Loading...
12-09-14KALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 9, 2014 CALL TO ORDER AND The regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and ROLL CALL Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Board members present were: Chad Graham, Charles Pesola, Rory Young, Matt Regier, Steve Lorch and Doug Kauffinan. Karlene Osorio-Khor was absent. Tom Jentz represented the Kalispell Planning Department. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Regier moved and Kauffman seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the October 14, 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. OLD BUSINESS: FLATHEAD Westside Neighborhood Parking Management Plan. A Residential HIGH SCHOOL PARKING On -Street Parking Permit Program around Flathead High and Elrod DISTRICT PUBLIC Elementary is being proposed. Residents in the vicinity of Flathead HEARING High School and Elrod Elementary School have requested the Planning Board consider creation of a residential on -street parking permit program that would require a permit for on -street parking when school is in session. The approximate boundary of the - - -- -parking-district-plan-includes-an-area-bounded- by 3rd-Street- West on the north, 9th Street West on the south, 2nd Avenue West on the east, and 6th Avenue West on the west. The overall plan including the specific terms and limitations for on -street parking, the roadways to be affected and the cost of the permits will be discussed. STAFF PRESENTATION Tom Jentz, . representing the Kalispell Planning Department reviewed this process to -date. Jentz noted this project has been going on for about two years and a few months. ago a plan was crafted for the parking area around Flathead High and Elrod Elementary Schools. A public hearing was held on October 14, 2014, and a work session was held on October 28, 2014 where the board took public comments. At that time there were still several options being offered from the neighborhood, school district and staff on how to manage issues around the high school, primarily parking. The purpose of the meeting tonight is to present the management plan that has been reviewed by the neighborhood and school district; provide another opportunity for public comment and determine if the planning board and the neighborhood fully understands what is being proposed. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 9, 2014 Page 11 Jentz reviewed the parking management plan (copy attached). Graham asked why 2"d Avenue was not included in the parking permit plan and Jentz said it wasn't included because the scope of the district will start out small with a provision neighbors feel they areoadd or impacted. The te blocks in the future if the g planning board could also recommend adding blocks before the plan goes to the city council. Lorch said if you own a property that fronts onto a street can the renter/owner buy a permit for one of the permitted avenues if they are not able to park on their street and Jentz said no because they have to own the property on the permitted avenues. Jentz suggested that the board discuss this issue to determine if it has any merit. Young asked why there is no parking on 4th Avenue between 5th and 6th, north of the school and Jentz said that is a place for bus parking. Kauffman asked if striping will be included in the plan and Jentz nd said no but typically there will be a sign at the beginning anddistrict. of each block to indicate the location of the special parking Lorch asked who would assess percentages saidastaff-wdetermine o d - -whether-a-new-block should be--added-and-Jentz probably do on -site surveys. Lorch thinks S5% is high and there needs to be some flexibility in the assessments. Further discussion was held. Young asked if the ability to buy multiple permits would conflict with the 72 hour ordinance and Jentz said they would still have to comply with all the other regulations such as not parking in yellow areas, near intersections, or leave a vehicle without moving it for more than 72 hours. There was discussion regarding the cost of administration of the district. Staff recommends that if there are still unresolved issues at the end of this meeting a 1°motmeeting between School could be held prior to acfina.l representatives and the Neighborhood public hearing in January. OARD DISCUSSION asked what happens if the school district can't provide the IO B additional parking offered and Jentz said he doesn't an that happening but the school district may decide discuss changing the boundaries. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December9, 21 Pe 2 Additional discussion was held regarding the percentages of occupancy and it was agreed that it should be reduced to 75%. Jentz added he does not have an answer of what to do with the residences that face the streets and whether or not they can buy permits on the avenues. Jentz continued with a discussion on the percentage of the property owners who must buy permits (75%) and Graham asked why that isn't set at 50%. Further discussion was held. Lorch said trying to ensure that the program funds itself is different than trying to set a bar that demonstrates that the neighborhood is committed to preserving their parking area. Lorch doesn't think 75% is too high but could affect the cost of the permits. Pesola suggested that since the number to come into the district is 75% of the property owners why not maintain it with 75%. Young noted if a percentage of property owners do not buy permits it would then goes to city council for a decision of what to do. At that time notices will be sent to the block affected indicating that they didn't achieve their quota and it will be up to council to remove their block from the district. Jentz added it is easier to count number of permits per block than it is to count permits per block per ownership. Graham said at 75% how would the blocks furthest