I2. Ordinance 1948, Conditional Use Permit text amendmentCITY OF
KALISPELL
Development Services Department
201 lst Avenue East
Kalispell, MT 59901
Phone: (406) 758-7940
Fax: (406) 758-7739
www.kalispell.com/planning
REPORT TO: Jarod Nygren, Interim City Manager
FROM: PJ Sorensen, Assistant Director of Development Services
SUBJECT: KZTA-25-02 — Conditional Use Permit Revocation Process
Zoning Text Amendment
MEETING DATE: December 1, 2025
BACKGROUND: This application is a request from the City of Kalispell. Current zoning regulations,
under Chapter 27.33, detail the processing and review criteria for conditional use permits, as well as
the denial or violation of a conditional use permit. This proposed amendment would clarify the process
for revocation of an issued conditional use permit.
The Kalispell Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on November 12, 2025, to
consider the request. Staff presented staff report KZTA-25-02 providing details of the proposal and
evaluation. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the staff report as findings of fact
and recommend to the Council that the request for the zoning text amendment be granted.
Seven comments were received at the public hearing both in favor of and opposed to the proposal. The
public hearing was closed and a motion was presented to adopt staff report KZTA-25-02 as findings of
fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the zoning text amendment be approved.
Commission discussion concluded that the request was appropriate, and the motion was approved on a
unanimous vote.
Following the November 12 meeting, more feedback was received by the City. As such, City staff
recommends Council amends Ordinance 1948 to clarify the proposed changes apply only to conditional
use permits granted after January 15, 2026. This could be accomplished by adding an item (3) to
Section 27.33.010 General Provisions that states, "all changes made to Section 27.33 through
Ordinance 1948 shall apply only to conditional use permits granted after January 15, 2026."
RECOMMENDATION:
TEXT AMENDMENT: It is recommended that the Kalispell City Council approve the first reading of
Ordinance 1948, an ordinance to amend the City of Kalispell Zoning Ordinance 1677, as shown on the
attached Exhibit A.
FISCAL EFFECTS: There are no anticipated fiscal impacts at this time.
ALTERNATIVES: Deny the request.
ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance 1948
November 12, 2025, Kalispell Planning Commission Minutes
Staff Report
Application Materials
Aimee Brunckhorst, Kalispell City Clerk
EXHIBIT A
Section 27.33.045: Revocation:
(1) If a conditional use for which a conditional use permit has been granted is not in compliance
with the requirements of the conditional use permit, the city may revoke that conditional use
permit.
(2) Prior to revocation, the city must send a written notice of revocation by certified mail to the
property owner and the user of the property. The revocation notice must:
(a) Identify which material misrepresentations the City believes the conditional use permit
holder made and/or which conditions the City believes the conditional use permit holder
has violated;
(b) State that the property must be brought into compliance within fifteen (15) business days
of the date of the notice of revocation; and
(c) Set a hearing date for consideration of the revocation.
(3) The City Council shall be the hearing body and follow its standard hearing procedures
including, but not limited to, hearing from the conditional use permit holder, and any other
witnesses through public comment. To revoke the conditional use permit, the City Council
must make a finding that one or more of the criteria in Section 27.33.045(4) has been
established by a preponderance of the evidence. In the case of a revocation of a conditional
use permit, the determination of the City Council shall be final, unless recourse is sought in
Flathead County District Court within thirty (30) days.
(4) The City Council may revoke, suspend, or reconsider a conditional use permit if it determines
that:
(a) The information in the application or otherwise provided by the applicant or the
applicant's agent as part of the original conditional use permit approval was false or
inaccurate, whether deliberate or unintentional, and that the misrepresentation was
material to the City's decision to grant the conditional use permit;
(b) The development or use of the property is not in compliance with the application
submitted as part of the original conditional use permit approval; or
(c) The development or use of the property is not in compliance with any condition or other
requirement of the conditional use permit.
