Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity/County Planning Board Minutes 04.07.2016 MINUTES LAUREL CITY-COUNTY PLANNING BOARD APRIL 7, 2016 10:00 AM COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Kathy Siegrist, President Dan Koch, City Rep. Judy Goldsby,County Rep. Lee Richardson,County Rep. Hazel Klein, City Rep. OTHERS PRESENT: Noel Eaton,City Planner CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by President Siegrist at 10:00 am. ROLL CALL: Roll Call was taken with the following members present: Koch, Goldsby, Richardson, Klein and Siegrist. Approval of minutes from the previous meeting: A motion was made by Judy Goldsby and seconded by Dan Koch to correct the minutes to read that the application for Major Preliminary Plat for River's Edge Industrial Park Subdivision was complete and was not denied for those reasons and the County Commissioners are not always happy with the reasoning for the Planning board's recommendations. There was also a typo in the first sentence as"rode" should be roll.The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. PUBLIC HEARING: Regal Community Park Zoning Variance from LMC 17.24.040 Allowable Density. President Siegrist opened the public hearing and asked staff to present the variance application prior to the public comments. Planning Noel Eaton spoke regarding the application variance for Regal Community Park to waive density requirements which allows for 9 mobile home units per net acre. The property is located to the south of East Maryland Lane,east of Date Avenue,and north of E.8th Street to waive the allowable density of 9 units per net acre in Residential Manufactured Homes zoning district. The property is currently zoned RMH. STAFF FINDINGS: 1. The property owner has submitted a variance asking to allow a more dense development of 11.6 units per net acre with a total net acreage of 6.27 acres. 2. LMC 17.24.040 states"The maximum allowable density for all mobile home parks shall be nine mobile homes per net acre." 3. LMC 17.24.010.0 states the intent of RMH districts is"to encourage suitable and proper development of mobile home parks or mobile home subdivisions." 4. LMC 17.04.020.C.3 Purpose and provisions states"The Laurel city council further declares the zoning plan is adopted for the following specific purposes: (3)To encourage innovations in residential development and renewal so that the needs of the community for housing may be met by greater variety in type and design of dwellings and by conservation of open space to preserve and enhance housing values and maintain residential neighborhood aesthetics." 1 5. On November 20, 2015 an application for preliminary plat approval and annexation for Regal Community Park Subdivision with two variance requests was submitted to the Planning Department for review. 6. The preliminary plat application was returned due to insufficiency.The preliminary plat application did not comply with Residential Mobile Home zoning requirements of allowable density of 9 units per net acre. 7. Planning staff recommended any zoning variances be brought to the Laurel City-County Planning Board prior to another subdivision application submittal due to the nature and degree of changes the variance could have on the proposed development as a whole. 8. The property is located outside of Laurel city limits but lies within Laurel's zoning jurisdiction. 9. Laurel's Growth Management Plan identifies a need for appropriate locations for compatible infill housing that would replace vacant or underutilized sites in existing neighborhoods 10. Laurel's Growth Management Plan accounts for residential land use policies to include "Infill development that complements existing neighborhoods should be encouraged." 11. The attached exhibit is a copy of the variance application request and a letter from the developer stating the need for the requested variance along with other variances submitted. 12. As per the requirements of LMC 17.72.070,a public hearing on the matter shall be held before the zoning commission before being heard by a governing body. As per B. of the section, public notice was published in the Laurel Outlook and adjacent property owners were notified by certified mail 15 days prior to the public hearing. ZONING COMMISSION CONSIDERATIONS AND RECOMMENDATION: The Zoning Commission shall review and make determinations on the following chapters and sections of the Laurel Municipal Code(LMC): 1. According to Chapter 17.60.020 of the LMC the Zoning Commission may not recommend granting a land use variance: 1. Unless the denial would constitute an unnecessary and unjust invasion of the right of property; 2. Unless the grant relates to a condition or situation special and peculiar to the applicant; 3. Unless the basis is something more than mere financial loss to the owner; 4. Unless the hardship was created by someone other than the owner; 5. Unless the variance would be within the spirit, intent, purpose,and general plan of this title; 6. Unless the variance would not affect adversely or injure or result in injustice to others; and 7. Ordinarily unless the applicant owned the property prior to the enactment of this title or amendment. STAFF SUGGESTED CONDITIONS: If the Zoning Commission recommends approval of the zoning variance,the following conditions are suggested: 1. The variance shall be good for 3 years from approval on unimproved property. 2. The applicant shall submit a major preliminary plat application for Regal Community Park to the planning department for review. 2 Applicant/Proponent: Mike Balch of C& H Engineering and Surveying spoke regarding the Regal Community Park. He is the engineer on the project representing owner Dan Wells. Mike stated that the first variance thee owners are requesting is a variance from section 17.24.050 of the City of Laurel Zoning Regulations for lot width. The minimum lot width within the zoning is 40 feet wide and the owners are requesting a variance for 30 foot wide lots. This lot width is similar to the lot widths of the surround subdivisions and in character with the neighborhood. PROPONENTS: President Siegrist opened the public hearing and read the rules and regulations for public hearings to the audience. President Siegrist asked three (3)times if there were any proponents wishing to speak in favor of the application. There were none. OPPONENTS: Tim McCullough of 1702 E.8th Street spoke. He has lived on his property for 26 years and for 23 years the road (by his residence)was garbage. There were improvements made to the road 3 years ago. Now he hears that the city plans to expand the amount of people that will live on the proposed property. He has not heard a word on what they plan to do to the road and whether or not his property will be considered in the city or if it will remain in the county. Ron Benner of 1408 E. Maryland spoke. The only issue he has with this is that this development won't undergo a traffic study. He thanked the Planning Board and County Commissioners for serving the citizens but he would like them to think about this issue long and hard. Currently there are only two ways to get into town from this location. You can take the main road into town or you can take E. Maryland into town. East Maryland is a private road that the City, County and State made into a secondary road. The people that live in the area have to pay for all of the maintenance done on the road. That road was only built for the local subdivision. It is a single layer of asphalt that is only 2 lanes wide. The subdivision built the road and maintained it until the county and city took it over. By allowing a larger density of people to live out there will increase traffic on E. Maryland which pushes the problem to their local subdivision which is unacceptable. President Siegrist asked two more times if there were any opponents wishing to speak against this proposed variance. There were none. Planner Noel Eaton spoke regarding the questions raised by the two opponents that spoke. The concerns on roads,traffic and annexation should be voiced during the preliminary plat. President Siegrist closed the public hearing. Lee Richardson feels the board should not vote on this until it has been annexed into the city limits. Planner Noel Eaton stated that she spoke with the City Attorney. He told her that because this will be annexed into the city limits during the subdivision process by the City Council,zoning variances have to be requested and a public hearing needs to be held prior to submittal of a subdivision application. 3 • A motion was made by Hazel Klein to approve the variance for allowable density as requested. The motion was seconded by Judy Goldsby. BOARD DISCUSSION: President Siegrist pointed out that the board in the past has made a point of trying to lessen the density in several zones. Judy Goldsby stated that if you try to put a 12 foot wide manufactured home on a 30 foot wide lot you will be able to reach out and touch your neighbor. City Planner Noel Eaton stated the surrounding neighborhoods had a different zoning designation when the homes were placed. Hazel Klein asked if the lots were going to be owned by the developer or sold as individual lots to the people living in the manufactured homes. She asked this question because the surrounding neighborhood is set up as manufactured home parks and not individually owned lots. President Siegrist stated this does not have any bearing on the variance for allowing more density. At this time the board went through the seven (7)criteria in LMC 17.60.020 that have to be met to approve the variance. The applicant has submitted a letter with the application stating facts of hardship in regard to the seven (7)criteria: (Exhibit A) 1. Unless the denial would constitute an unnecessary and unjust invasion of the right of property; In regards to#1 the applicant stated "denial of this variance would constitute an unnecessary and unjust invasion of the right of the property. The property should be allowed to be developed at a density similar to the surrounding neighborhood". 2. Unless the grant relates to a condition or situation special and peculiar to the applicant; In regards to#2 the applicant stated "Granting this variance relates directly to the density of the surrounding neighborhood. The project has developed land surround it and the current regulations appear to be more stringent than the regulations the neighborhood was developed with. The intent of the project is to provide a professionally managed, well maintained, and affordable mobile home park. In order to provide affordable housing the project needs to be developed at a density similar to the surrounding neighborhood. The developer is also proposing to provide public access easements for future right-of-way needs for the City of Laurel that reduce the developable acres of the property". President Siegrist doesn't think that is a condition special or peculiar to the applicant. 3. Unless the basis is something more than mere financial loss to the owner; In regards to#3 the applicant stated "Granting the variance will provide more affordable housing in the City of Laurel and will benefit citizens in need of affordable housing". Hazel Klein stated that she feels this is a question that can be answered by the board as to whether it's going to be a financial loss. 4 4. Unless the hardship was created by someone other than the owner; In regards to#4 the applicant stated"The hardship of the variance was created by the current zoning code for the City of Laurel". President Siegrist thinks Laurel has the right to place zoning codes and the codes were placed with a purpose. 