to the east and - - --west-where -half is -in -and half -is -out be calculated-and-Jentz said -the calculation includes only the block faces. Pesola agreed with Jentz that the permits should be relative to the spaces available not the properties but he thinks the number should be closer to 50-60% not 75%. The board agreed. Regier said a large part of this parking management plan is the school district finding new parking spaces which will alleviate the problem instead of pushing permits for parking spaces. Regier said this is a public street and we are essentially taking it and making it exclusively available to the property owners, which makes them private streets. Graham said this is similar to the public parking lots downtown Kalispell whose permits are purchased by private entities. Jentz said these methods have been litigated to the Supreme Court level and are legitimate tools to use. Regier said he finds it very unfair that someone on 2nd Avenue East can't go and, park on 2nd Avenue West when someone on 2nd Avenue West can park on 2nd Avenue East. It also seems very different than a 2 hour parking area where the rules apply to Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 9, 2014 Page13 Lorch said the district is proposed in a limited way in order to provide some relief for the people who live in those neighborhoods and are disenfranchised by this parking situation in front of their homes. The city is using a well -established and reasonable tool to represent those taxpayers and Graham added without the district a lot of the residents in the neighborhood are denied city services in a timely fashion. Graham asked Regier if he has another proposal in mind besides the parking district and Regier said the taxpayer paid for the new high school which helped alleviate the problems and the school board should be petitioned to find additional parking on their property or other alternatives such as providing parking on some of the neighborhood lots that the school district owns. Pesola said lie understands Regier's position especially for the residents whose homes front onto the streets that may become congested with this proposal. Lorch added ignoring the congestion and safety issues is not appropriate either and everyone is trying to come up with the best way to deal with these issues. Jentz noted the school board is aware of these issues and although they could entertain the idea of additional parking lots they may not have the funding for them. Devin-Kuntz-;-72-5-2n° -Avenue- West -stated that--his-letter--to-the editor was published two and one-half months late and after many fruitful discussions and meetings with the planning board, planning department staff and the school district. The letter is not representative of his or the residential parking committee's position at present, especially given everything that has transpired. Kuntz said the residential committee does have some issues with the draft Westside Neighborhood Parking Management Plan, most of which have been already discussed. Kuntz said the 85%-75% was overly aggressive and reducing that number prior to implementation is necessary. It had been mentioned to him by other neighbors and residents that the percentages of commuter parking needs to be discussed more at length. Kuntz noted on Page 6, Item E. c. regarding proof of vehicle ownership and current registration being required there was a question about work issued vehicles and how they would be accommodated. He noted obviously the guest passes could be used but then it would bring about other questions. Jentz said if someone regularly comes home in a pickup owned by the company they work for a permit could be purchased for the vehicle. There was further discussion on how this scenario would be handled and the fact that the enforcement of the district would be mostly Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 9, 2014 Page 14 complaint driven. Kuntz added the last comment he received is the residents on the streets should have the ability to opt into the program or be afforded other solutions to help accommodate them. Kuntz said aside from those comments everyone else agrees with how things are going and he commended everyone involved for their efforts in this long process. Dan Zorn, Assistant Superintendent of School District #5 stated he likes the 85%-75% numbers that were proposed and suggested perhaps that could be worked through. Zorn reviewed the following district concerns: • The parking area requirement piece that would trigger in the entire parking district is unnecessary since the school district is discussing making one of those lots into additional parking. • Requests to be added to or removed from the district noted in 4.A.a. should be limited to the avenues and not the streets. As noted previously 90% of the houses are facing the avenues so the issue is not on the streets. • For clarification if there was an addition or removal request it should read that the decision resides with the city council as stated in 4.B.b. not the City of Kalispell as stated in • Zorn noted that the 85% is deemed a full parking lot and is a number that they have worked off for their own lots to determine capacity. Their lots are usually over 90%. So if the 85% is deemed a full parking lot why wouldn't they use the same number on the avenues to trigger the petition process? • Regarding city services they would be willing to work with their kids on those issues for example if they will be plowing on 4th Avenue West on a particular day they would tell their students not to park on 4th Avenue West on that day. • They haven't gotten much credit for the efforts to create additional parking on district property to ensure that the students are parking on -site. He said in addition 7 years ago the taxpayers and the school district invested $35,000,000 to help relieve the parking problems around Flathead High School and he thinks