Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity/County Planning Board Minutes 09.05.2002DRAFT Minutes Laurel City-County Planning Board September 5, 2002 7:00 pm Council Chambers Members present: Gerald Shay, Chairman Doug Poeh/s, City Rep. Ed Thumer, City Rep. Kate Stevenson, City Rep. Ziggy Ziegler, County Rep. Clarence Foos, County Rep. Tom Robertus, County Rep. Laurel Haggart, City Rep. Others present: Cai Cumin, City Planner Cheryll Lurid, City Secretary Minutes of the August 1, 2002 meeting were reviewed. A correction was made on page 3, Joe Moore spoke representing the Masonic Organization, not Joe Morrow. The PlarmJng Board adjourned and the Zoning Commission convened to consider the following zone change applications: Continuation of Consideration of Zone Change - Masonic Temple on Airport Road A public hearing was held on this proposed zone change from Agricultural to Community Commercial at the August 1, 2002 meeting. Cai read his recommendations to the board. He recommends denial (see attached). Discussion by the board. Concems are of setting a precedence to future applicants; of going against the comprehensive plan; and safety concerns of a meeting hall being close to the landing strip. Motion to approve the zone change from agricultural to community commercial was defeated by a vote of 1-6. Preliminary, Plat - Hiram Subdivision This preliminary plat is the land that the proposed Masonic Temple would be placed on if the zone change is approved by the City Council. A 60-foot right-of-way has been requested on Airport Road by the County Public Works dcparUnent. Cai recommends approval of the preliminary plat subject to the 60-foot right-of-way and the zone change. Question on why the fire department isn't requiring any type of water storage for fire suppression, and a sprinkling system for the building? Jim Stevens states that because this is a minor subdivision (5 lots or less) the requirement for a storage tank, and sprinklers are not necessary. If the fire department were called to a fire they would bring their water tank with them to fight the fire. If this were a major subdivision (more than 5 lots) the requirements would be to have water storage tank. Question on whether or not this building is subjected to any building inspections. An engineer is drawing up the Plans and the state will inspect plumbing and electrical. The City of Laurel will do a fire inspection on the building. Motion by Kate Stevenson, second by Doug Poehls, to approve the preliminary plat of Hiram subdivision. Motion carried 6-1. Continuation of Zone Change - Laurel East Yellowstone Subdivision - William Siegel - 215 S. 4th Street Cai recommends that the board treat this as a land use variance and not a zone change and to recommend to the City Council that additional storage units be allowed without a zone change under the .following conditions: 1. Close the access gates in the abandoned alleyway in Blocks 24 and 25 to include the one fronting on Lots 11, 12, and 13 of Block 25; and that 2. A landscaping plan be prepared for approval by the City Public works Department and implemented accordingly. In designing a landscape plan for a storage unit facility, it is understood that security of the site and of the storage units is a consideration, and landscaping is not to be designed as a screen. The above conditions will alleviate the concerns expressed by the neighbors. Motion by Doug Poehls, second by Tom Robertus, to recommend that the city council approve a land use variance to allow more storage buildings to be built on the property at 215 S. 4th Street, subject to the above 2 conditions. Motion carded 5-2. Miscellaneous Business Ed Thumer suggested that on the month's when there is a short agenda for the board that Cai initiate some training sessions for the board. Cai stated that he could do so. 2 Update on Clark's Camp Cal updated the board on the ongoing problems and issues being dealt with at Clark's Can~p located on the Yellowstone River. At this time Jim Kraft, County Floodplain Administrator, is requesting public comments regarding the proposed issuance of a permit for a for camp and recreation facilities and on- site water and wastewater facilities at Clark's Camp. These facilities will be located within a floodplain. (See attached copy of the legal ad that was published in the Laurel Outlook). Cal states that this project began in 1996, and much of the project done on Clark's Camp was been done before the proper permits were obtained. Cai has written numerous letters to the owner's of the project and has never gotten a response back. Motion by Laurel Haggart, second by Ed Thurner to have