(5) As the granting of a conditional use permit is a matter of grace per Section 27.33.090, resting
in the discretion of the City and a refusal is not the denial of a right, conditional or otherwise,
the revocation, suspension, or reconsideration of a conditional use permit shall also be a
matter of grace and not a denial of a right, conditional or otherwise.
(6) A conditional use permit revoked pursuant to this section may be reinstated at the City
Council's discretion within one year upon a showing that all requirements of the conditional
use permit are being met and that any other deficiencies have been remedied. Should the
requirements not be met and/or all deficiencies not be remedied within one year, a new
application for conditional use permit must be submitted for review.
27.33.060: Termination and Transferability.
(1) The Conditional Use Permit shall not run with the lot, building, structure, or use.
When a new owner, lessee or other operator intends to continue a conditional use, the
new user must submit an administrative renewal application to the zoning
administrator verifying terms and conditions of the original grant of the conditional
use permit. If material changes related to the use of the property are proposed, the
new user shall reapply for a new conditional use permit subject to this Chapter.
(2) ...
27.33.090: Burden of Applicant. The burden of proof for satisfying the aforementioned criteria
considered for approval shall rest with the applicant and not the City Council. The granting of
the Conditional Use Permit is a matter of grace, resting in the discretion of the City Council
and a refusal, or revocation thereof, is not the denial of a right, conditional, or otherwise.
Should any information or representation submitted in connection with a conditional use
permit be incorrect or untrue, the approval based thereon may be rescinded, and other
appropriate action taken.
27.33.100: Decision Based on Findings. Every decision of the City Council pertaining to the
granting, denial, or amendment of a request for a Conditional Use Permit, or the revocation of
a conditional use permit, shall be based upon "Findings of Fact", and every finding of fact
shall be supported in the records of its proceedings.
ORDINANCE NO. 1948
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE KALISPELL ZONING ORDINANCE (ORDINANCE
NO. 1677), BY AMENDING CHAPTER 27.33, CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, BY
ADDING LANGUAGE THAT CLARIFIES THE REVOCATION PROCESS IN NEW
SECTION 27.33.045, AND AMENDING SECTIONS 37.33.060, 37.33.090, AND 37.33.100,
AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Kalispell has submitted a written request to amend the Kalispell Zoning
Ordinance, clarifying the process for revocation of an issued conditional use permit;
and
WHEREAS, the request was forwarded to the Kalispell Zoning Commission by the Kalispell
Planning Department as a recommended text amendment by after making such
evaluation under 27.29.020 of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the Kalispell Zoning Commission recommended that the text of the Kalispell Zoning
Ordinance be amended by clarifying the process for revocation of an issued
conditional use permit; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Kalispell Planning Department Report and the
transmittal from the Kalispell Zoning Commission and hereby adopts the findings
made in Report #KZTA-25-02.
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 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025.
ATTEST:
Aimee Brunckhorst, CMC
City Clerk
Mark Johnson
Mayor
EXHIBIT A
Section 27.33.045: Revocation:
(1) If a conditional use for which a conditional use permit has been granted is not in
compliance with the requirements of the conditional use permit, the city may
revoke that conditional use permit.
(2) Prior to revocation, the city must send a written notice of revocation by certified
mail to the property owner and the user of the property. The revocation notice
must:
(a) Identify which material misrepresentations the City believes the
conditional use permit holder made and/or which conditions the City
believes the conditional use permit holder has violated;
(b) State that the property must be brought into compliance within fifteen (15)
business days of the date of the notice of revocation; and
(c) Set a hearing date for consideration of the revocation.
(3) The City Council shall be the hearing body and follow its standard hearing
procedures including, but not limited to, hearing from the conditional use permit
holder, and any other witnesses through public comment. To revoke the
conditional use permit, the City Council must make a finding that one or more of
the criteria in Section 27.33.045(4) has been established by a preponderance of
the evidence. In the case of a revocation of a conditional use permit, the
determination of the City Council shall be final, unless recourse is sought in
Flathead County District Court within thirty (30) days.
