HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity/County Planning Board Minutes 02.12.1998
MINUTES
CITY-COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
FEBRUARY 12, 1998 7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: John Smith, Chairman
Gerald Shay, Member-at-large
Kurt Baltrusch, County Rep.
Miles Walton, City Rep.
Merrill Watkins, County Rep.
Clarence Foos, County Rep.
Bob Dantic, City Rep.
Charles Fischer, City Rep.
Betty Hart, County Rep.
Ed Thurner, City Rep.
OTHERS PRESENT: Cal Cumin, City Planner
Cheryll Lund, City Secretary
Motion by Miles Walton, seconded by Bob Dantic, to approve the
minutes of the January 8, 1998 meeting. Motion carried.
Motion by Miles Walton, seconded by Kurt Baltrusch, to approve
the administrative services bill for $200. Motion carried.
Public Hearing- Off-Street Parking
This public hearing was brought about due to the tough off-street
parking requirements for the downtown commercial businesses. It
requires a certain number of spaces per square footage of the
building being built. If the requirement cannot be met up front,
then there is a $1,000 fee assessed per each space, and this money
is then put into a "parking" fund. This is one of the reasons many
businesses have been unable to expand or rebuild in the downtown
area.
At last month's meeting Cal gave everyone a copy of the Yellowstone
County Unified Zoning Code for off-street parking requirements,
which he would like to see Laurel adopt. The off-street parking
requirements are about half of what Laurel requires, and he feels
it would serve Laurel better.
Proponents:
Larry McCann of the Laurel City Building Department expressed that
he would like to see Laurel change the off-street parking
requirements and have more relaxed requirements. He has seen that
in many cases our requirements have made it impossible for people
to expand their businesses. He also stated that several people
have gone through the Board of Adjustments regarding off-street
parking and the board relaxed the requirements. Not every person
is able to go through the Board of Adjustment and Larry wonders how
',
right it is for the Board of Adjustment to allow. relaxation of the
requirements. If the off-street parking was relaxed for everyone
than it would be fair for everyone. He has read the requirements
from Billings and would like to establish the same rules for
Laurel.
No one was present to speak against the off-street parking
requirements, and the public hearing was closed at 7:15 p.m.
After a general discussion on off-street parking it was felt that
the Board wanted to study this issue more and talk about it at the
March 12, 1998 meeting.
Motion by Gerald Shay, seconded by Clarence Foos, to postpone
the issue of off-street parking until the March 12, 1998 meeting.
Motion carried.
Public Hearing - Zone Change for Old North School Lot - Ricci's:
Proponents:
Vince Ricci introduced Reid Larson of Associated Grocers.
Mr. Larson stated that they are asking for an unused public zoned
piece of property to be changed to a more useable zone of community
commercial: this would place the property on the tax roll and
benefit both the city and the school district.
They will not be removing any residential homes and because it has
been zoned public they will not be removing any available
residential land.
In order for Ricci's to grow as retailers their store needs to
expand. Associated Grocers has been working with the Ricci's to
develop a suitable site for a larger store. They looked at quite
a number of locations and other options, and this proposed site
made the most sense as far as location and where it would exist in
regards to the population of the town.
Before putting the design of the store on paper they did a study as
to whether or not there is a need for the larger store. This was
determined by the total potential volume of the grocery business in
the area. After that is determined they take into consideration
the amount of consumption in grocery items per week, and from that
they determine whether a store makes sense in the proposed location
and if it would be an economically viable project. In order to
continue, they need to have the proper zoning.
Associated Grocers feels confident that this project makes sense
and that it would be a good project for the city of Laurel. The
trend in grocery stores is towards convenience. People want to
spend less time in their automobiles and more time walking, which
2
means that stores need to be closer to residential neighborhoods.
Bob Marvin of Marvin and Associates talked regarding the traffic
study.
Traffic impact analysis is a set procedure established by the
Institute of Transportation. It involves state of the art study of
efficiency and safety and identification of the existing road
system traffic volume, distribution of traffic, the number of trips
that would be generated by any development, and evaluating what
traffic control devices and changes would be necessary to manage
that impact.
In the case of the Thriftway store he analyzed traffic volume on
the existing streets surrounding the proposed location. Traffic
counters were placed to obtain the daily number of vehicles carried
by those intersections hourly. Traffic was counted during the peak
hours on the average day. Traffic and pedestrians coming from the
high school during the peak hours in the afternoon were also
counted. From there an analysis was done of the existing Thriftway
and how many trips were generated. It was found that those trips
were slightly less than the Institute of Transportation standard
for that type of land use and the institutes numbers were used as
an added measure of conservatieness.
He clarified that just because the store is doubling in size does
not mean that the number of patrons also doubles. The largest
increases of traffic at the proposed site will be on First Avenue
in front of the store which will generate about 18% more vehicles
on the street. On 7th Street it would be a 35o increase, and on
8th Street it would be an increase of 105%. However, Marvin noted
that the current volume on those streets is very low now.
According to the traffic study 20 years from now the proposed
Thriftway store will only contribute 7°s of the additional traffic.
The rest will be generated by the growth of the town and the road
system.
It was concluded through the traffic study that this proposed
development will have very little, if any, impact on the existing
street traffic. (Further information is contained in the Traffic
Study which is a part of the record of the Zoning Commission).
Jim Weurtman from CTA Architects gave a presentation on the
proposed site plan.
Mr. Weurtman met with the neighborhood group concerned with the
development of the store and addressed their concerns. Some of
their concerns were how large the store will be and where the dairy
department and meat departments will be. They were also concerned
with noisy delivery trucks, noisy compressors, safety of children
cutting through the parking lot, and water pressure.
3
Ricci's have attempted to address these concerns through a written
contract with the City. (see attached)
Mr. Weurtman gave some history on the property. The property was
owned by the school and after deciding it was no longer of value,
the school board put it on the market for sale. The school was not
able to use the property for any administrative buildings and
decided that the money from the sale of it would go towards a site
that would be suitable to build a school on. The school board
hired a professional appraiser to appraise it. It was found that
the only way to get any kind of dollar amount out of it was to have
it rezoned to commercial property. Based on the appraiser's
opinion and findings it would take too much money to make it into
suitable residential property. The property was then put up for
sale, and one bid was received from the Ricci's. The school
district thought it was in the best interest of the school to take
the offer from the Ricci's and did so.
Several drawings have been done of the proposed store. But, after
meeting with the neighborhood group opposing the project, a
different drawing was made trying to address all of the concerns of
the neighborhood.
The store will cover approximately 200 of the property, which is
far less than the city lot coverage maximum. The height of the
building will remain no higher than a 2 story residential building,
and the setbacks will also exceed the minimum requirements, so as
to keep the building as far away from the facing residents as
possible.
The main access to the store will be off of First Avenue. There
will be no parking strips on both sides of the main access to
eliminate any sight obstructions.
Weurtman said a rumor has been circulating around Laurel that the
proposed store will be the size of a Albertson/Buttrey big box
stores. The proposed store is about half the size of big box
stores.
Mike Dockery of the Crowley Law firm spoke on the issue of spot
zoning.
He pointed out that Cal Cumin's memo has quite an extensive
discussion on spot zoning: the factors involved in that
determination as well as a discussion of the factors and
circumstances of this zone change and how they relate to those
factors. The issue of spot zoning has no certain fixed outcome.
Every case is different. When you get into a question of spot
zoning it is not a question of the whether any of the factors are
present, but whether or not all of the factors are present.