5. Unless the variance would be within the spirit, intent, purpose,and general plan of this title; In regards to#5 the applicant stated"Granting the variance is within the intent and purpose of the zoning regulations. The regulations promote the prevention of waste and inefficiency in land use." President Siegrist doesn't agree that they are within the intent and purpose of the zoning regulations set for density. 6. Unless the variance would not affect adversely or injure or result in injustice to others; In regards to#6 the applicant stated"Granting this variance will not have a negative impact on others. The density proposed is similar to the surrounding neighborhood and will not negatively impact the property values. Supporting this project will provide additional sidewalks and trails that will improve pedestrian connectivity to the park for adjacent property owners." Judy Goldsby stated that to her it goes back to the surrounding neighborhoods as some of the people have had to buy several lots in order to get their little piece of land so that their neighbors aren't right on top of them. She feels this density change would adversely impact the property values. 7. Ordinarily unless the applicant owned the property prior to the enactment of this title or • amendment. In regards to#7 the applicant stated "the applicant purchased the property in the fall of 2015. We are unaware of when the current zoning regulations were adopted". President Siegrist feels that being unaware of the zoning regulations put into place by the City of Laurel is not a valid excuse. City Planner Noel Eaton stated that she is not sure of what year the zoning regulations were placed on this property but she believes it was 2006. Mike Balch spoke and stated that the reason they are proposing more density on these lots is because they have to dedicate more land for roads to improve the existing streets for the city. By dedicating more land for roads it's reducing their area which reduces the density of their property. By approving their proposal for density it will only allow another 16 units. In his opinion that is a minimal impact to the overall plan. Judy Goldsby asked if the plan is to put 73 units on 6.27 acres and if they do not get the proposed density requested it is her understanding that it will cut out 16 units. Mike Balch stated that if this proposed density is not approved they will have to look at their plan and maybe do cash in lieu of a park or not provide road easements. 5 President Siegrist stated that the board is probably more concerned that the request for the variance may not meet all seven (7)criteria sufficiently. Judy Goldsby stated that her concern is not the road but the impact this will have on the neighbors. Lee Richardson asked who was responsible for the costs to put Date Avenue in. Noel stated the developer is responsible for doing so. Hazel Klein stated that the concern is for the traffic emptying out onto E. Maryland because if it is privately maintained it is going to impact the people along that road as far as maintenance goes. She wondered if that could be considered under criteria#6 as an adverse effect. Noel stated that when the subdivision is annexed into the city the city will be responsible for maintaining that road, not the property owners. President Siegrist asked if there was further discussion. There was none. At this time a vote on the motion was taken. The motion failed by a vote of 0—5. PUBLIC HEARING: REGAL COMMUNITY PARK ZONING VARIANCE FROM LMC 17.24.050A. LOT DIMENSIONS. President Siegrist opened the public hearing and asked staff to present the variance request. City Planner Noel Eaton stated that Regal Land Development Inc. submitted an application for a variance requesting the property located south of East Maryland Lane,east of Date Avenue, and north of East 8`h to waive the minimum lot dimensions of 4,000 sq/ft in Residential Manufactured Homes zoning district. The property is currently zoned Residential Manufactured Homes. STAFF FINDINGS: 1. The property owner has submitted a variance asking to allow"the property to be developed at a lot width that adequately meets setback requirements." 2. LMC 17.24.050.A states"For single-wide mobile home dwelling units, minimum site dimensions shall be forty feet wide and one hundred feet deep with a minimum site area of four thousand square feet." 3. LMC 17.24.010.0 states the intent of RMH districts is"to encourage suitable and proper development of mobile home parks or mobile home subdivisions." 4. Set back requirements for RMH zoning districts are provided in table 17.16.020 of LMC.Set back requirements for RMH are as followed: a. Front-10ft b. Side-5ft c. Side adjacent to street-20ft d. Rear-5ft 5. LMC 17.04.020.C.3 Purpose and provisions states"The Laurel city council further declares the zoning plan is adopted for the following specific purposes: (3)To encourage innovations in residential development and renewal so that the needs of the community for housing may be 6 met by greater variety in type and design of dwellings and by conservation of open space to preserve and enhance housing values and maintain residential neighborhood aesthetics." 6. On November 20, 2015 an application for preliminary plat approval and annexation for Regal Community Park Subdivision with two variance requests was submitted to the Planning Department for review. 7. The preliminary plat application was returned due to insufficiency.The preliminary plat application did not comply with Residential Mobile Home zoning requirements of minimum lot size dimensions of 4,000sq/ft. 8. Planning staff recommended any zoning variances be brought to the Laurel City-County Planning Board prior to another subdivision application submittal due to the nature and degree of change the variance could have on the proposed development as a whole. 9. The property is located outside of Laurel city limits but lies within Laurel's zoning jurisdiction. 10. Laurel's Growth Management Plan identifies a need for appropriate locations for compatible infill housing that would replace vacant or underutilized sites in existing neighborhoods 11. Laurel's Growth Management Plan accounts for residential land use policies to include "Infill development that complements existing neighborhoods should be encouraged." 12. The attached exhibit is a copy of the variance application request and a letter from the developer stating the need for the requested variance submitted with other requested variances for the development. 13. As per the requirements of LMC 17.72.070,a public hearing on the matter shall be held before the zoning commission before being heard by a governing body. As per B.of the section, public notice was published in the Laurel Outlook and adjacent property owners were notified by certified mail 15 days prior to the public hearing. ZONING COMMISSION CONSIDERATIONS AND RECOMMENDATION: The Zoning Commission shall review and make determinations on the following chapters and sections of the Laurel Municipal Code(LMC): 1. According to Chapter 17.60.020 of the LMC the Zoning Commission may not recommend granting a land use variance: 1. Unless the denial would constitute an unnecessary and unjust invasion of the right of property; 2. Unless the grant relates to a condition or situation special and peculiar to the applicant; 3. Unless the basis is something more than mere financial loss to the owner; 4. Unless the hardship was created by someone other than the owner; 5. Unless the variance would be within the spirit, intent, purpose,and general plan of this title; 6. Unless the variance would not affect adversely or injure or result in injustice to others; and 7. Ordinarily unless the applicant owned the property prior to the enactment of this title or amendment. STAFF SUGGESTED CONDITIONS: If the Zoning Commission recommends approval of the zoning variance,the following conditions are suggested: 1. The variance shall be good for 3 years from approval on unimproved property. 7 2. The applicant shall submit a major preliminary plat application for Regal Community Park to the planning department for review. APPLICANT: Mike Balch of C& H Engineering and Surveying, Inc. spoke regarding the proposed lot width variance. They are proposing that lots along Date Avenue remain as 40 foot wide lots to match the neighboring lots. They are requesting lots along Regal Avenue be 30 feet wide. Requiring the developers to provide 40 foot wide spaces along Regal Avenue will cause undue hardship on the development of the Regal Community Park and offers no advantages to the City of Laurel. It is not a productive use of the land. The goal of their development is to provide affordable housing within the City of Laurel. Mike went over the seven (7) criteria of Chapter 17.60.020 and the hardships they cause. In regards to#1 the applicant stated"A denial of this variance would constitute an unnecessary and unjust invasion of the right of property. The property should be allowed to be developed at a lot wide that adequately meets the setback requirements. Providing additional land beyond the required setbacks is an inefficient use of the land and increases the cost of housing in the City of Laurel". In regards to#2 the applicant stated: "Granting this variance relates directly to the site and surrounding streets. The developer is proposing to provide public access easements for future right-of-way needs along Date Avenue and Maryland Lane. These easements reduce the amount of developable land for the project while providing critical future right-of-way." In regards to#3 the applicant stated: "Granting the variance will provide more affordable housing in the City of Laurel and will benefit citizens in need of affordable house." In regards to#4 the applicant stated: "The hardship of the variance was created by the current zoning code for the City of Laurel". In regards to#5 the applicant stated: "Granting the variance is within the intent and purpose of the zoning regulations. The regulations promote the prevention of waste and inefficiency in land use". In regards to#6 the applicant stated: "Granting this variance will not have a negative impact on others. Lot setback standards will be adhered to and adequate open space for light and air can be provided with the narrower sites". In regards to#7 the applicant stated: "The applicant purchased the property in the fall of 2015. We are unaware of when the current zoning regulations were adopted". At this time President Siegrist opened the public hearing for public comments with the same public hearing rules in effect as the previous public hearing. President Siegrist asked if there were any proponents wishing to speak in favor of the proposed variance. 