DeJana Complaint4
6
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Richard DeJana, Esq.
126 North Meridian
P. O. Box 1757
Kalispell, MT 59901
(406) 752-4120
Attorney for Plaintiffs
MONTANA ELEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, FLATHEAD COUNTY
Angeline Kruckenberg, Trustee for Winner Trust; Cause # DV- 02-601 (
R.H. Kruckenberg and Lila Kruckenberg; Dale R.
Pierce and Cheryle Pierce; Richard Riley and Patricia
Riley; Donald L. Kruse and Mary Kruse; Catherine M.
Stevenson; Raymond DeLong and Sandra DeLong ;
Scott Creekmore and Megan Creekmore; Tylen Fromm;
Dave Dedman and Tiffany Dedman; Perry Warner;
Linda K Ornowski ; Karen Nosek ; Anthony E. Hill and
Michelle L.Hill; GayAnn Weaver; Shirley Eads and
Keith Eads ; Katheen Lusk; Michael S. Harris; Eric Sutter
and Janice Sutter; Florance Noble; Beverly Crane; Brad
Kelsey and Brenda Kelsey;James Lockwood and Leila
Lockwood; Stacy Leach; Duane Eager; Barbara L.
Alsbury; Eric Kallis and Tara Kallis; Ryan Drollinger
and Julie Drollinger; Lowell B.Cooley and Barbara
Cooley; Leota May Sudan; Marvin Vaughn and Kerry
A. Vaughn; Melody Burkhart and Don Burkhart;
Kai Burns and Eugene Burns; Steven Alcock and
Cory Alcock; Natalie Jones; James D. Battie; R.T.
Adkins and Elaine Adkins; Dulane Fulton and Benita
Fulton ; Nancy Fryer; Susan Kunda; Jeramy Presta ;
Sandra K. Flanigan; Dorthy Cox; Linda Cranney;
Dave Christiana; Stephonie Evans; Terra Balke;
Christal Moody; and Rick Haegel,
Plaintiffs,
-vs-
CITY OF KALISPELL,
Defendant.
STEWART E STADLE,r
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATIONS OF INVALIDITY
OF CERTAIN ACTIONS OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL
The Plaintiffs allege:
COUNT 1 GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
1.1 Plaintiffs who are claiming relief under Section 4 of this Complaint are:
Angeline Kruckenberg, trustee for Winner Trust; R.H. Kruckenberg and Lila
COMPLAINT
Page 1 of 11
0
7
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Kruckenberg; Dale R. Pierce and Cheryle Pierce: Richard Riley and Patricia
Riley; Donald L. Kruse and Mary Kruse; Catherine M. Stevenson; Raymond
DeLong and Sandra DeLong ; Scott Creekmore and Megan Creekmore; Tylen
Fromm; Dave Dedman and Tiffany Dedman; Perry Warner ; Linda K Omowski ;
Karen Nosek ; Anthony E. Hill and Michelle L.Hill; GayAnn Weaver; Shirley
Eads and Keith Eads ; Katheen Lusk; Michael S. Harris; Eric Sutter and. Janice
Sutter; Florance Noble; Beverly Crane; Brad Kelsey and Brenda Kelsey.
1.1.1 Each of these Plaintiffs are landowners with a property boundary
contiguous to the proposed subdivision who as a result of the subdivision
will suffer a likelihood of material injury to their property values or are
within 150 feet of the proposed subdivision and will suffer a likelihood of
material injury to their property values.
1.2 All Plaintiffs have property in the immediate vicinity of the "Property" as
described in section 1.3 below and the impact of the annexation, zoning and
subdivision approval will adversely impact them with respect to, but not limited
to, their property values, their safety and potentially their property taxes.
1.2.1 Each of these Plaintiffs are private landowners within/ or near the City of
Kalispell that will in all likelihood suffer material injury to their property
or its value as a result of the approval of the subdivision and further that
the damages suffered by them are distinguishable from those suffered by
the Public in general.
1.3 The property in question is presently denominated as "Owens Addition No 310"
to the city of Kalispell and is described as stated on Exhibit A , attached.
1.4 That the allegations of this Section 1 of the Complaint are incorporated into each
other Section of the Complaint.