Montana courts have been clear that unless all factors are present
it is not spot zoning. As you can tell from Cal's discussion there
4
is always at least some element and some factors involved in any
zone change. Montana courts tend to look at what they call 3
factors but when you read them closely they actually break down to
about 4 primary factors. First is the prevailing use of the area,
the theory being that if the requested zone change is surrounded by
a single prevailing use, then the zone change if granted would be
out of character. You have residential to the north of the lot and
you have a home occupation to the southwest corner and the city's
main post office to the south. You have the school to the east and
the swimming pool and park. Also, First Avenue is a state highway
that is projected as a high volume street. It is very evident that
there is no one single prevailing use around the old north school
lot. As a result of this the court would tend to mitigate against
the finding of spot zoning.
Another factor that the court looks at is the size of the parcel,
which in this case is an entire city block. Under the Laurel
zoning ordinances the parcel size is the minimum size required for
the zone change.
The third factor is looking at the benefit of the zone change as
well as the burden it could impose.
In this case you have a completely vacant lot and any development
that occurs will have an impact on the surrounding property. If a
single car goes into that new development the traffic is increased
slightly. It is important when you deal with a zone change for a
completely vacant piece of property to remember that there is going
to be some impact with development of any kind.
What you have to do is focus on the community wide benefits that
will flow as the result of the proposed store. The school district
will benefit from the money they receive from the land. The city
will benefit with the tax revenue. The citizens will benefit with
the convenience of being able to walk to the store. Employment
will increase with the new jobs being made available. The benefits
that will occur to the citizens of Laurel far outweigh the
remaining negative factors that might be present.
The last factor and often the one considered the most important by
a court is whether or not the proposed zone change complies with
the city master plan or comprehensive plan. That is important
because that overall document is what a city or county should
follow when looking long range for the development of the
community.
This development is consistent with the comprehensive plan. In the
north residential area on the map within the comprehensive plan
future commercial was contemplated by a floating red dot. I would
submit that you have a single entire block area that is vacant,
that it is on a street that is currently used and will be heavily
traveled, and that it is appropriate for commercial use.
5
It is also consistent with the city zoning ordinance that
recognizes this kind of community commercial use should occur this
way rather than in strip development; this is a perfect
application of the zoning code. It is unlikely it would be made
into a new residential development because of First Avenue.
In conclusion Mr. Dockery stated that he is hard pressed to see how
any of the factors that would normally be present in a spot zoning
issue are present in this one. He has looked at all of the
factors. He has looked at how the lot sits, surrounding usage, and
the adjacent streets. He does not believe that any sort of spot
zoning is involved if it were determined that this should be zoned
community commercial.
When questioned about the proposed operating agreement Ricci's have
said they will keep with the City if the proposed zone change is
approved; (see attached) Mr. Dockery states that it would be a
contract with the City of Laurel, and the remedy if it were
breached would be an injunction through the court system.
Asked if Mr. Dockery feels this could be legally zoned community
commercial: he understands the way the comprehensive plan was
done, a red dot in the north residential area is an indication that
some community commercial would be appropriate in the area in the
future but the exact location was not specific. He is suggesting
that the area has now grown and the zone change would be consistent
with the island concept of community commercial and the need to
access high volume streets.
Joe Floyd from MSUB spoke regarding the phone survey he did for the
proposed store.
He has been a professor of sociology at MSUB for 20 years. He has
done approximately 50 telephone surveys in the past 12 years. He
has been trained to do telephone surveys and does his surveys
through a computerized, six-work station laboratory. It is a
state of the art system that produces accurate results.
There were a total of 398 telephone interviews done. The results of
the interviews have a margin of error of 5% plus or minus.
The most important questions asked were: How close do you live to
the store site? 43% lived within 1/2 of a mile of the site, 10.3%
live just a i/2 mile from the site, and 64.6% live over a 1/2 mile
from the site.
Respondents were then asked if they oppose or favor the building of
a grocery store at the north school lot next to the post office?
35.6% of the people strongly favored it; 11.9% said they somewhat
favor it; 35% said they neither favored it or opposed it; 5.5%
said they somewhat opposed it; 9.4% strongly opposed it and 2.6%
had no opinion one way or the other. Total percentage wise 47.5%
6
favored it; 35% were neutral; and 14.9% opposed it.
The people that opposed the store were asked why? 48.7% said they
wanted to keep the area residential; 28.7% was concerned with
traffic; 8.7% said there was no need to build a store; and 2.5°s
said they needed to build another school at the site.
Floyd found no statistical relationship between where the caller
lived and whether he was in favor or opposition of the store.
There was a statistical relationship between the people that
shopped locally and those that didn't care about driving a distance
to do their shopping. Those that grocery shop locally were
generally in favor of the store. Those that go a distance to shop
were generally opposed.
Debbie Ricci talked regarding the petition that was in the store.
It was put into the store on July 31, 1997 and ended on October 9,
1997. During that time they received 937 signatures. From that
she took out 180 as duplicates, no address, underage, out of the
state, or out of the area, which took the total to 757 remaining
signatures.
In Ward 1 there were 135 who favored; Ward 2- 146 that favored
(this is the ward the proposal is in); Ward 3 - 130 who favored;
Ward 4 - 121 who favored; and 225 outside of the city limits that
favored it.
She feels the above numbers show that they do have the support of
the community and their strongest support is in the ward that the
proposed store would be in. The rest of the support is evenly
spread throughout the city. This reflects what they hear every day
in their business regarding support of the proposed building. They
did not have their supporters come tonight and that is why she
brought in the petition.
Debbie states that the growth of Laurel since 1995-1997 has shown
68 new home starts on the north side and 6 on the south. The
growth is clearly on the north side of town.
Since 1995 there have been 13 new commercial buildings built and
only 2 of those are on the north side of the underpass.
The economic impact that Ricci's has brought to Laurel over the
years are: union employees with union pensions and wages and 16
Laurel vendors that sell their wares through them for a total of
$200,000 in fiscal year 1997. Since they have been in Laurel
(1989), they have put back into Laurel businesses over 1 million
dollars. That can and will raise with the building of a new,
bigger store.
As for the people that live around the proposed area that are in
7
opposition, Ricci's intention is not to lessen the value of their
homes or their contributions to the community. They are asking to
be able to serve those people for the next 20-30 years through
their grocery store services.
The business community must be able to stand up and take back what
is taken away by other markets. The zone change will allow a
vacant lot to be put back into private ownership so revenues can be
earned by both the city and the school district. It will provide
further competition for services and provide jobs for the
community.
Vince Ricci spoke regarding having the store remain where they are.
Even if they were to be able to buy the Masonic Temple and Mr.
Martin's property the total lot size would be 20,000 square feet
less than they need. That is not big enough.
Vince reminded everyone that Ricci's store is an independently
owned store. They do not have the backing and help such as Buttrey
does. If the Ricci's choose a bad location for their store they
are stuck with it.
He also brought up the rumor that the neighbors in the area of the
new store will be unable to get insurance. He read a letter from
State Auditor Mark O'Keefe regarding this matter. (see attached)
Neighbors will not be effected because no neighbor is within 40
feet of the proposed commercial store. The residents around the
post office don't have any problems insuring their homes.
He reminded everyone that the property is 300' of frontage on a
state highway, and the proceeds from this sale would help the
school in funding new land.
He has also heard citizens voice concern over the children that
will have to cross a busier street once the store is built. Right
at this point there are many middle school and high school kids
that walk along North and South First Avenue to get to the fast
food establishments. They have to cross many busy streets, all
busier than any amount of traffic that their new store would
generate.
He feels they are a core business in Laurel that needs to stay on
First Avenue. His store helps support a lot of local kids and
different organizations in raising money.
His existing building would not remain empty, as he has already
been approached by a local businessman and has a written letter of
interest.
