E5. Ord. 1883, R-4 Intent Second ReadingCITY OF
KALISPELL
Development Services Department
201 ls' Avenue East
Kalispell, MT 59901
Phone: (406) 758-7940
Fax: (406) 758-7739
www.kalispell.com/planning
REPORT TO: Doug Russell, City Manager
FROM: PJ Sorensen, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: Ordinance 1883 — R-4 Intent Zoning Text Amendment Second Reading
MEETING DATE: June 20, 2022
BACKGROUND: The City of Kalispell Growth Policy Plan -It 2035 land use map includes a
designation for Suburban Residential, which includes areas that are seeing annexation and
development for residential housing. The zoning ordinance, in each chapter relating to zoning
districts, includes a section on the intent of the zone along with the growth policy designations where
that zoning district would typically be found. Suburban Residential is included in the intent of the R-
1, R-2, and R-3 residential zones. Those zones are predominantly single-family zones with
limitations on townhomes. With greater demands for density with new housing projects given
current market conditions for construction and housing, there has been a greater need for higher
density projects, many of which have included townhomes, that have been reflected in Planned Unit
Development ("PUD") overlays on R-3 zones. Those PUDs effectively create R-4 zones for most
purposes. Therefore, staff presented a proposed zoning text amendment which would allow the R-4
zoning district to be implemented in the Suburban Residential growth policy areas.
Section 27.07.010 would be amended to read: "This district is comprised of primarily single-family
and duplex dwellings. Development within the district will require all public utilities, and all
community facilities. This zoning district would typically be found in areas designated as suburban
residential and urban residential on the Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map."
The Kalispell City Council, at their meeting on June 6, 2022, approved the first reading of Ordinance
1883 relating to the zoning text amendment unanimously.
RECOMMENDATION:
TEXT AMENDMENT: It is recommended that the Kalispell City Council approve the second
reading of Ordinance 1883, an ordinance to amend Section 27.07.010 of the City of Kalispell Zoning
Ordinance 1677, by including suburban residential as supporting R-4 (Residential) zoning districts.
FISCAL EFFECTS: There are no anticipated fiscal impacts at this time.
ALTERNATIVES: Deny the request.
ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance 1883
May 10, 2022, Kalispell Planning Board Minutes
Staff Report
Aimee Brunckhorst, Kalispell City Clerk
ORDINANCE NO. 1883
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE KALISPELL ZONING ORDINANCE (ORDINANCE
NO. 1677), BY INCLUDING SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL AS SUPPORTING R-4
(RESIDENTIAL) ZONING DISTRICTS AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Kalispell has submitted a written request to amend the Kalispell Zoning
Ordinance, by including Suburban Residential as supporting R-4 (Residential) zoning
districts; and
WHEREAS, the request was forwarded to the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning
Commission by the Kalispell Planning Department as a recommended text
amendment by including Suburban Residential as supporting R-4 (Residential)
zoning districts after making such evaluation under 27.29.020 of the Kalispell
Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission recommended that the
text of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance be amended by including Suburban
Residential as supporting R-4 (Residential) zoning districts; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the KPD Report and the transmittal from the Kalispell
City Planning Board and Zoning Commission and hereby adopts the findings made
in Report #KZTA-22-01 by including Suburban Residential as supporting R-4
(Residential) zoning districts.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
KALISPELL AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City of Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Ordinance No. 1677, is
hereby amended as follows on Exhibit "A".
SECTION 2. All parts and portions of Ordinance No. 1677 not amended hereby
remain unchanged.
SECTION 3. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its final passage.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND SIGNED BY THE MAYOR OF
THE CITY OF KALISPELL THIS 20TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022.
ATTEST:
Aimee Brunckhorst, CMC
City Clerk
Mark Johnson
Mayor
EXHIBIT A
Section 27.07.010 would be amended as follows:
"This district is comprised of primarily single-family and duplex dwellings. Development within the
district will require all public utilities, and all community facilities. This zoning district would
typically be found in areas designated as suburban residential and urban residential on the
Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map."
KALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD & ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING
MAY 10, 2022
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL
The regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning
CALL
Commission was called to order at 6:00 p.m. Board members present
were Chad Graham, Doug Kauffman, Rory Young, Joshua Borgardt,
Kurt Vomfell, Pip Burke, and Kevin Aurich. PJ Sorensen and Jarod
Nygren represented the Kalispell Planning Department. Keith Haskins
represented the Public Works Department.
ELECTION OF OFFICERS
Graham asked if there were any nominations for President. Kauffman
(PRESIDENT)
nominated Graham and Vomfell seconded the nomination.
ROLL CALL
The motion passed unanimously on a vote of acclamation.
ELECTION OF OFFICERS
Graham asked if there were any nominations for Vice -President.
(VICE-PRESIDENT)
Vomfell nominated Kauffman and Young seconded the nomination.
ROLL CALL
The motion passed unanimously on a vote of acclamation.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Vomfell moved and Kauffman seconded a motion to approve the
minutes of the April 12, 2022, meeting of the Kalispell City Planning
Board and Zoning Commission.
VOTE BY ACCLAMATION
The motion passed unanimously on a vote of acclamation.
HEAR THE PUBLIC
None.
MORNING STAR COMMUNITY —
The planning board will receive public comments regarding the
MEPA REQUIRED PUBLIC
environmental review record for the proposed sewer and water project
COMMENTS
that will provide city service to the Morning Star Court Community, as
required by the Montana Environmental Policy Act (MEPA). Morning
Star Court is a cooperatively owned affordable -housing mobile home
community, consisting of 41 residential units, located at 1717 South
Woodland Drive, Kalispell, MT. The community is proposing to
abandon their aged onsite water and wastewater infrastructure and
connect to adjacent City of Kalispell services. At the public hearing the
proposed project will be explained, including the purpose and proposed
area of the project, activities, budget, possible sources of funding,
environmental review findings and any costs that may result for local
citizens as a result of the project. All interested persons will be given
the opportunity to ask questions and express opinions regarding the
proposed project and any environmental impacts. Comments may be
given verbally at the meeting or submitted in writing prior to May 10,
2022, at 5 p.m. Anyone wanting to review the environmental review
record and project impacts or submit questions and comments should
contact Jonathan Gass at WGM Group, (406) 728-4611. Copies of the
draft environmental record is available at Kalispell City Hall
Development Services Department, 201 1st Avenue East, Kalispell, MT
59901 and will also be available at the public meeting.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Jon Gass w/ WGM Group, representative for Morning Star Community,
resented a brief power point for the board and public about the project
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of May 10, 2022
Page I 1
and the grants they are applying for.
KA-22-04 — MORNING STAR
A request from Morning Star Community, Inc. for annexation and initial
COMMUNITY ANNEXATION
zoning of R-4 (Residential) for property located at 1717 South
Woodland Drive containing 5.88 acres. The proposal would annex an
existing mobile home park to allow for the units to connect to city
sanitary sewer, which is located within the South Woodland Drive right-
of-way. The property to be annexed and zoned can be described as Lots
23, 24, and the North Half of Lot 9 of Block 1 of Greenacres, according
to the map or plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Clerk
and Recorder of Flathead County, Montana.
STAFF REPORT
PJ Sorensen representing the Kalispell Planning Department reviewed
Staff Report #KA-22-04.
Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning
Commission adopt Staff Report #KA-22-04 as findings of fact and
recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the property be annexed and
the zoning for the property be city R-4 (Residential).
BOARD DISCUSSION
Young asked about the road connections to the property on the south.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
MOTION
Vomfell moved and Borgardt seconded a motion that the Kalispell City
Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KA-22-04
as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the
property be annexed and the zoning for the property be city R-4
(Residential).