COMPLAINT
Page 2 of 11
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
COUNT 2 DECLARATION OF ILLEGAL ANNEXATION
2.1 That the Property was at the time of annexation used agriculturally.
2.1.1 7-2-4608 MCA states in part: Restrictions on annexation part:
(2) No parcel of land which, at the tune such petition for such proposed
annexation is presented to such council or legislative body, is used in whole or
in part for agricultural, mining, smelting, refining, transportation, or any
industrial or manufacturing purpose or any purpose incident thereto shall be
annexed under the provisions of this part.
2.1.2 That despite the admonition stated in Section 2.2 above, the City of
Kalispell pursuant to Title 7, chapter 2, Part 46 MCA annexed the Property
under Resolution 4679, attached as Exhibit B.
2.1.3 That the City and the Petitioners knew or should have known and in report
KA -01-08 acknowledged the use as agricultural.
2.1.4 The staff report to the Planning Board and to the City Counsel specifically
stated that the "property is being used for agricultural purposes... "
2.1.5 That the annexation as a result thereof is void ab initio .
2.1.6 That 7-2-4609 MCA provides in part:
Applicability of part. (3) When the proceedings for annexation of territory to a
municipality are instituted as provided in this part, the provisions of this part and
no other apply, except where otherwise explicitly indicated.
2.1.7 That this Court should under this section 2.1 of the Complaint declare the
annexation void.
2.2 That the Resolution 4679 does not contain a plan for provision of services and
there exists no agreement between the Petitioners and the City for such a plan.
COMPLAINT
Page 3 of 11
7
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2.2.1 7-2-4610 MCA requires either a plan or an agreement for provision of
services.
2.2.2 That the annexation as a result thereof is void ab initio.
2.2.3 That this Court should under this section 2.2 of the Complaint declare the
annexation void.
2.3 That the City of Kalispell conducted its annexation and zoning in violation of its
own code as more particularly stated in the following paragraphs.
2.3.1 76-2-303 MCA provides in part:
Procedure to administer certain annexations and zoning laws -- hearing and
notice. (1) The city or town council or other legislative body of a municipality
shall provide for the manner in which regulations and restrictions and the
boundaries of districts are determined, established, enforced, and changed,
subject to the requirements of subsection (2).......
(3) (a) For municipal annexations, a municipality may conduct a hearing on
the annexation in conjunction with a hearing on the zoning of the proposed
annexation, provided that the proposed municipal zoning regulations for the
annexed property:...
(b) A joint hearing authorized under this subsection fulfills a municipality's
obligation regarding zoning notice and public hearing for a proposed
annexation
2.3.2 That the city of Kalispell in its regulations provides:
27.30.020: Investigation of Amendment. Upon initiation of an amendment by
the City Councilor the Zoning Commission, or upon petition from a property
owner, the Zoning Commission shall cause to be made such an investigation of
facts bearing on such initiation or petition as will provide necessary information
to assure that the action of each such petition is consistent with the intent and
purpose of this title.....
27.30.030: Hearing for Amendment. The Zoning Commission shall hold public
hearings on the matters referred to in such initiation or petition at which
parties in interest and citiZ.ens shall have an opportunity to be heard At least 15
days notice of time and place of such hearing shall be published in an official
paper or paper of general circulation in the City. All property owners within
150 feet of the site of the proposed Zone change shall be notified via the United
States mail at least 15 days prior to the public hearing. Nunes and addresses of
adjoining property owners will be provided to the Flathead Regional
COMPLAINT
Page 4 of 11
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Development Office by the applicant and will be certified by the County Clerk
and Recorder's Office or an authorized title company. After such hearing or
hearings, the Zoning Commission will make reports and recommendations on
said petition or initiation to the city council.
2.3.3 That "All property owners within 150 feet of the site of the proposed
zone" were not " notified via the United States mail at least 15 days
prior to the public hearing."
2.3.4 That the "Names and addresses of adjoining property owners" were not
"provided to the Flathead Regional Development Office by the applicant" and
were not prior to the meeting " certified by the County Clerk and Recorder's
Office or an authorized title company. "
2.3.5 Because of the violations of its own code which it was required to adopt
under the enabling legislation, the actions of the City of Kalispell in
annexing the Property are void ab initio.
2.3.6 That this Court should under this section 2.3 of the Complaint declare the
annexation void.