8 PROPONENTS: Steve Wells of 5506 Sunny Cove in Billings, Montana spoke. He represents the developer/owner of the land and voiced his support for the project. He speaks as a potential home buyer. He feels this development will provide home options to citizens of Laurel as well as property tax revenue. From a buyers perspective it affords the opportunity to own your own property at a younger age. At this time most real estate purchased requires a 20%a down payment which makes it hard for some people to qualify for a loan. Most people in their mid-20's are living with their parents. He went on to state that where he lives now is inside the city limits and has 5 foot setbacks on both sides. The proposed lots at this property have a larger setback which will give residents more room on their property. President Siegrist asked two (2) more times if there were any other proponents wishing to speak in favor of the proposed variance. There were none. President Siegrist asked if there were any opponents wishing to speak against the proposed variance. OPPONENTS: Kathy Herr of 501 7th Avenue spoke. She stated that because this is in the county right now and because the city assumes that this will be annexed into the city this is putting the horse before the cart. She also asked how much research has gone into the plan of developing this acreage with a road survey. She stated she is also a little disappointed that the (Planning board) meeting wasn't started with the pledge of allegiance. Ron Benner of 1408 E. Maryland spoke. He wants the Planning Board to think about the fact that because of the setbacks this will end up looking like manufactured homes set up in a parking lot. With the smaller lot sizes there is no way a good sized tree will grow within the area. The smaller lot sizes being proposed will not make it a nice area for people to live. This is not what the community wants to promote for Laurel.The community wants aesthetically pleasing lots with trees and landscaping. Tim McCollough of 1702 E.8th Street spoke. He was looking at the diagram that the developer was showing in regard to the setbacks and wants to know where the residents are supposed to park. He did not see any parking spots in the front of the trailer and wants to know if it will change how far the trailer goes back or are the residents of the homes planning to park on the street. He is unsure because parking was not addressed. President Siegrist stated that parking will be addressed as part of the subdivision submittal. Matt Britton of 2034 E. Maryland Lane spoke. He keeps hearing that the mobile homes will be 12 feet wide. In his opinion that is not realistic as most of the 12 foot wide homes were built in the 1960's. Manufactured homes today are at least 16 feet wide. He spoke because he wanted to point this out to the board. Karen Scovell of 706 Mulberry Lane spoke. She lives a block off of E.8th Street. She would like to see shrubbery included in the plan as it would make for a more conducive neighborhood. She would like the plan to be designed for people looking for permanent homes. She went to look at manufactured homes and found where double wide homes are 30 feet wide. If people have a double wide home that costs a few thousand dollars to move they will be more prone to stay permanently. Narrower manufactured 9 homes run about 18 feet wide. She does not think the size of homes proposed will bring in long term care. She wants a neighborhood where the neighbors interact with one another. She would like to see double wide manufactured homes placed. She asked if the developer is looking at money. She asked how much the lots will cost. She wants to know how much lot rental will be. She would like to see an activity center built and maybe a swimming pool for use by the property owners. President Siegrist asked for the third time if any opponents want to speak against the proposed variance. Jim Johnson of 1715 Ridge Drive spoke. Jim stated he has nothing against mobile or modular homes as he lived in one 30 years ago. He sold his mobile home and bought property on Ridge Drive. He paid a lot of money for his property. He keeps hearing that this proposed development will increase his property values. He doesn't believe it will. He believes it will take property values down considerably. President Siegrist asked if there were any other opponents wishing to speak. There were none. Planner Noel Eaton addressed the comments that were made. She stated that a lot of the comments made are on topics that should be brought up during the subdivision application and not the variance requests. She stated that the roads will be addressed during the subdivision application. There is no way to determine whether or not the property values will increase or decrease at this time. And as far as prices for lots and whether or not the owners will place double-wide trailers or 12 foot wide trailers is not to be determined at this time. The city has codes in place regarding lot size requirements. Noel goes on to state that this development is within 500 feet of water and sewer lines and will have to be annexed into the city as per city regulations. Annexation will be requested with the subdivision application. Judy Goldsby stated for clarified that this variance is a request to ask for less than a 4,000 square foot lots that will be located on the street front along Regal Avenue. Planner Noel Eaton stated yes. President Siegrist closed the public hearing. A motion to recommend approval of the variance for lot dimensions for Regal Community Park according to staff findings and recommendations was made by Judy Goldsby and seconded by Dan Koch. BOARD DISCUSSION: The board went over the seven (7)criteria in LMC 17.60.020 and the applicant's comments regarding the hardships it would cause. 1. Unless the denial would constitute an unnecessary and unjust invasion of the right of property; In regards to#1 the applicant stated "A denial of this variance would constitute an unnecessary and unjust invasion of the right of property. The property should be allowed to be developed at a lot wide that adequately meets the setback requirements. Providing additional land beyond the required setbacks is an inefficient use of the land and increases the cost of housing in the City of Laurel". 10 2. Unless the grant relates to a condition or situation special and peculiar to the applicant; In regards to#2 the applicant stated: "Granting this variance relates directly to the site and surrounding streets. The developer is proposing to provide public access easements for future right-of-way needs along Date Avenue and Maryland Lane. These easements reduce the amount of developable land for the project while providing critical future right-of-way." 3. Unless the basis is something more than mere financial loss to the owner; In regards to#3 the applicant stated: "Granting the variance will provide more affordable housing in the City of Laurel and will benefit citizens in need of affordable house." 4. Unless the hardship was created by someone other than the owner; In regards to#4 the applicant stated: "The hardship of the variance was created by the current zoning code for the City of Laurel". 5. Unless the variance would be within the spirit, intent, purpose,and general plan of this title; In regards to#5 the applicant stated: "Granting the variance is within the intent and purpose of the zoning regulations. The regulations promote the prevention of waste and inefficiency in land use". 6. Unless the variance would not affect adversely or injure or result in injustice to others; and In regards to#6 the applicant stated: "Granting this variance will not have a negative impact on others. Lot setback standards will be adhered to and adequate open space for light and air can be provided with the narrower sites". 7. Ordinarily unless the applicant owned the property prior to the enactment of this title or amendment. In regards to#7 the applicant stated: "The applicant purchased the property in the fall of 2015. We are unaware of when the current zoning regulations were adopted". Judy Goldsby disagreed with the applicant's explanation of hardship for criterial#4"unless the hardship was created by someone other than the owner". The zoning codes are placed for a reason and they should be adhered to. The livability of having a mobile home on a 30 foot wide lot is difficult when you can't open your door at the same time as your neighbor without the possibility of touching doors.She feels that does not make an adequate livability situation for anybody. She feels like that takes property values down. President Siegrist stated that she thinks there is a problem with this variance request not meeting some of the criteria of LMC 17.60.020. Planner Noel Eaton stated that the variance has to meet all seven (7)criteria and the board needs to discuss all of the seven (7)criteria. In regards to#1 President Siegrist stated that the developer has said this would be inefficient use of land at the size the lot is now and yet the board has heard neighbors express that home is not just the land size your house is on, it's the entire neighborhood you live in. In her opinion the space of the land needs to be more than the size of a hotel room. Lee Richardson asked if the traffic from this will all go to Yard Office Road. 11 Noel stated that no one will ever be able to determine where the traffic will go from this subdivision and the current variance being discussed is about lot size. Hazel Klein can see where making the lot smaller could be most cost effective for the developers however that is not something the Planning Board should be considering. Although the city does need affordable housing they also need to be cognoscente of how it will impact the neighborhood. She feels that setbacks are very critical in creating privacy. And in the fact of criteria#7 the developer needed to do their due diligence before they purchased the property so they knew how it could be developed. President Siegrist determined that because the board determined that there are 2 criterial that could not be met and all 7 criteria have to be met to recommend approval the motion could be voted on. The motion to recommend approval of the variance for lot dimensions for Regal Community Park according to staff findings and recommendations was voted on and failed by a vote of 0—5. PUBLIC HEARING: Regal Community Park Zoning Variance from 17.24.070B. Mobile Home requirements of minimum street roadway. President Siegrist opened the public hearing and asked staff to present the variance request. Planner Noel Eaton spoke. Regal Land Development Inc. submitted an application for a variance requesting the property located south of East Maryland Lane,east of Date Avenue, and north or East 8th Ave waive minimum street roadway requirements found in the Laurel City-County Subdivision Regulations within Residential Manufactured Homes zoning district. The property is currently zoned RMH. 1. The property owner has submitted a variance asking to allow for"a street width of 24 feet with no on-street parking." 2. LMC 17.24.070.B Mobile home park requirements states"The minimum street roadway shall conform to the requirements found in the city-county subdivision regulations." 3. Table 16.16.C.1, Required Dedications and Street Improvements for Subdivisions, provides required widths for proposed street types.The proposed Regal Avenue falls under Residential Local Access and the requirements are as follows: a. Right-of-Way-67ft. b. Road Width-28ft. c. Lane Width- 12ft. d. Parking width- not specified. e. Pathway Width-5ft. 4. LMC 16.16.060.C.2 Improvement Design, states"All street improvements shall be designed by and constructed under the supervision of a professional civil engineer.All improvements shall meet or exceed the right-of-way and construction standards for the type of street to be constructed found within these regulations and adopted policies of the city and county public works departments as appropriate." 5. LMC 16.16.060.A.3.,states"There shall be right-of-way and road connections made when existing roads or platted roads outside of the subdivision connect to the subject parcel." 