2. Discussion of Revised Growth Policy PlanTri-City Planning Office
17 Second Street East - Suite 211
Kalispell, Montana 59901
Phone: (406) 751-1850
Fax: (406) 751-1858
tricity@eenturytel.net
REPORT TO: Kalispell Mayor and City Council
FROM: Thomas R. Jentz, Director
Chris A. Kukulski, City Manager
SUBJECT Adopting a Revised Growth Policy Plan
MEETING DATE: December 26, 2001 - Special Meeting
BACKGROUND: The Kalispell City Council called a special meeting to consider the
adoption of a Revised Growth Policy Plan largely in response to the recent actions by
the Board of County Commissioners disbanding the joint planning board. The
purpose of adoption of a growth policy for the city of Kalispell would be to provide
direction for future development and annexations into the city of Kalispell. While this
is a worthy goal for several reasons, adoption of the growth policy that was forwarded
to the Board of County Commissioners could be fraught with pitfalls and unintended
consequences.
Concerns with going forward with the current growth policy:
It has turned into a controversial document and that has strained city and county
relations. If we do proceed in the next six months to bring the city and county
back to the same table and re -constitute a city -county planning board and
planning jurisdiction boundary, the adoption of this plan for the city boundaries
will pose a stumbling block.
It places a cloud over the existing master plan as it applies to the fringe and
suburban areas around the city. Can half of a plan in the rural area stand with
the city adopting only the city portion or would it be within the urban service area?
Planning is supposed to be comprehensive and consistent, at least within the plan,
the county's half plan will not be consistent with the city's plan. This would throw
into question the legitimacy of both plans.
As the plan is written and intended, it is a city -county plan encompassing the
entire Kalispell planning jurisdiction area. The language and the policies reflect
this. Prior to considering the adoption of the plan, there needs to be some editing
to the plan to re -focus the plan as a city plan, not a city -county plan, that provides
guidance on how to address fringe area growth and development. While this may
not be a major effort, it must be done before adoption.
Providing Community Planning Assistance To:
• City of Kalispell • City of Columbia Falls • City of Whitefish
December 19, 2001 - - -
Page 2
• The plan was developed in an era of compromise and has been through several
drafts. Does this plan truly reflect current conditions and how the city sees itself
growing? Does it carry a true vision for the future of Kalispell. Having the wrong
plan in place may not be an improvement over what we have.
Support for adopting the plan.
• Since October 1, 2001 there has been a legal cloud hanging over all existing
master plans that apparently only the courts or the legislature can fully address.
The statutes are unclear whether they require the adoption of a growth policy to
made land use decisions or whether the existing master plan would prevail until
such time as a growth policy is developed and adopted. This raises several issues.
Can the existing master plan be amended? Can we entertain small or large scale
zoning amendments? Is the existing master plan still a viable policy document
after the county commissioners unilaterally disbanded the jurisdiction and the
planning board that oversees it? Adoption of a growth policy for the city would
eliminate some of this uncertainty.
• Development pressures continue on the fringes of the city with a demand for
services. Logical development pressures have outrun the vision of the 1986
Kalispell master plan. A new plan would allow the city to cleanly take new
projects through the review process without endless debate and questions.
There are certainly other issues and legal technicalities surrounding the adoption of a
new growth policy plan that warrant consideration by the council. Until there is
greater certainty regarding some of these issues it would be prudent to postpone
adoption of the growth policy plan.
RECOMMENDATION: The staff would recommend that the city council discuss some
of the issues related to the adoption of a growth policy plan, but postpone any action.
ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the city council.
Respectfully submitted,
Thomas R. Jentz Chris A. Kukulski
Director City Manager
Report compiled: December 19, 2001
c: Theresa White, Kalispell City Clerk
H: \TRANSMIT\KALISPELL\2002 \CITYGRO WTHPOLICYMEMO. DOC