He feels that there is a benefit of mixing churches, schools,
public property and his store together. There is the benefit of
people being able to travel to places they need to go on foot.
8
Opponents:
Diana Walker spoke representing The North School Lot Association in
opposition of the proposed Ricci's store. She said there are more
people than just the people within the 300' area that are members
of their association.
Her lawyer has assured the association that this is a simple case
of spot zoning.
She said that this is not about one particular person or store, it
is about a zone change that they feel is not appropriate.
She reminds everyone that the comprehensive plan is made up to
allow for the future. But she says there is commercial property
available for this proposed store, so why is the zone change being
considered? The comprehensive plan is also drawn up to protect all
of the home owners in Laurel, not just in this area being
considered for the zone change. It's there for the safety of the
children and citizens, and yes business development.
Traditionally no businesses are put in residential areas or by
parks and schools, at least until later years.
She states that this is a case of spot zoning which is illegal in
the state of Montana. Property values often drop when zone changes
are allowed in residential areas. She is worried that other
developers will follow with more businesses.
She states that, when the Post Office was placed where it is now,
it was done with many objections.
There are other businesses on First Avenue, but she states that
those were grandfathered in.
She feels they need to do a study of the comprehensive plan and a
study of First Avenue. There are cases in Montana that have gone
through the courts that won.
She wonders why we bothered with a Master Plan when we keep going
out of the scope of the Master Plan whenever a business wants to
move to a residential area.
She questioned how the traffic study could of been done well when
they couldn't even get one of their maps in the traffic study
right. She questioned why the traffic study was done on a day
when the schools were not in session and feels they could not of
obtained a true idea of the traffic.
She talked to the Police Chief regarding this matter and was told
that crime will increase. But then he also stated that it would
increase no matter what is put there.
9
She feels the telephone survey was biased because of not having an
option on the questions they asked.
She questions the insurance matter stating that it would effect
some of the homeowners.
She is wondering how the city could do this to the people that have
lived in the area for 20-30 years. She feels they need some
consideration. They chose to live near a park and school, not near
a business. The quietness of the neighborhood will be effected.
Homes are already intact in the area and are where they are suppose
to be. Ricci's has only a contract and their building can be
placed somewhere else. She stated that the Ricci's went to the
school board, the school didn't go to the Ricci's. The land will
hold its value. The school could make more by selling it to
someone else. They have done some checking on available property,
and there is other property available. Apartments and condos can
also be built in that area.
She states that only one market study was done for the area
proposed for the zone change.
She feels that by moving the Ricci's store 5 blocks business will
be taken out of the downtown area. No matter where the Ricci's
move there will be a benefit from the economic standpoint.
She wonders why the petition was taken into consideration
(proponents) when their organization was told that a petition was
not good enough.
Population of Laurel is 6,000 and only 700 people signed a petition
for it. That's a low percentage if it's calculated out.
Road repair will cost the city money. Water pressure to the homes
in that area will go down. And she feels the water pressure is
already low.
The neighbors do not expect it to remain vacant. They could build
apartments, condos, or a school administration office.
She wonders why Cal made a change in his recommendation, and
reminded the board that the city council wants the comprehensive
plan reviewed. She feels that this needs to be done before
allowing a zone change to happen. She feels the city is piece-
milling this together instead of looking at the whole package.
Kathy Baumgartner spoke. She wants the board to look at Cal's memo
comments in a different way and be more critical in their thinking.
Kathy specified that the post office is in a residential zone but
the use is public (although it is a commercially exempt tax free
10
use).
She went over Page 1, Paragraph 4 regarding the petition. They
were told to halt their pursuit of a protest petition as a petition
carries no legal clout. Yet here the Ricci's petition is used to
make some sort of statement as to the popularity of the Ricci's
proposed zone change. A better indicator of the zone change
popularity would be the well done professional study that the
Ricci's presented at the first zoning board hearing. In that
random telephone study, with a 5% = or - margin of error built in,
52.5% of the respondents were against the change (47.5% for). If
one were to figure in the margin of error those numbers become
47.5% - 57.5% against and 42.5% - 52.5% for. Clearly a majority of
Laurel residents are against the zone change.
Page 3, paragraph 4. Please note that the city cannot limit the
use of the property in question to use as a retail grocery. Once
the commercial zone is in place, any business that is allowed on
Table 17.20.010 of the city ordinances may legally conduct business
there, this includes coin operated car washes, bus terminals,
service stations, new and used car lots, restaurants, retail
fertilizer sales, gambling establishments, commercial storage
units, also paint and body shops, just to name a few. The fact
that the city cannot stipulate the future use of the-land takes
away any hope of guaranteeing that the surrounding residential lots
will not be subjected to incompatible businesses in the future.
Page 3, Paragraph 5. As to the idea that a good faith proposal be
made by the Ricci's to do everything in their power to keep the
business a grocery store, let me remind you of an incident that
occurred in the fall of 1993. A home occupation request that was
not in accordance with the city ordinances was granted because the
petitioner was a long standing Laurel citizen and businessman. The
man was unable to fulfill his goodwill obligation and that the
allowed occupation was a source of many complaints from the
neighbors. According to the record Cal Cumin stated that this is
one of the problems that sometimes comes about when we make an
exception for someone. Perhaps we should take a lesson from
history.
Page 4, last paragraph. Cal Cumin suggests that a "special
corridor zoning plan" be developed to control commercial
development along First Avenue. This comment coupled with the
implication that the city needs to review and possibly revise the
comprehensive zoning plan (12/16 Council of the Whole minutes)
suggests that perhaps no zoning change requests should be acted
upon until the city has an up to date plan upon which the City
Council can rely on to be accurate enough to support decisions that
affect the future of Laurel and her residents.
Page 5, paragraph 4. This states that, once the North School Lot
is made community commercial, the adjoining properties - even if
11
separated by a street or avenue - may petition for a like zone
change; the property does not have to meet the minimum 2.07 acres
requirement. This is quite alarming. What it means is that as
individual homeowners sell off their property surrounding the North
School Lot, they could sell to interested businesses thereby slowly
bit by bit, like a cancer, changing this residential area into a
commercial one.
Page 5, last paragraph. The communities to the North, meaning I
believe, primarily Molt and to some extend Rapelje currently do the
majority of shopping in Billings. Molt is 22 miles from Billings
and approximately 17 miles from Laurel. Are we to believe that to
save 5 miles of driving time the residents are going to come
shopping in Laurel rather than continue shopping in Billing, where
they have more than just grocery shopping? The increased volume of
truck traffic is of no value unless one assumes that these truckers
are actually coming through town to shop. Something that I highly
doubt. Let's not forget that old US Hwy. 10 is also a man arterial
and that is why Laurel's current commercial zones are set up on it
to the East and West. In fact within the last year a traffic light
has been placed at the corner of US Hwy. 10 and Yard Office Road
due to increased residential traffic, the kind that does stop to
shop.
Page 6, paragraph 5. If this were an outside real estate
developer, rather than a local real estate agent, as Mrs. Ricci
was, I truly believe that the city of Laurel would have no problem
in deciding that the comprehensive plan be followed as it stands
now, and recommend denial of the zone change request. However
being that the developers are local, the city finds itself trying
to make exceptions to the comprehensive plan and zoning regulations
in order to accommodate this developer. This could be interpreted
as favoring the individuals (Ricci's) over the. community (opposing
homeowners) which is clearly in line with the spot zoning issue.
Also I might add here that the Ricci's stated that they needed this
particular location because the lack of competition would help them
stay viable. This lack of competition, as it is hoped no other
businesses will be able to locate nearby, is also called a monopoly
which is against United States Law. One has to wonder if it is
legal for the City of Laurel to knowingly put a business in such a
choice position.