12 6. Section D103.1 Access road width with a hydrant,of the 2012 International Fire Code states "Where a fire hydrant is located on a fire apparatus access road,the minimum road width shall be 26 feet,exclusive of shoulders."The section provides a graphic depicting road width to be 26 feet wide at the location of the hydrant and 20 feet wide along the remainder of the road as shown below. 7. On November 20,2015 an application for preliminary plat approval and annexation for Regal Community Park Subdivision with two variance requests was submitted to the Planning Department for review. 8. The preliminary plat application was returned due to insufficiency.The preliminary plat application did not comply with Residential Mobile Home zoning requirements of minimum street roadway requirements found within the city-county subdivision regulations. 9. Planning staff recommended any zoning variances be brought to the Laurel City-County Planning Board prior to another subdivision application submittal due to the nature and degree of change the variance could have on the proposed development as a whole. 10. The property is located outside of Laurel city limits but lies within Laurel's zoning jurisdiction. 11. The attached exhibit is a copy of the variance application request and a letter from the developer stating the need for the requested variance submitted with other requested variances for the development. 12. As per the requirements of LMC 17.72.070,a public hearing on the matter shall be held before the zoning commission before being heard by a governing body. As per B.of the section, public notice was published in the Laurel Outlook and adjacent property owners were notified by certified mail 15 days prior to the public hearing. ZONING COMMISSION CONSIDERATIONS AND RECOMMENDATION: The Zoning Commission shall review and make determinations on the following chapters and sections of the Laurel Municipal Code(LMC): 1. According to Chapter 17.60.020 of the LMC the Zoning Commission may not recommend granting a land use variance: 1. Unless the denial would constitute an unnecessary and unjust invasion of the right of property; 2. Unless the grant relates to a condition or situation special and peculiar to the applicant; 3. Unless the basis is something more than mere financial loss to the owner; 4. Unless the hardship was created by someone other than the owner; 5. Unless the variance would be within the spirit, intent, purpose,and general plan of this title; 6. Unless the variance would not affect adversely or injure or result in injustice to others; and 7. Ordinarily unless the applicant owned the property prior to the enactment of this title or amendment. STAFF SUGGESTED CONDITIONS: If the Zoning Commission recommends approval of the zoning variance,the following conditions are suggested: 1. The variance shall be good for 3 years from approval on unimproved property. 2. The applicant shall submit a major preliminary plat application for Regal Community Park to the planning department for review. 13 PROPONENTS: Mike Balch of C& H Engineering and Surveying spoke regarding the Regal Community Park. He is the engineer on the project representing owner Dan Wells. He stated they are proposing a 24 foot wide street with no on-street parking. Three parking spaces will be provided for each site to eliminate the need for street parking. Mike went on to say they are proposing a narrower street section to calm traffic and slow down drivers so that pedestrians are safe. He stated street standards for Laurel are an older standard that provided wider streets. The newer way of planning helps provide affordable housing by requiring appeal to families that have kids. They are providing trails as a safe way to get to the park. There will be less pavement and runoff which allows more green space. They are proposing not having parking on the street. They are proposing parking on the lots that are 30 feet wide and 20 feet deep so there will be 3 parking spots for every home. He hopes the Planning Board will consider this variance request for minimum street roadway standards. PROPONENTS: President Siegrist asked if there were any other proponents wishing to speak in favor of the proposed variance. Steve Wells of 5506 Sunny Cove in Billings Montana spoke as an agent for the developer. He stated that people feel less comfortable speeding on narrower roads. He also stated if residents have empty space they will fill it. With parking on the streets there won't be broken down cars on the street. It basically just makes the road be used as a roadway instead of a parking area. It makes it better for the people that live there as far as safety. President Siegrist asked two more times if there were any other proponents wishing to speak. There were none. OPPONENTS: Tim McCoullough of 1702 E. 8th Street spoke. He stated that there is a half street alongside his property that is 21'wide. Years ago the city council told the developer that a fire engine couldn't get down the road and turn around. The city council has since said that fire trucks can go down alleyways. People will park along the road whether it is legal to do or not. So the street is going to be narrower and in his opinion it will be more of a hazard when neighborhood kids play in the streets. Fire engines have gotten bigger and this street will be narrower. President Siegrist asked if there were any other opponents wishing to speak in opposition of the variance. Todd McKeever of 1702 E. Maryland Lane spoke. He feels this will be creating safety hazards by having a high concentration of people and narrower streets. While he understands the developer is proposing parking in front of the homes there will still be people that will park on the street. That is the nature of people. A narrower street will create a bottleneck. 14 Ed Onoszko of 1602 E. 8th Street spoke. That street is already narrow and over the years as the population has increased and the middle school was built he has seen an increase both in traffic and in the speed of traffic. A narrow street without any off-street parking just promotes a highway mentality of tunnel vision. The narrower street just creates a straight shot for people to naturally increase their speed. President Siegrist asked if there were any other opponents wishing to speak. There were none. President Siegrist closed the public hearing. A motion was made by Judy Goldsby and seconded by Hazel Klein to recommend approval of the variance for minimum street roadway with staff comments and recommendations. DISCUSSION: President Siegrist read the facts of hardship from the developer in regards to the seven (7)criteria that need to be met for the board to approve the variance. 1. Unless the denial would constitute an unnecessary and unjust invasion of the right of property; In regards to#1 the applicant stated "A denial of this variance would constitute an unnecessary and unjust invasion of the right of property. The property should be allowed to provide streets that meet the standards of the International Fire Code and provide adequate access. Proving additional land beyond the required for adequate access is an inefficient use of the land and increases the cost of housing in the City of Laurel". 2. Unless the grant relates to a condition or situation special and peculiar to the applicant In regards to#2 the applicant stated "Granting this variance relates directly to the site and surrounding streets. The proposed streets have a straight alignment and a flat topography which ensures adequate access is provided and no public safety issues are created. The narrower street will enhance the safety of the neighborhood by calming the traffic and slowing down drivers so that pedestrians are safer". President Siegrist does not feel that there is a hardship as there the situation is not special or peculiar to the applicant. 3. Unless the basis is something more than mere financial loss to the owner; In regards to#3 the applicant stated "Granting the variance will provide more affordable housing in the City of Laurel and will benefit citizens in need of affordable housing. It will also create a safer neighborhood for pedestrians by slowing traffic down". Judy Goldsby stated that there is no on-street parking in Sunhaven Mobile Park and you can go over there anytime of night or day and there are cars parked along the street. She wondered who is going to monitor the vehicles that do park along the street as the Laurel Police Department is already busy. And if you have cars parked on both sides of the street she doubts a fire truck would be able to get down the street. 4. Unless the hardship was created by someone other than the owner; 15 In regards to#4 the applicant stated "the hardship of the variance was created by the current zoning code for the City of Laurel". President Siegrist stated this criteria has been discussed in the last 2 public hearings and is not considered a hardship. 5. Unless the variance would be within the spirit, intent, purpose,and general plan of this title; In regards to#5 the applicant stated "Granting the variance is within the intent and purpose of the zoning regulations. The regulations promote the prevention of waste and inefficiency in land use". 6. Unless the variance would not affect adversely or injure or result in injustice to others; In regards to#6 the applicant stated "Granting this variance will not have a negative impact on others. Adequate access to the site is provided with the current plan". 7. Ordinarily unless the applicant owned the property prior to the enactment of this title or amendment. In regards to#7 the applicant stated "The applicant purchased the property in the fall of 2015. We were unaware of when the current zoning regulations were adopted". President Siegrist stated that our zoning code cannot be considered a hardship. The board voted on the motion and it failed by a vote of 0—5. PUBLIC HEARING: Zone Change Application for Nutting Bros Subdivision 3'd filings lots 18-25,from Residential Tracts to Residential Manufactured Homes. President Siegrist opened the public hearing and asked staff to present the zone change. Rob Morehead has submitted an application for zone change. The affected property is located north of Eleanor Roosevelt Dr. and west of Yard Office Rd. The parcel is zoned Residential Tracts and located outside of Laurel's city limits but within the City's zoning jurisdiction. The applicant is requesting the property be zoned Residential Manufactured Homes. The property is legally described as Nutting Bros 3rd Filing,Section 10,Township 2 south, Range 24 east, lots 19-25. STAFF FINDINGS: 1. LMC 17.72.030 requires a pre-application conference for persons or parties interested in submitting an application for zone change. A pre-application meeting was held prior to submission of the application. 2. The application is seeking to change the zoning from Residential Tracts to Residential Manufactured Homes. A map is attached. 3. The property is approximately 30 acres. 4. The lot is currently vacant and the proposed use would be a mobile home park. 5. The property is located outside Laurel city limits but within the City's zoning jurisdiction and city- county planning jurisdiction. 6. LMC 17.24.040,Allowable density which states"The maximum allowable density for all mobile home parks shall be nine mobile homes per net acre." Based on acreage,this site could have a maximum density of 270 mobile homes. 