BOARD DISCUSSION
None.
ROLL CALL
Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
KA-22-02 & KPUD-22-01 - FARM
Files #KA-22-02 and KPUD-22-01 — A request from Kelcey and
DISTRICT
Tawnya Bingham for annexation and initial zoning with a Commercial
Planned Unit Development overlay on approximately 37.6 acres of land.
The development, called the Farm District, would be a mixed -use
development with a focus on an indoor youth athletic and arts facility
along with commercial and residential uses. The property is located at
the northwest corner of Highway 93 North and Church Drive and can be
described as a tract of land situated, lying and being in the east half of
the southeast quarter of Section 12, Township 29 North, Range 22 West,
P.M.M, Flathead County, Montana, and more particularly described as
follows to wit: Lot 2 of Patterson Tracts, as shown on Certificate of
Survey No. 17246 (both records of Flathead County, Montana) and
containing 37.635 acres, subject to and together with a 60 foot county
road known as Church Drive, subject to and together with all
appurtenant easements of record.
STAFF REPORT
PJ Sorensen representing the Kalispell Planning Department reviewed
Staff Report # KA-22-02 and KPUD-22-01.
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of May 10, 2022
Page 12
Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning
Commission adopt Staff Report #KA-22-02 as findings of fact and
recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the property be annexed
and the zoning for the property be B-2 (General Business), with a PUD
overlay.
Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning
Commission adopt Staff Report #KPUD-22-01 as findings of fact and
recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the Farm District PUD be
approved subject to the conditions listed in the staff report.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Discussion regarding pulling building permits prior to final plat,
condition 918 access off Church Dr, the geotechnical report requirement
in condition 922 and site plans.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Eric Mulcahy — Land Use Planner, Sands Surveying, 2 Village Loop —
representative for the applicant. Let the board know they are pleased
with the conditions in the staff report.
MOTION — KA-22-02
Kauffman moved and Vomfell seconded a motion that the Kalispell City
Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report # KA-22-02
as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the
property be annexed and the zoning for the property be B-2 (General
Business), with a PUD overlay.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Vomfell likes the project and feels it's very innovative. Graham noted he
likes this visionary project and likes to see something coming though for
youth.
ROLL CALL
Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
MOTION — KPUD-22-01
Kauffman moved and Vomfell seconded a motion that the Kalispell City
Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KPUD-22-
01 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that
the Farm District PUD be approved subject to the conditions listed in the
staff report.
BOARD DISCUSSION
None.
ROLL CALL
Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
KPUD-22-02 — NOLLER TRUCK &
A request from JCA Management, LLC, for a Commercial Planned Unit
RV
Development ("PUD") overlay on approximately 9.72 acres of land.
The property is currently zoned B-2 with a placeholder PUD overlay,
which requires a full PUD submittal prior to development. The proposal
includes locating a truck and RV Center on the property. The property is
located at 3178 Highway 93 South near the intersection of Highway 93
and the Bypass. It can be described as Assessor's Tract 3C, a tract of
land situated, lying and being in the southeast quarter of the southeast
quarter of Section 29, Township 28 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M.,
Flathead County, Montana, shown as Tract 1 of Certificate of Survey
21952 in the office of the Clerk and Recorder, Flathead County,
Montana.
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of May 10, 2022
Page13
STAFF REPORT
PJ Sorensen representing the Kalispell Planning Department reviewed
Staff Reports #KPUD-22-02.
Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning
Commission adopt Staff Report #KPUD-22-02 as findings of fact and
recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the PUD for Noller Truck
and RV Center be approved subject to the conditions listed in the staff
report.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Discussion regarding the required developer's agreement in condition
92, sewer main extension requirements in condition 912 and the entrance
on Hwy 93 and how it will be affected by the new development and
MDT's involvement.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Lonnie Martin — Project Manager, CFS Engineers, Topeka, KS —
representative for applicant — offered to answer any questions the board
may have.