Page 7, paragraph 3. Points of contention:
1. The people who walk to church are the same people who do
not want the zone change.
2. The students who travel to the south side of town are not
going to the grocery store as much as they are frequenting the
fast food establishments.
12
3. Let's not assume that the new business will hire 20 full
time employees. A full time job, 40 hrs/week, consists of
2080 hours per year (40 X 52 weeks) and can be termed Full
Time Equivalent FTE. so:
20 full time jobs = 20 FTE # of emp. X hr/vr
20 half time jobs= 10 FTE 2080
20 qtr. time jobs = 5 FTE
It is not unusual for companies to hire people to work less
than 20 hours/week in order to avoid paying benefits -
especially those with a lot of overhead.
SUMMATION: The basic components of this controversy are the same
as they were last September. We have a zone change request that is
a spot zoning issue. We have a comprehensive plan that has been
questioned as to its veracity. The only new items are: 1) the
traffic study and 2) the Ricci's proposed modifications in the
development's layout. Although these latter two items will be of
interest to the City Council, they have no bearing or impact on the
zone change request before the city planning board. It remains
simply a zoning issue of whether or not this zone change will be in
accordance with the comprehensive plan.
Last fall Cal Cumin sat before you and adamantly stood by his
recommendation that this zone change be denied. At one meeting he
stated that this was an example of illegal spot zoning and would
stand by his decision in a court of law. Because he has now done
a 180 degree turn and no longer feels that it is an illegal
request, I implore you to not unquestioningly follow the advice of
the city planner. Please make an informed decision based on what
you believe. Whatever position you decide to take will change the
face of Laurel forever. If you desire more time to check into the
facts for yourselves remember that ordinance 17.72.060 zoning
commission action page #442(3) states that you have the right to
delay action on the application for a period not to exceed 30 days.
Polly VanNice spoke regarding the zone change. She feels the area
in question is the heart of Laurel. It concerns her that the city
wants to change the character of the community to commercial from
public. Suggests the Ricci's made a good buy on the property. All
of the benefits that have been suggested here tonight will be of
the same benefit in any other spot in town. She also states that
the traffic study was done on the wrong day. She talks regarding
the foot traffic and a concern with it. She doesn't want First
Avenue turning into Grand Avenue.
She also states that usually architectural drawings never look like
the finished product. Questions phone survey questions that were
asked.
She stated she feels that Merrill Watkins and Bob Dantic should
abstain from voting on this issue because of a conflict of
13
interest. (Bob Dantic works at Jan's IGA, Merrill Watkins is a
school board member)
Bob King spoke regarding the same issues. He reminds the board
that they voted unanimously to deny the application last September
and that Cal had said it was against the comprehensive plan and a
definite spot zoning issue. He hopes that this doesn't come down to
politics with the man with the most money winning. The homeowners
in that area have to rely on elected officials to turn this down.
He hopes all people are considered in this, not just those who
stand to profit from this zone change.
REBUTTAL:
Bob Marvin, who did the traffic study spoke regarding why the PIR
day was used. He said that he needed an effective, efficient count
without the influence from the high school. But they did also take
a count on a day when the high school was in session. Both kind of
days were taken into account for the traffic study figures used.
(see attached letter for more clarification)
Mike Dockery of the Crowley Law Office spoke regarding the spot
zoning issue. This isn't a case of a developer, but of a local
owner buying a site for a specific purpose. He would like to point
out that yes there are many things that could be put into a
commercial zone. This is the specific reason the Ricci's have
drawn up an agreement that they will follow regarding this
particular site if the zone changes to commercial. In this case
the express purpose of this zone change is to put in a grocery
store.
Regarding the strip zoning issue. Each individual zone change that
is requested in that area in the future has to go before this
board, such as this application did, and be reviewed. The control
will still be retained by the city zoning commission.
Regarding the crime rate increasing. With any zone change that is
developed a crime rate will increase. But this is not a reason to
deny this zone change, as any zone change or change to the
undeveloped lot will increase crime.
He also pointed out that the schools decision to sell this piece of
property was being discussed and was decided on long before the
Ricci's approached the board in April. Whether or not the deal is
good for the Ricci's or not, that came about because they were the
only bidder.
The Ricci's have made it clear through this proposal that this zone
change will be good for the city of Laurel. They have proven it
will be beneficial for the city. The Board now has to decide as to
whether the benefits to the city outweigh the small detriments.
14
He disagrees that the comprehensive plan is not being followed.
Debbie Ricci talked regarding the further so called development
that will occur as commercial up First. Avenue should this zone
change be granted. With Laurel's parking ordinances it would take
at least 3 homes to have enough parking space to develop one
business. And with how the neighborhood has expressed themselves
as to feeling so highly about their homes she doesn't foresee 3 of
them selling at the same time to make it happen.
Public zoning allows commercial use on it. What Ricci's asking for
is not that big of a leap from that. Community Commercial allows
an island usage, not strip zoning. If she took the same site and
put Ricci's Family Fun Center on the front sign it would be legal
to do. Zoning is meant to be ongoing, it is not designed for
stopping growth in a town. In the comprehensive plan there are
words like promote, encourage and develop. A zoning is a growing
and working entity that provides for a growing, working city.
They are not trying to draw customers from Molt. They have never
claimed they would do that.
The comment was made that wherever they locate they will benefit
the city with taxes. This is not true if the store was to go
outside the city limits. No taxes or special licensing fees are
collected outside the city limits. The site by Alder Ridge trailer
court, where the opposition has suggested that they go is outside
the city. They cannot go anywhere and be a viable entity.
Public Hearing was closed.
Motion by Ed Thurner, to postpone this proposal until the next
meeting in March. Motion died for a lack of a second.
Clarence Foos asked Diana Walker where the property is that she
keeps saying the Ricci's could develop on. He wants to know the
location, the size and price.
She states there is some property on Yard Office Road, and another
piece of land out by the interstate exit.
He asks her if she knows the ground condition as to whether or not
it could handle a large store. She states it is swampy land.
She cannot locate the property by the interstate on the map.
He is wondering if she is trying to tell the Ricci's where to build
and what property to purchase?
He also states that the acreage she mentioned that is available on
E. Maryland and Alder is not fit to build even residential homes
on. That was determined through tests done when a developer tried
15
to place homes on that land.
He also comments that if the Ricci's made a good deal on the land
they bought from the school, good for them. They have a right to
make a good deal.
Miles Walton clarified that Merrill Watkins and Bob Dantic as
appointed members of the Planning/Zoning Board have a legal right
to vote on this issue, unless they are gaining monetarily from the
outcome. The City Council just went through an intensive study
regarding this issue because it came up during the Water Project
the city is working on. He pointed out that they do also have the
right not to vote.
Question to Cal by Kurt Baltrusch regarding the issue of spot
zoning. If the opposing group takes the City or Ricci's to court
will that tie up this application for a zone change?
Cal states that it could.
Kurt wonders if maybe that issue should be clarified before they
vote on this zone change.
Joe Leckie gives an opinion that if the City Council does grant a
zone change he is comfortable that he can adequately and
successfully defend that action against a claim of this-being a
spot zoning.
In regards to what it would do to the process for the Ricci's: if
the zone change were granted and the opponents decided to bring
legal action they could ask for injunctive relief. If they
obtained an injunction that would be a district court telling the
Ricci's or the city that zone change could not go into effect
pending some legal determination. There are some other legal
ramifications, for instance those requesting the injunction may be
required to post some kind of a bond so that if in fact there is
damage that results from that injunction than that bond can go
against mitigating those kinds of damages.