COUNT 3 DECLARATION OF ILLEGAL ZONING
3.1 That the City of Kalispell on February 19, 2002 adopted Ordinance number 1411
(A) which zoned the Property R-4, Two Family Residential, a copy is attached as
Exhibit C.
3.1.1 That the Property prior to the illegal and void annexation was zoned Single
Family Residential under Flathead County Zoning.
3.1.2 That because the property had not been legally annexed to the city, the city
was without the power to enact Ordinance 1411 and the zoning is void.
3.1.3 That based upontheforgoing as stated in this section 3.1 of the Complaint,
COMPLAINT
Page 5 of 11
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
the zoning of the property should be declared void ab initio.
3.2 The allegations of the preceding paragraphs of this Compliant are herein
incorporated.
3.2.1 76-2-303 MCA provides in part:
Procedure to administer certain annexations and zoning laws -- hearing and
notice. (1) The city or town council or other legislative body of municipality
shall provide for the manner in which regulations and restrictions and the
boundaries of districts are determined established, enforced, and changed,
subject to the requirements ofsubsection (2).
(2) A regulation, restriction, or boundary may not become effective until after a
public hearing in relation to the regulation, restriction, or boundary at which
parties in interest and citizens have an opportunity to be heard has been held. At
r,.,..., 1 c 4--t - -. -. _ _r., - � - —
t -i i"/= — uouuieipue unnexuuons, a muntcipatity may conduct a hearing on
the annexation in conjunction with a hearing on the zoning of the proposed
annexation, provided that the proposed municipal zoning regulations for the
annexed property:
(I) authorize land uses comparable to the land uses authorized by county
zoning;
(ii) authorize land uses that are consistent with land uses approved by the board
of county commissioners or the board of adjustment pursuant to part 1 or 2 of
this chapter; or
(iii) are consistent with zoning requirements recommended in the growth policy
adopted pursuant to chapter 1 of this title for the annexed property.
(b) A joint hearing authorized under this subsection fulfills a municipality's
obligation regarding zoning notice and public hearing for a proposed
annexation..
3.2.2 That the public hearing before the Kalispell City Planning Board and
Zoning Commission was held jointly on the annexation and zoning.
3.2.3 That "All property owners within 150 feet of the site of the proposed
zone" were not " notified via the United States mail at least 15 days
prior to the public hearing."
3.2.4 That the "Names and addresses of adjoining property owners" were not
"provided to the Flathead Regional Development Office by the
COMPLAINT Page 6 of l l
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
applicant" and were not prior to the meeting " certified by the County
Clerk and Recorder's Office or an authorized title company. "
3.2.5 Because of the violations of its own code which it was required to adopt
under the enabling legislation as alleged in this Section 3.2 of the
Complaint, the actions of the City of Kalispell in zoning the Property are
void ab initio.
3.3 76-2-303 MCA provides in part:
(3) (a) For municipal annexations, a municipality may conduct a hearing on
the annexation in conjunction with a hearing on the zoning of the proposed
annexation, provided that the proposed municipal zoning regulations for the
annexed property:
(i) authorize land uses comparable to the land uses authorized by county
zoning;
(ii) authorize land uses that are consistent with land uses approved by the board
of county commissioners or the board of adjusimentpursuant to part I or 2 of
this chapter; or
NO are consistent with zoning requirements recommended in the growth policy
adopted pursuant to chapter 1 of this title for the annexed property.
3.3.1 That the R-4 of the City is not a comparable land use zoning to the
County's R-1. And in fact in the staff report KA -01-8, on page 1 the staff
points out the significant differences in the prior zoning and the R-4
designation.
3.3.2 That the R-4 uses could not be created under 76-2-303(3)(a)(ii) in that the
R-4 zoning is not "consistent with land uses approved by the board of
eounty commissioners or the board of adjustment pursuant to"Title 76,
Chapter 2, Parts 1 or 2.
3.3.3 That the city of Kalispell is without a "growth plan".
3.3.4 Because of the violations of its own code and the enabling legislation as
COMPLAINT
Page 7 of 11
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
alleged in this Section 3.3 of the Complaint, the actions of the City of
Kalispell in zoning the Property are void ab initio and the Court should so
rule.
3.4 The zoning as adopted constitutes "spot zoning".
3.4.1 That the prevailing use of the land in the area surrounding the Property is
single family and significantly lower densities and that the R-4 zoning is
different from the prevailing use in the area.