(4) The City Council may revoke, suspend, or reconsider a conditional use permit if it
determines that:
(a) The information in the application or otherwise provided by the applicant
or the applicant's agent as part of the original conditional use permit
approval was false or inaccurate, whether deliberate or unintentional, and
that the misrepresentation was material to the City's decision to grant the
conditional use permit;
(b) The development or use of the property is not in compliance with the
application submitted as part of the original conditional use permit
approval; or
(c) The development or use of the property is not in compliance with any
condition or other requirement of the conditional use permit.
(5) As the granting of a conditional use permit is a matter of grace per Section
27.33.090, resting in the discretion of the City and a refusal is not the denial of a
right, conditional or otherwise, the revocation, suspension, or reconsideration of a
conditional use permit shall also be a matter of grace and not a denial of a right,
conditional or otherwise.
(6) A conditional use permit revoked pursuant to this section may be reinstated at the
City Council's discretion within one year upon a showing that all requirements of
the conditional use permit are being met and that any other deficiencies have been
remedied. Should the requirements not be met and/or all deficiencies not be
remedied within one year, a new application for conditional use permit must be
submitted for review.
27.33.060: Termination and Transferability.
(1) The Conditional Use Permit shall not run with the lot, building, structure, or use.
When a new owner, lessee or other operator intends to continue a conditional
use, the new user must submit an administrative renewal application to the
zoning administrator verifying terms and conditions of the original grant of
the conditional use permit. If material changes related to the use of the
property are proposed, the new user shall reapply for a new conditional use
permit subject to this Chapter.
(2) ...
27.33.090: Burden of Applicant. The burden of proof for satisfying the aforementioned
criteria considered for approval shall rest with the applicant and not the City Council. The
granting of the Conditional Use Permit is a matter of grace, resting in the discretion of the
City Council and a refusal, or revocation thereof, is not the denial of a right, conditional,
or otherwise. Should any information or representation submitted in connection with
a conditional use permit be incorrect or untrue, the approval based thereon may be
rescinded, and other appropriate action taken.
27.33.100: Decision Based on Findings. Every decision of the City Council pertaining to
the granting, denial, or amendment of a request for a Conditional Use Permit, or the
revocation of a conditional use permit, shall be based upon "Findings of Fact", and
every finding of fact shall be supported in the records of its proceedings.
KALISPELL CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING
November 12, 2025
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL
The regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and
CALL
Zoning Commission was called to order at 6:00 p.m. Commission
members present were Pip Burke, Doug Kauffman, Joshua
Borgardt, Cate Walker and Rory Young. Jarod Nygren, PJ
Sorensen, and Kirstin Robinson represented the Kalispell
Planning Department. Keith Haskins represented the Kalispell
Public Works department.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Borgardt moved and Burke seconded a motion to approve the
minutes of the October 14, 2025 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.
BOARD MEMBER SEATED
Walker recused herself from KPP-25-03 and KCU-25-05; she is
a representative for the applicant.
KPP-25-03 & KCU-25-05 — NORTH
File #KPP-25-03 and #KCU-25-05 — LBO Properties, LLLP, has
WEST VIEW
submitted applications for North West View, including requests
for (1) preliminary plat approval for 149 residential units (111
detached single-family and 38 attached single-family/townhouse)
on approximately 42.58 acres, including lots, roads, and common
areas; and (2) a conditional use permit to allow the attached
single-family/townhouses. The property is located approximately
750 feet north of the intersection of Stillwater Road and Taelor
Road.
STAFF REPORT
Donnie McBath representing the Kalispell Planning Department
reviewed Staff reports #KPP-25-03 and KCU-25-04.
Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Commission
adopt Staff Report #KPP-25-03 as findings of fact and
recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat
for North West View Subdivision be approved subject to the
conditions on the staff report.
Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Commission
adopt Staff Report #KCU-25-05 as findings of fact and
recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the Conditional Use
Permit to allow townhome development within the R-3
(Residential) zoning district be approved subject to the conditions
on the staff report.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Sorensen clarified to Young that the CUP is required for 2 or more
townhomes in R-3 zoning.
Kalispell City Planning Commission
Minutes of the meeting of November 12, 2025
Page I 1
PUBLIC HEARING
Eric Mulcahy — 2 Village Loop — Representative for the applicant.
Requested condition #29 be stricken from the staff report and was
happy to answer any questions the commission had.
Rudy Urban — 830 McMannamy Draw — Opposes the project; has
concerns about school capacity and is sad to see farmland be split
up.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Sorensen clarified condition #29 to Kauffman. Nygren advised
the commission that condition #29 could be stricken from the staff
report.
MOTION — KPP-25-03
Kauffman moved and Borgardt seconded to amend the conditions
AMENDMENT
of KPP-25-03 to strike condition #29 that all townhouse units
within the subdivision shall utilize shared driveways designed to
a maximum width of 24 feet.
ROLL CALL — KPP-25-03
Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
AMENDMENT
ROLL CALL — KPP-25-03
Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
MOTION - KCU-25-05
Kauffman moved and Borgardt seconded that the Kalispell City
Planning Commission adopt amended Staff Report #KCU-25-05
as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council
that the Conditional Use Permit to allow townhome development
within the R-3(Residential) zoning district be approved subject to
the conditions listed on the staff report as amended.
BOARD DISCUSSION
None.
ROLL CALL — KCU-25-05
Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
BOARD MEMBER RE -SEATED
Walker resealed.
BOARD MEMBER SEATED
Young recused himself from KPP-25-04; he is a representative
for the applicant.
KPP-25-04 — NORTH MEADOWS
File #KPP-25-04 — Roger Foley has submitted an application for
preliminary plat approval for North Meadows Subdivision,
containing 44 townhouse/attached single-family lots (22 parent
lots) on approximately 12.13 acres, including lots, roads and
common areas. The proposal includes variance requests relating
to setbacks from Ashley Creek (generally 200 feet to be reduced
in some areas to 100 feet), cul-de-sac road length (generally 600
feet to be increased to about 870 feet), and block length (generally
a maximum of 600 feet to be increased to about 900 feet). The
property is located at 1859 South Meadows Drive.
STAFF REPORT
PJ Sorensen representing the Kalispell Planning Department
reviewed Staff reports #KPP-25-04.
Kalispell City Planning Commission
Minutes of the meeting of November 12, 2025
Page 12
Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Commission
adopt Staff Report #KPP-25-04 as findings of fact and
recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat
for North Meadows Subdivision, along with the requested
variances for (a) the stream setback, (b) the cul-de-sac length, and
(c) the block length, be approved subject to the conditions listed
on the staff report.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Sorensen clarified the standard setback to Walker and clarified
the building sprinkling requirements to Burke. Sorensen stated
that there will be a condition for the sprinklers in the CC&Rs in
the final plat and that the fire hydrants will be operational prior to
any construction.
PUBLIC HEARING
Jacqueline Pipolo — 139 Rimrock Ct — Opposes the project and
has concerns for wildlife, water quality, and that approval would
set a precedence for future setback variances.
Rikki Moffet — 147 Rimrock Ct — Opposes the project and
requested the commission to adhere to rules and ordinances.
Toby McIntosh — 2250 Hwy 93 S — Representative for the
applicant and is happy to answer any questions the commission
may have. He stated that the street length was approved by fire
and that Fish Wildlife and Parks provided a recommendation for
the subdivision and that regulation allows for variances.