If it is decided to grant this zone change we need to show that it
follows the comprehensive plan. If we deviate from the
comprehensive plan then we need to show why we deviated.
Cal is questioned on what criteria the board needs to consider in
making this decision.
Cal states that the board needs to look at compliance with the city
zoning ordinance and with the comprehensive plan process.
The board needs to look at the legal aspects of it which has been
addressed by the county attorney.
16
The board should look at the impact to the surrounding
neighborhood, and then weigh that impact on the community as a
whole.
The board needs to not let the emotions of the people speaking here
tonight sway their opinions. They have to, as board members,
represent the Laurel City/County Planning area, as a whole.
Cal stated that he recommended denial in September because he
didn't feel the Ricci's gave a strong enough case for what they
wanted to do.
Cal states that the fundamental issue the board needs to look at is
what would be the best for the community.
As Cal stated in his written recommendation to the zoning board he
listed the benefits of the proposal.
He reminds the board that their recommendation carries a lot of
weight and that is why this needs to be closely looked at,
considered, and a vote then cast for or against.
Discussion on location of commercial businesses on the north and
south side of the underpass in Laurel. Is there a better way of
balancing the location of those businesses?
Discussion on First Avenue being a state highway and the future
paving of the road to Molt. This will draw more traffic into town.
First Avenue is a major arterial and was included as such when the
master plan was put into effect.
Cal states that factor could make a difference in deciding on this
zone change. First Avenue goes right down the middle of Laurel.
It was designed to hold a large amount of traffic. That is a major
factor supporting the proposal.
Bob Marvin states that, in his opinion, First Avenue as it is
designed now could hold up to 9,000 cars per day.
Cal states that just because one zone change may be granted doesn't
mean others will follow automatically and the whole area will
become commercial. This board and the city of Laurel has control
over that through the process of zone changes. Every zone change
application has to go through the zoning commission and then the
city council.
Betty Hart points out that the Ricci's are not trying to draw
customers from the interstate, but are trying to benefit the people
to the north. They are trying to be good neighbors and it is
showing by the agreement they will make with the city and by the
meetings they have held with the people opposing their project.
17
Question on the agreement?
Cal states that they are requesting a zone change and as part of
their application they are including a proposed contractual
agreement with the city the details of which are shown on the
submitted site plan and draft copy of the written agreement (see
attached).
Discussion on what would happen to the land if the Ricci's store
only remained active for 5 years?
Cal states that if any new commercial uses conform to community
commercial zoning they can locate on the site.
But, the city could step in and rezone that site on their own
initiative.
Motion by Miles Walton, seconded by Ed Thurner, to postpone
the decision on the Ricci's zone change to the March 12, 1998
meeting. Motion carried with one vote against.
Discussion on updating parts of the Comprehensive Plan.
As per Cals memo to the board in February he does not feel that the
whole plan needs to be redone but only parts of it.
The board discussed further and decided that there are parts of the
comprehensive plan that need to be studied, but not the entire
plan.
Cal suggests that the board focus on the downtown business district
and First Avenue, including the off-street parking requirements.
More discussion.
Motion to adjourn. Meeting was adjourned at 10:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
hery~l Lund, Secretary
18
~1( , ;
•~ ~
McMo
SUIiJECI': Findings and Conclusions Regarding Ricci's
Zone Change Request
TO:
Laurel Zoning Commission
~1 FROM: Cal Cumin, Laurel Planning Consultant
DATE: February 6, 1998
LEGAL COtvLt~NTS
The Laurel Municipal Code (17.72.050 (G)) requires that, "The planning director shall
report his findings and conclusions in writing to the rezoning coaunission, which report
shall be a matter of public record"
State code (MCA 76-2-304) references the `Purposes of zoning': (1) Such regulations
shall be made in accordance with a comprehensive plan and designed to lessen congestion
in the streets; to secure safety from fire, panic, and other dangers; to promote health and
the general welfare; to provide adequate light and air; to prevent the overcrowding of
land; to avoid undue concentration of population; to facilitate the adequate provision of
transportation, water, schools, parks, and other public requirements. (2) Such regulations
shall be made with reasonable consideration, among other things, to the chazacter of the
district and its peculiar suitability for particulaz uses and with a view to conserving the
value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout such
municipality.
State code (MCA 76-2-305(2)) provides that when a protest against a proposed zone
change is signed by the owners of 20% or more of the area of the lots immediately
adjacent in the rear thereof extending 1 SO feet therefrom or of those directly opposite
thereof extending 150 feet from the street frontage of such opposite lots, such amendment
shall not be come effective except by the favorable vote ofthree-fourths of all the
members of the city council.
There is a valid legal protest. The City staff determined that there aze 36 property owners
within the 300' radius protest azea; twenty-fiv~protested the zone change, and 11 did not.
Six of the eight City Council members mustYPo approve the application for zone change in
order for it to be in effect. In addition, a protest petition was turned in with 77 signatures
on it including 23 people who also protested elsewhere. A petition favoring the zone
change posted in Ricci's store listed 603 signatures. By ward, these signatures are as
follows: Ward 1-88, Ward 2 {ward of zone change)-94, and Ward 3-100. People living
Ward ~' ` 9l
outside the City limits constituted 133, and 47 did not list any vcritication or their
signature couldn't be read.
SPECIFICS OG' RICCI APPLICATION
Ricci's have requested a zone change from Public to Community Commercial for the old
North School Lot in First Avenue Subdivision, a 300x300-foot square block of land
bounded by First Avenue on [he east and Second Avenue on the west, behveen Seventh
and Eighth Streets.
ZONING-GENERAL
Zoning is one method of land use controls a community can utilize to force land use to
occur in the manner the community approves. All land in Laurel and outside of Laurel up
to one mile is zoned. Part of the function of zoning is to control land until the need for
change to a more intensive use isjustified. Looking at the Laurel Zoning Map, one can
see large areas of Agriculture-Open Space or Residential Tracts. This pattern basically
reflects that such lands will not be zoned a more dense land use until there is a demand for
such density accompanied by landowners willing and able to invest the time and expense in
changing the zone based on perceived market conditions. Some communities have zoned
large aeeas commercial in the hopes that such availability of commercial land would attract
new business. Mostly what happens in such over zoning situations is that existing
commercial zones are devalued by too much commercially zoned land, and commercial
uses that do occur tend to be marginal in economic impact. The dynarnic of American
zoning and land use is the factors that interplay: an applicant in the competitive mazket
place willing to invest in a change and the community through its Local government
evaluating and, finally, accepting, denying, or modifying such change. The process is
driven by the entrepreneur in our market economy. Telling the Ricci's that they should put
their new store on east or west side of town--or anywhere, for that matter--neglects the
primary criteria for such change in the economy--the entrepreneur. Others have said the
City should help Ricci's develop in the azea of their existing store. This approach is not
yet part of Laurel's system of government whereby it would step in to promote a specific
business (which could also lead to enhancing the competitive edge of one business over
others in the community). Amore common way local government gets involved in
promoting economic development is in planning for and setting up incentives such as areas
wherein taxes are reduced or water and sewer are provided to entice commercial
development. The City may want to look at something like this in its downtown azea, but,
at present, no such programs exist. For now as it has been traditionally, new economic
investment rests with the private landowner, and his plans and wants are modified by the
need of the community as a whole as represented by the City Council--and at the
preliminary level, the Planning Board.
2
The task of the Planning Board and the City Council is to evaluate proposals to change the
existing land use status quo in respect to what is good For the City as a whole now and in
the future. Tliis is difficult to do in a small community where families involved have often
known each other for generations.