3.4.2 That the Property is only 10 acres and is under a single ownership.
3.4.3 The R-4 zoning on the Property is more in the nature of special legislation
designed to benefit one landowner at the expense of the surrounding
landowners and/or the general public.
3.4.4 That the R-4 zoning is not in accord with any valid existing land use plan.
3.4.5 That because of the forgoing, the zoning constitutes spot zoning and must
be declared invalid.
COUNT 4 DECLARATION OF IMPROPER APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISION
4.1 That on October 7, 2002, the City of Kalispell gave final Plat approval to a
subdivision located on the Property, by adopting Resolution 4742. Said adoption
was based upon fraudulent information and contrary to evidence and contrary to
City and State law.
4.1.1 That specifically the lot sizes for proposed lots are smaller than allowed
by the zoning. (See lots 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15.)
4.1.2 That adequate provision has not been made for the traffic impact.
4.1.3 That the park land dedication, was based upon the finding that the
COMPLAINT
calculation of the amount due as cash in lieu, was done in disregard of the
unimproved value of the land as annexed to the city and is inadequate.
Page 8 of 11
1
4.1.4 That the staff report misstated the density of the surrounding uses.
4.1.5 That the staff misrepresented the road services.
3
4.1.6 That the City illegally based its decision on the density purportedly
4
prescribed in the Master Plan which was of no force or effect at the time of
5
the adoption of the preliminary plat.
6
7
4.1.7 That as a result thereof, the actions of the City Counsel were arbitrary,
8
capricious and without factual basis.
9
4.2 That on October 7, 2002, the City of Kalispell gave final Plat approval to a
10
subdivision located on the Property, by adopting Resolution 4742. Said adoption
11
was illegal in that the Property was not legally annexed to the City of Kalispell.
12
4.2.1 Based upon the allegation of th s Section 4.2 of the Complaint, the Court
13
must declare the subdivision approval null and void.
14
COUNT 5 DECLARATION T14AT ORDINANCE 1438 IS ILLEGAL AND VOID
15
16
5.1 76-2-306 MCA provides in part: Interim zoning ordinances. (1) The city, or town
council or other legislative body of such municipality, to protect the public safely,
health, and welfare and withoutfollowing the
17
procedures otherwise required
preliminary to the adoption of a zoning ordinance, may adopt as an ur ency
18
measure an interim ordinance orohibitinp any uses which may be in conflict with
a contemplated zoning proposal which the legislative body is considering or
studying or intends to study within a reasonable time.
19
5.2 That Ordinance 1438 was to have been adopted pursuant to the previously stated
20
statute on November 4, 2002.
21
5.3 That said Ordinance exceeds the jurisdiction granted to adopt as an urgency
22
23
measure an interim ordinance prohibiting any uses which may be in conflict.
24
5.4 The Ordinance having been adopted in a manner exceeding the powers of the city
25
is void.
26
5.5 That the articulated reasons for the adoption of the Ordinance do not constitute
27
justification for the adoption of an urgency measure.
W
COMPLAINT Page 9 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5.6 That the Ordinance is void, voidable and invalid.
COUNT 6 THIS ACTION HAS BEEN BROUGHT BECAUSE THE CITY OF
KALISPELL HAS FAILED TO ENFORCE INTERESTS SIGNIFICANT
TO ITS CITIZENS.
6.1 The Plaintiffs have retained attorney Richard DeJana to prosecute this matter and
protect those significant interests at $150.00 and hour plus costs and
disbursements.
6.2 That the same are reasonable fees for such action.
Wherefore the Plaintiffs pray:
1. That the annexation of the Property be declared void or void ab initio;
2. That the zoning of the Property be declared void or void ab initio;
3. That the preliminary plat approval for of the Property be declared void or void ab
initio;
4. That the Ordinance 1438 be declared invalid and void; and
5. Their costs, disbursements and attorney fees as incurred herein.
Dated this November 6, 2002.
Richard DeJana & Associates PLLC
by �'liGvTL �' s.�.
