12-11-84 Master Plan HearingKALISPELL CITY —COUNTY MASTER PLAN
COMMENTS RECORDED DURING PUBLIC HEARING
DECEMBER 11, 1984
1. Kal—Mont Lumber Company entered into the record a written comment, sub—
mitted by Charles H. O'Neil on behalf of the shareholders. They aske
that the area owned by this company in the Park Dale and Whitefish
R3•ver•are-a••be. c-ons•idered as indus.tr.ial use,for the proposed Ma.ster
Plan. Even though this site has not been completely operational for
the last two years there is industrial activity taking place there and
the most suitable use for the area is industrial. Mr. Warner. and Wes
Stanley, who live in the area, both commented in favor of the Kal—Mont
suggestion. It has been proposed to be suburban residential.
2. Al.Rierson, owns property about four blocks outside the city limits,
stated that he felt a plan for areas in the County is the respons.ibil—
ity of the County Commissioners and not the City. He was concerned
that the Plan would have some effect on people's property taxes. He
further stated that he believed that the community needs a plan, a
good plan.
3. Jim Treweek, owner of property on the north side of West Reserve Drive
and adjacent to Whitefish Stage Road, felt that if the area around him
went more residential that would put pressure upon his farming opera—
tion. He further stated that he felt that. a good plan was a very
necessary tool for a community to work with. He felt that when a plan
is finally set up, it should not be in concrete so that it cannot be
changed or amended.
4. Andy Anderson, owner of property south of Kalispell adjacent to High—
way 93, stated that he wanted the area south of Kalispell left with
the agricultural designation.
5. Jim Jones expressed a concern that perhaps the Plan was not comprehen—
sive enough and had too many spot islands of designations.
6. Herb Koenig, farmer of land north of the City on Church Drive, expres—
sed the opinion that the .County had a responsibility to see that we
live by some kind of orderly. development. He felt that we no longer
have the right to do exactly as we please. He further stated that we
have to show responsibility in our uses of our property and take into
consideration what would be of benefit to the neighborhood.
7. Ed Mitton; resident on Rocky Cliff Drive, stated that he did not want
'his area designation to be changed.
8. Doug Johns, representing Developer's Diversified, stated that he was
under a contract to dispose of their property beyond Buffalo Hill in
an orderly and responsible manner. He stated that the proposed compre—
hensive plan still addresses that area as urban residential. They
have recently sold 22 acres for the Psychiatric Hospital. He did not
feel that this, designation would be conducive to his orderly disposal
of the property. He stated that they have considered doing one or
several PUD's on the property and he wanted a land use classification
that would allow PUD's with mixed use.s. He stated that in order for a
mixed use PUD to take place the comprehensive plan had.to have a com—
mercial designation. The urban residential designation would not
work. In addition, the land is surrounded on three sides by the City
and he felt that when the property was'developed it would be brought
i-iin-t-h8'-C'ity"for;the service, that would be available.
9. Norb Donahue, former city attorney, stated that the Master Plan was
many things more than just land use.. He further stated that the law
states that in the absence of zoning a building permit issued in viola—
tion of the land use portion of the Master Plan is void. In light of
this, a Plan that can be followed has to be developed because it is
not just a guide.
10. Mel Ferguson, owner of property along U. S. Highway 2 (LaSalle Road)
in Evergreen, expressed concern that according to this Plan his pro—
perty has two separate designations. The land adjacent to the Highway
is designated as commercial and the property behind it, to which there
is no road, is designated as residential.
11. Mr. & Mrs. Curtis Johnson, owners of propery on the north side of West
O Reserve Road across the road from the Court Club, were concerned
because their property was being designated as urban residential
when there is a business on the property. They felt that because they
are .surrounded by commercial or industrial, they should have a commer—
cial designation. When looking at the plan further, they discovered
that previously it was designated as agriculture and now was being pro
Upon finding this out, Mr. Curtis John
posed to be urban residential.-
son asked that it be left as agricultural.