superintendent). We know first hand that plans can and do change. To say that this Iand will be reclaimed or rebuilt within a three to five year time frame after removing the gravel is highly questionable. Time extensions can be legally granted. The "mess" could go on for years and years. Even Mr. Johnson, who represented McElroy and Wilkin and abstained from the vote, closed his presentation by saying he wouldn't like it either if it were in his neighborhood! There is no question but that the value of our properties would be depreciated. That is unfair to all of us who have worked hard to make our homes and yards an asset to the city of Kalispell. My family will definitely plan to attend the Commissioner meeting that will address this issue. Please do not grant this zone change. If you will take time to tour the site, I am sure you will agree that this is definitely not industrial, but residential property. To grant the change will not be in the best interest of the city. Incidentally, the subject property is about three blocks from a home that is listed on the National Historical Registry. Isn't there some regulation that prohibits an industrial site this close to historical property? Thank you for your consideration. I was totally impressed with the professional workings of the Planning Board and Zoning Commission. I am looking forward to seeing how effective the Com- missioners will work to preserve the quality of property and living in our very nice East North neighborhood. Very truly yours, C-4il- ClaraEllen Anderson cc: Mr. Dale Williams Mr. Robert Watne Gravel -pit z' one.",,... change queaL 0 faces opposition, McElroy & Wilken ort an reenwoo village Campground. wants to di The two acres that McElroy & g Wilken wants to purchase are into hillside zoned residential. Under the .pro- posal, they would be rezoned heavy industrial. By The Daily Inter Lake. ., The film would have to follow up with a conditional -use permit The planning office does not to actually expand the -pit bound - favor McElroy & Wilken's plan to aries, said Johnson. expand its gravel pit into a hill- Worried about Evergreen's res- side on the northeast edge of idential -development spilling Kalispell. . , . over the Flathead River bridge, . The proposed zone. change the planning office also ,recom- comes up for a hearing before mends rejection of a zone change the Kalispell City -County Plan- near Panoramic Heights -and .!n1ngeBoard)abFAp,=ditWft in 9fe�S1d �S@J' i�$:t :1 Skj�Isat 'nditVJAJb t.9S@tera9itigeigMars r( S,raltdt hea*=g ftfm the P-i%ire-Al"ddyvgratttem-4eiWt lof--)bOUd. hqk io- J ->-,t;M .Vc,7 protest.. ; - -. ... I Robert and- Terri -Quirk: and A hill and sharp knob separate Don and Jeannie Nelson seek to the residential .neighborhood change zoning on 26 acres from from the gravel pit. -McElroy & `the present 80-acre agricultural " Wilken can better smooth off the ,zone to a suburban 5-acre zone, edge of its gravel "pit if the knob The ,property is northeast. of the is removed, said Jean'Johnson, of Montana. 35 bridge, near a series eng%ieering consultants: Paul of older subdivisions. Stokes & Associates. Only:4wo zone changes have But the planning office says the been allowed since the Eastside 1 knob and .its line of-trees',serve as . Zoning> District was adopted in a barrier'between homes aiid the 1977,.,notes a ftport from the gravel pit. ' .. : , �' - �... _k , Manning,. office. One was, to" per - An 'existing home would ±tie mit a church. moved off the hillside 'if the zone ,The area is considered prime change were approved. .-.`i farmland if -irrigated; and the The" --gravel pit s nearing property. itself is•under cultiva- exhaustion end state=reguiatio� `,tion,. the reportsays. r. . require that-111lsides-"be sloped-4t' The' city -county master plan a 1 to-3,ratio during reclamation, cans for.':protecting agricultural isai& Johnson. McElmy.& Wilken land ,and..directing growth :to plans an eventual industrial park existing; urban areas. Turning on the soj'he said. V- ; a the - ; r acreage Anto, ',estate The -knob would "also produce ranchettes can , be seen as com additionalgravel; said -Johnson:; PlY11111 WY, nlaigina.11Y with the Contrary= to plantiftigt office master plan. concerns, trucks `would -not , use . " ' The ' 26 acres is currently split the residential streets to "haul into two. lots. Without the zone gravel, he said. = change the lots cannot bedivid The McElroy & Wilken pit is ed' further. A 5-acre minimum lot 'al6ng`,.=fhi5 _- Stillwater -RW6r size would allow five lots-..i between Whitefish°Stage Road : .!The- tside Zoning District is and-th(ONergreen strip 'It.backs betweethe Flathead River on onto:. a 'section of the #'pity the ,w1st- and- Fairmonf� and fietweefi Seventh l4Airenue East .Amdahl roads on the east,,..',1 41 C• L Ot 49 ca Ji eta do ��py �, �' p,.as �� «• w vi ,•.•� w0$moo ,PIZ 0- °�' > Q. cr5. a' v� �Up, A'ph0>vyoai..`"^$•�U"':�, p , v 30 y ++ C7. v� 0 2Q .. ^SOU ii $ c. 3cg (�9 ^; . " `" � � � • � �. �a',, , c�i O; eq � �i emuu. �' o� �.� "•>� :� y �.•� tsf k(;� s'' �., = ',A' s�; III O N 0y ,.•,� °%' r-++ Q) $ Y`r .'~ `~ •,V•i F; � Mir N V� .p i13 . .r . J;'. .30 02 .Cv vctsfA wwpv7�`>ny,��. !�j �.�.�api��$.�c�sv,'��v`aS�•r��v��`��•��v .q•�p o. .o °' bion oZJ jj v tv cc cc 0 —0 J �.. :: > r " t s i 4 > 0 0 `CT is 4) 50) 4i J= IOD _0 0 r -0m.- -70 5at ir 0 0 u �- 1- o.owc to to 0 10 0 0' Is ; r C%S . 4 S! 2 o 0 E (D Cl) 0 40. t 40. co 10 11) (11 ID 01 (D 40 C, 0. 0 g o vnvs CIO- 0 0 0 0 cts= 0 cis (3) CIS (i), tD 0 .0 0 s. 4� 0 13) 0 0 as 12 -.4,0 4? 'CTO"2'�� =6 b 0o 8 0-� 1-,1 0 ,4 o 5 a .0 4Cd 43 0 -- &86 o CL o -0 ar Cu C) 0 SD t*sir 6 M."W' 'IM-L 0S.tko W-U) boo CL>Q PC " r. 1� o S. 2 - 0, s. 10 =� Cd cc 0 (1 = ij l- r. a) !A - ow 0 u Ca N a,. -14 a." 0 ci Ch us w r. cis 15 V 0 dj� as - - - = W 0 S�-Oas 4 CU .40 0 � = N 0 124 0, =lw Rg 4� $?4 z Ca 10 0 0 cr 4—:4 2 v 0 cis cc as :3 0 1 Id 0 4) 1 2 � = >-O.�I-m Z, st >,O 0 O'C3 :,. 51 ::: $. 4 r- L - =,- Cd 0 a) o Cd d) 0 0.44 4� off- =rd OW4,— 0 ',a E a, E "04.2! 0 0 P'.z 0 4�,O 00 W 014CS E 10 0" 0 0 0 = 0. 42' 0 .5 -1 di 40 two> '0 cts, V-09 4 W 4� 0 = R a 6 uw > c 0 (oL) 41 ✓CS 00 IV CA ca o ca_ 0 Z 7E s. 0 0 i%: As be cd 0 UW) !:0 A cd tj- M >%Oms (D >, 0 0-0 - SZ +- - 0 �.5 cd C, - 2- (Dz C,'0 u R 21-0 CD 0 E- ca eQ M 0 -.4 > cu (D *— 11)