Zoning is constantly changing to reflect needs of the City such as when the amount of land
where manufactured housing+ could be placed was expanded. This change was initiated by
the City. Changes also occur from individuals requesting it to satisfy personal or business
desires. This type of change is privately proposed, and the City evaluates i[ and makes a
decision whether to approve it or not. This is what Ricci's are doing.
Another type of zoning that occurs in this north-central Laurel area is the grandfathered or
non-conforming land use. This is a type of land use that does not conform to the
overlying zone but was a different type of land use at the time the zoning was enacted
(about 1978). The grandfathered use still continues and is allowed to do so by the City. If
such a use stops for thirty days, the City can require that any new activity on the site
conform to the present zoning.
Another facet of local zoning that affects Ricci's request is the nature of a zoning district
in general. Because the City has established zones for all various land uses anticipated in
the community, an applicant is allowed--once a specific zone is obtained--to put into that
zone anything allowable within that zone. The list of various uses allowed are outlined in
the Laurel Zoning Ordinance (Table 17.20.010). Under Community Commercial Zoning
such uses as farm and garden retail sales, furniture, hospitals, laundries, and mortuaries aze
allowed. The City cannot stipulate that if Community Commercial Zoning is granted,
allowable uses on the property will be limited to such and such (this is a process known as
`contract zoning'--and is illegal).
What is allowed is for an applicant, aware of the fears of adjacent land owners that
unknown commercial uses will be invited once a commercial zone has been obtained, to
specifically delineate what is proposed on a site. To make such a proposal binding, the
applicant must put the proposal into a contractual form and ask the City to become a party
thereto. The City cannot require the proposal as part of its decision making conditions.
The proposal is an offer by the applicant to strengthen their position by trying to convey to
the public that what is being promised during the preliminary (and critical) phases of the
project actually materialize if and when the project becomes a reality. By becoming a
party thereto, the City understands that the contract is with the present applicant and is
specific to that land owner. If the proposed land use, in this case a grocery store, should
fail, the underlying land is still zoned Community Commercial, and any of the allowable
uses could be implemented by a new land owner. Accordingly, part of the task of the
Planning Board and the City Council is to evaluate the Ricci application as a viable
economic enterprise and land use on the North School Lot. This does not mean every
decision maker has to have a thorough understanding of the business plan and market for
grocery stores in the Laurel area, but it does mean that factors the Ricci's put forwazd
such as being long-term members of tlic local business community, the investment in taxes,
employees, and new store planning have a known value in the community.
There is no Community Commercial zoning in the area of the North School Lot, and, to
introduce such a new zone, an applicant needs at Icast a city block area in size. The North
School Lat meets this minimum size area.
There is other commercial land use in the area. The latter is land areas actually used for
commercial purposes and range From home occupations (where residents operate small
businesses such as a day care out of their homes) to the Laurel lvfain Post Office.
Home occupations are types of zoning variance that allow people to operate businesses in
their homes that do not impact their neighbors and do not change the basic residential
nature of the neighborhood. Examples of such home occupations are daycare's, artist's
studios, music teachers, etc. There are several of this type of land uses mixed into the
residential area azound the North School Lot.
The Laurel Zoning Ordinance under 17.12.140 defines Community Commercial zoning as,
"--primarily used to accommodate community retail, service and office facilities offering a
greater variety than would normally be found in a neighborhood or convenience retail
development. Facilities within the classification will generally serve an area within a one
and one-half mile radius, and is commensurate with the purchasing power and needs of the
present and potential population within the trade area. It is intended that these business
facilities be provided in business corridors or islands rather than a strip development along
arterials."
One of the concerns expressed about allowing this zone change is that it will become a
prelude to strip development of First Avenue from the Central Business District to
Twelfth Street. An economic policy listed in the comprehensive plan specifically states,
"Discourage commercial strip development while recognizing that certain types of
commercial uses must be located adjacent to areas of high volume vehicular traffic." It is
up to the City to insure that strip development does not occur--as per the guidelines it has
adopted of record. Granting this zone change does not automatically trigger strip
development. In fact there is no provision for actually allowing strip development.
Between the subject property and the Central Business District is residential land, and
applications for zone change on less-than-block-size lots will have to be made as either
Community Commercial (if Ricci's is granted) or Central Business District. The North
School Lot is a parcel by itself, and considerable argument would have to be put forth to
leap the street to the north so a continuation of commercial development could occur.
Furthermore, the City could rezone the property at its own behest, should the proposed
grocery store not materialize. Abetter way of controlling commercial development on
First Avenue is through the development of special corridor zoning plan. Because First
Avenue is unique in that it is the major north entrance into the City, is a State lvghway,
will soon 6e linking up with communities to the north via new paving, will soon see the
return of lazge commercial trucks, and is currently way under maximum design traffic
volume--it needs to be considered under some sort of special zoning and planning analyses
4
A
that may provide for changes in land use only when certain prerequisites are in place, The
City Council has requested tltc Planning Board look at changing its Zoning Ordinance, and
this particular area of the City will get particular attention.
Another aspect of zoning Hutt has been discussed through the process of reviewing this
application is that of `spot zoning'. Spot zoning is a legal term that refers to illegal zoning
that has occurred ar is contemplated based on several factors: size of tract involved,
compatibility of zoning with comprehensive plan, the benefits and detriments resulting
from the zoning action for the owners of the newly zoned property, its neighbors, and the
surrounding community; and the relationship between the uses envisioned under the new
zoning and the uses currently present in the adjacent area. The criteria are flexible and the
analysis needs to reflect the facts and circumstances of a particular case.
Laurel's Zoning Ordinance largely prevents the first possibility of spot zoning by requiring
that, before a new zone can be introduced into an area, a minimum size area be included in
the zone change--approximately one 300x300-foot square area, a city block in size. The
purpose of this was to prevent a landowner with two lots in the middle of a block from
applying for a zone change for his two lots to a zone that was not already existing in the
vicinity. A landowner in the middle of a block zoned R7500 could not apply for a zone
change to R6000 for his two lots. Laurel's requirement that a minimum amount of land be
available before such a request could be entertained prevented frivolous and time
consuming applications that, when reviewed, would be found to be basically spot zoning--
isolated zoning that benefit only an individual without contributing to the integrity of land
use spread over a larger pattern.
A land owner who wishes to change the zoning on his property to that of an adjacent
property--even though such adjacent zone maybe across a public right-of--way, does not
face the minimum land area requirement. The latter orily applies to introducing a wholly
new zone into an area. The Ricci application consists of the minimum area to apply for a
new zone change.
The second criteria involved in spot zoning is compatibility with the adopted
comprehensive plan of the City. Laurel has such an adopted plan. The `Land Use Plan'
shown in Laurel's plan shows most commercial development occurring along Main Street,
South First Avenue, and in the area of Pelican's Truck Stop. Since its adoption in 1978,
commercial land use in Laurel has predominated in the South First Avenue azea--to the
detriment of the old downtown area. Furthermore, the major residential area of the City
tends to the north part oftown--necessitating trips across town to South First Avenue
stores (or the present site of Ricci's). First Avenue North in 1978 was also slow-traffic,
State highway going nowhere. Now the highway to the north is planned for paving in
1998 and connecting to highway improvements to communities to the north as well as the
new Chiefloseph Battlefield interpretive site. Trucks, long banned on the road, will
reappear with the new paving. First Avenue is designed and has been constructed as a
major transportation route, and its use will continue to increase steadily. It is not a street
5
that now residcntia! construction will occur on--unless such construction is subsidized by
Federal housing programs for apartrttcnts or with similar market leveling incentives.