MOTION — KPP-25-04
Burke moved and Borgardt seconded that the Kalispell City
Planning Commission adopt Staff Report #KPP-25-04 as findings
of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the
preliminary plat for North Meadows Subdivision, along with the
requested variances for (a) the stream setback, (b) the cul-de-sac
length, and (c) the block length, be approved subject to the
conditions listed on the staff report.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Sorensen advised Borgardt that regulations allow for reductions
in setbacks based on geotechnical reports and gave Stillwater
Bend as an example of a setback variance within the city. Nygren
added that the state doesn't have any regulations for these types
of setbacks and that it is up to the planning commission and city
council to determine if the variance is justified. Sorensen clarified
to Burke that no precedence would be set because regulations
allow for variances to be allowed on a case -by -case basis. Walker
stated that there could have been measures taken for better road
alignment but Sorensen stated that the road aligns with existing
roads for future connection and was already in place. He added
that the road extension is included in the Transportation Plan.
Nygren added that the regulations allow for encroachment to
cross Ashley Creek. Kauffman stated that he did not have a
problem with the setback variance based on the geotechnical
information and professionalism of the engineering. Nygren
stated that the commission can amend the road alignment but
maintenance and plowing should be considered. Haskins added
Kalispell City Planning Commission
Minutes of the meeting of November 12, 2025
Page l3
that the road should intersect perpendicularly and that the
proposed alignment is as close to city standards as possible.
ROLL CALL
Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
BOARD MEMBER RESEATED
Young resealed.
KZTA-25-02 — CUP REVOCATION
File # KZTA-25-02 — The City of Kalispell has initiated a petition
TEXT AMENDMENT
for a zoning text amendment relating to the revocation of
conditional use permits. Current zoning regulations, under
Chapter 27.33, detail the processing and review criteria for
conditional use permits, as well as the denial or violation of a
conditional use permit. This amendment would clarify the
process for revocation of an issued conditional use permit.
STAFF REPORT
PJ Sorensen representing the Kalispell Planning Department
reviewed Staff reports #KZTA-25-02.
Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Commission
adopt the findings in staff report KZTA-25-02 and recommend
to the Kalispell City Council that the proposed amendment be
adopted as provided herein.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Sorensen advised Walker that there would be changes to the CUP
application if the text amendment was adopted; Nygren added that
when a CUP is granted, the language would be clear of the city's
requirements. Sorensen clarified to Young that CUPS go through
the public hearing process due to higher impacts and allow for
conditions on that use.
PUBLIC HEARING
Colton Little — 3195 MT 206 Columbia Falls — Opposes the
amendment and has concerns about how this would affect existing
CUPS such as the Flathead Warming Center CUP.
Tonya Horn — Director of the Flathead Warming Center —
Opposes the amendment because it puts businesses and non-
profits at risk and stated that the Warming Center has met all of
the their CUP conditions.
Kindee Nelson — 220 Liberty St — Supports the amendment
because it will prevent frivolous lawsuits in the future.
Arthur Fretheim — 240 9'1i St E #201 — Opposes the amendment
and has concerns for economic and constitutional issues, and adds
additional burdens to property owners.
Rose Askvig — 211 Liberty St — Supports the amendment because
it will bring Kalispell up to speed with other cities.
Brant Horn — 92 Stillwater River Trail Whitefish — Opposes the
amendment because not enough evidence is required to revoke
CUPS and that there is no due process.
Kalispell City Planning Commission
Minutes of the meeting of November 12, 2025
Page 14
Ron Gerson — 9 4'h Ave E — Opposes the amendment because it
will cause uncertainty to economic growth.
MOTION — KZTA-25-02
Burke moved and Kauffman seconded that the Kalispell City
Planning Commission adopt the findings in staff report KZTA-
25-02 and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the
proposed amendment be adopted as provided herein.
BOARD DISCUSSION
Sorensen advised Walker of the 3 criteria that would prompt a
CUP review and stated that having parameters provided clarity
for everyone involved. Nygren added that CUPS are issued by the
grace of city council and that the amendment covers gaps in the
current zoning regulations. Nygren also stated that the proposed
policy is used by other municipalities, and that state law provides
for it. Kauffman stated that city council has always had the ability
to revoke CUPS. Sorensen clarified the termination and
transferability process and stated that the planning department
continually reviews processes. Sorensen stated that the revocation
process would require a preponderance of evidence in the finding
process and that the amendment was reviewed by the city
attorney's office.