16 7. The City of Laurel Growth Management Plan describes the area of town where this property is located as"East Side"This portion of the City is currently developed and holds much of the older housing stock. It is mostly developed with single-family homes with pockets of manufactured homes." 8. As per the requirements of LMC 17.72.070,a public hearing on the matter shall be held before the zoning commission before being heard by the Yellowstone County Commissioners. As per B. of the section, public notice was published in the Laurel Outlook and adjacent property owners were notified by certified 15 days prior to the public hearing. ZONING COMMISSION CONSIDERATIONS AND RECOMMENDATION: 1. As per LMC 17.72.060 the Zoning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council to: 1. Deny the application for amendment to the official map; 2. Grant action on the application for a period not to exceed thirty days; 3. Delay action on the application for a period not to exceed thirty days; 4. Give reasons for the recommendation. STAFF SUGGESTED CONDITIONS: 1. LMC MCA states that zone changes cannot be conditioned; therefore, no conditions have been included. APPLICANT: Scott Aspinlieder representing owner Rob Morehead spoke. The property owner is requesting the zone be changed from Resident Tracts to Residential Manufactured Homes.The requested zoning is consistent with the zoning in the area as there is RMH zoning directly across the street on Yard Office Road. There is also Highway Commercial and Community Commercial zoning in the near proximity which has higher density. Scott when on to state that traditionally when they look at zone changes as a planner, an engineer and an agent they try to find areas where they are gradually stepping down density and gradually buffering commercial and heavy commercial with higher density and the residential to lower density residential. i 1 Scott went on to say that if you look at the map this is gradually what this zone change does. It goes from community commercial to a higher density manufactured home and then transitions into traditional residential lots. When they look for higher density develops this type of property is what they look for. They try to put these types of developments where there is good traffic flow. There is good traffic flow on Yard Office Road and also off of Highway 10 East. Scott went on to say that there is an 80 foot parkland buffer along the north side of the property which will help minimize the impact to the residential property along the north. There are also trees and brush along that buffer strip. At this point they are asking for this zone change so they can start the developing process. It will be hard for him to answer questions regarding traffic. He also pointed out that Noel had stated that the gross density(without figuring in roads and parkland)could be 270. They have not laid out the 17 development on paper yet because they don't know if they will get the support of the Planning Board to do this. Scott went on to state that there has been a lot of discussion as to how higher density and mobile home parks are seen in this community. He thinks in large this is an unfair characterization of manufactured homes. He stated as part of a growing community there has to be some form of stepping stone method for people to get into the housing market. Not everyone coming out of college can afford to buy a 3,000 square foot house on the west side. Not everyone can afford to buy a condominium or a townhouse. We have to be able to provide opportunities and options for residents wanting to get into the housing market. A nice well-groomed community of manufactured homes gives an opportunity to young families to put roots down into a community. These residents eventually are able to buy housing in different parts of the town. In his opinion the key to getting people in a community is to be able to provide some lower to moderate income housing options. That is one of the motivators for this development. Scott went on to say that they are not asking for variances and they plan to follow all applicable codes for this development. They plan to make this a project that everyone can be proud of. Scott is also a resident of Laurel and wanted to speak as a proponent for this project. He lives at 923 8th Avenue. Scott's parents lived in a single wide manufactured home. Eventually they were able to buy a small house and then a larger house. Scott went on to state that this will be annexed into the city which will bring more tax base to the City of Laurel. He advocates for this project in a number of ways as this needs to be thought about in full circle. PROPONENTS: President Siegrist asked if there were any proponents to speak in favor of the proposed zone change. Rob Morehead of 1014 N.32"d Street in Billings spoke. He had several points he wanted to mention. This is a property that they are going to own and they don't plan to re-sell it to people that don't care. He owns a couple of mobile homes in Sunhaven Court in Laurel and that court is run with an iron fist. If they park outside (the court)they get a notice and a warning and then their vehicle is towed. He wants to model this manufactured home court, as far as management is concerned, after Sunhaven. Rob went on to state that they will be paying$300,000 to$400,000 to make improvements to the city of Laurel's sewer lines. Rob stated the parkland to the north will be used as a buffer for the property owners on the north. They plan to plant more trees. He is putting very strict covenants and guidelines on the people that can move. He wants to make this place something to be proud of. President Siegrist asked if there were other opponents wishing to speak in favor of this zone change. Larry Nelson of 2945 Highwood in Billings spoke. He is one of the agents involved in this project. He stated that this is the best type of zone for this piece of property. This will be a planned community that will probably appeal more to elderly buyers because it will be in a safe area of town and it will be well maintained. It will be a good transition for elderly. This is not about what is being built but it's about 18 opening up the box and having discussion on it. He went on to state that the average payback for a city on a development this size is 4.5 years. This development will be a boost for Laurel's tax base. President asked if there were any other proponents wishing to speak in favor of this zone change. There were none. OPPONENTS: President Siegrist asked if there were any opponents wishing to speak. Tim McCoulough of 1702 E. 8th Street spoke. He stated that he has heard that they are going to sell the lots at a reasonable rate and then he heard they were not going to sell the lots. He is wondering which one they plan to do. He stated he hasn't heard whether they plan to have new homes or whether or not they would allow people to bring their homes in from somewhere else. President Siegrist stated that this is not relevant to the zone change request. Mr. McCoullough stated it would be relevant as the developers didn't express whether they were or not. The fact that they don't know where the power or water is going to be hooked in or where the roads are going to go and it makes it hard for the people here tonight to determine whether or not this would be in their best interest or not. President Siegrist stated that until the zone change is approved the developers are not required to submit a plan. Nancy Lausch of 1608 E. Maryland spoke. She has lived at her address for 40 years. The proposed trailer court would be directly behind her house. She thinks the proposed court will affect their property values and their standard of living. She has talked with all of the neighbors and they have all expressed concerns over the traffic it will bring to the road. She goes on to state that every trailer court within a 2 mile perimeter of her property is an eyesore. She does not think the city needs another trailer court on that end of town. David Murja of 1608 E. Maryland spoke. He stated that this is a radical change of zoning and wonders why they need this change. This is a neighborhood that has been here for decades. There is already a trailer court close by and now this developer wants to put in another one. He is not sure why. It will increase the density which will impact the neighbors. The reason there is zoning is so the people that buy in that area have an assurance that it will remain as such and their investment is safe. He stated that this would be unjust to the existing property owners for the board to allow this change in the zoning. Ed Onoszko of 1602 E.8th Street spoke. He is concerned with property values going down. In his opinion anytime a trailer court goes in the property values seem to depreciate. Whether that is true or not when you go to sell your home people that see the trailer court development tend not to buy your home. There are already a number of trailer courts around his property and it seems like he is being choked in that they are being surrounded by additional trailer units. You can talk with the city police and they will tell you that crime rate in "the swamp" (Village Subdivision) is high. If there are another 200 units allowed just down the street from his property he is concerned that the crime rate will go up. He does not feel that this proposed development is of any benefit to the city of Laurel. 19 Randy Frickel of 1365 E. 8th Street spoke. He said that the concerns that he had were already addressed by previous opponents of the development. He does not believe Laurel needs this housing and feels that it is all coming down to the developer making money. Karen Scovell of 706 Mulberry Avenue spoke. She stated this sounds like it's going to be a different kind of Manufactured Home Park. She has seen developments of manufactured homes that are well kept because the managers of the park are on top of problems. In her opinion it sounds like this will be well kept and they need to take a different look at what's going on. Todd McKeever of 1702 E. Maryland spoke. He opposes the zone change for this property. He presented the board with a list of names of people opposing the zone change that could not attend the meeting. (see attached) President Siegrist asked if there were any other opponents wishing to speak against the zone change. Neil Gunderson of 2024 E. Maryland Lane. He stated Nutting drainage ditch that runs off of the property to the east off Yard Office road and it runs through his property. That drainage ditch is always running no matter what time of year it is. It only varies by about a foot. He understands that there is a stretch of land above that ditch that belongs to the Yellowstone County and is parkland. He suggested that the buffer zone be larger to protect the neighbors from the manufactured home court. He also would like them to put a fence on the south end of the property next to the drainage ditch to keep the kids from playing there. Planner Noel Eaton reminded the public that this public hearing is only concerning the zone change. Ron Benner of 1408 E. Maryland spoke. He feels that the zone change from Residential Tracts to a multi-family situation is the issue here as RMH will cause a much higher density. He stated that if this is going to be done the infrastructure needs to be looked at to see what the impact will be. He has had conversations with Rob Morehead about the Nutting drain and Rob presented some options for the ditch that need to be looked into. The department of Natural Resources owns the water that is in Nutting drain because it is a natural spring. He is also concerned with the amount of groundwater this new multi-family development will cause as the ground could become over-saturated and cause problems with roads and property. Janet Johnson of 2057 E. Maryland Lane spoke. She is concerned with how this development will affect the city's infrastructure if it is approved. She went on to say there are already issues in the trailer court to the east of Yard Office Road as there is already a large amount of police calls trashy lots. She is totally opposed to this zone change. Candy Onoszko of 1602 E.8th Street spoke. She handed Planner Noel Eaton some additional signatures she collected from people opposed to the zone change. (see attached) Her property is surrounded by trailer houses already and she is concerned about this addition causing more crime in her neighborhood. She wondered how this will impact Laurel schools. Charles Peaton of 1505 E.8th Street spoke. He complained that the trailer courts are all around him and he considers them as trashy as a landfill. He is also not happy with the high rates of speed that the cars go on the roads in that area. He is not in favor of the zone change. 