09-13-83 Planning BoardCall to Order
and Roll Call:
Approval of Minutes:
Election of Member at Large
of Planning Board:
KALISPELL CITY COUNTY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
September 13, 1983
Members Present:
Ed Trippet, President
Kathleen Jukich
Bob LeDuc
Douglas Morton
Paul Palmer
Virginia Sloan
James B. Stephens
Members Absent:
Jack Peters
Others Present:
Nakul Verma, Planning Director
Jim Mohn, Senior Planner
Jerry Juretus, Senior Planner
The meeting was called to order by President,
Ed Trippet at 7:30 P. M. in the Council
Chambers, Kalispell City Hall. Roll was
taken.
Ed Trippet called on any corrections or
amendments to the minutes as mailed. Being
none, they were approved.
Ed Trippet welcomed aboard new member, Jim
Stephens..
The following names were submitted to the City
Council and County Commissioners for approval:
(Bob) Charles Lilenthal and Les Ormiston.
Received written comment from the City Council
expressing no objections with either candidate.
No written response has been received from the
County Commissioners stating that they have no
objections to either candidate. By secret
ballot, the decision was 6 votes for Ormiston
and 1 vote for Lilenthal.
Old Business: Verma brought up the subject of the Montana
Association of Planners Conference in Hot
Springs, which will be held September 28th,
29th and 30th. Question as to whether Planning
Board monies can be used for this particular
expense. Awaiting opinion from the County
Attorney's office. Verma stated that the CAB
budget can only accommodate expenses for one
Planning Board member from each Planning Board.
Discussion ensued about which member of the
Planning Board should go. No decision was
reached.
New Business: Paul Palmer brought up the subject of Buffalo
Head Subdivision. He felt that it was unfair
to have to go through the subdivision approval
process again, as the project has already re-
ceived subdivision approval for 4-plexes and
6-plexes. The only change that will occur is
that of ownership as the new proposal is re-
questing townhouse development. He felt some-
thing should be done to adjust this situation.
Verma stated that the State Law requires sub-
division review and he is resubdividing the
lots. Paul stated that it's a weak law to
require a whole new plat. Jukich stated that
was the way the Statutes read.
Comprehensive Plan Review: Verma introduced Jerry Juretus, Senior Planner,
who has been working from 9 to 12 months on
an update of the Kalispell Comprehensive Plan.
Juretus gave a brief presentation comparing
a 1967 land use study with one conducted in
May of 1983. The basic changes reflected in
the new study were the following:
1. Increased commercial development south of
Kalispell on Highway 93.
2. Increased commercial development east of
Kalispell on Old U.S. Highway,2 and on
LaSalle Road and;,
3. Increased residential development north
and west of the City.
Juretus discussed the strengths and weaknesses
of the existing Comprehensive Plan. Basically,
the existing plan is just a land use plan.
Elements for transportation and community fac-
ilities had not been included in that plan.
stated that in updating the plan,.considera
tions were given to the existing plan and the
1983 Land:�Use Study. In addition, certain
environmental constraints were reviewed.
These included soil constraints south of
Kalispell, topographical constraints 'southwest.
of Kalispell and f1oodplan constraints east of
Kalispell adjacent to. the Flathead River. The.
most suitable areas.for future development are
.to the north and northwest. A conceptual plan
was developed for the area. This_div.ided the
developed area..into five neighborhoods, each
with a population of 4 to 5 thousand. Juretus
then explained the proposed Comprehensive Plan.
Board members asked a series of questions about
the proposal. Jukich felt that areas should be
d.eliniated for Mobile Homes. Verma said that
many areas .are showing Mobile home locations
as it is being required by Federal Law to elim-
inate descrimination against low income groups.
Board.members expressed concern about traffic
and transportation system.. Juretus stated that
the next step in the process would be to send to
the Board a written text and other documents
regarding the proposed plan. The staff would re-
__. ceive Board input and .make requested changes. A
draft plan would be prepared and distributed for
public review and comment. This comment period
would last appoximately six months. Then the
Board will hold public hearing and send their
recommendations to the City Council and the County
Commissioner.
Meeting adjourned at. 8:45 P. M.
Respectfully .Submitted,
Sharon H"Bowman
RecordinApproved
Chairman