The Ricci's, with their application, leave proposed mitigation measures to lesson the
impact on the neighborhood; these conditions have been submitted by Ricci's as a draft,
apparently with tl~e thought that other ideas that could further mitigate any adverse impact
can be added before the list is formalized, submitted, and signed with the City. As stated
earlier, the Planning Board and the City cannot dictate these conditions, but it is astute of
the Ricci's to propose such an agreement and submit it as part their application.
In addition to plans Ricci's wish to submit to mitigate the impact of change coming to the
neighborhood, the City should look at discouraging student drivers from using Second
Avenue. This can be done by using stop signs at Seventh and Eighth Streets and Second
Avenue or by using speed humps on Second Avenue. The City can also enforce truck
traffic ordinances to keep the large delivery vehicles from using streets other than First
Avenue to service the Ricci facility. "
As part of their submittal, Ricci's had a traffic analysis prepared by a professional traffic
engineer, and all Planning Board members received a copy. The thrust of the traffic
analysis can be summed up in a quote from the report: "Since all of the surroundine
streets and intersections are operating substantial[kbelow capacity. additiona[ traffic
attributable to this development would not sienificantly impact the surrounding street
system." Furthermore, "The study analysis indicates that no additional measures such as
additional traffic lanes or traffic control devices are warranted as a mitigation measure."
Laurel's comprehensive plan also provided for commercial development by indicating on
the Land Use Plan a future commercial site(s) with the red dot. The dot acknowledges the
possibility of future commercial development to serve the residential north side without
specifying an exact location. The implementation of such a commercial azea is also
reflected in the Zoning Ordinance (one of the tools for implementing a comprehensive
plan) whereby Community Commercial areas are designed to occur as an island of
commercial activity--thus not perpetuating any strip commercial development.
The third factor in spot zoning considerations is who benefits-and who is harmed by the
rezoning--and the magnitude of same. The Ricci's will benefit from being allowed to
proceed with their new grocery store. They are not real estate developers who will
promote the property and move. They want the zone change so they can invest $2.6
million in a new store to continue to serve a customer base they have built up over years in
the community and which they hope to expand as Laurel grows.
The people who Feel they will be most negatively impacted are those living across the
street From the project. The zone change site is presently an open park-like area. Any
change from that open park-like area would be negative. The adjacent houses, although
older, are well kept and their owners have invested back into the properties; the residential
area is a sound and traditional one. The North School Lot acts as a buffer from the
.•1
increasingly busy First Avcnuc, the high school, and the activities associated with the
swimming pool/park complex in summer.
The construction of a grocery store as proposed by Ricci will superimpose on the site a
23,000 square foot stivcture and accompanying parkins lot. Along with such imposition
comes the traffic, noise, lishts, and commotion certainly not extant on the property now.
The Planning Board and City Council need to look at the proposal from the standpoint of
the community as a whole and try and answer the question, "Is it good for the
community?" At the same time they need to understand that unless the zone change
benefits others rather thanjust the Ricci's, the possibility of spot zoning is applicable and
the concerns of the neighborhood are over ridingly valid.
Relocating Ricci's to the contemplated site will better serve the north side residential azea
grocery and sundry items market. It will shorten the distance required for shopping and
probably allow many who desire to walk to the facility to do so rather than drive. This
reduced cornmuting/trip generation will reduce general energy costs and wear and teaz on
the streets and private investments (vehicles). People can presently walk to the several
churches in the area and to the schools, and, with the granting of the zone change, also to
address other primary needs such as food. Students who currently trek to the south side
of the tracks during lunch hour maybe induced. to do their noontime shopping at the
available facility. Provision of shopping facilities for home needs in the proposed location
will also contribute to the lessening of congestion for attempting the same needs across
the tracks on the crowded First Avenue South area. The proposal also utilizes a site that
has remained vacant and off the tax roles for years. No other proposed uses aze lined up
to use the site. The biggest commercial advantage to the site is the frontage on First
Avenue which is, conversely, the biggest disadvantage to aloes-density, residential-type
project ever materializing on the site. Ricci's have stated they cannot survive in their
present location and need to expand and relocate to stay competitive. Ricci's pay out
$385,225. a year in employee salaries and benefits. The new store will pay approximately
$43,798 a year in taxes, up from the $8,500 the current store contributes. Ricci's have
also stated that the new store will employ approximately 40 people, almost double what
they currently employ.
The fourth factor in spot zoning is the relationship of uses involved. Lf the North School
Lot was totally surrounded by the very viable residential neighborhood as represented by
that established along the west side of Second Avenue, the intrusion of a grocery store
complex as proposed would clearly contravene acceptable land uses. However, the real
viability of this neighborhood actually begins at Second Avenue and deepens to the west.
The neighborhood extends only marginally to the north of the Old School Lot, does not
exist across the First Avenue to the east, and is dominated by the large Main Post Office
Complex on the south.
7
LAURL•L'S COMPRL•FIGNSIVCFLAN
Laurel prepared and adopted a comprehensive plan in 1978 entitled Larrre! Planning Dafa
Souk ai+d Coinprel+ensrve Plcu+. In that plan is a'Land Use Plan' adopted as part of the
comprehensive plan. The Land Use Plan was a reflection of the way the people of Laurel
wanted their community to look and grow at the time of the adoption of the
comprehensive plan. The comprehensive plan of a community is not a static document; it
changes as the needs of the city change and grow along with the desires of its people. It is
also a very general document because of the need to achieve a community consensus prior
to adopting such a plan. Some communities update [heir plans on a regular basis every
four or five years; others on a more as-needed basis or as funds are available.
Comprehensive plans are instituted by zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations, and
building code enforcement. Laurel's zoning extends outside its city limits one mile; its
subdivision authority extends in some places north to King Avenue and east to meet the
Billings' planning area. State law has prevented Laurel from extending its building code
beyond its city limits, and this has led to problems of conflicting land uses around the
community's periphery--and will continue to do so. Comprehensive Plans are also legal
documents, and state law requires that City land use decisions to be based on and comply
with adopted comprehensive plans.
Since the adoption of the comprehensive plan, those elements most needing to be changed
or updated in the plan, such as water and sewer systems--and housing, have been updated
by the City through special consultants with expertise in the particulaz azea. The City
Council in January 1998 asked the Planning Board to review the comprehensive plan and
provide feedback as to need for update, costs, scope of work, etc. of the 1978 plan.
SLMIvIATION
The application for zone change from Ricci's, if approved, will change the land use map of
Laurel. Given the tremendous impact that First Avenue will have on north Laurel in the
coming years, this kind of a proposal could be expected for such a large, undeveloped
parcel. The community is fortunate that what is proposed is not from a real estate
developer, but is from along-time City business seeking to expand its business and better
serve its customers. The proposal does not introduce a new product that people will
commute long distance for, but, rather, addresses basic home grocery shopping needs.
Too much of Laurel's old business is moving south of the railroad tracks while the bulk of
the population is in north Laurel. This situation creates more traffic and more congestion,
pollution, expenses in public roadway maintenance, and so forth. The population is aging.
and the ability to walk [o a store far basic requirements is an asset that will grow in
appreciation.
8
.~
The Ricci's have proposed to mitigate all of the negative impacts they can determine to
ease the transition of their proposal into the neighborhood. Much of what happens in the
future is just change that will occur over time whether }ticci's utilizes the lot or someone
else develops it. The big impactor to the residential area is First Avenue, and the long
term use and development of this street is largely out of the hands of local people and their
government. Area residents, Ricci's, and the City Council of Laurel need to work
together to meld private interests, the authority of government to control land use, and
what is best for the City now and in the future.
EIGHTH STREET
i:.
r
B6 PARKING STALLS
_ .....