20 Planner Noel Eaton reminded the public that concerns voiced here tonight need to be based on factual events. President Siegrist read the letters of protest into the record. (see attached) Matt Britton of 2034 E. Maryland spoke. He told the board that there are enough trailer courts on the east end of Laurel and the city doesn't need anymore. He asked the board to keep that in mind. STAFF REPONSE TO QUESTIONS City Planner Noel Easton stated that 99%of the comments from the public are not applicable to discussing the zone change request from Residential Tracts to Residential Manufactured Homes. The comments that were brought up by the public are comments that can be considered at the annexation and subdivision review. Noel went on to say there are Laurel Municipal Zoning codes that the developer will have to follow if the zone change is approved. A motion to approve the zone change request from Residential Tracts to Residential Manufactured Homes was made by Hazel Klein and seconded by Judy Goldsby. BOARD DISCUSSION: President Siegrist stated she understands both the public and the developers concerns regarding this property. She feels that because this property is adjacent to commercial properties and is probably not suitable for one-acre home sites. Dan Koch asked Noel to explain why the zone change cannot have conditions put on it by the board. Noel stated that there cannot be any conditions put onto a zone change. Judy Goldsby stated that at this time there are 30 acres and the minimum lot size required is one acre. If this is changed to Residential Manufactured Home zone what would the allowable density be? Noel stated that cannot be determined at this time because the developer needs to decide where the roads and easements are going to go. Judy Goldsby asked if this could potential triple the number of allowable homes. Heidi Jensen stated the answer to her question cannot be determined at this time. Hazel Klein had a question on voting on the motion as there could be a possible conflict of interest as her office is involved in the sale. She told the board she will abstain from voting. Lee Richardson stated that if a lift station is put in the sewer will work very well. He was involved in the same type of situation in Red Lodge. He thinks Laurel needs this type of a development if it is done well. 21 President Siegrist stated that Laurel has a need for housing. She does not think that 1 acre lots will work for the area. President Siegrist stated that in order for this development to move forward they will need to have this zone change approved. It is not considered spot zoning as there is commercial zoning across the road. President Siegrist asked if there was any further discussion from the board. There was none. At this time the vote on the motion to approve the zone change was voted on by the board members present and carried by a vote of 3—1 with Hazel Klein abstaining from voting. This will go to the Yellowstone County Commissioners for their consideration. PUBLIC HEARING: Preliminary Plat application Lot 1, Block 1 Amended Entertainment Park subdivision. President Siegrist opened the public hearing and asked staff to present the application. Planner Noel Eaton spoke. She read her staff report on the preliminary plat application. Stephen Diefenderfer applied for preliminary plat approval for Lot 1, Block 1 Amended Entertainment Park Subdivision which contains 2 lots on approximately 6.202 acres of land for highway commercial development. The subject property is located southwest of the intersection of East Railroad St. and Juniper Ave.The property is located within the city limits of Laurel. Planning staff recommends that the Planning Board adopt the staff report and Findings of Fact as presented in this staff report. No variances were requested on the property. PROPOSED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Pursuant to Section 76-3-608(4), MCA,the following conditions are recommended to reasonably minimize potential adverse impacts identified within the Findings of Fact: 1. All public improvements shall be built to Montana Public Work Standards and to the specifications made in the Subdivision Improvements Agreement provided with the application for preliminary plat. 2. To minimize effects on local services, utility easements shall be provided on the final plat. 3. Minor changes may be made in the SIA and final documents, as requested by the Planning, Legal or Public Works Department to clarify the documents and bring them into the standard acceptable format. 4. To minimize the effects on the natural environment,a weed management plan and property inspection shall be approved by the County Weed Department, prior to final plat approval. 5. The final plat shall comply with all requirements of the Laurel-Yellowstone City-County Planning Area Subdivision Regulations, rules, regulations, policies, and resolutions of the City of Laurel, and the law and Administrative Rules of the State of Montana. 22 PROCEDURAL HISTORY: • A pre-application meeting was conducted with Planning Staff for the proposed subdivision on January 25, 2016 • The preliminary plat pre-application sufficiency and completeness review was done and submitted to the owners agent • The City County Planning Board has noticed a public hearing for April 7, 2016. PLAT INFORMATION: General location: Southwest of the intersection of East Railroad SL and Ji er Ave Legal Description: Lot 1, Block 1, Entertainment Park Subdivision YA Section NW 15, Township 2S, Range J4E. Subdivider and Owner: Stephen Diefenderfer Engineering and Surveyor: Bryan Alexander, Sanderson Stewart Existing Zoning: Highway Commercial Existing Land Use: Vacant Land Urban Proposed Land Use: Highway Commercial Gross Area: 6.202 Proposed#of Lots: 2 Lot Sizes: 3.2 and 3.0 acres Parkland Requirements: Parkland requirementvvao satisfied with initial subdivision PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT: The Findings of Fact for the preliminary plat of Lot 1, Block 1 Amended Entertainment Park Subdivision have been prepared by the Laurel City-County Planning Department staff for review by the City/County Planning Board.These findings are based on the preliminary plat application and address the review criteria required by the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act(76-3-608, MCA)and the Laurel- Yellowstone City-County Planning Area Subdivision Regulations. A. What are the effects on agriculture and agricultural water user facilities, local services,the natural environment,wildlife and wildlife habitat and public health and safety? (76'3'608(3)(o\, MCA) (Section 3 (C)(3)(a), LYCCPASR) 1. [�ectonaQricubureandm�ricukura| vvateruserfacUb�s. 23 The proposed subdivision will have no impact on agriculture.The 6.202 acre subdivision site is currently vacant land. It is surrounded by highway commercial zoning to the west, interstate 90 to the south and light industrial to the north and east of the property. 2. Effect on local services a. The subdivision improvements agreement has provided detailed information regarding: • Water • Sanitary sewer • Storm drainage • Streets 3. Effects on the natural environment The proposed subdivision is proposed as a 2 lot amended subdivision with no current plans for development.The site is zoned Highway Commercial and surrounded by commercial and industrial zoning. 4. Effects on wildlife and wildlife habitat There are no known endangered species or critical game ranges on site. Due to close proximity to Interstate 90 and adjacent industrial zoning, it provides little wildlife habitat. Little cover and shelter is available for wildlife species in the area. 5. Effects on public health and safety There are no adverse effects on public health and safety.A geotechnical was provided and is attached to the application.There were no significant findings. B. Was an Environmental Assessment Required? (76-3-603, MCA)(Section 16.9 LYCCPASR) An environmental assessment was not required with the application. C. Does the subdivision conform to the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act and to local subdivision regulations? (76-3-608 (3)(b), MCA) The subdivision, with proposed conditions, satisfies the requirements of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act and conforms to the design standards specified in the LYCCPASR. The subdivider and the local government have complied with the subdivision review and approval procedures set forth in the local and state subdivision regulations. D. Does the subdivision conform to sanitary requirements? (Section 3(C)(3)(e), LYCCPASR) The existing subdivision is already connected to city services. E. Does the proposed plat provide easements for the location and installation of any utilities? (76- 3-608(3)(C), MCA Utility easements shall be provided on the face of the final plat. 24 F. Does the proposed plat provide legal and physical access to each parcel within the subdivision and notation of that access on the plat? (76-3-608(3)(d), MCA) Legal and Physical access to all lots has been provided and is shown on the preliminary plat. If future subdivision of proposed lots 1A and 1B occur,a 67ft wide access and utility easement is provided for the purpose of allowing access to lots 1A, 1B,and subsequent subdivision lots thereof. CONCULSIONS OF FINDINGS OF FACT • The preliminary plat of Lot 1, Block 1 Amended Entertainment Park Subdivision does not create any adverse impacts that warrant denial of the subdivision. • With the proposed conditions, Lot 1, Block 1 Amended Entertainment Park Subdivision is in compliance with the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act, LYCCPASR and the City of Laurel Growth Management Plan. RECOMMENDATION Planning staff recommends that the City/County Planning Board make findings and should they decide to approve include the staff report and staff recommended conditions and adopt the Findings of Fact as presented. APPLICANT: Brian Alexander of Sanderson Steward located at 1300 NW Transtech Way in Billings spoke as an agent for owner Stephen Diefenderfer. Brian stated that Planner Noel Eaton gave good information on the project and asked the board if they had any questions from him. President Siegrist stated the board can't ask questions of him until after the public hearing is over. PROPONENTS: President Siegrist asked three (3)times if there were any proponents wishing to speak in favor of the application. There were none. OPPONENTS: President Siegrist asked three (3)times if there were any opponents wishing to speak in opposition of the application. There were none. President Siegrist closed the public hearing. A motion to approve the preliminary plat with staff recommendations and findings of fact was made by Dan Koch and seconded by Judy Goldsby. 