Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity/County Planning Board Minutes 06.10.1993 MINUTES LAUREL CITY-COUNTY PLANNING BOARD JUNE 10, 1993 7:00 P.M. CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: John Hawley Smith, Chairman Larry Thomas, City Rep. Joseph Bradley, City Rep. Donna Kilpatrick, City Rep. Lonnie Kellogg, City Rep. Gerald Shay, Member at Large Donald Gudgell, County Rep. Clarence Foos, County Rep. Billielou Lance, County Rep. MEMBERS ABSENT: Jim Ziegler, County Rep. OTHERS PRESENT: Cal Cumin, City Planner Cheryll Lund, City Secretary Forrest Hill, 35 Byam Road Milt Wester, 211 Laurmac Bonnie Hofland, 1026 7th Avenue Craige & Sonya Whitley, 2247 Old Hwy. 10 Leesa Butler, P.O. Box 221 Roberta Montgomery, 20 4th Avenue Kent & Linda Harris, 1208 4th Avenue The minutes were read and upon a motion by Billielou Lance, seconded by Donna Kilpatrick, the motion carried. Home Occupation- Bonnie Hofland- 1026 7th Avenue Honnie Hofland is requesting a Home Occupation to start a Child Care business in her home. She plans no more than 6 children (2 of which are on .her-own}. She.hae applied for a State license and is __ .. waiting for a day to go do a training session. Joe states that we can approve this on the condition that she gets her state license and city business license. Motion by Joe Bradley, seconded by Gerald Shay to recommend to the Council that this Home Occupation be approved for a Family Day Care Home, subject to Mrs. Hofland obtaining the correct licenses. Motion carried. Home O^cupation- Roberta Montgomery- 20 4th Avenue Roberta Montgomery is requesting a Home Occupation to start a mail order retail wholesale business. -1- -,j~~q3 There would be no customers to the home. The business is strictly mail-order. She does live in a commercial zone. Motion by Gerald Shay, seconded by Hillielou Lance, to recommend approval to the City Council for this Home Occupation. Motioa carried. ISTEA APPLICATIONS Forrest Hill and Milt Wester spoke concerning the application for a Railroad Museum. The Museum would be placed adjacent to the interstate. There would be a large building to house the museum and a separate house for a "Working Artist's Studio". The museum itself would be reinforced and made into a secure area with the use of concrete walls and an alarm system. Forrest Hill has a large collection of firearms, original art from this area, Indian artifacts, and slot of memorabilia. He is willing to put them in the museum. He would also be the "onsite" artist using the artists studio. Mr. Hill passed around pictures of his collectioh of firearms and memorabilia, plus some paintings that he has collected and some that he painted himself. He states that this collection came from this area and that he would like to see it stay in this area. Milt Wester states that there is slot of available railroad memorabilia. He has been in contact with the railroad concerning this. They are willing to participate in this. Milt says that the local matching funds should come out of the community. Mr. Hill has also committed to contributing to the fund, and possibly even giving the amount needed to complete the matching of the funds. The Chamber of Commerce has agreed to commit to this project, completely. They plan on having their offices in with the museum. For the maintenance required on this the Chamber of Commerce has committed to taking care of that also. They already have a Secretary on staff. The museum would be gathering memorabilia and artifacts from all modes of transportation. -2- ISTEA APPLICATION- BIKE PATH Craig Whitely spoke concerning this application. He and the people in DeCarlo Subdivision feel that there is a problem with children riding their bikes into town. He proposes to put the path adjacent to Highway 10, or possibly through land that the gold course owns on Golf Course Road. It's been difficult to get any firm cost estimate. The closest estimate would be $75,000. This price depends on where it would be located. The estimated distance of the pathway would be over a mile along Highway 10, and 1 1/8 mile along the golf course path. The path would be paved, 6 feet wide, with a 4 inch gravel base and 2 inches of asphalt. Question on receiving easements? He stated that he felt it would be fairly easy because the land they would go through is somewhat worthless. ISTEA APPLICATION- CHIEF JOSEPH BATTLEGROUND Kent Harris spoke concerning this application. This area, Chief Joseph Battlefield, has recently been selected by the National Park system as a historic monument. He feels that this will attract people from other areas to come visit Laurel. If we don't do anything with this battlefield there is a possibility that artifact hunters will gradually destroy the site, and eventually make it less appealing as a historical site. The application satisfies most of the