Andy Matthews — 1000 Basecamp Dr — owner of Montana Basecamp
RV Park — concerned with how this development will affect his RV
Park.
MOTION
Vomfell moved and Kauffman seconded a motion that the Kalispell City
Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KPUD-22-
02 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that
the PUD for Noller Truck and RV Center be approved subject to the
conditions listed in the staff report.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Discussion regarding the land use and zoning in the area.
ROLL CALL
Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
BOARD MEMBER SEATED
Young recused himself from the Eagle Valley Ranch Addition
KA-22-03, KGPA-22-01 & KZC-22-
A request from Spartan Holdings for a zone change, growth policy map
03 — EAGLE VALLEY RANCH
amendment and annexation and initial zoning of property, to be known
ADDITION
as Eagle Valley Ranch Addition on 6.8 acres of land at 3201 U.S. 93
North. The developer of Eagle Valley Ranch PUD has acquired land
adjacent their development (Home Outfitters) and neighboring property
currently within the County that is being requested to be included in the
Eagle Valley Ranch PUD. The application includes a zone change of the
existing Home Outfitters building which is City R-2 to the Eagle Valley
Rand PUD, and annexation and initial zoning of surrounding County
property from County SAG-10 to the Eagle Valley Ranch PUD. The
request would also include a growth policy map amendment from
suburban residential to urban mixed use on those properties annexing
into the city, allowing for neighborhood commercial uses, similar to the
commercial properties within the current Eagle Valley Ranch PUD. The
goal of the change is similar to that of the original PUD which is to
provide a diverse neighborhood close to existing services and
commercial development on the north side of Kalispell and allows for
inclusion of properties that are currently segregated from the
development. The proposed development is generally situated along
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of May 10, 2022
Page 14
Highway 93 south of Ponderosa Residential Subdivision, east of
Northern Pines Golf Course and north of the Montana National Guard
facilities in the West '/2 of Section 19, Township 29 North, Range 21
West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. A more particular legal
description can be obtained at the Kalispell Planning office.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Discussion regarding the development of the property where the existing
building sits and what requirements there might be if the building were
to be torn down and the signal light that will be installed by MDT at
Rose Crossing.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
MOTION — KGPA-22-01
Kauffman moved and Vomfell seconded a motion that the Kalispell City
Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KGPA-22-
01 and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the Kalispell
Growth Policy Future Land Use Map be amended from Suburban
Residential to Urban Mixed Use.
BOARD DISCUSSION
None.
ROLL CALL
Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
MOTION — KA-22-03
Kauffman moved and Vomfell seconded a motion that the Kalispell City
Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KA-22-03
as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the
property be annexed and the zoning for the property be City RA-2
(Residential Apartment) with the Eagle Valley Ranch PUD zoning overlay
and conditions herein.
BOARD DISCUSSION
None.
ROLL CALL
Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
MOTION — KZC-22-03
Kauffman moved and Vomfell seconded a motion that the Kalispell City
Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report #KZC-22-03
as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the
property be rezoned from City R-2 to City RA-2 with the Eagle Valley
Ranch PUD zoning overlay and conditions herein.
BOARD DISCUSSION
None.
ROLL CALL
Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
BOARD MEMBER RESEATED
Young re -seated.
KZTA-22-01— R-4 INTENT
A request from the City of Kalispell for a zoning text amendment
amending Section 27.07.010 of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. The
amendment would change the intent of the R-4 (Residential) zoning
district to include areas designated as suburban residential in addition to
urban residential on the Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map.
STAFF REPORT
PJ Sorensen representing the Kalispell Planning Department reviewed
Staff Report #KZTA-22-01.