Cai draft a letter of concern to Jim Kraft regarding this matter. Motion carded 5-1 with Ziggy abstaining. Laurel would also like to bring the Board's concerns on this matter to the attention of the Laurel City Council. Doug Poehls stated he would bring this matter up at the next council meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 7:45 pm. Respectfully submitted, Secretary Special K Ranch wi/1 NOIICE have an open house and i applica[inn for a Floodplain Permit ha~ MONTANA TItlRTEENTH JUDICIAL Saturday, Sept. 14. It is desi been submitted to the Yellowstone County DISTRICT COIJRT, be a fun family event with F]oodplainAdmini$lralor for usmp andrec~e- YELLOWSTONE COIYNTy games and prizes, hay ation facilities and on-site water and waste- I~ Tile MATTER OF TIlE ESTATE water facilillas at Clark's Camp southeast of hot air balloon rides, start ~l at noon. Dinner begins pm. Date of Application: August 22, 2002. MATTHEw E RENNER,, Tickets are $5 for adults neeeus~. for children. ' Applicant: Tom and Priscilla Korb Cause No. DP 02-189 tion begin at 2 pm. 'n Ferch lllSBackBayDdve Judge Susan P. Wa0:ers Billings, MT 59106 and Friends will play and Scope of Project: Applicants wish to NO'IICE TO CREDITORs afternoon, provide on-site water and wastewater ~qOTICE IS HEREBy GIVEN that the facilltias to support receptions, meet- ha~ been appothted personal Special K was hags, lectures, g'~neral store and host of the above-named estate. started 16 years a overnight stays in sleeping roores, persons having claims against the said who have dev, disabili- Future uses may be overnight tent required to present their Claires ties livin~ e i location- campe~ and self-contained RV's.* ~s after the date of the first al challenge. *NOTE: The on/y permitted activity so f this notice or said clanus wtll ,e forever barred. Today, on 178 acre far for Clarks Camp is a RV camp- Claim~reusteitberbemailedtoW-flliam ranch, there am ground (8-19-1995), wkinh was nevar , pemonal representative, at 512 baiR, undac~takermore(5.18.2001). .~ast First Street, Lamel, Montana 59044, with four residents a a home Acce~ory uses to a Campground are advisor couple livi~ ~tom receipt requested, or filed with the [ in each allowed. Sleeping rooms in a floodway 2lark of the above-entitled ComI, home. The residents a e develop- are prohibited by mgulaion. ing their living and vocational ~'c . . Dated this 24th day of July, 2002. omme~ts concerning this application for a /s/WILLIAM V. RENNF.~ skills in the family at~ ~sphem of permit related to tl~ use th the floodplain this working ranch. 7t 7 are car- faust be submit~l within fifteen (15) days )ha L. Mohr WILLIAM V, REI~qER lng for livestock, a ~xee nd shrub- of this notlc~ to: [ttomey at Law pbfry nursery, and growi bedding Jam,S L. Ifraf~ FloodPlain AtlminisWator ~O. Box 219. ' ants and tomatoes in 2 green Room 309, Yellowstone County , 13 1/2 Colorado Avenue houses coveting an ama ~ 30 0~t~ Courthouse ~ Lanml, Montana 59044 square feel ' ~'''. 217 North 27th S~xeet- ~ (406) 628-8725 · PO Box 35004 Attorney for Personal Representative betweenS..pe, cl~ K R [ch is 'Billings, MT59107 / (PublishedLausel Outlo on ,k?uma.us and City 2 -277 / 02. and 9-*O2) ok a-2 -02, s-2a- y ur check or money order to: ' ~Z.~4~ The Laurel Oufook Address l ,~ll~i~ Laurel, MT 59044 City State _ Zip Phone Ad Start Date Charge per Week # of weeks 'an I thl pint: l MEMO SUBJECT: Findings and Conclusions Regarding Zone Change Request From Agricultural Open-Space to Community Commercial Adjacent to Ak'port Road in the NE1/4 of Section 4, T2SR24E TO: Laurel Zoning Cornmi~sion FROM: Cai Cllmin, Laurel Planning D/rector DATE: September 5, 2002 LEGAL COMMENTS The Laurel Municipal Code (17.72.050 (G)) requires that, "The planning director shall report iris findings and conclusions in writing to the rezoning commission, which report shall be a matter of public record." State code (MCA 76-2-304) requires that local governments take into consideration during deliberations on proposed zone changes the 'Pllrposes ofzonln~': (1) Such regnlmfons shall be made in accordance with a comprehensive plan and designed to lessen congestion in the streets; to secure safety from fire, panic, and other dangers; to promote health ancl th~ general welfare; to provide adequate light and air; to prevent the overcrowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population; to facilitate the adequate provision of transportaxion, water, schools, parks, and other public requ/remems. (2) Such regulations shall he lllade with reasonable consideration, among other things, to the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for