ISTEA requirements having to do with historic significance and beautification. It would be a very worthwhile project that would benefit Laurel and Yellowstone County. The proposal is an unmanned center that would be very low in cost to maintain both from a physical and a personnel point of view. He has visited quite a few of these historical sites in Oregon, Washington and Idaho. They designed their site plan like those that they visited. He feels that there is a large demand for this type of historical site. There is slot of interest in this area. He wants to do this project with quality. The cost would be about $95,000. About $30,000 would be for the facility, $15,000 for the site improvements (utilities), another $20,000-$30,000 for site improvements (paved parking lot, walking paths). The remainder would go for talking devices along the trail and the physical exhibits themselves. -3- i They do have acquisition of the property. The state has given tentative approval to allow some entity to require ownership. They also have "Friends of Canyon Creek" that has raised $3,000 already for this project, and is standing behind this group. They already have the critical ingredients to get this project started, and then maintained. He feels that they can get 20,000 visitors per year at the site. The National Park Service has said that once we have established the need they would take over with the possible staffing and manning of the site. Without the Lehicle of the ISTEA Funds this project will never get off of the ground. The "Friends of Canyon Creek" is definitely incapable of raising $100,000. It is critical that they get some kind of assistance, like from this ISTEA program. Kent states that he has not applied to the County for help. He did approach them about the project and they were very open to the project. Question on the site being unmanned? Will this bring about more destruction of the facility by vandals? Kent feels that the people that will be visiting the site will have enough interest in it that if they do see some destruction going on they will notify the police. Also, the site will be approximately 100 yards from the parking lot. This may inhibit some of the vandals. He feels that the people visiting the sites will also take pride in the site. Question on being able to get a better estimate on the cost of this project? Can they get a better breakdown for us? Kent states that he will get a better estimate for us. Question on building this project in phases? Kent feels that if you do it in phases you are possibly opening it up for more vandalism. He would like to do it all at one time. Question on when the site will be open? Kent feels- that not everyone will be visiting this site just in the summer. He would also like to see the facility lighted and possibly a video camera installed to help to deter in the vandalism. He also stated that they do stand .behind the Railroad Museum. He feels that both the Battleground and the Museum would be an asset to one another. The battleground will be sold to the National Park System just as soon as it can be. -4- Question on fire protection? Kent states that they are trying to build it just as fire-proof as it can be. A suggestion is made that the Fire District's could possibly move their boundaries to include this site. Question on who would be doing the displays? Kent states that it would have to be done in a professional manner and that the National Park system has requirements in the area of display. New Subdivision Laws The new laws in effect changed the definition of a subdivision from anything under 20 acres to anything under 160 acres. Because of this we will have slot more subdivisions come through our Board. The Board needs to hold a Public Hearing on this to begin the _ changes. The Council will need to make these into Ordinances. Question on the ISTEA applications? Cal stated that we do not have to make any decisions on this until June of 1994. Cal would like to see the Battleground and the Museum work together so that we don't have Laurel fighting Laurel for funding. Motioa by Billielou Lance, seconded by Derald Shay, to approve the bill for $3,375 for April, May and June services by Cal Cumin. Motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Cheryll Lund, Secretary -5- MEMO SUBJECT: Planning Activities Report for Second Quarter of 1993 TO: Laurel-Yellowstone City-County Planning Board FROM: Cal Cumin The following are indicative of the planning-related activities for the second quarter of 1993. Aori1 ISTEA coordination with County Planning Board Meeting Zone change petition administration Minor subdivision plat administration City Council meetings Laurel Grants Committee meeting Subdivision process questions MAX ISTEA application coordination and meetings Ciry Council meetings Planning Board meeting Subdivision