25 DISCUSSION: Planner Noel Eaton clarified that this parcel is just west of the nursery on E. Railroad Street on the south side of the road which is legally described as Lot 1, Block 1 of Amended Entertainment Park Subdivision. Noel went on to state that the parcel is hooked to city water and sewer.This has to go through a major subdivision procedure because it is already a subdivision. There are no plans for development at this time as they are subdividing the parcel in half for resale purposes. There is a 60 foot access easement that is located on the dividing line of the proposed 2 lots. The zone will remain Highway Commercial. The motion was voted on and carried by a vote of 5-0. This will go before the City Council for approval. NEW BUSINESS: There is no new business. OLD BUSINESS: River's Edge Industrial Park River's Edge Industrial Park is set for a public hearing before Yellowstone County Commissioners on April 19, 2016 at 9:30 a.m. in Billings. MISCELLANEOUS: The next meeting is scheduled for 10:00 am on May 5, 2016. Noel told the board that there are now 3 openings on the Planning Board. A presentation on the Airport Affected area was going to be on the agenda for this month but Noel was unable to complete her research before tonight's meeting. PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA TOPICS: There was no public comment. A motion to adjourn was made by Dan Koch and seconded by Judy Goldsby. The motion carried by a vote of 5—0. The meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Cheryl) L nd, Secretary 26 0���-w������� �� � �m�.�~�m-�m m� APR 86 Laurel City-County Planning Office 115 West First Street Laurel,MT 59044 April 2,2016 Re:Zoning change residential to residential manufactured homes It is a high concern to us that the hearing on April 7,2016 beginning at 10:00 am is set during the working hours for most residences. We are sending this letter to be included in the concerns for the discussion on the potential zoning change from residential to residential manufactured homes in the Nutting Bros.second and third filing. We are strongly against this zone change. The reason we bought our residence at 1806 East Maryland was because all the homes are residential housing. We are strongly opposed to having manufactured homes behind us. We do not want our neighborhood market values to drop due to manufacture homes being brought in. We also have concerns that the County already has a hard time controlling the speed on East Maryland. It is used for one of the main travel ways to the schools and town and it would only increase the traffic by bringing in more homes. The increase of residences would not only increase the traffic issues that already exist, but would also increase the already over whelmed Fire,EMS service and County Deputies. We are also concerned with what services would be used to supply these residences for utilities. All residents are currently on well and septic systems,which is working well. We don't want to be forced to use city services or to pay taxes for services we do not need. By keeping the Residential zone in place it would reduce the number of quality homes that could be built. Sincerely, Shawn and Brita Jones 1806 East Maryland Laurel,MT . ffECEWEI Damon and Miriam Pope 182OEMaryland bn Laurel MT 59044 April 6, 2016 Laurel City-County Planning Board 115 W First St Laurel MT 59044 Re:Zoning changes To Whom It May Concern: This letter concerns the application for zoning changes regarding the property North of Eleanor Roosevelt Dr as described in the Notice of Public Hearing published in the Laurel Outlook on March 17, 2016 and March 24,2016. Let it be known that we, Damon and Miriam Pope of 1820 E Maryland Lane,oppose the zoning change from Residential to Residential Manufactured Homes. A few of the reasons that we purchased a home in Laurel,despite its further proximity to Damon's employment,is for the small-town feel of the community and for the privacy that our particular place of residence provides. As a family with several young children we appreciate having plenty of room for our children to roam and feeling that they are safe to do so in our own yard. The change in zoning would affect our privacy as well as increase traffic on our street making it unsafe for our children to play outside in our yard. The noise pollution would also have a detrimental effect on our family as we retire to bed early each night due to early work schedules. We purchased our property, nearly a two acre lotas a financial investment. Having a mobile home park so near will decrease our property value,diminishing our investment. Thank you for considering our views and opinions.We hope that the board will decide against the proposed zoning changes that will negatively affect so many of Laurel's current residents. Sincerely, Damon and Miriam Pope - ' (4)0r— � . �r- i' .~ EEIVE Dear City-County Planning Board, APR 0 7 9(116 [j BY: I would like to oppose pp the new zone change due to the building of a trailer court. I have been a resident and a home owner in Laurel for 16 years. I have had 2 of my vehicles windows broken, 2 vehicles broken into, and my house has been shot with BB guns. Two of the people caught for these crimes lived in the trailer court. I am not against building new houses or developing the land, I am against the building of a trailer court. Trailers can become an eyesore, they will decrease the value of my home, and bring crime into the neighborhood. I oppose the trailer court for these reasons and would greatly appreciate it if you would take this letter into advisement. Sincerely, 95 f i Larry Allen Petition To Reject Proposed Zone Changes To Property Located in Nutting Bros 2nd Filing North of Eleanor Roosevelt Dr We;the undersigned residential property owners,hereby file our united protest to changing the zoning designation to"Residential Manufactured Homes"in Lots 18&19-25 of Section 10,T2S,R24E. The zoning charge, which will allow a large trailer park to be developed,will adversely impact our property values and the enjoyment of our homes. We already have large trailer park on the east side of Yard Office Road. The further concentration of a high-density population to the west of Yard Office can only place stresses the infrastructure of the surrounding area. SIGNATURES/ DDR S //g (-o 6) -'11P ► L 141,2 ;.4_3ca(Z_ _/ s- S' . %. -=-mac Via+r ra l..6€44 -. /e/2 76'4414.,p-7,,_, b4 , c u tk-'14.44:///lodfz,6- 7-7j/dkw . • c)7a.7 t 4.1 Ait r Petition To Reject Proposed Zone Changes To Property Located in Nutting Bros 2nd Filing North of Eleanor Roosevelt Dr We;the undersigned residential property owners,hereby file our united protest to changing the zoning designation to"Residential Manufactured Homes"in Lots 18&19-25 of Section 10,T25,R24E. The zoning charge,which will allow a large trailer park to be developed,will adversely impact our property values and the enjoyment of our homes. We already have large trailer park on the east side of Yard Office Road. The further concentration of a high-density population to the west of Yard Office can only place stresses the infrastructure of the surrounding area. SIGNATURES/ADDRESSES ✓.)4N v .x c ,t, 0 I i. evAa YL4PD� v c ,t/ 91044 _ 170'+ `c b 6%E ©�._ L-.0.ea L NAT 5ci c 44-1- I i (A a ii 0 I5I! RI dye- DK. l aura, fl 71. 5 ice(7 .7-1--7„( 4::-_, _ 1,5-z 7 X7:._L-6 /2 16, c zi 3-5,_7c -,. c l h)-1 r, c\w >r. C,a i Li. i\,1 F3ci OSI ci ' .t 1 �( , — 19(5 - ,;,,tc. /'77 5 76c/ Y I.( 071,--u7 ciu , 6LG `� " _ ..-1 , , ' 1- 1 cam', ', QQ� _ . __ viVT 7 "i`). '? . . ! iv gi o ,` 00.11/& /,A 64- /-f 5. )11-A- I,J )y-), //3 r-\ L.1 1%ri, / .rf -t'H la- / iJ, /4::: 17g- 1--44c /1_ Lii fi z. k oo 4 l( l-s-' -e Luc, ('1 -5►cI 0 j ,�„7.- �,---- /pc- 1/714-eq A I ri. � / (`l 7 (-- ." -1-" 'if( L).4/ i__________1____ /6.L /(0. g 3" -E-- -----t/L -,:-/-frAAA-44 /7/1---- lib ,,vi,r.-- Petition to [action] Petition summary and This is petition against a zone change from Residential Tracts to Residential Manufactured Homes for the property north of background Eleanor Roosevelt Dr., Nutting Bros.20 Filing,S10,T2S, R24E,loy18"&lots 19-25,Nutting Bros 3rd Filing. Action petitioned for We,the undersigned, are concerned citizens who urge our leaders to act now to[action item(s)for which you are petitioning] Printed Name Signature Address Comment Date &alliSz1(43 4. al /‘4,-. eL—: V!‘",57., l 9A/A &wig 0,vAs-zxe.. ' .0!"; _/ ./:,,e),„,5g,ILS /14. e:- g2f15/ 1,#5ce#•G/ 4A'X �.Pry /�/1.‘•-t 7 �i'�--- /P/02. E P./IN Sf Lr,,c( y/yA<,, tq-06-e,?) :TO(A VI,SAI; Ulf.* ,t,‘ X F y ! ' L1 n -� D i„rel 7 o,2 6 to��� i �4 -d�.,e. Liw& _,9.,- �l(/L use 4 J y/y//� Lzo.tA Lcj 7 111 L) et.st A k Li - ./16 Lluaccterpil i nrs'A i Itil Locu51- il vt, 4/4 Pt/ . . .. _, /dir4.4:.....ka ‘ . C.i.,: ‘ • Li 4 . � ae l)f - 4 ' 1' , L 1' Loc 4" Y- Y_ cc e�c ( Q\ cz -42--„,` , i 1 �.,�;��.k - a,.3 ✓r� Q"-� , .1-f(el Petition To Reject Proposed Zone Changes To Property Located in Nutting Bros 27'4ng North of Eleanor Roosevelt Dr 3 We;the undersigned residential property owners residing on East Maryland Lane with our properties abutting and adjacent to the proposed zone change area,hereby file our united protest to changing the zoning designation to"Residential Manufactured Homes"in Lots 18 & 19-25 of Section 10,125, R24E. We have all made substantial investments in our properties based on the single family, large lot character of the area where we reside. The zoning charge, which will allow a large trailer park to be developed along the south side of our properties,will adversely impact our property values and the enjoyment of our home. We already have large trailer park on the east side of Yard Office Road. The further concentration of a high-density population to the west of Yard Office can only place stresses the infrastructure of the surrounding area and increase usage on segment of E. Maryland Lane,which the current residents paid to construct and pay to maintain. SIGNATURES/ADDRESS ___ ----- _ --.,-.2, _ • - '''' IL' 1 _ e..-,)....--z c•-'-'::-; /5'06 Z". /)-7,-;2 /47--/r/ g-c2b C il/ifa IF /IA Z 0 AT , i 9// May, 44 (47 \ i n / I 4I--- / 7,2 E n74/ /14-id- LA" \ p?..,<1 • , ,:: 0.57 E-, MA-1 -1,1 c-A-A)D &N. Ci 01j M — - ..--- 0 .-1--7- \nit fr 1/UVIO s-kA i V,, --?7 /. 2 5 4--. / W /1 L/1-- ,..c_ - i) 1 i / i , ' i i'l .: ' 1 4'Ai ,'i. ' .0„ e _, I V a t . tc:141 /1 t•1 0 Sildi' a _)tC1 , ---.-v \ LALA0,1,, ) 313 K----- ‘,.....--:-, —•qpip A I ,..0... ,....0011-'...