This is a zone change request from Residential 7,000 (R-70) to Residential 6,000 (R-60) on Lots 5, 6, 7 & 8, Block 7, Happy Hollow Subdivision, a 1.36 acre parcel of land. A pre-application neighborhood meeting was held on February 23, 2017 at Oasis Water Park. The Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing on April 4, 2017, and is forwarding a recommendation of approval and adoption of the findings of the 10 criteria. The City Council conducted its public hearing on April 24, 2017. The City Council closed the public hearing but chose to delay action on this item until the May 22, 2017, Council meeting.

Zone Change applications are reviewed using statutory criteria referenced in the Alternatives Analyzed section of this memo. Zone Changes require approval through an ordinance. Zone Changes allow the change from one type of zoning district to another types of zoning – e.g. residential single family to residential multi-family or residential to commercial. A Zone Change cannot have conditions of approval and if approved, permits the owner to use the land for any purpose allowed within the zoning district.

 

↵City Council may:

• Approve the zone change and adopt the findings of the 10 criteria as recommended by the Zoning Commission;
• Deny the zone change and adopt different findings of the 10 criteria;
• Allow the applicant to withdraw the zone change; or
• Delay action on the zone change request for up to 30 days.

The Planning staff reviewed the request and recommended approval based on the proposed findings of the 10 criteria for zone changes. The Zoning Commission concurred. There is R-60 zoning in close proximity to the subject property and the existing multi-family apartments have been a part of the neighborhood fabric for 60 years. The proposed zoning will allow the property owner to re-build the existing 4-plex dwellings using traditional financing and this will tend to stabilize and improve neighboring property and market values. A valid protest petition has been filed against the zone change. In order to approve the requested zoning, a 2/3 majority vote of the present and voting members of Council is required.

Prior to making a decision on the requested zone change, the City Council shall consider the findings of the Zoning Commission:
1.   Is the new zoning designed in accordance with the Growth Policy?
The proposed zone change is consistent with the following guidelines of the 2016 Growth Policy:

• Home Base: A mix of housing types that meet the needs of a diverse population is important; Common to all types of housing choices is the desire to live in surroundings that are affordable, healthy and safe.
  The proposed zoning would allow the applicant to re-build three 4-plex dwellings that will conform to zoning. The existing structures were constructed in the mid 1960’s prior to the current zoning code and are at the end of their building life cycles. The current zoning discourages investment in the property for regular maintenance or improvements since the structures could not be re-built. Financing improvements or sale of the property is unnecessarily complicated by the current zoning. The property provides a desirable and needed housing choice in the area dominated by single family and two-family dwellings.

• Strong Neighborhoods: Zoning regulations that allow a mixture of housing types provide housing options for all age groups and income levels; Walkable neighborhoods that permit convenient destinations such as neighborhood services, open space, parks, schools and public gathering spaces foster health, good will and social interaction; Neighborhoods that are safe and attractive and provide essential services are much desired.
  The proposed zoning will allow the reconstruction of the existing three 4-plexes. The zone change does not allow the owner to add additional multi-family dwellings on the property without special review approval. The applicant has submitted a concurrent special review application to expand the multi-family units. The owner could add single family or 2-family dwellings on the property with or without a zone change approval. 

2.   Is the new zoning designed to secure from fire and other dangers?
The new zoning requires minimum setbacks, open and landscaped areas and building separations. The new zoning, as do all zoning districts, provides adequate building separations and density limits to provide security from fire and other dangers.
 
3.   Whether the new zoning will promote public health, public safety and general welfare?
Public health and public safety will be promoted by the proposed zoning. The current zoning of the parcel does not provide certainty for future re-construction of the three 4-plexes and encourages the property owner to not invest in regular maintenance or upgrades of the property. This tends to have a negative effect on the surrounding properties and neighborhood. Ensuring the zoning is conforming to the development will promote the public health, safety and general welfare of the area.
 
4.   Will the new zoning will facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirement?
Transportation: The proposed zoning will not have any effect on the existing transportation system as there are already three 4-plexes existing on this property.
Water and Sewer: The City provides water and sewer to the property. There will be no additional impacts to the system from the proposed zoning. 
Schools and Parks: Schools and parks should not be affected by the proposed zoning.  
Fire and Police: The subject property is served by city public safety services. The Police and Fire Departments had no concerns with the zone change.
 
5.   Will the new zoning provide adequate light and air?
The proposed zoning provides for sufficient setbacks to allow for adequate separation between structures and adequate light and air.
 
6.   Will the new zoning effect motorized and non-motorized transportation?
The new zoning will have no effect on transportation systems.
 
7.   Will the new zoning will promote compatible urban growth?
The new zoning does promote compatibility with urban growth. The proposed zoning will allow this parcel to continue at this location and the use is compatible with the existing neighborhood.
 
8.   Does the new zoning consider the character of the district and the peculiar suitability of the property for particular uses?
The proposed zoning does consider the character of the district and the suitability of the property for the proposed use. This area is a mix of single-family, duplex and multi-family dwellings. The proposed zoning is identical to the zoning southwest of the subject property and is an appropriate zone with the adjacent zoning of single and duplex residential neighborhoods to the north, east and south.
 
9.   Will the new zoning conserve the value of buildings?
The property is currently developed with three 4-plex dwellings, a nonconforming use in the existing R-70 zone. Approval of the zone change will make the current development conforming to zoning and will allow for reconstruction of multi-family dwellings. The value of existing buildings and the parcel will be improved and conserved by the proposed zoning.
 
10. Will the new zoning encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the City of Billings?
The proposed zoning will allow the existing development to continue and to be re- constructed if necessary in the future. This is the most appropriate use of the land at this location.

 

If the zone change is approved city fees for arterial construction and storm water will be adjusted to the new zoning designation of R-60. The property value of the buildings will be stabilized and may increase over time when improvements are completed on the property. Denial of the zone change could de-stabilize the property value and lead to future dis-investment in building maintenance.  

This is a zone change application for existing developed lots at the intersection of Cody Drive and Covert Lane. The existing three, 4-plex apartment buildings were constructed in the mid 1960s prior to the current zoning of R-70. The R-70 zone does not allow more  than 2 attached dwelling units. The proposed zoning of R-60 would allow the existing buildings to be conforming to the zoning. The owner could re-build the 4-plex apartment buildings on the property if the zone change is approved. The zone change would not  allow the owner to add additional multi-family dwellings on the property without a special review approval. The owner could add single family or 2-family dwellings on the property with or without a zone change approval.

The site is 1.36 acres in total lot area and is adjacent to R-70 zoning to the north, east and south. To the southwest, there are several lots zoned R-60, but these are now owned by the City Parks Department. There are 3 additional lots on the west side of the large park that are zoned R-60 and these are developed with single family homes. The 15-acre park directly west of the subject property is zoned Public and managed as a natural park.

There are have been few zone changes proposed within this area of Billings since zoning was adopted by the County in 1973. One zone change was approved for property at 209 - 221 Wicks Lane to RMF-R. This 1.12 acre property is developed with two 6-plex apartments and 1 duplex (14 units). Another nearby zone change was approved for property at 332-338 Sharron Lane. This 15,516 square foot parcel of land is developed with 2 duplexes (4 units). There are several corner properties within the area that have developed with multi-family dwellings or with multiple single and 2-family dwellings. In the immediate neighborhood, there are no apartment-style dwellings with more than 6 units in a building. Outside of the immediate neighborhood, there are a few multi-family apartments including the new apartments west of All American Pharmaceutical on Pemberton Lane, the Volunteers of America elderly housing apartment on Wicks Lane, and some apartments on Almadin Lane in Lake Hills Subdivision.

The subject property is within an established neighborhood and the existing 4-plexes were constructed prior to zoning in this area of Billings Heights. While the apartments have served as a good housing choice in this stable neighborhood, their useful life span is nearing its end. The
site was developed without any significant off-street parking, landscaping or amenities for the residents. All types of housing and development now require a minimum number of off-street parking spaces, appropriate landscaping, enclosures for solid waste collection, complete sidewalks, outdoor amenities for residents such as outdoor patios, play areas and areas where informal social activities can take place. All of these customary amenities are lacking on the site.

Both streets, Covert Lane and Cody Drive, are built to current City street width standards - 34 feet from curb to curb - and there is adequate width to accommodate on-street parking and local traffic through the area. Both streets are considered local streets so traffic counts are not taken on a regular basis. Only 1 traffic count was taken on Covert Lane in 1996. The count was done west of Lake Elmo Road and resulted in a traffic count of 675 vehicle trips per day. On average, apartments generate 6 to 8 vehicle trips per day per dwelling unit. This number includes trips by residents as well as visitors and service providers such as mail delivery and trash services. The existing 12 dwelling units generate between 72  and 96 vehicle trips per day total.

Twenty five interested persons attended the pre-application meeting with the owner and the consultant team for the applicant. The sign in sheet and the meeting minutes are attached to this staff report. Many concerns were voiced by the surrounding property owners and residents on topics ranging from street capacity, the proposed increase in development density, concern with the lack of property maintenance, incomplete sidewalks, and on-street parking.

The Billings Heights Neighborhood Plan (2006), the Infill Policy (2011) and the City of Billings Growth Policy (2016) have goals and guidelines that generally support the proposed zone change for this property. Under the current zoning, the existing 4-plexes could not be re-constructed or have major repairs due to their legal non-conforming status.

The R-70 zone does not allow more than 2 attached dwelling units for each 9,600 square feet of lot area. The existing zoning would allow the 4-plexes to be demolished but re-development could only consist of single family or 2-family dwellings. The property could accommodate up to 12 dwelling units in this configuration without a zone change. The newest residential construction in the neighborhood is over 10 years old, but assessed values for dwellings average between $150,000 to just over $200,000. The proposed zone change would allow the owner to demolish and re-construct 3 new 4-plex dwellings on the property without additional zoning approval from the City Council. It is a benefit to the area to align the existing development with the zoning regulations so investment in new construction can be accommodated. When properties fall into a legal non-conforming status, maintenance tends to be neglected because the investment is at risk and improvements generally never occur. In addition, purchasers and sellers of legal non-conforming properties do not have access to standard forms of financing or insurance.

The Heights Neighborhood Plan emphasized the need to ensure new housing in existing areas fit in with fabric of the area and mapped this area as a neighborhood to accommodate a medium density residential development. Medium density, as defined by that plan, was between 4,000 to 7,000 square feet per dwelling unit. This medium density designation was not meant to be applied on a lot-by-lot development but an overall density in a neighborhood. The average density of this neighborhood from Meadowlark Lane to Wicks Lane and west to the BBWA (and excluding the park land) is about 3.5 dwellings per acre or 1 dwelling for each 13,000 square feet of land area. There is a good mixture of housing choices in the neighborhood ranging from single family homes on large lots, to apartments, to townhomes and condominium units. The 2011 Infill Policy and the 2016 Growth Policy support maintenance of existing housing choice in neighborhoods by ensuring the zoning is compatible and property investments are encouraged.
 

The Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing on April 4, 2017, and received the staff recommendation and testimony from the applicant's agent, Bryan Alexander from Sanderson Stewart.  Mr. Alexander spoke about the poor condition of the site with flooding and explained the back part of the lot was originally the septic system when the property was in the County.  

Mr. John Jones, representing the applicants, stood to speak in favor of the zone change, stating that his client would like to be able to remove the existing buildings and replace them with new apartments and be in compliance with zoning.  With the buildings currently non-conforming to zoning it makes obtaining insurance difficult and refinancing is also a difficult task.  Rezoning would make the property as it is more easily repaired and insured.

The public hearing was then opened for those wishing to speak in favor of the zone change.  One person from the neighborhood stood to speak in favor of the zone change, stating the existing buildings are a blight on the neighborhood and should be replaced with the same number of units. No one else spoke in favor of the zone change. 

The meeting was then turned to those wishing to speak in opposition of the zone change.  Fifteen people from the surrounding neighborhood stood to speak in opposition of the zone change.  Their main concerns and opposition to the zone change were as follows:

• Density would be too much for the corner lot and way out of character with the neighborhood.
• Traffic in the area is already heavy from new construction to the north and higher density would increase the traffic problem.
• The proposed site plan shows no green space for outdoor activities and there is no developed park in the area, and children would be playing in the street.
• There isn't enough off street parking for all the proposed units. Although they are only required to have 42 spaces for the proposed density, there would more likely be 90 cars minimum with this proposal.
• The property has been poorly managed now. How will that change with the same management company?
• The zone change will devalue the surrounding properties and the proposed housing density will make the devaluation worse.
• The natural park land in the neighborhood has deer, antelope, wild turkeys, squirrels, geese and ducks. With the new development, this will change the habitat area and these animals will go away.
• Current roads are in poor condition, the increased traffic will only make it worse.
• There are no sidewalks in the neighborhood and with the zone change and proposed density there will be even more pedestrians in the streets.
• There is no bus stop in the neighborhood and now students all have to go to Lake Elmo to be picked up. This will increase the pedestrian/traffic conflicts that already exist.
• There is a high water table in the area and it will be very difficult for new development to be able to retain water on site as they are required.  The land that the apartments are on currently floods whenever there is a heavy rainstorm. 

Mr. Alexander was asked to respond to the concerns of the neighbors.  He stated that he would respond to the questions that directly relate to the zone change, as some of the comments were directed at the special review application and the proposed units included in that proposal.  He stated that the zone change does allow more density but without a special review the added density would not be allowed.  Also there are water problems on the site and there will have to be solutions designed to handle the high water table.  The buildings on the site now get flooded each time there is a heavy rain storm.  Mr. Alexander also stated the site does need to be improved and a zone change would open the door to being able to remove the existing buildings and construct new buildings that would be an improvement to the area.

The public hearing was closed. The surrounding neighbors collected and submitted a protest petition against the proposed zone change. Lot owners within 150 feet of a proposed zone change may protest the zone change. If 25 percent or more of the lots within 150 feet protest the zone change, it is considered a valid protest. A valid protest of a zone change would require a 2/3 majority vote of the City Council to approve the protested zone change. There are 21 lots within the 150-foot protest area. The Planning Division checked the submitted petition against the ownership records for the protest area. A valid protest requires at least 6 of the lots within 150 feet to protest the zone change. Six lots within 150 feet of the zone change have protested the request. This is a valid protest as indicated to the City Council at its meeting on April 24. The submitted petitions are attached to this report.

Commissioner Boyett made a motion to recommend approval and adoption of the findings of the 10 criteria. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Larson. Discussion about the proposed zone change by the Commission included the understanding that the current buildings do not meet current zoning and that makes them difficult to insure and to get financing to repair.  The Commission also discussed that in order for the applicant to construct any more than the 12 units on the site they will be required to come to the City with a special review which would give the neighborhood the chance to be involved with what is being proposed. 

The motion was called and was approved on a 3-2 vote.

The Consistency with Adopted Plans and Policies is discussed in the Alternatives Analyzed section above.