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of May 10, 2022
Page 15
Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning
Commission adopt Staff Report #KZTA-22-01 and recommend to the
Kalispell City Council that the proposed amendment be adopted as
provided herein.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Discussion regarding how this will affect future land growth, the
difference between R-3 and R-4, and allowable density with this change.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
MOTION
Vomfell moved and Young seconded a motion that the Kalispell City
Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt Staff Report # KZTA-22-
01 and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the proposed
amendment be adopted as provided herein.
BOARD DISCUSSION
None.
ROLL CALL
Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
OLD BUSINESS
Nygren updated the board on the recent city council meeting.
NEW BUSINESS
Nygren updated the board on the June planning board meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at approximately 7:41pm.
Chad Graham
President
APPROVED as submitted/amended:
Kari Barnhart
Recording Secretary
Kalispell City Planning Board
Minutes of the meeting of May 10, 2022
Page 16
R-4 (RESIDENTIAL) ZONING DISTRICT INTENT
ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT
STAFF REPORT #KZTA-22-01
KALISPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT
MAY 4, 2022
This is a report to the Kalispell City Planning Board and the Kalispell City Council regarding a
request for a text amendment to the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance to amend Section 27.07.010
relating to the intent of the R-4 (Residential) zone. A public hearing has been scheduled before
the Planning Board for May 10, 2022, beginning at 6:00 PM in the Kalispell City Council
Chambers. The Planning Board will forward a recommendation to the Kalispell City Council
for final action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The City of Kalispell Growth Policy Plan -It 2035 land use map includes a designation for
Suburban Residential, which includes areas that are seeing annexation and development for
residential housing. The zoning ordinance, in each chapter relating to zoning districts, includes a
section on the intent of the zone along with the growth policy designations where that zoning
district would typically be found. Suburban Residential is included in the intent of the R-1, R-2,
and R-3 residential zones. Those zones are predominantly single-family zones with limitations
on townhomes. With greater demands for density with new housing projects given current
market conditions for construction and housing, there has been a greater need for higher density
projects, many of which have included townhomes, that have been reflected in Planned Unit
Development ("PUD") overlays on R-3 zones. Those PUDs effectively create R-4 zones for
most purposes.
A: Applicant: City of Kalispell
201 First Avenue East
Kalispell, MT 59901
B. Area Effected by the Proposed Changes: Any R-4 zoned property within the
jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Kalispell will be affected by the proposed changes
as well as areas designated as Suburban Residential in the City of Kalispell Growth Policy
Plan -It 2035.
C. Proposed Amendment: Section 27.07.010 would be amended to read: "This district is
comprised of primarily single-family and duplex dwellings. Development within the
district will require all public utilities, and all community facilities. This zoning district
would typically be found in areas designated as suburban residential and urban residential
on the Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map."
Page 1 of 4
D. Staff Discussion:
As shown in the above map in the light yellow, the suburban residential land use designation is
used throughout a significant portion of areas currently outside the city limits, but within both the
annexation boundary and the growth policy area. The Sections 27.04.010, 27.05.010, and
27.06.010 tie the R-1. R-2, and R-3 zones to that land use designation. Those zones are
primarily single-family zones. There is very little R-1 zoning in the city, which are half -acre
minimum lot sizes and allows agricultural use. The R-2 and R-3 allow for 10,000 square foot
and 6000 square foot minimum lot sizes respectively, and both allow for townhomes with a
conditional use permit.
The R-4 is very similar to the R-3, with all the same lot size and development standards. It was
intentionally put together so that the only real difference would be allowing duplexes and two -
unit townhome configurations as a permitted use. That difference in use then allows two units
on a standard 6000 square foot lot. It is important to note that is different than overall density,
which would need to take streets, parks, and open space into account and is a separate
discussion.
Since overall density in the different land use designations is outlined in the growth policy, the
past number of years have seen development patterns which have included R-3 zoning with
PUDs which have allowed for shifts of density within the boundaries of a project that remain
within the overall allowable density. For example, there are projects that have utilized
townhome designs at 3000 square feet per unit, but have maintained parks and open space that
keep the overall density within the growth policy limits. That type of development is specifically
Page 2 of 4
provided for in the PUD chapter of the zoning ordinance. The end result is essentially creating
an R-4 development that is subject to a PUD level review.