administration, questions, and coordination (of Majestic Sub) with County Surveyor Annexation issues Double-wide mobile home zoning issues Appraisal info for subdivisions Zoning administration and questions Subdivision legislation--interpretation with County Clerk and Recorder • June Subdivision administration and questions City Council meetings Planning Board meetings Subdivision ordinance changes ISTEA meetings and application review Planning budget work Zoning administration and questions Laurel Grants Committee meeting Board of Adjustment meeting r 1 ?J LJ ti y 0 AMENDMENTS TO THE LAUREL SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE TO COMPLY WITH CHANGES MADE BY THE 1993 STATE LEGISLATURE Add new section, 16.08.035: Certificate of Survey "Certificate of Survey" means a drawing of a field survey prepared by a registered surveyor for the purpose of disclosing facts pertaining to boundary locations. 2. Delete section 16.08.260: Occasional Sale. 3. Change section 16.08.390: Subdivision to read as follows: "Subdivision" means a division of land or land so divided that creates one or more parcels containing less than 160 acres that cannot be described as a one-quarter aliquot part of a Unites States government section, exclusive of public roadways, in order that the title to or possession of the parcels may be sold, rented, leased, or otherwise conveyed and any resubdivision and further a condominium or area, regardless of its size, that provides or will provide multiple space for recreational camping vehicles or mobile homes. A subdivision comprises only those parcels containing less than 160 acres that cannot be described as a one-quarter aliquot part of a United States government section when the parcels have been segregated from the original tract. The subdivision plat must show all the parcels whether contiguous or not. 4. Change 16.08.420 Tract to Tract of Record to read as follows: "Tract of Record" means a parcel of land, irrespective of ownership, that can be identified by legal description, independent of any other parcel of land, using documents on file in the records of the County Clerk and Recorder's Office. 5. Change 16.12.070: Preliminary Plat Approval--Public Hearing--Relevant Evidence to be Heard to Criteria for Local Government Review to read as follows: (1) The basis for the governing body's decision to approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove a subdivision is whether the preliminary plat, environmental assessment, public hearing, Planning Board recommendations, or additional information demonstrates that development of the subdivision meets the requirements of State Subdivision and Platting Act, the Yellowstone County Subdivision Regulations, and the Laurel Subdivision Ordinance. (2) The governing body shall issue written findings of fact that weigh the affects of the proposed subdivision through the following criteria as applicable: (a) the affect on agriculture, local services, the natural environment, . wildlife and wildlife habitat, and public health and safety; (b) compliance with: (i) State survey requirements; (ii) local subdivision regulations; (iii) local subdivision review procedures; (iv) the provision of easements for the location and installation of any planned utilities; and (v) the provision of legal and physical access to reach each parcel within the subdivision and the required notation of that access on the applicable plat and any instrument of transfer concerning the parcel. 6. Add 16.20.030(A)(20): Certification by the County Treasurer that no real property taxes assessed and levied on the land to be subdivided are delinquent. 7. Add 16.20.030(A)(21): Any subdivision that establishes or defines a section line and creates a parcel that crosses the established or defined section line so that an irrigation district assessment boundary is included in more than one section shall note on the survey the acreage or the farm unit or created parcel in each section, and the surveyor preparing the survey shall notify the appropriate irrigation district or the existence and purpose of the survey. These requirements shall only apply to subdivision surveys for which the survey-)r determines that, based on available public records, the subdivision survey involves land traversed by a canal or ditch owned by an irrigation district (as established pursuant to Title 85, Chapter 7, MCA) or land included in such an irrigation district. The following changes are not required by the last Legislature but are needed Laurel Subdivision Ordinance: upgrade the 1. 16.08.130 Director: change the last part from "--four and one-half mile jurisdictional area." to "--city-county planning board jurisdictional area." 2. 16.12.040(B): change the number of copies required to twenty-four. 3. 16.16.020(A): change the number of copies required to twenty-four. .7