4Richard eJana
COMPLAINT
Page 10 of 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
i8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
COMPLAINT
2002043 ( �OqDL)
—EXHIBIT A
A TRACT OF LAND, SITUATED, LYING, AND BEING IN THE NORTHEAST
QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 28 NORTH,
RANGE 21 WEST, P.M, M., FLATHEAD COUNTY, MONTANA, AND MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS TO WIT;
REGINNING at the northwest corner of the Northeast Quarter of the F)
Northwest Quarter of Section 19, Township 26 North, Range 21 West,
P.M. M., Flathead County, Montana, which is on the southerly R/W of
a 60 foot county road known as Sunnvs�de Drive; thence along said
R/W N88°11118"E 595.46 feet; thence leaving said R/W S03°35100"E
118.43 feet; thence S88°11118"W 263.40 feet; thence S00oaq�2011E
198.70 feet; thence S77°44'26"W 4.09 feet, thence S00°09'20"E
983.16 feet to the south boundary of said NEI/4 N111/4; thence along
said south houndary SB8°25'20"W 335.10 feet to the southwest corner
thereof; thence N00°09'20°W and along the west boundary of said
NEI/4 NW1/4 1299,66 feet to the point of begirming and containinq
10.736 acres, all as shorn as Tract 1 of Certificate of Survey Me
12924, records of Flathead County, Montana.
STATE OF MONTANA,
County of FlaNead 55
RecordM at the reges[��01
this. day of �2e ��- o clock eM recordW in
Ne recur s of Flathead CPodunty, Sute a Monlauu. 'aT/
Fee Ems= CJUY/ rry..zt.�
,2002043[(rU IPIeAeae c�n,y elertW RavrJ[r�1
RECEPTION N0. l / I
Page 11 of 11
2002043 f (p4C(j
RESOLUTION NO. 4679
_ A RESOLUTION TO PROVIDE FOR THE ALTERATION OF THE BOUNDARIES OF THE
CITY OF KALISPELL BY INCLUDING THEREIN AS AN ANNEXATION CERTAIN
REAL PROPERTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A", TO BE
KNOWN AS OWENS ADDITION NO. 310; TO ZONE SAID PROPERTY IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE KALISPELL ZONING ORDINANCE, AND TO DECLARE AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Kalispell has received a petition from Gaylon
Owens/Owl Corporation, the owner of property located west
of Lone Pine View Estates, south of Sunnyside Drive and
east of the Burlington Northern right-of-way and further
described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and thereby made
a part hereof, requesting that the City of Kalispell
annex the territory into the City, and
WHEREAS, the Tri -City Planning Office has made a report on Gaylon
Owens' Annexation Request, ##KA -01-8, dated January 8,
2002, and
WHEREAS, the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission
recommended that the territory be annexed into the City
of Kalispell, and
WHEREAS, said territory is included within and conforms to the
Kalispell City -County Master Plan, and
WHEREAS, the City of Kalispell desires to annex said property in
accordance with Title 7, Chapter 2, Part 46, Montana Code
Annotated.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT.RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF KALISPELL AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. That all the real property as described in
Exhibit A, be annexed to the City of Kalispell and the
boundary of the City is altered to so provide, and shall
be known as Owens Addition No. 310.
SECTION II. Upon the effective date of this Resolution,
the City Clerk is directed to make and certify under the
seal of the City, a copy of the record .of these
proceedings as are entered on the minutes of the City
Council and file said documents with the Flathead County
Clerk and Recorder.
�X 1,i -t%4_ 6
e
2002043 (pqccx-_)
From and after the date of filing of said documents as
prepared by the City Clerk, or on the effective date
hereof, whichever shall occur later, said annexed
territory is part of -the City of Kalispell and its
citizens and property shall be subject to all debts, laws
and ordinances and regulations in force in the City of
Kalispell and shall be entitled to the same privileges
and benefits as are other parts of the City.
SECTION III. The territory annexed by this Resolution
shall be zoned in accordance with the Kalispell Zoning
ordinance.
SECTION IV. This Resolution shall be effective
immediately upon passage by the City Council.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND SIGNED BY THE MAYOR OF
THE CITY OF KALISPELL THIS 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2002.
Pamela B. Kee y
Mayor
ATTEST:
Theresa White
City Clerk
Cyyct I(c [IE JceAiiiata is
I L:.'�y cs� !y th=i Yie In^!n;msst t0 whirl! thio
aHn:ad a atn:o, aroc; U:py c' ti�a uigina.l en fiia in
t1!3 G:I `.9 CI the Clak 01';)o G' l�'f UY IG.'titS;T?ii.
wt;1san,y`r,dsr;d ass,Jci"'JC:!y,a8.1
D0�
County, Mon"''
by.—=c r� Cktk
2002043 f (0qC0
EXHIBIT A
A TRACT OF LAND, SITUATED, LYING, AND BEING IN THE NORTHEAST
QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 28 NORTH,
RANGE 21 WEST, P.M.M., FLATHEAD COUNTY, MONTANA, AND MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS TO WIT:
BEGINNING at the northwest corner of the Northeast Quarter of the
Northwest Quarter of Section 19, Township 28 North, Range 21 West,
P.M.,M., Flathead County, Montana, which is on the southerly R/W of
a 60 foot county road known as Sunnyside Drive; thence along said
R/W N88°11'18"E 595.46 feet; thence leaving said R/W S0303510011E
118.43 feet; thence S88°11'18"W 263.40 feet; thence S0000912011E
198.70 feet; thence S7704412611W 4.09 feet, thence S0000912011E
983.16 feet to the south boundary of said NEI/4 NW1/4; thence along
said south boundary S88025 12011W 335.10 feet to the southwest corner
thereof; thence N0000912011W and along the west boundary of said
NEI/4 NW1/4 1299.66 feet to the point of beginning and containing
10.736 acres, all as shown as Tract 1 of Certificate of Survey No.
12924, records of Flathead County, Montana.
STATE OF MONTANA, I
ss
County of Flathead
Recorded at the request
this Jsa, day of _
20�at
the recor s of Flathead County, State of Montana.
Fee $ --.� Pd,
RECEPTION NO. 200204311 ri j
County
o'clock and recorded in
0
ORDINANCE NO. 1411(A)
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION 27.02.010, OFFICIAL ZONING MAP, CITY
OF KALISPELL ZONING ORDINANCE, (ORDINANCE NO. 1175), BY ZONING
CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS ASSESSOR'S TRACT 8 LOCATED IN
SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 28 NORTH, RANGE 21 WEST, P.M.M., FLATHEAD
COUNTY, MONTANA (PREVIOUSLY ZONED COUNTY R-1, SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL)
TO CITY R-4 (TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL), IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY -
COUNTY MASTER PLAN, AND TO PROVIDE AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Gaylon Owens/Owl Corporation, the owner of property
described above, petitioned the City of Kalispell that
the zoning classification attached to the above described
tract of land be changed to R-4, Two Family Residential,
and
WHEREAS, the property as described exists as property surrounded
to the North by single family homes, County R-1
classification, to the East by single family homes, City
R-4 and County -R-1 classification, to the South by
undeveloped Stratford Subdivision, City R-4
classification, and to the West by low density
residential, and agricultural, County R-1 classification,
and
WHEREAS, the petition of Gaylon Owens was the subject of a report
compiled by the Tri -City Planning Office, #KA -01-8, dated
January 8, 2002, in which the Tri -City Planning Office
evaluated the petition and recommended that the property
as described above be zoned R-4, Two Family Residential
as requested by the petition, and
WHEREAS, the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission
adopted the TCPO report and recommended the property as
described be zoned R-4, Two Family Residential, and
WHEREAS, after considering all the evidence submitted on the
proposal to zone the property as described R-4, Two
Family Residential, the City Council adopts, based upon
the criterion set forth in Section 76-3-608, M.C.A., and
State. Etc. v. Board of County Commissioners Etc 590
Ptd 602, the findings Of fact of TCPO as set forth in
Report No. KA -01-8.
a �
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
KALISPELL AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. Section 27.02.010, of the Official Zoning Map
of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, (Ordinance No. 1175)
is hereby amended by designating the property described
as Assessor's Tract 8 located in Section 19 as R-4, Two
Family Residential.
SECTION II, The balance of Section 27.02.010, Official
Zoning Map, City of Kalispell Zoning Ordinance not
amended hereby shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION III, This Ordinance shall be effective thirty
(30) days from and after the date of its final passage
and approval by the Mayor.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL
AND SIGNED BY THE MAYOR THIS 19TH FEBRUARY, 2002.
ATTEST:
Theresa White
City Clerk
Mayor
h