As it has become common to approve these projects more or less subject to existing design
criteria and conditions that would otherwise attach as part of a subdivision or other review, the
extra time and expense of a heightened review process does not seem to add a significant benefit
to the city, the developer or the public that outweighs the added cost. Staff believes that, by
allowing the R-4 zone in suburban residential growth policy areas and relying on city codes,
regulations, policies and design criteria, the same result can be accomplished through a more
streamlined process. It is also important to note that any property within the suburban residential
designation would not automatically be entitled to an R-4 zone, but would need to go through a
public hearing process to analyze the most appropriate zoning designation as well as review any
specific subdivision or other proposal under the applicable standards.
EVALUATION BASED ON STATUTORY CRITERIA
The statutory basis for reviewing a change in zoning is set forth by 76-2-303, M.C.A. Findings
of Fact for the zone change request are discussed relative to the itemized criteria described by
76-2-304, M.C.A.
1. Is the zoning regulation made in accordance with the r�policy?
The proposal is consistent with the growth policy in several respects. First, Chapter 3,
Community Growth and Design, Recommendation 3 of the Growth Policy, states that the
City should "continually monitor, update, and streamline development codes to keep
abreast of changing trends and technologies, to better coordinate the development review
process, and to avoid unnecessary, costly delays in processing applications." This
proposal, as discussed above, is an effort to do precisely that.
Chapter 4A, Land Use — Housing, Goal 1 of the Growth Policy also recognizes the need
to "provide an adequate supply and mix of housing that meets the needs of present and
future residents in terms of cost, type, design, and location."
Furthermore, Chapter 4A, Land Use — Housing, Policy 10 of the Growth Policy, in
defining low density suburban residential neighborhoods, includes single-family homes
on 5000 square foot lots, zero lot line/patio homes, and townhomes as types of housing
that are appropriate in the suburban residential designation. The R-4 zoning district fits
within that character of development.
2. Does the zoning regulation consider the effect on motorized and nonmotorized
transportation systems?
The proposed amendment would not have a direct effect on the transportation systems
themselves, although the potential higher densities could have an effect. Under city
codes, individual projects would be reviewed for their impact on those systems, typically
with a traffic impact study that would provide recommended mitigation.
Page 3 of 4
3. Is the zoning regulation designed to secure safety from fire and other dangers?
Any development will continue to be required to meet building, fire, and health codes.
4. Is the zoning regulation designed to promote public health, public safety, and the general
welfare?
The general health, safety, and welfare of the public will be protected by city regulations
which would apply to the development of any of the properties affected.
5. Does the zoning regulation consider the reasonable provision of adequate light and air?
The development standards within the zoning ordinance help provide for appropriate
interaction between developed properties, including light and air.
6. Is the zoning regulation designed to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation,
water; sewerage,, schools, parks, and other public requirements?
The zoning ordinance creates a more predictable, orderly, and consistent development
pattern. That pattern allows for a more efficient allocation of public resources and better
provision of public services.
7. Does the zoning regulation consider the character of the district and its peculiar
suitability for particular uses?
The amendment reflects the residential character of the districts affected and maintains
the general residential nature of the suburban residential growth policy areas.
8. Does the zoning regulation consider conserving the value of buildings?
Building values are conserved by providing reasonable standards within zoning districts
and through development standards under city regulations including building and fire
codes.
9. Does the zoning regulation encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the
municipality and promote compatible urbangrowth?
The amendment helps create consistency throughout comparable zones, which promotes
compatible urban growth.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board adopt the findings in staff report
KZTA-22-01 and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the proposed amendment be
adopted as provided herein.
Page 4 of 4