ROLL CALL
Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
OLD BUSINESS
Sorensen updated the commission on city council action on items
from the October Planning Commission meeting.
NEW BUSINESS
Sorensen updated the board on the upcoming Tuesday, December
9, 2025 Planning Commission Meeting and Work Session.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at approximately 8:23 PM.
WORK SESSION
Transitioned into work session on the Montana Land Use
Planning Act.
Chad Graham
President
APPROVED as submitted/amended:
Kirstin Robinson
Recording Secretary
Kalispell City Planning Commission
Minutes of the meeting of November 12, 2025
Page 15
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVOCATIONS
ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT - STAFF REPORT #KZTA-25-02
KALISPELL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
NOVEMBER 12, 2025
This is a report to the Kalispell City Planning Commission and the Kalispell City Council regarding
a proposal from the City of Kalispell for a text amendment to the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance to
clarify the process for revocation of an issued conditional use permit. A public hearing has been
scheduled before the Planning Commission for November 12, 2025, beginning at 6:00 PM in the
Kalispell City Council Chambers. The Planning Commission will forward a recommendation to
the Kalispell City Council for final action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Current zoning regulations, under Chapter 27.33, detail the processing and review criteria for
conditional use permits, as well as the denial or violation of a conditional use permit. This
amendment would clarify the process for revocation of an issued conditional use permit.
A: Applicant: City of Kalispell
201 First Avenue East
Kalispell, MT 59901
B. Area Effected by the Proposed Changes: Any property within the jurisdictional boundaries
of the City of Kalispell will be generally affected by the proposed changes with more direct
changes for properties subject to a conditional use permit.
C. Proposed Amendment: The amended sections, as proposed, would read as follows:
Section 27.33.045: Revocation:
(1)If a conditional use for which a conditional use permit has been granted is not in compliance
with the requirements of the conditional use permit, the city may revoke that conditional
use permit.
(2)Prior to revocation, the city must send a written notice of revocation by certified mail to the
property owner and the user of the property. The revocation notice must:
(a) Identify which material misrepresentations the City believes the conditional use
permit holder made and/or which conditions the City believes the conditional use permit
holder has violated;
Page 1 of 5
(b) State that the property must be brought into compliance within fifteen (15) business
days of the date of the notice of revocation; and
(c) Set a hearing date for consideration of the revocation.
(3)The City Council shall be the hearing body and follow its standard hearing procedures
including, but not limited to, hearing from the conditional use permit holder, and any other
witnesses through public comment. To revoke the conditional use permit, the City Council
must make a finding that one or more of the criteria in Section 27.33.045(4) has been
established by a preponderance of the evidence. In the case of a revocation of a conditional
use permit, the determination of the City Council shall be final, unless recourse is sought in
Flathead County District Court within thirty (30) days.
(4)The City Council may revoke, suspend, or reconsider a conditional use permit if it
determines that:
(a) The information in the application or otherwise provided by the applicant or the
applicant's agent as part of the original conditional use permit approval was false or
inaccurate, whether deliberate or unintentional, and that the misrepresentation was
material to the City's decision to grant the conditional use permit;
(b) The development or use of the property is not in compliance with the application
submitted as part of the original conditional use permit approval; or
(c) The development or use of the property is not in compliance with any condition or
other requirement of the conditional use permit.
(5)As the granting of a conditional use permit is a matter of grace per Section 27.33.090,
resting in the discretion of the City and a refusal is not the denial of a right, conditional or
otherwise, the revocation, suspension, or reconsideration of a conditional use permit shall
also be a matter of grace and not a denial of a right, conditional or otherwise.
(6)A conditional use permit revoked pursuant to this section may be reinstated at the City
Council's discretion within one year upon a showing that all requirements of the conditional
use permit are being met and that any other deficiencies have been remedied. Should the
requirements not be met and/or all deficiencies not be remedied within one year, a new
application for conditional use permit must be submitted for review.