-- '`. /111A/ ( /°114.' / / ) 40- 1 LO 2 i #11 21,Z .10 ir :- t.... A.J , AV I I a filti-,•.. c 6 I ( ati • 6 102,4017- r , * it" \..JLF`'•. ---- ,•_ . • ... A / 4. :4; 4 1110.4 ' Y 0 Q------ . I A E ---- oi i ,- . • I/7 0 --,,,,i i / 4 ( 1 - r- - 1 ', 7/ f . .. ..'6'Y'L‘I\ Vb1,/laU V- .'q-'6 1 .,-Q (1 ,,,_ Petition To Reject Proposed Zone Changes To Property Located in Nutting Bros 2 Fi ing North of Eleanor Roosevelt Dr 3ru We;the undersigned residential property owners residing on East Maryland Lane with our properties abutting and adjacent to the proposed zone change area,hereby file our united protest to changing the zoning designation to"Residential Manufactured Homes"in Lots 18 &19-25 of Section 10,T2S,R24E. We have all made substantial investments in our properties based on the single family, large lot character of the area where we reside. The zoning charge,which will allow a large trailer park to be developed along the south side of our properties, will adversely impact our property values and the enjoyment of our home. We already have large trailer park on the east side of Yard Office Road. The further concentration of a high-density population to the west of Yard Office can only place stresses the infrastructure of the surrounding area and increase usage on segment of E. Maryland Lane,which the current residents paid to construct and pay to maintain. SIGNATURES/ADDRESSES (taAA-/Crb* ,cn 1136 ;d4 �( , 6-?0cd -A1 (O$5 �(-e� i1.6viilefi--70<15z P4cjo ,�� c f *.t -lir/ - G A. c.it L _,-,c 7 ,/z /707 e ,xir y 4-7(1 AIr'/m7 ...5-7~ `- 1NROI d ‘ol II)"iti ' foo PO RS-1)tiCT5R0yY VillfftiNLIC kS _ V .� __ LaK.A ANIL f41 1 ''w�„ 1505 E M41I -�I LA 1,60,kk •, 6 1))0_ct € 46.J ( A, Lcu-u 136 E. /1(6. 1100 Ln Cr�.�vc/ /1/I.i �y lax, f. c 1 a,v (,vi L U �.U ` Zo/q / 7 / '/ 1 4 1. ' . ill, II a�1 , a 40":" '' itittA/1f e. ..e.i.. ' ./ ta,,,, 06,.... 01.0-5`I i / i rp j 0 � & 1.4 • 1 A. 0 1f`, ,/,1Jv f r d%`4 iili ., i „, .• ( \44111L'" t Petition To Reject Proposed Zone Changes To Property Located in Nutting Bros 2nd Filing North of Eleanor Roosevelt Dr We;the undersigned residential property owners, hereby file our united protest to changing the zoning designation to"Residential Manufactured Homes"in Lots 18&19-25 of Section 10,T2S, R24E. The zoning charge,which will allow a large trailer park to be developed, will adversely impact our property values and the enjoyment of our homes. We already have large trailer park on the east side of Yard Office Road. The further concentration of a high-density population to the west of Yard Office can only place stresses the infrastructure of the surrounding area. SIGNAT RES/ADDRESSES >/ iii �/1 �/ �P..68 J 4/7/2016 Re: Zoning change of Nutting Bros.2°d and 3rd Filing North of Eleanor Roosevelt Drive Laurel City County Planni/:oard, My name is /rr_ _ - - d I live at l,(D (, 6-1,--11—and I want to inform you that I am against ch: %'fig of the zoning of the Nutting Bros 2ild d 3 filing from Residential Tracts to Residen- tial Manufacture, omes. The zone change will pave the way for the installation of high density manufactured homes. This situation will result in the loss of considerable value of the existing homes surrounding the proposed area and there will be no way to recoup this lost value should this proposed action take place. This action will also pave the way to severely impact the City of Laurel with added strain to law enforcement agencies and volunteer ambulance and fire services. Other municipal services that may be impacted include city water service,sanitary service and garbage services. East Maryland Lane and Ridge Drive extending from Yard Office Road to Adler Drive are maintained through an RSID paid through the property owners within the subdivision. The additional traffic counts due to the potential high density development would cause premature maintenance to be performed. This cost is bore by the property owners and not the developers. This will further erode property value of the areas surrounding the proposed de- velopment. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, 4/7/2016 Re: Zoning change of Nutting Bros.rd and 3"'Filing North of Eleanor Roosevelt Drive Laurel City County Planning Board, My name is ;J9- %3-'� . , r`f n I live at/'(a 4 E- 6 A N i� and I want to inform you that I am against the changing of the zoning of the Nutting Bros 2nd and 3'd filing from Residential Tracts to Residen- tial Manufactured Homes. The zone change will pave the way for the installation of high density manufactured homes. This situation will result in the loss of considerable value of the existing homes surrounding the proposed area and there will be no way to recoup this lost value should this proposed action take place. This action will also pave the way to severely impact the City of Laurel with added strain to law enforcement agencies and volunteer ambulance and fire services. Other municipal services that may be impacted include city water service,sanitary service and garbage services. East Maryland Lane and Ridge Drive extending from Yard Office Road to Adler Drive are maintained through an RSID paid through the property owners within the subdivision. The additional traffic counts due to the potential high density development would cause premature maintenance to be performed. This cost is bore by the property owners and not the developers. This will further erode property value of the areas surrounding the proposed de- velopment. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, • 4/7/2016 Re: Zoning change of Nutting Bros. 2"d and 3rd Filing North of Eleanor Roosevelt Drive Laurel City County Planning Board, My name is /I : )'5:6-,v and I live at /y4c41/d_f r' /-? i-,�,.•;' ' T and I want to inform you that I am against the changing of the zoning of the Nutting Bros 2"d and 3rd filing from Residential Tracts to Residen- tial Manufactured Homes. The zone change will pave the way for the installation of high density manufactured homes. This situation will result in the loss of considerable value of the existing homes surrounding the proposed area and there will be no way to recoup this lost value should this proposed action take place. This action will also pave the way to severely impact the City of Laurel with added strain to law enforcement agencies and volunteer ambulance and fire services. Other municipal services that may be impacted include city water service,sanitary service and garbage services. East Maryland Lane and Ridge Drive extending from Yard Office Road to Adler Drive are maintained through an RSID paid through the property owners within the subdivision. The additional traffic counts due to the potential high density development would cause premature maintenance to be performed. This cost is bore by the property owners and not the developers. This will further erode property value of the areas surrounding the proposed de- velopment. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, II 4/7/2016 Re: Zoning change of Nutting Bros. 2"d and 3rd Filing North of Eleanor Roosevelt Drive Laurel City County Planning Board, My name is l) ��' JPS e�C/ and I live at///GS /1/(^r, �� �, „�„/PIT and I want to inform you that 1 am against the changing olithe zoning of the Nutting Bros 2"d and 3rd filing from Residential Tracts to Residen- tial Manufactured Homes. The zone change will pave the way for the installation of high density manufactured homes. This situation will result in the loss of considerable value of the existing homes surrounding the proposed area and there will be no way to recoup this lost value should this proposed action take place. This action will also pave the way to severely impact the City of Laurel with added strain to law enforcement agencies and volunteer ambulance and fire services. Other municipal services that may be impacted include city water service,sanitary service and garbage services. East Maryland Lane and Ridge Drive extending from Yard Office Road to Adler Drive are maintained through an RSID paid through the property owners within the subdivision. The additional traffic counts due to the potential high density development would cause premature maintenance to be performed. This cost is bore by the property owners and not the developers. This will further erode property value of the areas surrounding the proposed de- velopment. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, -- it April 6, 2016 RE: Zoning changes to Nutting Bros. 2nd and 3'd Filings Laurel City and County Planning Board, I, Eugene Eckhardt, live at residence 1723 East Maryland Lane, Laurel, MT. I am opposing the zone change that is coming before you today. Lots 18 and 19-25 of section 10, T25, R24E are zoned Residential with one residence per acre per lot. I have learned that the party is asking the committee to change the zone to Residential Manufactured Homes which could have up to 11 homes per acre. In my opinion, this high-density concentration of population to the west of Yard Office Road would place stresses on the infrastructure of the city and the surrounding area. The one statement I have to you the committee is that you will not consider this zone change. Thank you. Sincerely yours, rdeiet_ixek Eugene Eckhardt 4/7/2016 Re: Zoning change of Nutting Bros.2"d and 3`d Filing North of Eleanor Roosevelt Drive Laurel City County Planning Board,Board, My name is.Dof d�4�//(• ;ti d I live at /G Q g4 and I want to inform you that I am against the changing of ttkrzoning of the Nutting Bros 2°d and filing from Residential Tracts to Residen- tial Manufactured Homes. The zone change will pave the way for the installation of high density manufactured homes. This situation will result in the loss of considerable value of the existing homes surrounding the proposed area and there will be no way to recoup this lost value should this proposed action take place. This action will also pave the way to severely impact the City of Laurel with added strain to law enforcement agencies and volunteer ambulance and fire services. Other municipal services that may be impacted include city water service,sanitary service and garbage services. East Maryland Lane and Ridge Drive extending from Yard Office Road to Adler Drive are maintained through an RSID paid through the property owners within the subdivision. The additional traffic counts due to the potential high density development would cause premature maintenance to be performed. This cost is bore by the property owners and not the developers. This will further erode property value of the areas surrounding the proposed de- velopment. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Since y, 4/7/2016 Re: Zoning change of Nutting Bros.2°d and 3rd Filing North of Eleanor Roosevelt Drive Laurel City County Planning Board, My name is �I: � 1/I&i and I live at I102-r-0'11CI Lf,V'() l..f'1 r and I want to inform you that I am against th changing o the zoning of the Nutting Bros 2°d and 3'd filing from Residential Tracts to Residen- tial Manufactured Homes. The zone change will pave the way for the installation of high density manufactured homes. This situation will result in the loss of considerable value of the existing homes surrounding the proposed area and there will be no way to recoup this lost value should this proposed action take place. This action will also pave the way to severely impact the City of Laurel with added strain to law enforcement agencies and volunteer ambulance and fire services. Other municipal services that may be impacted include city water service,sanitary service and garbage services. East Maryland Lane and Ridge Drive extending from Yard Office Road to Adler Drive are maintained through an RSID paid through the property owners within the subdivision. The additional traffic counts due to the potential high density development would cause premature maintenance to be performed. This cost is bore by the property owners and not the developers. This will further erode property value of the areas surrounding the proposed de- velopment. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely,