04-10-07 Click to Download Minutes by injeopardy

VIEWS: 26 PAGES: 102

                       MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING
                               APRIL 10, 2007

CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL The regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and
CALL                   Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Board
                       members present were: Timothy Norton, Rick Hull, Bryan
                       Schutt, Robyn Balcom, and John Hinchey. Kari Gabriel was
                       absent. Nicole Johnson, Sean Conrad and Tom Jentz
                       represented the Kalispell Planning Department. There were
                       approximately 60 people in the audience.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES         Balcom moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to approve
                            the minutes of the March 13, 2007 regular planning board

                            The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.

HEAR THE PUBLIC             No one wished to speak.

FLATHEAD HOSPITAL           A request by Flathead Hospital Development Company, LLC
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY,        for a conditional use permit to operate a learning center and
LLC - CONDITIONAL USE       sick child day care center (Dinosore program) in the lower
PERMIT                      portion of the existing building at 66 Claremont Avenue. The
                            Kid Kare program, a day care center, currently occupies the
                            upper level of the building and until recently the VA Clinic, a
                            medical use, occupied the lower level portion of the building.
                            The property is zoned H-1, Health Care, and a conditional
                            use permit is required for the proposed change in use.

STAFF REPORT KCU-07-03      Nicole Johnson, representing the Kalispell Planning
                            Department presented Staff Report KCU-07-03 for the Board.

                            Johnson stated this is a conditional use permit request by
                            Flathead Hospital Development Company to locate a sick
                            child day care center (Dinosore) and a kindergarten
                            (Individual Learning Center) in an existing building located
                            within the Kalispell Regional Medical Center campus. The
                            property is zoned H-1 Healthcare and a conditional use
                            permit is required to locate these 2 functions within the
                            building. The existing building is 2-story and the Kid Kare
                            program operates from the upper level of the building and as
                            proposed the kindergarten and sick day care center will be
                            located in the lower level, which was formerly the VA Clinic.

                            Johnson said these programs have multiple entrances and
                            exits which they will share with the Kid Kare program. The
                            proposal will combine the 3 day care functions under one
                            roof and serve the hospital employees and the general public.

                            During the review a variety of issues were addressed
                            including parking. The parking lot will be re-striped and a
                            van accessible spot will be provided. The lights in the

                                                                 Kalispell City Planning Board
                                                       Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                                                   Page 1 of 33
                         parking area and on the building will be brought into
                         compliance with the city’s outdoor lighting standards, and a
                         permit will need to be obtained to modify the existing signs
                         for the property.

                         Staff recommends that the planning board adopt the staff
                         report KCU-07-03 as findings of fact and recommend to the
                         Kalispell City Council that the conditional use permit be
                         approved subject to the 6 conditions listed in the staff report.

QUESTIONS BY THE         Norton was glad to see that the outdoor lights in the parking
BOARD                    lot and on the building will be brought into compliance with
                         the city’s lighting standards.

APPLICANT/AGENCIES       Marcello Pierrottet, Facilities Manager for Kalispell Regional
                         Medical Center said they are trying to combine all of the kids
                         into one building which will be a benefit to the parents. This
                         facility will serve the KRMC employees and the general

                         Pierrottet said originally when the VA Clinic was located in
                         this building it required 200 square feet of space per parking
                         space, 22 spaces, and now with this use they will only be
                         required to provide 9 parking spaces which will alleviate
                         some of the parking problems on the campus.

PUBLIC HEARING           No one wished to speak.

MOTION                   Hinchey moved and Balcom seconded a motion that the
                         planning board adopt the staff report KCU-07-03 as findings
                         of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the
                         conditional use permit be approved subject to the 6
                         conditions listed in the staff report.


ROLL CALL                The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.

PRELIMINARY PLAT -       A request from Brian Cloutier, of Ashley Square Partnership,
ASHLEY SQUARE            for preliminary plat approval to create two lots on a 3.193
AMENDED PLAT OF LOT 2,   acre lot within Ashley Square. The property can be accessed
RESUB OF LOTS 1 & 3 OF   from US Highway 2 West and is zoned B-3, Community
GIBSON ADDITION NO. 41   Business. Lot 2A contains an existing building and parking
                         lot on 2.887 acres in the northwest corner of Ashley Square.
                         The state Driver Services and Northland Hobbies are two
                         examples of businesses located in this commercial building
                         (1325 Highway 2 West). Lot 2B is located in the northeast
                         corner of Ashley Square south of Fatt Boys Bar and Grille
                         (1307 US Highway 2 West) and is currently vacant.

STAFF REPORT KPP-07-05   Nicole Johnson, representing the Kalispell Planning
                         Department presented Staff Report KPP-07-05 for the Board.

                                                              Kalispell City Planning Board
                                                    Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                                                Page 2 of 33
                     Johnson said this is a preliminary plat request to subdivide
                     2 lots within Ashley Square Commercial area. Johnson
                     provided the location of this proposal for the board. The
                     property is zoned B-3 and the applicant is proposing to
                     subdivide lot 2 which would create lot 2A at approximately 3
                     acres and lot 2B at approximately 1/3 of an acre. The
                     property is currently developed with buildings, parking lots,
                     signs, etc. and they are not proposing to further develop any
                     of the sites at this time.

                     Johnson noted during review they addressed a variety of
                     issues which resulted in the conditions, most of which relate
                     to the future development of lot 2B which contains
                     landscaping and parking spaces, and compliance with the
                     sign regulations and building standards.

                     Staff is recommending that the planning board adopt staff
                     report KPP-07-05 as findings of fact and recommend to the
                     city council that the preliminary plat of Ashley Square
                     Amended Plat of Lot 2, Resub of Lots 1 & 3 of Gibson
                     Addition No. 41 be approved subject to the 8 conditions
                     listed in the staff report.

BOARD QUESTIONS      Hull asked for the reason behind this subdivision and
                     Johnson stated that the consultant could address his

APPLICANT/AGENCIES   Erica Wirtala, Sands Surveying stated she is representing
                     Mr. Cloutier. Wirtala noted that this project comes before
                     the board as a major subdivision because of the previous
                     splits of the parcel. One use for lot 2B could be that Fatt
                     Boys Bar & Grill purchase the lot for additional parking.
                     Wirtala said they don’t have any firm development plans at
                     this time. If there are further development plans they would
                     go before Site Review.

                     Wirtala said they are in agreement with all of the conditions.

                     Norton asked about access onto the highway. Wirtala said
                     the existing access would be used. She added MDT would
                     like to look at the access at the time development plans are
                     firm in case there would be additional use of that access or a
                     change in use. Wirtala said that lot 2B goes up to the R/W of
                     the highway and there is still quite a bit of buffer area
                     between the lot and the highway.

                     Norton asked if the sidewalks are along Highway 2 and along
                     the interior road. Johnson said the conditions note the
                     sidewalks would be along the highway and within the interior
                     of the lot and added Public Works felt that it would be more
                     appropriate to wait until the use was known for the site and
                     then determine where the sidewalks should go.

                                                          Kalispell City Planning Board
                                                Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                                            Page 3 of 33
                         Balcom asked if there was any discussion regarding the poor
                         condition of the current parking lot. Wirtala said a good
                         portion of this property is grass and landscaping. She added
                         there is a small portion that is part of the parking area
                         however the upgrade of the parking lot was not included in
                         the conditions.

PUBLIC HEARING           No one wished to speak.

MOTION                   Balcom moved and Schutt seconded a motion to adopt staff
                         report KPP-07-05 as findings of fact and recommend to the
                         city council that the preliminary plat of Ashley Square
                         Amended Plat of Lot 2, Resub of Lots 1 & 3 of Gibson
                         Addition No. 41 be approved subject to the 8 conditions
                         listed in the staff report.

BOARD DISCUSSION         Norton said his only concern was the condition of the
                         parking lot and that has been addressed.

ROLL CALL                The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.

GATEWAY PROPERTIES       A request from Gateway Properties, Inc., for annexation into
(VALLEY RANCH)           the City of Kalispell with the initial zoning of R-2, Single
ANNEXATION AND           Family Residential, and a Planned Unit Development (PUD)
PLANNED UNIT             overlay zoning district on the 80.7± acre project site. The
DEVELOPMENT              PUD will be known as Valley Ranch and is proposing 204
                         residential lots, 29 townhouse lots and a future assisted and
                         independent living facility with up to 120 units on the project
                         site. The project site is in the County zoning jurisdiction and
                         is zoned SAG-10, Suburban Agricultural. The project site is
                         located on the east side of Highway 93 approximately 1 ½
                         miles north of the intersection of Highway 93 and West
                         Reserve Drive.

STAFF REPORTS KA-07-05   Sean Conrad representing the Kalispell Planning Department
& KPUD-07-02             presented Staff Reports KA-07-05 & KPUD-07-02 for the

                         Conrad said before the planning board is a request for
                         annexation & initial zoning of R-2 Single Family and a
                         Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay district to allow
                         some deviations in the R-2 zoning district. The deviations
                         would include smaller lot size, smaller lot width, varying the
                         types of land uses, and varying the setbacks.

                         Conrad described the location of the property for the board.
                         Conrad said the PUD layout is a conceptual plan and the
                         board is not reviewing a preliminary plat at this time. The
                         developer is seeking approval of the zoning and the PUD
                         layout so they can have direction on how to proceed with the
                         development of the project.

                                                              Kalispell City Planning Board
                                                    Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                                                Page 4 of 33
                  Conrad reviewed the PUD layout for the board. The land uses
                  vary but are primarily residential and include large lots
                  abutting the Ponderosa Subdivision and being 12,000 and
                  25,000 square feet in size. Between these lots and Ponderosa
                  the developer has proposed a 20 wide swath of land for a
                  bike path and landscaping. South and west on the site the
                  lots are 6,000 to 7,000 square feet and are alley loaded
                  garages. The developer is also requesting that townhouses
                  and an independent/assisted living facility be permitted
                  through the PUD overlay. Conrad said there are also larger
                  residential lots, 7,800 – 9,000 square feet as the property
                  transitions down to the site of the proposed Glacier Town
                  Center (Wolford Mall).

                  Conrad said the developer is proposing approximately 15
                  acres of parkland and open space and he described these
                  areas. There could be some changes to the parks as the
                  Parks Department felt that combining the parks into fewer
                  larger parks would be more appropriate.

                  Conrad noted the developer has proposed 2 access points
                  along Highway 93, an access point east to an 80 acre piece of
                  property with the possibility of future connection with
                  Whitefish Stage Road, and 2 access points to property to the
                  south (Wolford Mall site). The traffic study indicates that the
                  2 access points along the highway would be limited to right-
                  in if traveling north; right-out to continue traveling north; or
                  if traveling southbound on Highway 93 a left turn into the
                  project site. However, a left turn onto the highway from this
                  project site would be prohibited. For that reason Condition
                  #8 states when the developer comes in to submit the
                  preliminary plat he would not get final plat approval until a
                  connection to either the south or to the east was secured.

                  Conrad reviewed the letters received on this project. (Copies
                  are attached to the minutes).

                  Conrad said there is a Stormwater Management Plan which
                  would be reviewed when the preliminary plat comes in.

                  Staff is recommending that the planning board adopt staff
                  report KA-07-05 as findings of fact and recommend to the
                  city council that the initial zoning upon annexation of this
                  property be R-2 (Single Family Residential) and adopt staff
                  report KPUD-07-02 as findings of fact and recommend that
                  the PUD for Valley Ranch be approved subject to the 13
                  conditions listed in the staff report.

BOARD QUESTIONS   Hull asked if the developer owns the access to the west to
                  Highway 93 and Conrad said yes.

                  Hinchey referenced the 5 lots along the highway that are not
                  a part of this development and asked if there was any
                  discussion with those landowners to how those lots will be

                                                       Kalispell City Planning Board
                                             Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                                         Page 5 of 33
                     accessed when this project develops? Conrad said as far as
                     he knows the developer has not discussed access to those
                     lots with the owners. But access could be discussed with the
                     first phase of the preliminary plat. Conrad reminded the
                     board when the preliminary plat comes in there could be
                     deviations on the design but the concepts would remain the
                     same. He added MDT has already indicated that access to
                     Highway 93 will be limited.

                     Schutt said the board is not approving a preliminary plat but
                     is reviewing the initial zoning and he asked if the PUD
                     elements are set or in progress. Conrad said the PUD
                     elements are set and are included in the conditions. Some
                     changes to parks, roads and access could occur. Increases in
                     percentages of townhouses, units in the assisted/
                     independent living facility and access points would require
                     an amendment to the PUD which would have to be reviewed
                     by the planning board.

                     There was further discussion regarding access points and
                     road connections.

APPLICANT/AGENCIES   Bruce Lutz, Sitescape Associates said he is representing
                     Gateway Properties. They began this effort almost a year ago
                     and had several meetings with the planning office. After the
                     August revision of the Growth Policy in this area they
                     analyzed the surrounding properties and took particular note
                     of the Silverbrook project to the north which will facilitate the
                     connection of water and sewer to this property and was a
                     pivotal point in the decision of Gateway Properties to go
                     ahead with the Valley Ranch project.

                     Lutz said their strategy was to create a transition from the
                     lower density properties to the north and northeast by
                     creating larger lots in the 1/3 acre category and above along
                     their border with Ponderosa Estates. Lutz also noted the
                     location of the open space as it relates to the open space of
                     Ponderosa. He said this would create a larger open area that
                     will benefit everyone. In addition, in the 20 foot buffer
                     between this project and Ponderosa a trail will be created
                     and become a link between all of the open spaces within
                     Valley Ranch.

                     Lutz noted that the townhouse lots were also an attempt to
                     create more efficient housing but also create an enclosure in
                     this development that was an aesthetic barrier between
                     Valley Ranch and the more commercial properties to the west
                     and to the south.

                     Lutz said they ended up with an increased setback (100 feet
                     total) from the highway R/W to the assisted/independent
                     living project. They don’t have a problem with this increased
                     buffer but it may result in a reduction of units for the facility
                     or a more challenging architecture for the building which will

                                                           Kalispell City Planning Board
                                                 Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                                             Page 6 of 33
come back to the board in detail before that project moves

Lutz continued that one of the special parts of the property is
the knoll that is situated south of the northwesterly entry
into the project. Everyone agreed that the knoll needed to be
preserved and left in open space. There will be no intent to
take down any of those trees or alter the topography in any

Lutz said they originally contemplated having the
assisted/independent living on the south part of the project
and in closer proximity to the future Glacier Town Center but
all agreed that the site on the west would provide better
views and a better location.

The interior residential areas have more density but are
planned with streets and alleys. The typical size of those lots
is 48 feet wide by 130 feet long. They went for a longer lot so
that they could have some variation in the setbacks and
avoid the snout forward aesthetics. The streets will be open
to nice boulevard plantings, limited parking on the street,
and a nice look throughout. The 7,800 – 9,000 square foot
lots are driveway in lots.

Lutz said the Parks and Recreation Department prefers an
open space strategy that would accommodate larger park
areas and utilize underground storm drainage throughout
the project.

Lutz said they received a letter from the Wolford organization
that states Wolford would entertain the idea of Valley Ranch
connecting with the Glacier Town Center project to the
south. They are mentioning only one access point and if that
is approved Lutz said they would recommend that this
access road be moved to better connect to the future Rose
Crossing extension and over to the lighted intersection on
Highway 93. They fully realize that this project depends on
the Wolford project in order for them to connect and get to a
traffic light and they accept the condition that states that
this project cannot go to final plat until that is achieved.

Brent Card, 41 Kintla in Kalispell said they met with the
Ponderosa Homeowners Association to discuss this project.
Card said the 20 foot buffer/trail goes around the
circumference of the project and includes the park/knoll
area along the highway. Card said knowing that Ponderosa
Estates is a subdivision with larger lots they orientated their
larger lots on their border and placed a park area to connect
to Ponderosa’s park. The only reason for the townhouse idea
was to provide a buffer between the larger lots and the
commercial properties. Card said they are excited about the
rear loaded garages because they like the old neighborhoods
in Kalispell with the alleys. It also makes the neighborhood

                                     Kalispell City Planning Board
                           Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                       Page 7 of 33
nicer with all of the houses oriented to the front.

Card said they prefer the smaller parks that are more spread
out so the residents can enjoy a park closer to their home.
They wanted to provide more park areas rather than having
higher density.

Card said they had 3 deeded accesses onto Highway 93 and
knowing the traffic concerns they eliminated one planned for
the far south. They also moved the northern-most access in
consideration of Ponderosa’s access to get as much
separation as possible. Card said he feels they have a great

Andy Hyde, Carver Engineering said they will be involved
with the civil aspects of the project including water, sewer,
roads, and storm drainage. Silverbrook is extending big city
mains down the east side of the R/W and this project will be
connecting to those for water supply and sewage conveyance
to the treatment plant.

Hyde said this property is essentially flat and it was brought
to their attention by an adjacent farmer who has worked this
land for decades that there is a small depression in the
northeast corner that collects water. Their approach with the
drainage design is to fill that area to get it to drain. Hyde said
the properties in Ponderosa Estates north of this site have
had water either in their crawl spaces or basements and they
pump it out. Hyde said they can put in conveyance systems
to get the water out of there and will try not to interrupt the
drainage patterns that may have already been established by
the pumping of the adjacent properties.

Hyde continued regarding eliminating the many smaller
parks one of the approaches they took with the stormwater
was to try to decentralize it, collect the water but then to
dispose of it in many smaller systems rather than collect it
and concentrate it in fewer bigger disposal systems. They
were trying to spread the water out rather than put it all in
one place. He noted they don’t disagree with Condition #9
but he would also like to suggest that in addition to the
Parks Department that Public Works should be involved in
the input for the location and the size of the drainage
facilities. The open space typically does get used for
stormwater disposal and because of the heightened
awareness of the impacts of stormwater Public Works is
carefully reviewing those issues. The City of Kalispell will be
charged with the responsibility of maintaining these systems
permanently and if they are not accessible for maintenance
bigger problems could be created.

Norton noted the depression is on Lots 6, 7, & 8 however,
there is not a park there. He asked how would the water be
retained. Hyde said on the street to the south of the lots

                                      Kalispell City Planning Board
                            Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                        Page 8 of 33
                 there will be a line running to the west and an underground
                 detention and disposal system will be put in. They would
                 have to put in some kind of parallel pipe on the back side
                 basically to intercept that water because they don’t want
                 water flowing from Ponderosa into basements or crawl
                 spaces on lots in Valley Ranch. Hyde also mentioned that
                 they have a series of test holes drilled out there right now
                 and they are monitoring groundwater. Depending on the
                 results of the monitoring they may recommend finished floor
                 elevations that preclude crawl spaces. Any sort of
                 improvement on those lots south of the path could end up
                 blocking or intercepting flow and they don’t want to block
                 existing disposal patterns that are already working. But at
                 the same time knowing that they could put in some kind of
                 French drain or infiltration piping to intercept the water and
                 move it to a place where the disposal wouldn’t cause

PUBLIC HEARING   Craig Luke, Ponderosa Estates Subdivision said he has 2
                 official protests to submit. The first official protest is from
                 people who all own lots within 150 feet of the Valley Ranch
                 proposed project. Luke said they wish to officially protest any
                 change in the current zoning density, R-1 in the Kalispell
                 City Growth Policy area of the properties included in the
                 proposed project known as Valley Ranch. (Copy attached to
                 the minutes)

                 Luke continued the second official protest is from people who
                 own lots in Ponderosa or in close proximity to this
                 development. They wish to officially protest any change in
                 the current zoning density, R-1 in the Kalispell City Growth
                 Policy area of the properties included in the proposed project
                 known as Valley Ranch. (Copy attached to the minutes)

                 Sharon DeMeester, 415 Chestnut Drive, Ponderosa Estates
                 read portions of a letter to the board. (A copy is attached to
                 the minutes).

                 DeMeester summarized their major concerns are water,
                 traffic, setbacks, and light pollution. She added the
                 developers are proposing much more density than Highway
                 93 can handle until something is done with the traffic.

                 Jean Ambrose – 445 Sirucek Lane stated her concerns are
                 the same as DeMeester’s. The growth policy shows that it
                 should be R-1 and she is confused as to why it needs to be
                 changed. She walks her dog on the southern border of
                 Ponderosa and it is very steep there. She thinks saving the
                 knoll is a great idea and the other tree barriers should be
                 saved too because they serve as wind breaks. She is officially
                 protesting any change in the current zoning density due to
                 the reasons that were documented by DeMeester.

                                                      Kalispell City Planning Board
                                            Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                                        Page 9 of 33
Cork Andrews, said that he is a property owner with 2 pieces
of property that adjoin the Valley Ranch project. Andrews
said he is not opposed to the project. Years ago when all the
land was owned by Al Reed, Reed envisioned this was a
logical place to have development. A lot of time since 1978
has been spent putting in the infrastructure, including power
and gas, where the easement is located. The developers have
talked to him because his property connects to Highway 93
and he is working with them to help with their access to the
highway. The neighbors have brought up some good issues
and the planning board will be able to handle those issues
when they receive the first plat. The project is proposed for
the right spot.

Bill Dale, Bigfork resident said change is coming and they
have to accept a certain amount change. He feels this is an
appropriate location for this type of density.

Dale wanted to address the assisted living facility proposed
because he started 2 very successful assisted living facilities,
Prestige and Riverside, which he added are both full. There
is a demand for more assisted living in this area. The parking
situation at these facilities is not as bad as some might think
because it doesn’t involve a lot of traffic. Dale reviewed the
traffic generated by the other assisted living facilities in the
valley for the board. He said assisted living facilities make
good neighbors.

Melissa Evanoff, 4th Street West said she called Lewistown
Chamber of Commerce to get a relocation packet because
even though she agrees growth is inevitable she thinks
growth needs to happen with integrity. Evanoff said she
misses the old Kalispell. She noted that the Lewistown
Chamber of Commerce said the amount of people from
Kalispell and Bozeman who have contacted them about
relocation is unbelievable. She said the native people are
being pushed out because of subdivisions like this which
brings in people from out of state. Evanoff suggested the
board stick with bigger lots.

Tom Kittle, 134 Sinopah said that he is a builder and would
like to take his hat off to Gateway Properties for a great job
and he supports it 100%. To put a 100 foot buffer between
Ponderosa and Valley Ranch is too much and could take
away 80 lots. Kittle said if the homeowner’s of Ponderosa are
interested in a 100 foot buffer they should have bought the
property. He added this is a great place for an assisted living
facility, a great location and he feels the traffic has been
addressed by the developers. Kittle said that he believes the
open areas, the different size lots, and the trails, makes it a
very nice subdivision and he said Kalispell and our economy
will benefit from this project.

                                     Kalispell City Planning Board
                           Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                      Page 10 of 33
                      Wayne Smith, 118 Ponderosa Lane said he bought his lot 5
                      years ago because it was large and he has a dog. Smith said
                      to look across his fence to the south and see a trailer park
                      subdivision makes him ill. They were told at one time that
                      there was going to be 100 foot lots and he is opposed to the
                      small lots that are adjacent to Ponderosa Estates.

                      Pete Wessel – 121 Rainbow Drive said that he is not a
                      neighbor but it is good to see a lot of people involved who are
                      directly affected by a project. Others of us are not as
                      fortunate. He said everyone is Highway 93 North neighbors
                      because everyone drives that road. There needs to be some
                      comprehensive planning done as far as the transportation
                      system. He knows the city is in the process of updating the
                      Transportation Plan but it is not complete yet. He would be a
                      lot more comfortable with the access to this site if he knew
                      what the Glacier Town Center trip generation was. How
                      much traffic will it generate? Wessel said it is hard to look at
                      these projects closely without having the big picture and they
                      need to look much farther than just this site.

MOTION - ANNEXATION   Schutt moved and Norton seconded a motion to adopt staff
                      report KA-07-05 as findings of fact and recommend to the
                      city council that the initial zoning upon annexation of this
                      property be R-2 (Single Family Residential).

BOARD DISCUSSION      Schutt asked about the official protest and what steps the
                      board should take. Jentz said there is a provision in the
                      state law that addresses action on the protest letters by the
                      City Council and has no bearing on the board. If the board
                      recommends approval it will be forwarded to City Council.
                      City Council will then determine if the letters contain
                      signatures from at least 25% of the lot owners within 150
                      feet of this project. If the protest percentage was met, a
                      2/3rds majority vote of the council would be required for

                      Schutt asked if the board should be holding an annexation
                      hearing prior to the PUD. Jentz noted that board doesn’t hold
                      a hearing on the annexation but deals with recommending
                      an appropriate zoning classification to the City Council.
                      Council then takes care of the annexation issue and applies
                      the appropriate zoning.

                      Hull said he is very much opposed to this project for a
                      number of reasons. The board always talks about having a
                      large piece of property so the developer can do the kind of
                      development that the board wants to see. This proposal is
                      unusual for a rural piece of property. The minimum lot size
                      for R-2 is 9,600 square feet. The developer is requesting a
                      reduction of the minimum lot size to 6,000 square feet for
                      single family homes, which is smaller than his lot on 5th
                      Avenue West. The width is going to be 48 feet instead of 70
                      feet. A 5 foot rear setback from the alley is extremely small.

                                                           Kalispell City Planning Board
                                                 Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                                            Page 11 of 33
Hull said when they were reviewing the Riata Ridge project
on Willow Glen the board was upset that they had only gone
to the minimum lot size of 9,600 square feet and now these
developers are requesting 6,000 square feet.

Hull continued there will be more than 2,000 vehicle trips
out of this subdivision onto Highway 93 trying to make left
hand turns back to Kalispell. This is huge amount of traffic
on 93 and the developer’s only real proposal is hopefully by
the time this is completed there will be some magical way
that they can get on to 93. This project has a lot wrong with
it including density, roads, and transportation problems.

Schutt said one of his frustrations is they are trying to review
a PUD without having the entire plan and it makes it tough
for the board.

Hinchey said he feels this project has certain positive
characteristics. However, he is still bothered by the traffic
problems and the fact that they are really relying on some
connectivity to the south and the east which is an unknown
at this time. It seems premature to him to be talking about
the PUD. Hinchey said the density is pretty tight that far
from the city limits. Hinchey stated the traffic situation is too
undecided at this point for him to support the PUD.

Balcom said she is still confused about the density. She
asked is it a benefit for the developer to submit a PUD
because it gives them the freedom to deviate from the zoning
and asked if they approve the zoning but not the PUD would
the developer have to stick to the lot standards of a straight
R-2 subdivision. Norton said that is correct. If the board
approves the R-2 zoning but not the PUD they would have to
redesign the project with 9,600 square foot lots.

Hull agreed if they approved the R-2 zoning either this
developer or someone else could come in with another PUD
or a straight R-2 subdivision where they are not asking for
deviations. Hull added there are reasons why the standards
are in place.

Balcom suggested taking all of the concerns into
consideration and perhaps a plan could be reached that
every one could live with.

Norton said he lives on a 1/3 acre lot in the city and it is an
adequate size for a buffer between him and his neighbors. He
said what the board asked for at the work session is included
in this PUD. Norton said it seems now the board is changing
their minds. He doesn’t see any new issues with the
exception of the neighborhood’s concerns brought up at the

Conrad said the initial zoning they are requesting is R-2 and

                                      Kalispell City Planning Board
                            Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                       Page 12 of 33
                         with a fair amount of deviations from the R-2. Under the
                         PUD the zoning regulations allow a maximum of 5 units per
                         acre. They are coming in at about 4.4 units per acre. It is
                         totally up to the discretion of the board how much density to
                         allow under a PUD but 4.4 units still substantially complies
                         with the Suburban Residential land use designation on this
                         property which calls for up to 4 units. Conrad said what the
                         public gets in return for this PUD is increased open space
                         and parkland. If they were to come in and do a straight R-2
                         the parkland would only be about half the open space
                         proposed here.

                         Hull said the board can’t just listen to the neighbors because
                         the neighbor’s never want increased density. The board also
                         has to consider what is good for the city. He realizes the
                         density is comparable to downtown but he still thinks it is
                         not laid out well.

ROLL CALL - ANNEXATION   The motion passed on a roll call vote of 3 in favor and 2

MOTION – VALLEY RANCH    Schutt moved and Balcom seconded a motion to adopt staff
PLANNED UNIT             report KPUD-07-02 as findings of fact and recommend that
DEVELOPMENT              the PUD for Valley Ranch be approved subject to the 13
                         conditions listed in the staff report.

BOARD DISCUSSION         Balcom said that the lots are too small and should be closer
                         to what is called for in R-2 zoning. She doesn’t have any
                         problems with the assisted/independent living facility and
                         doesn’t feel that it will cause an additional traffic problem.

                         Jentz said he wanted the board to keep on track. If you have
                         no problem with the assisted/independent living facility then
                         you are looking at 220 housing units or 3 units per acre
                         density for the remaining 75 acres of the site. The small lot
                         trade-off is an extra 10 acres of parkland. If the PUD is
                         denied either this developer or someone else can come back
                         in with a regular subdivision that may have slightly bigger
                         lots but the total number of lots would be the same with a
                         net reduction in open space and parkland.

                         Norton said that is an excellent point because all they would
                         be doing is a drop from 232 lots to 220 lots and then they
                         would lose open space.

                         Hull said they were talking about consolidating the open
                         space into a municipal park. If they take the
                         assisted/independent living facility out there still would not
                         be alleys wide enough for garbage trucks to get through and
                         would not have lots that are as wide as the ones in
                         downtown Kalispell.

                         There was discussion regarding the alley width and Jentz
                         noted that the street and alley widths are proposed at the

                                                             Kalispell City Planning Board
                                                   Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                                              Page 13 of 33
                     city urban design standards. Hull disagreed. P.J. Sorensen
                     said most alleys in the older part of town are 16 feet wide for
                     the R/W and 20 feet wide between Main Street and First
                     Avenues East & West. In this project the developer was
                     proposing 30 foot wide alleys. The R-2 would be a 10 foot
                     setback but the garage setbacks proposed for this project
                     would be very similar to what you would see throughout the
                     rest of the city, even with the request to reduce the setback
                     to 5 feet the alley was significantly wider.

                     Balcom said normally with PUD’s they receive more
                     information and they have a better feel for how the project
                     will work. Balcom suggested continuing the PUD and the
                     developer ask for further clarification. Also the comments
                     and concerns of the neighbors can also be addressed.

MOTION TO CONTINUE   Balcom moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to continue
                     the discussion of the PUD for Valley Ranch until the May 8,
                     2007 meeting.

ROLL CALL            The motion to continue passed on a roll call vote of 3 in favor
                     and 2 opposed.

BOARD DISCUSSION     Conrad asked if the board could give the developer some
                     direction on what they would like to see with this PUD that
                     would help them make an informed recommendation to

                     Hull said personally he would like to see a subdivision design
                     to reflect the rural area that it sits in.

                     Schutt said it would be helpful to see more detail on the
                     roads and traffic circulation.

                     Hinchey said it’s the traffic flow that is his biggest concern.
                     He would like to see how residents would get south to

                     Conrad said the only problem that this developer has with
                     moving traffic to the south is without the mall site being
                     proposed at this time it is difficult for them to provide more
                     information to the board. Norton noted that Condition #8
                     addresses traffic and needing some outlet to the east and the
                     south. Hinchey said they also heard that Wolford would only
                     allow one road through his property and according to
                     Condition #8 the one road would be sufficient to proceed.
                     However, it would only be one way out to the south or east.
                     Conrad stated that Wolford may want to allow only one
                     access road into their property but staff, and the planning
                     board may recommend 2 or 3 to the city council because it
                     would provide for better traffic circulation and connectivity to
                     the adjacent property.

                     Jentz said this developer is at the mercy of the Wolford

                                                          Kalispell City Planning Board
                                                Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                                           Page 14 of 33
                          Development and there is no timeframe for when that project
                          may or may not come in. The board is recommending the
                          zoning and a plan for the neighborhood and at some point
                          someone has to actually get the roads built to Whitefish
                          Stage and Highway 93 whether it is this developer building
                          the roads themselves or accessing the roads built in the
                          Wolford project. Jentz noted the bigger question is if the
                          board is comfortable with the design. He said this project is
                          not premature as the entire section is being planned out with
                          200 acres of commercial development and 150 acres of
                          residential development, so now how do we make it work.

ASHLEY HEIGHTS -          A request from Ashley Heights, LLC, for annexation and
ANNEXATION                initial zoning on approximately 8.5 acre tract of land. The
                          owner is requesting annexation into the City of Kalispell with
                          the R-4 (Two Family Residential) zoning district.         The
                          property is currently zoned County R-1 and is located on the
                          western end of Bismark Street, immediately west the
                          Sunnyside subdivision phase 2.

STAFF REPORT – KA-07-02   Tom Jentz, representing the Kalispell Planning Department
                          presented Staff Report KA-07-02 for the Board.

                          Jentz stated this is an 8.5 acre piece of land for annexation
                          into the city with an initial zoning request of R-4. Sunnyside
                          Drive forms the northern boundary and Bismark Street
                          would enter into this property at the southeast corner. The
                          Highway 93 Bypass forms the western boundary. There is a
                          2 -1/2 acre strip that will be purchased by MDT as part of
                          the bypass expansion. In addition there will be a deceleration
                          ramp coming onto Sunnyside Drive from the bypass in the
                          future but no access onto the bypass is proposed at this
                          location. Sunnyside Drive will actually dead end when the
                          bypass is constructed.

                          Jentz said the R-4 zone is a single family/duplex zone with a
                          6,000 square foot minimum lot size. There was a subdivision
                          plat submitted as part of this proposal however staff did not
                          support the R-4 zone change request and decided to hold the
                          subdivision application until after the board could decide on
                          the appropriate zoning for this property. Jentz said staff is
                          recommending an R-3 zoning which is a straight single
                          family residential zone with a 7,000 square foot lot

                          Jentz said the Growth Policy land use designation is 3-12
                          units per acre which would accommodate either an R-3 or R-
                          4 zone. When the site is reviewed they look at the bypass
                          that will be on the west side. Jentz added this board said 5
                          years ago that more density against the bypass would be a
                          better use of land because it would create less desirable lots

                                                              Kalispell City Planning Board
                                                    Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                                               Page 15 of 33
                     that would be cheaper. Since then the board reconsidered
                     that thought and generally has come to the conclusion that it
                     would not be a place that we would encourage or direct a lot
                     of people.

                     Jentz reviewed the surrounding land use which is 1 acre lots
                     or larger to the north and west and smaller lots, R-4 & R-3 to
                     the south and east. He said when the property to the east
                     came in at R-4 a fair amount of concerns were voiced by the
                     neighborhood. Also city council is concerned with the
                     amount of traffic on Sunnyside Drive, which is a rural road.
                     Therefore staff felt that R-3 would be more appropriate for
                     this property.

                     Jentz reviewed the letters received from the neighborhood.
                     (Copies are attached to the minutes)

                     Staff is recommending that the planning board adopt staff
                     report KA-07-02 as findings of fact and recommend to the
                     city council that the initial zoning for this property upon
                     annexation be R-3, Urban Single Family Residential, not the
                     R-4 Two Family Residential as requested by the applicants.


APPLICANT/AGENCIES   Wayne Freeman, CTA stated the applicant is on vacation and
                     he agreed to represent the developer. Freeman said the
                     applicant had submitted a preliminary plat along with the
                     annexation request & initial zoning of R-4. In the preliminary
                     plat request it was specifically spelled out there would be 3
                     lots that would be townhouse lots. Freeman showed the
                     board the location of those 3 lots. The idea that most of these
                     lots could ultimately have multiple townhouses has been
                     eliminated with the submittal of the plat which is
                     predominately single family. He continued with regards to
                     the bypass the applicant is asking for permission and
                     intends to put a sound barrier berm wall that would be set
                     back from the buildings and would eliminate the sound
                     problems. They have worked with the Parks Department who
                     has requested cash-in-lieu of parkland for improvements to a
                     nearby park.

                     Freeman said his client is requesting approval of the R-4
                     zoning and the preliminary plat request that was submitted.

                     Schutt asked what drives the decision to put 3 townhouses
                     in a subdivision that would raise it to an R-4 for a small
                     economic pay back. Freeman said his client has identified
                     this project as in-fill and the margins of return are very low.

                     Norton asked how many lots are being requested under the
                     R-4 zoning and Freeman said 38.

PUBLIC HEARING       Neil Pierce, 1015 Ashley Drive said he lives near this

                                                          Kalispell City Planning Board
                                                Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                                           Page 16 of 33
property. Three years ago they were before this board on
another R-4 subdivision that is immediately to the east and
it turned out to be a mess. The streets are substandard, the
sidewalks and driveways have all broke, they have rebuilt the
main road three times and there are still sink holes 1-1/2
feet deep. When that developer came in here 4 years ago they
wanted R-4 and the neighbors fought it. Sunnyside Drive is
only 32 feet wide and can’t handle the amount of traffic that
they already have. On the west side of the existing R-4
subdivision in the winter they have to park in the street
because the driveways are so steep they can’t stay on the
driveway. There is no open space and kids play in the street
because the only park available is Begg Park which is all the
way over by the Lakers baseball field and Airport Road.
Pierce stated that he strongly opposes an R-4 subdivision on
this property.

Mark Krom stated he lives at 701 Ashley Drive on the corner
of Bismark and Ashley Drive. The streets are very narrow
and 2 cars can’t pass on the street, the sidewalks are
cracked, and in front of his house there is a sinkhole about 1
foot deep that has never been fixed. If there is only one
entrance into this new subdivision it is going to be very busy
on this corner. Krom added if they plan on building
townhouses they will block everyone’s view of Lone Pine.
Krom said he hoped this proposal is not approved.

Cheryl Pierce, 1015 Ashley Drive said they tried to talk to the
board to get the other subdivision stopped and they were not
able to stop it even after filing a lawsuit. No one inspected
Sunnyside subdivision and now they have overloaded the
sewers, stormwater is a problem and the affects on the
schools is astronomical. Pierce said there is not enough fire
or police protection and those houses are built too close
together. She added when one of the houses caught on fire it
burnt the other one. The board has to stop approving these
subdivisions with this high of density.

John Hammett, 1215 Sunnyside Drive said he has lived at
this address since 1962 and is right across the road from
this proposed subdivision. Hammett said he is asking the
planning board to deny Ashley Heights as submitted. R-4
zoning is too dense. Lots at 6,000 square feet are too small
and townhouses are even worse. There is no park and where
are those kids going to play? R-3 zoning is 7,000 square feet
and single family but they have the same problem with the
small yards and no park. Sunnyside Drive is very busy and
is a feeder route to Foys Lake and Meridian Roads. It can’t
handle an additional 400 to 1,000 vehicle trips from this
subdivision. Hammett said a lot of people use Sunnyside
Drive for walking, biking, and the high school runs their
track team routinely on that road. Hammett added
Sunnyside Drive is a substandard road and the developer
should be required to bring it up to the city standards for the

                                     Kalispell City Planning Board
                           Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                      Page 17 of 33
                   safety of everyone. The hill is truly a hazard and the entrance
                   to this subdivision should be down the hill on the western
                   edge of the property. Sunnyside Drive is also the first
                   deceleration lane off the bypass and won’t be able to handle
                   the additional traffic generated from the bypass let alone this
                   subdivision. Hammett suggested that this property should be
                   redone to put in 8-10 nice homes. He hopes it will be denied.

                   Angie Kruckenberg, 1116 Sunnyside Drive said she is there
                   to voice her objection to the Public Works Department’s
                   request to require the developer of Ashley Heights
                   subdivision to include a 60 foot R/W to an existing private
                   easement/their private road. She noted the location of her
                   property on the map for the board. Kruckenberg said they
                   will seriously defend their private road.

                   Joe Kauffman, 393 Valley View Drive said the existing zoning
                   is County R-1 and he feels that the R-4, R-3, & R-2 are all
                   too high of a density for this hillside, which he added is
                   sloping. The existing zoning of County R-1 should stay in

                   Mel Sharon, 37 Primrose Court East showed the location of
                   his property to the board. He asked the board to consider the
                   people who live on the hill and have invested $100’s of
                   thousands of dollars into their properties. They could have
                   gone to a higher density when those homes were built but
                   they didn’t because they wanted to provide a buffer between
                   their property and what is across the bypass. Sharon agrees
                   with the comments made about Sunnyside subdivision and
                   the lack of construction quality. His subdivision is all paved,
                   curbed with sidewalks and one acre lots. The traffic coming
                   off the bypass ramp will exacerbate the traffic problems that
                   the area already has. Sharon said he is against anything but
                   the current zoning.

MOTION             Hull moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to adopt staff
                   report KA-07-02 as findings of fact and recommend to the
                   city council that the initial zoning for this property upon
                   annexation be R-3, Urban Single Family Residential, not the
                   R-4 Two Family Residential as requested by the applicants.

BOARD DISCUSSION   Schutt said the board has often discussed how to determine
                   an appropriate buffer between the density of the city and the
                   larger properties in the County. It is his opinion that the
                   densities should decrease the further out they are from
                   downtown. He bikes on Sunnyside and in looking at this
                   property he feels R-4 is inappropriate.       Now that the
                   neighbors have voiced their concerns and after reading the
                   staff report he thinks R-2 zoning would be more appropriate.

                   Balcom said she agrees because R-3 seems too dense for this

                                                        Kalispell City Planning Board
                                              Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                                         Page 18 of 33
                           Hull said that he also agrees with the R-2 zoning proposed
                           by the board. The hillside is very nice and it should not be
MOTION TO AMEND            Schutt moved and Balcom seconded a motion to amend the
                           original motion to recommend to city council that the initial
                           zoning for this property be R-2 (Single Family Residential)
                           instead of the R-4 (Two Family Residential) as requested by
                           the applicant.

BOARD DISCUSSION           Jentz said if the recommendation is amended, findings need
                           to be discussed. He also reminded the board that they are
                           only discussing the initial zoning on this property and not
                           the issues with the subdivision. If the zoning is approved
                           they will be coming back with another proposal.

                           Balcom wanted to bring up the road easement issue that was
                           addressed by a neighbor and she was reminded those issues
                           will be discussed when the preliminary plat is reviewed.

ROLL CALL – AMENDMENT      The motion to amend the original motion passed on a roll call
                           vote of 4 in favor and 1 opposed. In making the motion, the
                           board directed staff to amend the findings to insert R-2
                           which would be minor amendments to the findings. The
                           board said they were comfortable with the changes as noted

ROLL CALL                  The original motion as amended passed unanimously on a
                           roll call vote.

WILLOW CREEK – GROWTH      A request from Wayne Turner for a growth policy amendment
POLICY AMENDMENT,          from industrial to suburban residential on a portion of the
ANNEXATION, PLANNED        project site, annexation and initial zoning classification of R-
UNIT DEVELOPMENT &         3, Urban Single Family Residential, with a PUD overlay over
PRELIMINARY PLAT           the entire 140± acre project site. The developers have also
                           requested approval of Willow Creek, a preliminary plat to
                           create 288 single family lots, 82 townhouse lots and 9 lots
                           which would accommodate multi-family buildings. A total of
                           24 multi-family buildings are proposed over the 9 multi-
                           family lots and would allow up to 340 condominium units.
                           The property is in the County zoning jurisdiction and is
                           zoned R-1, Suburban Residential, and I-2, Heavy Industrial.
                           The property is located on the north side of Foys Lake Road
                           at the intersection of Foys Lake Road and Valley View Drive.

STAFF REPORTS, KGPA-07- Sean Conrad representing the Kalispell Planning Department
01, KA-07-03, KPUD-07-01 presented Staff Reports KGPA-07-01, KA-07-03, KPUD-07-01
& KPP-07-02              & KPP-07-02 for the Board.

                           Conrad said the project is located on Foys Lake Road north
                           of the intersection of Valley View Drive. Conrad noted before
                           the board is a Growth Policy amendment on approximately
                           30 acres to change the land use from industrial to suburban
                           residential to allow the residential uses proposed. Also before

                                                                Kalispell City Planning Board
                                                      Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                                                 Page 19 of 33
the board is an initial zoning of R-3 over the entire 140 acre
site, a Planned Unit Development to allow a number of
deviations including smaller lot sizes, townhouses in the R-3
zoning district as a permitted use, multi-family buildings as
a permitted use within the R-3 district, as well as some
setback deviations on the smaller lots. Conrad added there is
also a preliminary plat request that would ultimately allow
up to 710 dwelling units on this site divided between 9 multi-
family lots and numerous single family and townhouse lots.
There is a significant amount of parkland and open space
and an overall trail system connecting the entire project

The four major issues are noise along the bypass which
borders this property on the west, setbacks to maintain
water quality and wildlife habitat from Ashley Creek which
runs along the north boundary of the site, traffic impacts
associated with 6,000 to 6,500 vehicle trips per day from the
overall project, and stormwater.

Conrad reviewed the location of the bypass, condominium
units, townhouses, large and small single family lots, open
space/parkland and the bike trails. Conrad described the
architectural features of the structures. Of note is the overall
density of this project which is quite dense. All along Foys
Lake Road the developer is proposing a fencing system which
would be a 5 foot high vinyl fence and a stepped retaining
wall and buffer will be constructed along a portion of Foys
Lake Road.

Conrad said when the planning board reviewed this project
at its work session they requested that a noise study be
included. No detailed noise study was submitted by the
developer and therefore was not included in the board’s
packet. The bypass has changed somewhat where previously
it was thought that it would go up and over this section of
Foys Lake Road now they are considering constructing the
bypass below Foys Lake Road which could play a factor in
the noise levels. Conrad said that it is up to this board as to
whether or not they want to require that the developer
submit a noise study so they can illustrate how the 60
decibel level will be met for the condominium units. If
changes need to be made to the layout of the design as a
result of the study, they would have to come in before this
board with an amended design.

Balcom asked if there would be a barrier and Conrad said
the developer has proposed some berming but we don’t know
if it is adequate because the noise study has not been

Conrad said this project will generate a significant amount of
traffic. A lot of it will go along Foys Lake Road and then north
on Meridian Road. According to the traffic study a number of

                                     Kalispell City Planning Board
                           Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                      Page 20 of 33
the intersections on Meridian Road are already impacted and
the level of service is bad and getting worse. The Public
Works Department commented that they are recommending
as part of phase 1, which is located at the southeast corner
of the project, that all of the improvements recommended in
the traffic study save for a possible light at the intersection of
Valley View Drive and Foys Lake Road, be completed as part
of phase 1. Conrad reviewed the improvements for the board.

Conrad continued regarding stormwater the initial proposal
by the developers is to retain stormwater on-site using bio-
swales that hold the water and then discharge it eventually
to Ashley Creek. Conrad said the city has recently adopted
stricter stormwater standards and if this development is
approved they would have to comply with those standards
and show how predevelopment runoff would be entering the
culvert and not impacting other properties. Conditions #22 &
#23 relate to the stormwater drainage management plan.

Conrad said the final item is the setbacks from Ashley Creek.
Fish, Wildlife and Parks (FWP’s) recommended a 200 foot
setback from the high water line of Ashley Creek. This
setback is fairly significant and if the 200 foot setback was
approved by this board and approved by council they would
have to pull all of their buildings and associated parking lots
out of the setback area. FWP’s said a 200 foot setback
should also include a 75 foot vegetative buffer and outside
the 75 feet they could install a bike path or trail. The
developers went back to FWP’s and were looking for
something to allow the condominium units to get closer to
Ashley Creek. The project as proposed comes significantly
closer than the 200 foot recommended buffer.

Conrad noted last week FWP’s sent a letter (included in the
packets) that states they still recommend the 200 foot
setback but if the city is looking at allowing a reduction in
that setback FWP’s and the city shouldn’t allow anything less
than 150 feet and then the vegetative buffer should be
increased from 75 feet to 125 feet. The developer is
requesting that the board consider off-site mitigation for
encroachment into the 150 foot setback. The current
recommendation and discussion in the staff report refers to
the 200 feet setback.

Conrad reviewed the letters and emails received from
adjacent property owners. (Copies are attached to the

Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and
Zoning Commission adopt staff report KGPA-07-1 and
recommend that the growth policy land use designation for
the entire 140.5 acre site be Suburban Residential on the
Kalispell Growth Policy Future Land Use Map.

                                      Kalispell City Planning Board
                            Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                       Page 21 of 33
                     Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and
                     Zoning Commission adopt staff report KA-07-3 and
                     recommend that initial zoning of the 140.5 acre site be R-3
                     as shown on the zoning district map for the property.

                     Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and
                     Zoning Commission adopt staff report KPUD-07-1 as findings
                     of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council the PUD
                     for Willow Creek be approved subject to the 49 conditions
                     listed in the staff report.

                     Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and
                     Zoning Commission adopt staff report KPP-07-2 as findings
                     of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the
                     Willow Creek subdivision, phase 1-6, be approved subject to
                     the 49 conditions listed in the staff report.

                     Conrad reviewed some of the conditions more thoroughly for
                     the board.

QUESTIONS FROM THE   Balcom asked if the vinyl fencing along Foys Lake Road was
BOARD                adequate enough for wind and to mitigate noise from the
                     road. Conrad said it would provide screening with
                     landscaping which probably would not help with noise.
                     Conrad added if the board doesn’t feel that type of fencing is
                     appropriate they could recommend a different type of
                     fencing. Hull noted the board requested a fence along this
                     part of the subdivision but did not want a 6 foot high wall
                     along the road and the fencing proposed was the developer’s

                     Schutt asked if the bike path along Foys Lake Road was
                     inside or outside of the fence. Conrad said it would be
                     outside the fence and would serve as both a sidewalk and
                     bike path.

APPLICANT/AGENCIES   Wayne Freeman, CTA said they are trying to create a
                     community with housing that is geared toward mixed income
                     families. He stated it is not affordable housing and the units
                     would be in the $180,000 - $400,000 range.

                     Freeman said one thing this project does that the previous
                     submittal didn’t is it proposes a considerable amount of
                     parks and open space. The project is a “town center”
                     approach where higher density is located toward the center
                     and larger lots around the perimeter to take into
                     consideration the existing properties that are adjacent to this

                     Freeman said traffic is being addressed by including an 80
                     foot R/W that runs through this site and connects to
                     Highway 2. They tried to create a system that works not only
                     within the confines of the development but recognizing that
                     people will use this road as a way to avoid traffic on the main

                                                          Kalispell City Planning Board
                                                Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                                           Page 22 of 33
arterial roads.

The traffic study indicates that traffic is already a problem in
this area and there are intersections that are failing.
Freeman stated this developer has no objection to fixing
those areas. However, there are points within the conditions
of approval in relation to traffic that the developer is
requesting some minor relief.

The traffic study recommends that the improvements to the
area roads be completed in 2 phases rather than all at once.
However, the Public Works Department is requesting that all
of the improvements be completed with Phase 1, before even
one lot has been sold. These improvements will cost
approximately $2 million dollars and the developer is asking
for some relief by allowing the improvements to be completed
in 2 phases.

Freeman said the other item is along Foys Lake Road
(Condition #26) where Public Works has requested that the
entire length be replaced before Phase 1 is final platted.
Again the developer is not opposed to upgrading this section
of road to an arterial street but they are asking that these
improvements be completed in 2 phases.

Freeman said that they have spent a considerable amount of
time working with Fish, Wildlife & Parks (FWP’s) in trying to
define the 200 foot setback from Ashley Creek. The entire
site is pasture with some level of vegetation on the south side
of the creek. FWP’s has indicated that they want some
improvements along the edge of the creek by creating a
native planting corridor. The developer proposed a 100 foot
vegetative buffer and FWP’s came back with 125 feet. Along
the entire length of Ashley Creek the developer is willing to
install, per FWP’s specifications, native trees and shrubs. In
addition, the Parks Department is asking for trails along the
creek and there was a general agreement that they would put
the trails system as close to the buildings as possible leaving
a buffer of 20 feet between the trail and the buildings.

