This is a request for a special review to allow three new multi-family buildings including one 5-plex and two 4-plex buildings for a total of 13 dwelling units in a Residential 6,000 (R-60) zone on a 28,902 square foot parcel. The subject property is legally described as Lots 14A, 14B and 14D of Mattson Acres Subdivision. The property is generally located at 711 Mattson Lane just west of the intersection of Bench Boulevard and Mattson Lane. The Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing on October 5, 2010, and is forwarding no recommendation on a 2-2 vote.

The Planning Division reviewed this application and recommended conditional approval. Before a recommendation of approval or conditional approval can be made, each special review request must demonstrate conformance with three primary criteria: 1) the application complies with all parts of the Unified Zoning Regulations, 2) the application is consistent with the objectives and purposes of the Unified Zoning Regulations and the 2008 Growth Policy, and 3) is compatible with surrounding land uses and is otherwise screened and separated from adjacent land to minimize adverse impacts. This application conforms to the first criteria, in so far, that it meets required setbacks and does not exceed maximum lot coverage. Planning staff determined the application is conforming to the purposes of the regulations and the 2008 Growth Policy and the 2006 Heights Neighborhood Plan. The development will fill in existing under-developed lots in an established neighborhood in Billings. The neighborhood plan indicated this area for mixed uses and higher density housing. Multi-family dwellings are allowed by special review approval in the R-60 zoning district.

Planning staff found the application also conforms to the second and third criteria. The submitted and supplemental drawing for this application appears to meet all zoning requirements for setbacks, lot coverage and building height. The off-street parking spaces will be designated for the use of the residents and assigned. The buildings will be the first multi-family dwellings in the immediate area but it appears the mass of each building will be similar to surrounding single-family and two-family dwellings. Residents of the development will be able to safely walk to Mattson Lane and Lambrecht Lane to access shopping, schools and the bike trails east of Bench Boulevard. The dumpster is located near the proposed access on Mattson Lane and will have the required site obscuring enclosure. Planning staff found the proposal is compatible and recommended several conditions of approval to mitigate any potential adverse effects on the surrounding area. Planning staff found the proposal consistent with goals of the 2008 Growth Policy, specifically the goal of encouraging in-fill and developments that are consistent with neighborhoods and adjacent land uses.

Planning staff recommended conditions for this special review based on the approval criteria for special review uses. Planning staff has recommended the following conditions to address building facades, lighting, safety, and pedestrian flow.

Planning Staff Recommended Conditions:
1. The special review approval shall be limited to Lots 14A, 14B and 14D of Mattson Acres Subdivision, generally located at 711 Mattson Lane.
2. Any expansion of the proposed building, building occupancy or parking lot greater than 10 percent of what is shown on the submitted site plan will require an additional special review approval.
3. The development of the two 4-plex buildings and the one 5-plex shall be in substantial conformance with the site plan dated September 27, 2010.
4. All site lighting on the buildings, in parking areas or under covered porches shall have full cut-off shields so lighting is projected to the ground and not on to adjacent properties.
5. The solid waste dumpster shall be enclosed with a sight-obscuring fence on three sides and a sight-obscuring gate. The enclosure will be a minimum of 6 feet in height and constructed of material similar in style and compatible with the residential structures.
6. A pedestrian crossing sign shall be posted at the drive approach on Mattson Lane. This sign will alert drivers exiting to watch for pedestrians on the public sidewalks.
7. The applicant will apply for a Master Site Plan Approval as required by Section 27-622 of the Unified Zoning Regulations.
8. These conditions of special review approval shall run with the land described in this authorization and shall apply to all current and subsequent owners, operators, managers, lease holders, heirs and assigns.
9. The proposed development shall comply with all other limitations of Section 27-613 of the Unified Zoning Regulations concerning special review uses, and all other City of Billings regulations and ordinances that apply.

**NOTE** Approval of this Special Review does not constitute approval of a building permit, sign permit or fence permit. Compliance with all applicable local codes will be reviewed at the building permit level. This application is for a Special Review as noted above and no other request is being considered with this application. The Planning Division points out that the use and development of the property must be in accordance with the submitted site plan.

If approved, the development and redevelopment of this property would increase the city's tax base.

This is a request for a special review to allow the construction of one 5-plex and two 4-plex for a total of 13 dwelling units on a 28,902 square foot parcel located generally at 711 Mattson Lane in Billings Heights. The property was recently subdivided into 4 lots from the original single Lot 14. Lot 14C, 719 Mattson Lane, is not included in this application and contains the original development of Lot 14 – a single-family dwelling. The subject property has street frontage on Mattson Lane and on Lambrecht Lane to the north. The street frontage on Lambrecht Lane is unimproved and is proposed to remain unimproved for this development. The developer proposes to construct a single drive approach off Mattson Lane to access all three new buildings. The R-60 zoning district does allow multi-family dwellings through the special review process. The proposed 13 dwelling units is the maximum possible for the lot area in the R-60 zone.

The property to the south is the Heights Walmart Planned Development (PD) zone. The underlying zoning is Community Commercial (CC) and the area is fully developed for commercial uses. The Heights Walmart development was approved in 2000 and construction was completed in 2001 and 2002. The other surrounding properties are zoned R-60 and many were developed prior to annexation and are on larger residential lots. Some of these lots have been re-developed in the past 10 years, to create smaller residential lots for single family or for duplex dwellings. Lambrecht Lane to the north is an unimproved gravel road that is a dead end west of Bench Boulevard. Bitterroot Elementary School is located on Bench Boulevard opposite the intersection with Lambrecht Lane. The Heights Neighborhood Plan was approved by the City Council in 2006. The Future Land Use plan for this area was shown as “Mixed Use” or higher density residential uses with professional offices or neighborhood retail uses.

The applicant proposes to construct three, 2-story buildings and a parking garage with 7 stalls. Additional off-street parking is also provided for a total of 20 new off-street parking spaces. The minimum number of spaces required for this number of dwelling units is 17 spaces – 5 spaces for the 5-plex with 1-bedroom units and 12 spaces for the 3-bedroom units in the two 4-plexes. The landscaping shown meets the requirements for new multi-family developments. The site plans shows a 5-foot privacy fence along the west and east property lines and on the property line adjacent to Lot 14C. A hedge is proposed for the east property line of Lot 14B adjacent to 722 Lambrecht Lane.

The applicant has provided a supplemental site plan that included a wider access road, internal pedestrian sidewalks to Lambrecht Lane and south to Mattson Lane, clarification of the parking space provisions and the solid waste dumpster location.

The Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing on October 5, 2010, and received the staff recommendation of conditional approval, testimony from Ben Nistler, NHB, LLC, agent for the landowner, and several surrounding property owners including Terri and Dallas Lasich of 643 Mattson Lane. Joe Clevenger of 707 Mattson Lane, Brenda and Donna Bowles of 649 Mattson Lane and Mark Boyd of 1925 Lake Elmo Road also testified on the application. The Zoning Commission also received written testimony from Larry Gerek, owner of property at 764 Jaque Lane, and Linda Thomson, resident of 764 Thomson Lane.

Mr. Ben Nistler of NHB, LLC testified in favor of the application. Mr. Nistler stated the units would be marketed to entry and mid-level market renters. Mr. Nistler stated this is a good area for an in-fill project and the neighborhood plan supported higher density housing in this area between Bench Boulevard and Main Street. Mr. Nistler acknowledged that parking will need to be assigned to the residents to prevent blocked or unauthorized parking in the development. Mr. Nistler stated he recently held a neighborhood meeting to discuss the development and received input from 3 property owners. He state he will ensure the enclosed garage spaces are not used for storage other than vehicles. Mr. Nistler stated the development would be the most efficient use of the cities existing infrastructure in Mattson Lane and would provide a better property value than either a single or two-family development.

In response to a questions from Commission Member Ed Workman, Mr. Nistler stated the only area to expand parking is currently set aside to handle the stormwater drainage. This is a requirement of the City Code to retain all added storm water on site prior to discharging to the city's system. Mr. Nistler stated it may be possible to get one additional parking space on the north end of the existing parking lot.

Terri Lasich of 643 Mattson Lane testified in opposition to the application. Ms. Lasich stated all the property along Mattson Lane were single family homes on large lots - 9,000 square feet or more. Ms. Lasich stated even lots zoned Highway Commercial have single family homes. Ms. Lasich stated the R-60 does not mean there has to be multi-family dwellings. Ms. Lasich stated her preference would be for one single family home on each of the lots. Ms. Lasich stated no one in the neighborhood was in favor of this many units on this property. She stated the city services were already over capacity, there was no alley, the residents did not want to look at a garbage enclosure out in front and there was not nearly enough parking on the plan.

Joe Clevenger of 707 Mattson Lane testified in opposition to the plan. Mr. Clevenger stated that parking was a big deal on Mattson Lane, especially since the Heights Walmart was built and the city did not stripe the travel lanes or the parking lanes. Mr. Clevenger stated there is no parking on the side of Mattson adjacent to Walmart but people do it all the time because the city did not install no parking signs. Mr. Clevenger was concerned about the small setback for the 5-plex directly adjacent to his home and the proposed 2nd floor deck. Mr. Clevenger stated people on the deck would have a nice view of his bedroom. Mr. Clevenger stated the access drive should go through to Lambrecht Lane for safety reasons. Mr. Clevenger was concerned about the lack of sidewalks on Lambrecht Lane. Mr. Clevenger stated he was told the lighting from the new Walmart would not be a problem on his property but he hardly ever turns on lights after dark because the Walmart lighting gives off enough light to his property to see. Mr. Clevenger stated he wondered how this application was accepted since the Planning staff denied a duplex just two doors down from this property. He stated many existing residents use the on-street parking and putting a new fire hydrant in front of this apartment complex would eliminate more on-street parking.

Ms. Brenda Bowles of 649 Mattson Lane testified in opposition to the application. She stated the neighborhood was all single family residential and the proposal did not fit in with the neighborhood. Ms. Bowles stated there has been traffic problems on Mattson Lane since the Heights Walmart opened and the added traffic from 13 new dwellings on this small lot would make it worse. She stated it was sometimes difficult to get out of her driveway waiting for traffic to clear. She asked the Commission to recommend denial and let the builder put in single family or two-family homes. She stated the lot was not large enough for 13 dwellings. She stated their property value took a big hit when Walmart went in and this apartment complex would further depress their property value. Ms. Bowles stated traffic at Wicks and Main is already backed up at any time of the day. Ms. Bowles was concerned about dust generated from Lambrecht Lane if the developer was not required to take care of the gravel street. She stated she was concerned about truck traffic into the property and how that would effect Mattson Lane.

Dallas Lasich of 643 Mattson Lane testified in opposition to the application. Mr. Lasich stated Mattson is only one block long but it gets a lot of speeders and he hears near collisions all the time. He stated more traffic from the apartments would create more problems on Mattson.

Mark Boyd of 1925 Lake Elmo Drive testified in opposition to the proposal. He stated the neighborhood was all single family and the development would be out of place. He stated the pedestrian traffic from the development could result in traffic conflicts since everyone going to Walmart would cross mid-block. He stated it would be preferable to have sidewalks on Lambrecht Lane installed.

Donna Boyd of 649 Mattson Lane testified in opposition to the application. She state the development is out of character and she did not want to look at a dumpster out in front on Mattson Lane.

In response to the comments from the surrounding property owners, Ben Nistler stated property values should not be affected by his development. He state there are many manufactured homes in the area that would not increase in value in any case. The proposed multi-family development would add a lot of property value and be an efficient use of the land. Mr. Nistler stated he was interested in providing more housing choice in the area. He stated there were similar multifamily developments previously approved on Bench Boulevard in R-60 zoning districts also surrounded by existing single family and duplexes. Mr. Nistler stated that if an owner purchased a home assuming the R-60 district was a single-family only district, then the purchaser was mistaken. Mr. Nistler stated the R-60 zoning specifically considers multi-family uses by special review approval. Mr. Nistler stated Mattson Lane is fully developed as a local street access and should be able to physically accommodate the additional traffic. Mr. Nistler stated the development would bring more tax dollars to the school system than a single family development and would help support other local city services more effectively than a single family development. Mr. Nistler stated the sidewalk out to Lambrecht Lane and out to Mattson Lane was in response to a Planning staff concern about safe travel from the apartments to the adjacent city streets. Mr. Nistler stated the lot coverage is 28% as proposed and is well below the allowed 40% limit in the R-60 zoning district. Mr. Nistler stated the privacy fence and hedges were provided to buffer adjacent property and to provide privacy to the new residents. In response to a question from Chairman Dailey, Mr. Nistler stated the proposed structures were two-story of about 27 feet in height. The buildings would not have a full basement but would have crawl space foundations. 

Commission member Dan Wagner moved for conditional approval with an added condition to increase the off-street parking to 21 from the 20 shown on the site plan. The motion was seconded by member Ed Workman. Member Wagner proposed the Commission also consider conditions related to setbacks and number of dwelling units. There was not a second. Member Workman stated he would not vote in favor of the motion to conditionally approve based on the addition of 1 parking space. Member Workman stated although the development met all of the requirements for zoning it was not an appropriate location for a multifamily development. Members Wagner and Hawkins voted in favor of conditional approval and member Workman and Chairman Dailey voted against the motion. The Zoning Commission is forwarding no recommendation to the City Council.  

Please see the Alternatives Analyzed and Background Sections of this report for discussion on this applications consistency with adopted plans and policies.