Page 2 of 5
27.33.060: Termination and Transferability.
(1) The Conditional Use Permit shall not run with the lot, building, structure, or use.
When a new owner, lessee or other operator intends to continue a conditional use, the
new user must submit an administrative renewal application to the zoning
administrator verifying terms and conditions of the original grant of the conditional
use permit. If material changes related to the use of the property are proposed, the
new user shall reapply for a new conditional use permit subject to this Chapter.
(2) ...
27.33.090: Burden of Applicant. The burden of proof for satisfying the aforementioned criteria
considered for approval shall rest with the applicant and not the City Council. The granting
of the Conditional Use Permit is a matter of grace, resting in the discretion of the City
Council and a refusal, or revocation thereof, is not the denial of a right, conditional, or
otherwise. Should any information or representation submitted in connection with a
conditional use permit be incorrect or untrue, the approval based thereon may be rescinded,
and other appropriate action taken.
27.33.100: Decision Based on Findings. Every decision of the City Council pertaining to the
granting, denial, or amendment of a request for a Conditional Use Permit, or the revocation
of a conditional use permit, shall be based upon "Findings of Fact", and every finding of fact
shall be supported in the records of its proceedings.
D. Staff Discussion: As a general proposition, the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, like most
zoning ordinances, creates zoning districts on an official map. Within those districts, there
are uses allowed by right and uses allowed through a conditional use permit. Uses allowed
by right are typically the uses you would expect in a neighborhood, such as a single-family
house in a residential zone. Those uses do not require any special land use process.
Conditionally permitted uses, on the other hand, are not guaranteed uses. They are usually
uses with a greater impact on the surrounding neighborhood than is normally expected.
They are issued as a matter of grace after a public hearing and a determination by City
Council, usually with certain conditions to mitigate the increased impacts.
Since the issuance of conditional use permits is a matter of grace, they are typically
revocable. The Kalispell Zoning Ordinance contained language prior to 2008 which
specifically provided for the revocation of a permit. During the course of a comprehensive
update to the ordinance, the specific language was replaced with more general language
intended to incorporate a wide range of potential action if a property was not being used in
compliance with its conditional use permit, including revocation.
Leaving the process and criteria as general as in the current ordinance can present
difficulties when trying to address situations that may be perceived to be out of compliance.
This text amendment is intended to provide clarity in those situations by (a) clearly stating
Page 3 of 5
that a conditional permit can be revoked; (b) providing a method of notifying the owner and
user of the property; (c) establishing the City Council as the forum utilizing its standard
procedures; (d) allowing for an appeal to the court system; (e) providing criteria for the
Council's consideration; and (f) allowing a process of reinstatement if the property is
brought into compliance or voiding the conditional use permit after a year if the property is
not brought into compliance. It also provides for a review when a new owner, lessee, or user
intends to continue to use a property under an existing conditional use permit.
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 growth polio
Conditional use permits are referenced in the growth policy as part of the zoning regulations
which implement the growth policy. The proposed regulation would be in accordance with
the growth policy by adding clarity to the conditional use permit process, and the potential
revocation of a conditional use permit in particular.
2. Does the zoning regulation consider the effect on motorized and nonmotorized
transportation systems?
The proposed amendment would have a minimal effect on the transportation systems,
although it would help ensure that any conditions of a conditional use permit related to
traffic mitigation or other transportation issues will be implemented.
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. As
with criteria, it would help ensure that any conditions of a conditional use permit related to
them will be implemented.
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. As with other
criteria, it would help ensure that any conditions of a conditional use permit related to them
will be implemented.
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. As with other criteria, it
Page 4 of 5
would help ensure that any conditions of a conditional use permit related to them will be
implemented.
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. As with other criteria, it would help ensure that any conditions
of a conditional use permit related to them will be implemented.
7. Does the zoning regulation consider the character of the district and its peculiar suitability
for particular uses?