that is getting lost in this discussion. Bernie Windauer, 2nd Avenue West stated he and his wife have lived in this neighborhood since 1989. He said yes, it is not quite as congested now as it was before Glacier High School was built, but we all have to remember that the problems are not just parking it is Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 9, 2014 Page 15 garbage and everything else that goes along with it. Windauer said when you look at the percentage of the people who are in favor of the parking district — 97%, that has to indicate that there is a problem. He appreciates everyone working together but questioned why more residents are not at this meeting and perhaps they are getting frustrated. Windauer addressed the large amount of rentals on the west side; lower property values; and the unwillingness of property owners to improve their properties. He suggested developing off -site parking using the money made on parking fines to supplement the program. He added the residents should not be shouldering the burden of the cost of the program because they are not the root cause of the problem. Mike Lincoln, Assistant Principal of Flathead High School stated he is hoping the goal is still to provide parking in front of residents houses and not to provide empty streets. He brought the following points: • With the building of the parking lots there isn't anything in the draft policy for the district because the parking district will be able to continue to grow. • Enforcement isn't being done now as he can point out vehicles that have been parked in the same spot for weeks - in violation -of the-72-hour limit so -enforcement will -have -to-- -- be done to ensure that the permits are purchased and used by the residents. • Regarding the discussion on the number of permits that need to be sold, he is ok with it being a number as opposed to so many houses but the amount that can be sold can't be unlimited because that would create crowded streets again? • Parking lots would be a great idea but satellite lots wouldn't work unless the shuttle would run all day, and the cost to the district could be too much. • What happened to the discussions of creating a TIF district to create new lots, or a partnership between the city and the school district for assistance in purchasing houses to be used for future parking? • A particular lot that has only one facing house with 18 parking spots — one person signing up and the way the draft is set up that would open up both sides of that street which needs to be addressed. Cindy Petek, 1175 Somerset Drive said it needs to be considered how punitive all of this seems towards the kids. We want these kids to graduate and become taxpaying residents, not residents living off the taxpayers. The harder it is made for the kids to get to school, whether it is driving to a shuttle at a certain time to get to school or Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 9, 2014 Page 16 whether it is someone who comes to the school and has to drive around 15 blocks looking for a parking place and then decides not to go to school at all. Getting the kids to school is important. Petek touched on event parking and said as far the services for the residents that is a city issue. The city should try to find a time when they can plow and get the services to the residents. Scott Davis, 448 51h Avenue West stated he is a life-long resident and he went to Flathead High School. Davis said he has talked to a lot of people who live in this neighborhood and yes, there is a problem with parking but he doesn't believe creating a parking district is the key. What needs to be done is to help the school district with tax incentives and give people tax breaks. He suggested approaching some of the churches in the neighborhood about leasing their large parking lots Monday through Friday. Davis also thinks students or their parents should also have to pay for parking permits just like someone who works downtown. BOARD DISCUSSION I Jentz briefly reviewed the following: • He has talked to Public Works about plowing in the middle of the night and their reply is they do come in for special calls but there is overtime involved. • Regarding special events before or after school hours — the parking district is 8:00 to 3:00 and then it is open parking. •- The -school -district -is -aware there are -other -options -that -they could pursue such as leasing parking. • Creating a tax increment financing district (TIF) was discussed early -on. This is where you take an area that is blighted and the property taxes are frozen and as development occurs the increase in property value is collected and put towards projects. Jentz is not aware of any development plans for this area that would create new life it is just the opposite. Jentz asked if the board thinks the school district and the neighborhood should meet to discuss the unresolved issues and if a public hearingshould be held in January. The board agreed the meeting should take place and the public hearing should be held on January 13, 2015. Graham noted that city council has approved the first reading of the planned unit development for Captain's Marine. Council removed Condition #23 which was a deviation to the solid surface paving regulations in the no -build areas. NEW BUSINESS: I Jentz noted as discussed there will be an agenda for the January 13t' meeting. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 9, 2014 Page17 ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at approximately 9:00 p.m. NEXT MEETING The next regular planning board meeting is scheduled for January 13, 2015 beginning at 7:00 p.m. and located in the Kalispell City Council Chambers, 201 1st Avenue East, Kalispell. Chad Graham _ Michelle Anderson President Recording Secretary APPROVED as submitted/corrected: /�115 Kalispell City. Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of December 9, 2014 Page 18