~ ~~ ~~
...~
111
Ill
Q ~ ~. ~ _
0
Z .. :7... _._ __
_°. L. _i
... i. .. .....~....
0
U
w
N
R ICCI~S TH RIFTWAY
~~
AI"VI
r~ o-
SEVENTH STREET
"'~y~'f.
;i :%i,.
ii-e::..
..r-a~
~=
u
z
'w
u
w
e
J
Itl
.~.
Z
kl
Q
f
N
tL
SITE DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT PLAN SCALE: 1" = 20' -O" ~~-
RICCI'S THRIFTWAY
LAUREL • MONTANA
OPERATING AGREEMENT
THE CITY OF LAUREL,IVIT AND
RICCI'S THRIFTW
^K
• .,
1. WE WILL NOT BE OPEN 24 HOURS
2. WE WILL INSIST THAT ALL DELIVERIES
USE 1sT AVE AND 7TH STREET. NOT 8TH
STREET OR 2~ AVENUE
3. WE WILL HAVE ALL TRUCKS SHUT OFF
MOTORS WHILE UNLOADING.
4. WE WILL PATROL OUR PROPERTY DAILY,
AND MAKE SURE GARBAGE IS PICKED
UP.
5. LANDSCAPING WILL BE DONE, TO
ENSURE HEADLIGHTS WILL NOT SHINE
INTO NEIGHBORS HOMES.
6. PARKING LOT LIGHTS WILL BE FITTED
WITH SHEILDS TO DIRECT LIGHT TO
' PARKING LOT, AND AWAY FROM.
RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
T,
7. ALL HEATERS AND COMPRESSORS WILL
BE LOCATED INSIDE THE FACITITY AND
SOUND WALLS WILL BE INSTALLED TO
REDUCE ANY NOISE.
8. RICCI'5 THRIFTWAY WILL PROVIDE THE
LAUREL POLICE DEPARTMENT WITH
WRITTEN PERMISSION TO PATROL OUR
PARKING LOT AFTER HOURS TO
PREVENT AFTER HOUR TRAFFIC.
9. THE CITY HAS PROPOSED A GARBAGE
COMPACTION CONTAINER. RICCI'S
THRIFTWAY WILL COMPLY WITH THE
CITY'S PROPOSAL WICH WILL ALLOW
ALL GARBAGE TO BE IN AN ENCLOSED
CONTAINER.
10.
,. ,
11.
12.
THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE BEING
PROPOSED AS PART OF A BINDING
CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY
OF LAUREL AND RICCI'S THRIFTWAY AS PART OF
THE APPLICATION PROCESS FOR A ZONE
CHANGE.
I
Mark 07.'eefe
STATE AUDITOR
February 11, 1998
Vince Ricci
Ricci's Thrift Way
201 1st Ave.
Box 458
Laurel, MT 59044
Dear Mr. Ricci:
STATE AUDITOR
STATE OF btONTANA
COMMI55[ONER OF INSURANCE
COMMISSIONER OF SECURITIES
In response to your inquiry I have checked with the underwriting departments of the five
leading homeowners' insurance companies in Montana, based upon annualized
premium volume. The companies and their responses are set forth below:
1. State Farm Fire and Casualty:
The underwriter stated they have
2.. Sam, f~rcor:,
increases for this reason.
The underwriter stated they
issue: The underwriter stag
eligibility or rates in thei~oe,
3. Fire Insurance Exchange`(Farmers):
nor would there be any
The undervriter stated that homes in predominantly "commercial" areas are
unacceptable, however, just because there is a supermarket in a residential
at each situation on a case
MltcheU Building/PO Box 4009/Helena, Monona 59604.4009/(406) 4442040/1.800.332.6148/FAX; (446) 444-3497
• ,,, r ° ,
Wince Ricci
Page 2 '
February 11, 1998
4. Allstate; '
bo em s within 40' of commercial properly are not eligible for coverage as new
business.. ~ e company wou n- o"'~f non=renew existing business..
5. State Farm General: ~ '
Same a 1.
I hope this addresses your concerns. If you have questions regarding specific insurers
not listed above, please give me a call.
Sincerely,
Kim He~nritt
Compliance Specialist
Policyholder Services
t<H/pp '
,,
• ~~ Marvin & Associafes
Traf{rc, 7rr+nsportaiion & Civil Engineers „
Dcbbie Ricci
Ricci's Thriftway
1231 5'" Avenue
Laurel, MT 59044 January 23, 1998
Re: Proposed Supermarket Development
First Avenue Sub. Traffic Access
Dear Mrs. Ricci:
This letter is written to clarify an issue that has been brought up during review of our December 1997
Traffic Accessibility Study. Apparently people who have read our report noticed that traffic counts
taken on 10/16/97 and 10/17/97 (Thursday & Friday) coincided with days that the high school was
not in session, due to PIR days. Since school was not in session, traffic volumes would indeed be
lower than a normal school day. However, the lower volumes would only appiy to hours that the
high school begins and ends.
Setting our counters on weekdays, when school was not in session, was done intentionally to
detemtine weekday hourly variatioris, without the high school's traffic generating influence. Since,
First Avenue has relatively low traffic volumes, the schools influence would greatly distort hourly
variation curves, which are used to determine directional splits, traffic characteristics and peaking
factors. To account for high school traffic, hand counts were taken on Tuesday 10/14/97 (3-4 p.m.,
when school was iri session) and are summarized in Figure 4., of the report. These volumes are
approximately 19% higher than the peak PM hour (5-6 p.m.) counts and were used to evaluate the
capacity of adjacent intersections and proposed accesses. Peak hour traffic between 5 and 6 p.m.
was also used in capacity calculations because this hour is coincident with peak generation rates of
the proposed facility and reflect maximum impact of the development on the street system.
Jn addition to existing volumes, we projected 20 year design hour volumes (Figure 10.); which are
at least 200% greater than existing volumes. Capacity calculations.indicated'tliat even at this ]evel.
of traffic the proposed development would not significantly impact the street system. Therefore, we
had to conclude that this development's impact on the street system's efficiency would be minimal,
during the worst condition. ..
We tried to write our report in a manner which could be understood by a lay people, unfortunately
we did not elaborate on the timing and purpose of our data collection plan. If I can provide additional
clarification, please advise. ~ ' -
..
...,
~ i
~ i ~, '~ h , i f '. ~ / I. f. .41 , ,~ gip; •~~..
. ...1 '~ ~ ~ ~. .. 1. ... ...... .... ~ t ~ .: 1. ,e... ~ J i.. .'J
• Robert R. Marvin, P.E.
112? Alderson Avenue ^ Suite #204 ^ Billings, MT 59102 ^ (406J 248-5088 ^ Fax (406) 252-1157
•I
• • ~ Associated Food Stores lnc.
JJ2 PLAINVICW • P,O. 00% 2717 • f11lLING7, MONTANA 5910) • x•106) 245.7777
Ricci's Thriftway:
[ am issuing this letter [o address a few concerns that were brought up in our
phone conversation on January 19, 1998.
of
ou the o p Y .,°`° °"„ °tt~`"
Y pportunity to receive an rocess our order in a timely manner. ith the
opportunity to unload via pallet, this should also cut our delivery time at your store by
more that half, allowing both of us a larger delivery time window to work with and still
permit you to utilize your present stocking hours.
the
•+~ .uw+lvl U611er Gllmaie We Carl
run the unit at your score durine deliverv~
We also foresee no reason why the tractor would need to run durine delivery
I hope by addressing these issues now we can help alleviate future concerns
regarding these issues.
Sincerely,
~~~~
Darrell Shepovalof
Transporation Supervisor
t0