particular uses and with a view to conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout such municipality. State code (MCA 76-2-305(2)) provides that when a protest against a proposed zone change is signed by the owners of 25% or more of the area of the lots within 150 feet from the subject zone change, such amendment shall not be come effective except by the favorable vote oftwo-th/rds of all the members of the city SPECIFICS OF ZONE CHANGE REQUEST The parcel of land for which a change has been requested is approximately 2.066 acres in size, the minimum for which a zone change call be requested where such zone is a n~w zoning district being introduced into an area. Ifa Community Commercial Zone already here existed, for example, a much smaller parcel--such as a single cky lot (50 by 100 feet)--could be changed by expanding the existing zone. The parcel is generally located between the Laurel Cemetet7 and the Laurel A/rport and is adjacent to and will be accessed by Laurel Airport Road. The site is the Flight Pattern Area of the airport milized by alrcmlt taking offand landing on the existing runways of the airport. Land to the east, south, and west is vacant, although the City is working to acquire land the south and west for cemetery expansion. CONSIDERATIONS In reference to "purposes of zoning:" The first issue the Zoning Commission and the City must consider under State law is compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. The introduction of Con,.,unity Commercial into this north area of Laurel does not comply with the adopted Plan. The proposed zoning is not designed to lessen congestion in the streets; however, the existing roadways can easily carry the increased Uaffic generated by the planned use as a private fi'aternal orgauization. The issues of "fire, panic, and other dangers" can be addressed by local emergency service providers. Adequate light and air, the overcrowding of the land, and preventing undue concentrations of population are not issues here, nor are anticipated impacts on sclmois, parks, and other public hcilities. In considering the character of the area and its particular suitability for a private f~atarl~ organization fitcility, propexty value changes and impacts are not un issue, but the location of such a gatheaqng place in the fight pattern of the airport and adjacent to a cemetery are considerations. The fact that the site is far ~om City services such as community water and sewer systems and fire and police is also a consideration. The next step/n development, if zoning approval is grained by the City Council, is review by the Laurel Planning Board of the subdivision plat. Since the subject site is located in the County, approval/disapproval/or conditional approval recommendations by the Planning Board will be sent to the Board of County Commissioners. If the land area of the development was contiguous to the City of Laurel, the City could require annexation, and the subdivision plat would be reviewed aha decided on by the City and not the County Commissioners. REC OMME~ATION Given the considerations discussed herein, my recommendation is to deny this request for zone change. All property, owners have a right to apply for a zone change iftheit request me~s the minimum requirements--such as land area, ownership, etc. Such an application process, however, does not commit the City in any way to approving the zone change request. The right to apply does not imply a fight to receive. Approval of this application constitutes a change in the City adopted Comprehensive Plan. There is no good reason to do this. The location of a highway commercial zone in this pan of Laurel's planning jurisdiction area was not foreseen by City decision makers when the plan was adopted, and nothing has happened to change that plan. Community Commercial Zoning is a zone that allows for a broad rouge of commercial activity to include car sales and truck repak. If for some mason in the future the presently planned use of this site stopped, any use allowed in a Community Commercial Zone conla be started onthe site. Furthermore, once Comrmmity Commercial is approved onthis site, any adjacent property owner in the future could request similar zoning~ and the Zoning Commi.qsion would be hard pressed to deny such zomg. The sile is also far from City services and, as a building in which numbers of people will gather, is too close to the airport land and takeoffpatterns of aircraft. 