The amendment does not change the character of any districts. As with other criteria, it
would help ensure that any conditions of a conditional use permit related to them will be
implemented.
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 urban growth?
The amendment helps create consistency throughout comparable zones, which promotes
compatible urban growth.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Commission adopt the findings in staff report
KZTA-25-02 and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the proposed amendment be
adopted as provided herein.
Page 5 of 5
CITY OF
111CAILISPEILIL
Development Services
Department
201 1st Avenue East
Kalispell, MT 59901
Phone (406) 758-7940
ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT
Email: planning(a)kalispell.com
Website:
www.kalispell.com
Project Name
CUP Revocation
Property Address
N/A
NAME OF APPLICANT
City of Kalispell
Applicant Phone
1(406)758-7940
Applicant Address
201 First Avenue East
City, State, Zip
Kalispell, MT 59901
Applicant Email Address
planning@kalispell.com
If not current owner, please attach a letter from the current owner authorizing the applicant to proceed with the application.
OWNER OF RECORD
Owner Phone
Owner Address
City, State, Zip
Owner Email Address
CONSULTANT (ARCHITECT/ENGINEER)
N/A
Phone
Address
City, State, Zip
Email Address
POINT OF CONTACT FOR REVIEW COMMENTS
PJ Sorensen
Phone
1(406)758-7940
Address
201 First Ave E
City, State, Zip
Kalispell, MT 59901
Email Address
planning@kalispell.com
List ALL owners (any individual or other entity with an ownership interest in the property):
Development Services
c rry c>r= Department
1K..'N IL I S P ELL 2011st Avenue East
Kalispell, MT 59901
Phone (406)755-7940
What is the proposed zoning text amendment? (if modifying an existing code section, please list the specific section - for example: Section 27.07.040(3))
Chapter 27.33 (Sec. 27.33.050) - Add criteria and procedures for revocation of conditional use permits
What is the purpose or intent of the proposed text amendment?
To clarify the criteria and procedure for revoking issued conditional use permits
HOW WILL THE PROPOSED CHANGE ACCOMPLISH THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF (please attach additional sheets):
a. Whether the new zoning was designed in accordance with the growth policy.
b. Whether the new zoning will affect motorized and nonmotorized transportation systems.
c. Whether the new zoning will secure safety from fire and other dangers.
d. Whether the new zoning will promote public health, public safety and general welfare.
e. Whether the new zoning includes the reasonable provision of adequate light and air.
f. Whether the new zoning will facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, and other public requirements.
g. Whether the new zoning gives consideration to the character of the district and its peculiar suitability of the property for particular uses.
h. Whether the new zoning was adopted with a view of conserving the value of buildings.
i. Whether the new zoning will encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the municipality.
I hereby certify under penalty of perjury and the laws of the State of Montana that the information submitted herein, on all other submitted forms,
documents, plans or any other information submitted as a part of this application, to be true, complete, and accurate to the best of my knowledge.
Should any information or representation submitted in connection with this application be inorrect or untrue, I understand that any approval based
thereon may be rescinded, and other appropriate action taken. The signing of this application signifies approval for the Kalispell City staff to be
present on the property for routine monitoring and inspection during the approval and development process.
Applicant Signature Date
Development Services
Department
CIA Y or
201
KALISPELL hone ( Avenue East
Kalispell, MT 59901
Phone406)758-7940
APPLICATION PROCESS
(application must be received and accepted by the
Kalispell Planning Department 35 days prior to the
Planning Commission Hearing)
A pre -application meeting with a member of the planning staff is required.
Application Contents:
1. Completed application form & attachments
2. Electronic copy of the application materials submitted. Either copied onto a disk or
emailed to planning@kalispell.com (Please note the maximum file size to email is
20MB)
3. Application fee based on the schedule in the link below, made payable to the City of
https://www. kalispell.com/DocumentCenter/View/447/Planni ng-Fees-Schedule-2023-PDF?bid Id=