3 MEMO SUBJECT: Findings and Conclusions Regarding Zone Change Request for Laurel East Yellowstone Subdivision, Block 24, Lots 1-8 and the Vacated 20x85.7 feet of alley and the 30x87.3 feet of vacated South 3rd Street; and Block 25, Lots I 1-20 and the Vacated west I0x30 ofailey and the 60x150 feet of vacated South 3rd Street adjacent to Lot 20 in GeneralVicinity of 215 South 4th Street from Residential Limited Multi-Family to Highway Commercial Zone TO: Laurel Zoning Commission FROM: Cal Cumin: Laurel'Planning Director DATE: July 10, 2002 LEGAL COMMENTS The Laurel Municipal Code (17.72.050 (G)) requires that, 'Tue planning director ~hall report his findings and conclusions in writing to the rezoning commlasion, which report shall be a matter of public record." State code (MCA 76-2-304) requires that local governmerits take into consideration during deliberations on proposed zone changes the 'Purposes ofzonlng': (I)Such regulations shall be rllade in accordance with a comprehensive plan and designed to lessen congestion in the streets; to secure safety from fire, panic, and other dangers; to promote health and the general welfare; to provide adequate light and air; to prevent the overcrowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population; to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, schools, parks, and other public requirements. (2) Suchregnlations shall be made with reasonable consideration, among other things, to the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for particular uses and with a view to conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the mom appropriate use of land throughout such municipality. State code (MCA 76-2-305(2)) provides that when a protest again~ a proposed zone change is signed bythe owners of 25% or more of the area of the lots within 150 feet from the subject zone change, such amendment shall not be come effective except by the favorable vote of two-thirds of all the members of the city council. SPECIFICS OF ZONE CHANGE REQUEST The applicant bas requested a zone change from Residential Limited Multi-Family to Highway Commercial for the above described property. The property is southwest of and adjacent to the BNSF Railroad line. There is currently a row of commercial storage units on the site, and the Landowners wish to add further units to the north and south of the existing unit. Community Hope is located across Cedar Avenue to the northwest, apartment complexes are located to the west across Cedar, and a residence is located on the property at its south end fronting on South 4th Avenue. A couple of trailer houses and two other houses are located to the east of the property. All of this area is zoned Residential Limited Multi-Family. The area to thc east across the railroad a-acks is zoned Highway Commercial and is considered contiguous to this site. CONSIDERATIONS In reference to "purposes of zoning": The proposed rezoning does not comply with the Comprehensive Plan, but this could he mitigated as a consideration of growth of adjacent Cormnunity Commercial uses and the fact that storage units already exist on the site. The proposed zoning is not designed to lessen congestion:in the streets; however, Cedar Avenue can adequately serve the site. The issues of "fire, panic, and other dangers" are adequately addressed by local emergency service providers. Adequate light and air, the overcrowding of the land, and preventing undue concentrations of population are not relevant issues, nor are anticipated impacts on schools, parks, and other public facilities. The in-fill of vacant land within the City helps the tax base as well as is conducive to more compact cornmlj~'y growth-~ which also helps save tax nmney. Consideration of the character of the area and its- particnla, r suitability for housing with a view to conserving property values via the most appropriate use of land could he an issue; however, storage un/Is in conjunction with multiplex residences is a common Iand use pattern. RECOMMENDATION Given the considerations discussed here/n, I advise the Zoning Commission to treat this application a~ a land use variance and recommend to the City Council that the additional storage units be allowed. Under variance provisions, the City can condition its approval. Such conditions should include: 1. Close the access gates in the abandoned alleyway in Blocks 24 and 25 to include the one fronting on Lots 11, 12, and 13 of Block 25; and that 2. a landscaping plan be prepared for approval by the City Public Works Department and implemented accordingly. (This will be required under new construction provisions of the City's existing ordinances.) In desi~tming a landscape plan for a storage unit facility, it is understood that security of the site and of the s~orage units is a consideration, and landscaping/s not to be designed as a screen.