Freeman indicated to the board the areas of the development
that encroach within the 150 foot buffer of Ashley Creek and
noted it is 1.29 acres. He said they are trying to work with
FWP’s to determine what they could do to mitigate the areas
off-site. Freeman explained the environmental community
has indicated there is a need for creation of a GIS database
to determine where those critical areas are located both
within the city and in the county. He stated the developer
has proposed either to fund that study or provide an initial
endowment that the city could hold to acquire those critical
areas or work to secure conservation easements.

Freeman said they are completing a noise study and they
plan to berm along the bypass areas regardless of what the

                                     Kalispell City Planning Board
                           Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                      Page 23 of 33
                   noise study determines.

                   Freeman referred to Condition #46 that requires that the
                   water rights that go with this property be transferred. He
                   said the water rights do not necessarily go with the property
                   and they do not know if the developer is going to able to
                   secure them. Freeman said the developer owns some
                   separate water rights that could either be retired or
                   transferred to the city from another location within the valley
                   that could be enough to off-set any impact from this

                   Freeman noted that vinyl fences are not cheap, particularly
                   the model proposed. He added vinyl fencing is relatively
                   maintenance free and in 25 years will still be there and will
                   not weather or deteriorate. However, they are not opposed to
                   the board recommending another type of fencing for this

                   Freeman said they have been working with Public Works on
                   stormwater. He said all stormwater will be held on-site and
                   they are proposing bio-swales throughout that would filter
                   the water as it is coming through and then hold it and
                   discharge it at a controlled rate.

BOARD DISCUSSION   Hull asked if the water rights would be on Ashley Creek and
                   they are Ashley Creek. He also asked if the board agreed to
                   the phasing of the road improvements listed in Condition #26
                   what work would be completed when. Freeman said the
                   traffic study recommends that the improvements be
                   completed in 2 phases. The other thing that is important to
                   note, Freeman added, is the traffic study was completed prior
                   to knowing what the configuration of the bypass would be in
                   relation to Foys Lake Road. He noted that the developer is
                   proposing that a new traffic study be completed that would
                   consider the new configuration of the bypass and they would
                   implement      the   improvements       according   to   the
                   recommendations of the new study.

                   Balcom noted that the staff report calls for the 200 foot
                   setback from Ashley Creek and they are using 150 feet and
                   she asked why there is a difference. Freeman said that
                   FWP’s requested the 200 foot setback and now has indicated
                   that they would consider a 150 foot buffer to include a 125
                   foot vegetative zone. They are trying to be creative and work
                   with the city and FWP’s to provide an incentive to provide off-
                   site mitigation for those areas within the 150 foot buffer.
                   Norton added there is a letter from Fish, Wildlife & Parks
                   that was given to them tonight that clarifies FWP’s position
                   on the buffer/setback from Ashley Creek along with CTA’s
                   response to that letter. (Both letters are attached to the

                   Schutt mentioned Willow Creek Road within the subdivision

                                                        Kalispell City Planning Board
                                              Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                                         Page 24 of 33
                 and asked the width of that road and how it would serve as a
                 south connector between Foys Lake Road and Highway 2.
                 Freeman said Willow Creek Road is proposed as an 80 foot
                 R/W. He said the developer wanted to have a larger road
                 recognizing that this road would be used as an arterial.

                 Schutt said that the project has only decreased by one unit
                 since the original proposal with one-half of those units being
                 multi-family. Freeman noted that this proposal is an entirely
                 different community than was originally proposed.

PUBLIC HEARING   Marilyn Bain, 3350 North Ashley Lake Road read a
                 statement for the record. (A copy is attached to the minutes)

                 Steve Lucky, 341 Stoneridge Drive said he is an International
                 Security Consultant/Counter Terrorism Specialist who works
                 in Washington, D.C. and commutes from beautiful Flathead
                 Valley. He said it is a long commute to D.C. and he chooses
                 to do that because of the quality of life here which is very
                 important to him. Lucky doesn’t think you can find people
                 who would be willing to pay $180,000 - $400,000 for lots
                 and houses that small. He suggested that this high of density
                 is the same as you would find in an intercity ghetto. When
                 you stick between 2,000 and 3,000 people on 140 acres in
                 that area the traffic problems speak for themselves as do
                 many of the other factors. We live in the 3rd largest
                 contiguous state in the U.S. with less than one million people
                 so we have a lot of space in Montana. We definitely need
                 affordable housing because everyone needs a good place to
                 live but we don’t need to do it this way. This dramatically
                 adversely affects those who live in that area, the police, fire
                 department and everything else. He feels this type of density
                 will create a magnet for criminal activity.

                 Melissa Evanoff, 4th Street West asked for the dimensions of
                 a 4,000 square foot lot. Norton said that the board or the
                 developer will address all of the questions during the board
                 discussion. Evanoff expressed her concerns regarding the
                 placement of the bicycle path so close to the highway and the
                 amount of traffic that will exit on to Appleway having to cross
                 over the rails to trails path. She felt that both proposals were
                 very dangerous for the children in the area.

                 Evanoff asked if the taxpayers would be responsible for the
                 cost of the road improvements. She is also concerned about
                 bringing so many more homes into the market and what this
                 surplus would do to her property values.

                 Evanoff said that Peterson School is full and the school is
                 discussing moving the 6th grade classes to Linderman
                 School. She said there isn’t enough room for the additional
                 children and is also worried about the safety of the children
                 going to school with all of the additional traffic in the area
                 that this subdivision would generate. She noted at her

                                                      Kalispell City Planning Board
                                            Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                                       Page 25 of 33
intersection of 4th and Meridian there are people who
constantly run that stop sign and it is just a matter of time
before an accident happens.

Evanoff asked if this development is really necessary or just
a chance for this developer to make a lot of money. She
wonders if the developer really cares about the quality of our
town. Evanoff also asked if the Sewage Treatment Plant will
be able to handle all of the additional sewage.

David Rice, 511 South Meridian said the density here
compared to their rural community is excessive and not
consistent with the rest of the neighborhood. The traffic flow
from this rascal is going cripple Meridian which already has
major problems. He asked the board to require the developer
to construct the road improvements as the subdivision is
being built because Meridian won’t survive the added traffic
afterward. Rice said adding traffic lights at every intersection
where there are stop signs now won’t solve the problems.

Pete Wessel, 121 Rainbow Drive said he understands the
developer is trying to produce a different product but he will
show the board photos of another development by them,
Empire Estates, which Wessel thinks is atrocious.

Wessel said since the previous plan was submitted the
number of units was only reduced from 711 to 710. He
added with the PUD proposal they are proposing a little bit
bigger park, maybe a bit more bike path and a little better
design but the board indicated at the work session that they
felt the number of units needed to be cut back.

Wessel said there is more density in this proposal than the
west side of Kalispell. Wessel said if there needs to be density
in Kalispell it needs to be encouraged in a walkable distance
to downtown. The people in this subdivision would be driving
to town which is a major problem with this site.

Wessel did an analysis of three recent developments in the
city. Empire Estates is 35% owner occupied and 65% rentals;
Buffalo Stage is 65% owner occupied and 35% rentals; and
Ashley Park is 50% owner occupied and 50% rentals. He said
looking at a higher quality development such as Buffalo
Stage you will see a higher level of homeownership. He added
that a large majority of the rentals are not affordable rentals.
Wessel mentioned he attended the affordable housing work
session with city council last night and one of the main
points was why are we building 1,200, 1,400, & 1,600
square foot houses for people who can’t afford them.

Wessel noted he reviewed the design guidelines for this
project which proposes 7 different housing styles but there is
no guarantee that is what will be built. Wessel said that he
has a problem with the city allowing development to be

                                     Kalispell City Planning Board
                           Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                      Page 26 of 33
architecturally  self-regulated.    In   addition    to    the
condominium units being reviewed by the city’s Architectural
Review Committee, Wessel feels that the Committee should
also approve a pallet of 10-15 home designs which the
developer would be required to build. He also thinks there is
a need to pay special attention to the architectural design of
the homes that will be built adjacent to Foys Lake Road and
the bypass such as 2-sided architecture and height

Wessel said a 3,000 foot fence along Foys Lake Road is not
acceptable. He suggested the board drive out by Empire
Estates where there are split-rail vinyl fences that are pulling
apart and the rails are laying on the side of the road. He
doesn’t think vinyl fencing will hold up, especially at that
length. He did provide an example of a shorter vinyl fence at
Glacier Commons which is nice and photos of Buffalo Stage
subdivision which he likes because it that has an ample
greenbelt, meandering bike paths, a frontage road, and
houses that are oriented to the street.

Wessel continued regarding the noise from the Highway 93
Bypass, this area qualifies for federal funding for sound
walls. Ashley Park in the southern part of Kalispell also
qualifies for this funding.

Wessel stated the traffic study completely neglects studying
the intersection of Idaho and Meridian. That location
functions at a level of service E out of scale of A-F and a
project of one-half the one proposed will put this intersection
into the level of service F. He added when the traffic signals
are installed by this project it will get worse. Wessel
disagreed that Willow Creek Drive would be used as an
arterial because no one would drive an S-shaped road with
residential driveways as a cut-through. He added this is the
same kind of bad design as Meridian. He uses Foys Lake
Road to Meridian Road every day and will continue to drive
that way.

Wessel asked so what will improve this project? Lower
density; architectural guarantees from this developer; the
road through the site should be straightened; greater
setbacks from the bypass; and high quality construction
along Foys Lake Road and the bypass. Wessel felt the project
needs further review.

Wessel referred to the information sent to the planning board
prior to the meeting. (Copy is attached to the minutes)

John Rauk, 125 Stoneridge noted that he appreciated the
intelligent and well prepared comments that have been
presented by the neighbors. He noted most of what he
wanted to say has already been discussed but he wanted to
paint a picture of when all the current board members and

                                     Kalispell City Planning Board
                           Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                      Page 27 of 33
city council members are no longer around and the people
who sit in their chairs are suddenly faced with condemning
all the homes on the north side of Meridian all the way to
Idaho. This board will not be here to take care of the
problems that their decisions are creating. He referred to off-
site mitigation and the water rights issue as bribes. He said
water rights are not adjudicated in the State of Montana.
People believe they own the water rights but they have to be
approved for a use when it is deferred from its original use.

Rauk feels it is all about money, the money the city makes,
the money the builders and developers make, the money the
landowner makes. We as homeowners in the area are also
involved in the money game because we are looking at the
appreciation or depreciation of our property. He said this is
just window dressing and wondered if the board really is
looking at the issues. Rauk thought the comment by the
board member who asked, where do they draw the line was a
very good point. The line should be drawn now. This is R-1
and there is no compromising and no debate. It should be
left R-1. Everyone out in this area purchased properties
based on the R-1 zoning and then to have the city entice
developers through annexation, which allows the developer a
much larger density, is wrong.

Rauk noted he heard said that the board doesn’t care about
neighbors but they should care about the people around a
project because they have been paying taxes a lot longer
than the people who will purchase those homes in the
proposed subdivision. You can make a project like this
beautiful but stick to the R-1 zoning.

Sarese Grant, 640 South Meridian said her primary concerns
are safety and traffic. Her children cross Meridian every day
to school and there are plenty of children who do. Increasing
the traffic in this area, regardless of stop signs and traffic
lights does not change the ratio that the cars will outnumber
the children. Grant said there have been several accidents on
the bridge over Ashley Creek. In addition there are many
other pedestrians and bicyclists who use the area roads and
it is not safe now. She is worried that the cost of road
improvements will come from the taxpayers and there isn’t
enough money. Grant said she is also concerned about the
environment and the wildlife along Ashley Creek.

Grant voiced her concerns about Peterson School. It is full
and even if next year those 6th graders are gone and there are
60 seats open, those 60 seats will be filled by the students
who are currently displaced to other schools. The kids across
the street from her can’t go to Peterson School because it is
full. Grant said that she opposes the project.

Connie Lestiko – 5 Winward Loop said she is a resident of the
city and is here in full support of Marilyn Bain’s and Pete

                                     Kalispell City Planning Board
                           Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                      Page 28 of 33
Wessel’s presentations. Those 2 presentations alone would
give the board enough information to know that this project
needs further review. Lestiko said she is surprised that the
recommendation from the staff is to approve this proposal.
She said to take the current zoning of R-1 and to change it to
an R-3 with a PUD would change the whole nature of the
area. She noted R-3 and R-2 zoning calls for single family
homes yet with the PUD they are proposing 340 units out of
710 that would be multi-family units. She added that doesn’t
count the 82 townhouses.

Lestiko reviewed some of the major deviations the developer
is proposing which are smaller lot size; reduced setbacks;
and allowing townhouses and condominium units in a single
family zone. She said this proposal is way too dense for this

Lestiko said that she has been a member of the Police
Advisory Council for years and she knows what a task it is
for our current law enforcement personnel to cover the city.
By adding 710 more units will make it more difficult.

Lestiko added the environmental impact with all of the
previous uses on that land just reinforces the need for the
200 foot setback from Ashley Creek. Lestiko thinks the
setback should be required and the board should not accept
off-site mitigation.

Lestiko asked the board to seriously consider the public
comment. She added she doesn’t understand the comment
made by the board that the neighbors are not going to be
listened to because they never want the density, which was
shocking for her to hear. She feels the board should listen to
what every taxpayer has to say but especially those who are
most affected.

Julie Robinson – 955 Foys Lake Road said she and her
neighbors have concerns about wildlife and traffic. She
counted 6 dead deer in one month on a small stretch of Foys
Lake Road, which is a major arterial for deer to travel to and
from their habitat. If there are 6,000 more vehicles going
down this road there will be a lot more dead deer and she
believes multiple car accidents.

Robinson described the icy condition of the road especially
on the bridge. She also expressed her concern about the
safety of kids walking to school and the dangerous speeds at
which people already travel in this area.

Robinson described the problems that she and her neighbors
are currently experiencing with groundwater and stormwater
runoff. She feels that the developer’s proposed system will
only create more problems on their properties. She noted
that she is also worried that she will be taxed out of the

                                    Kalispell City Planning Board
                          Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                     Page 29 of 33
neighborhood and she cannot afford to move.

Robinson said that she appreciates the time the architects
have put in to try and make this project appealing she just
thinks that it is the wrong place at the wrong time.

Irene Houston – 1314 - 2nd Street West said she is concerned
about the density and traffic on 2nd Street. She is less than 1
block from Peterson School and there is a lot of traffic on
that road now and she is sure there is going to be a lot more.

Mrs. Roach – 963 Foys Lake Road said they live across the
road from the proposed development. Most of her concerns
have already been voiced. However she doesn’t feel enough
consideration has been given to those homeowners who live
outside of this subdivision. As the homeowner right across
the road she is concerned with the overflow of the excess
water and is certain during high water when the water from
Willow Creek Subdivision is released her house will be

Roach said she is also concerned about the noise along Foys
Lake Road which is loud at times now and with the addition
of 6,000 cars from this development and the bypass will be
excessive. She asked if there was any consideration for noise
barriers for the homeowners who are already there.

Roach said she agrees with Julie Robinson that they are
trying to do a good job but again it is too many homes
proposed and too many exceptions to the rules without real
clarification as to why. She hopes that the board will ask the
developers to take their plan back and present something
that is workable for the current residents, the community
and potentially for the city of Kalispell.

David Klingensmith, 245 Stoneridge said as a newcomer to
the valley he sees the growth and he doesn’t have a problem
with growth as long as it is done appropriately. He agrees
with the statement made from one of the board members
that there needs to be some logical transition from city to
rural. If those transitions are not done it will be a great
disservice to the city and to those who live in the county who
have purchased their property with the R-1 zoning. With the
density of this proposal including a 2-3 story condominium
at the far west corner of Foys Lake Road there isn’t much
transitioning from the city to the county R-1. He feels the
density is excessive.

Klingensmith noted he was also appalled that the proposal
was to support this project with 49 conditions. It would be
like him telling his patient you are fine you only have 49
problems. Obviously this project needs to be started over
from the beginning and reworked. He realizes this property is
going to be developed. He added it is a beautiful drive out

                                     Kalispell City Planning Board
                           Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                      Page 30 of 33
                       Foys Lake Road and he would hate to see that transition lost
                       with a huge development like this one.

                       Scott Creekmer, 229 Sunset Trail said he wanted to reiterate
                       what Marilyn Bain said earlier. He is a builder who built a
                       home in Stoneridge and he was talking with his painter one
                       day, who happens to be 65 years old, and Creekmer said he
                       couldn’t wait to see what would be built on this site because
                       they will be beautiful homes. His painter responded anyone
                       would be a fool to build over there because when he was a
                       kid they used to get chased out of there because it was so

                       Edna Carter, 100 South Meridian Road said she has lived
                       there for 40 years and everyday the traffic is backed up from
                       Albertson’s past Peterson School. She can’t get out of her
                       driveway even though she eventually made a circular
                       driveway so she doesn’t have to back out. Carter said her
                       property also backs up to the mill and she has watched
                       many fires there and they had to bring in Cats and other
                       equipment to put out fires in the sawdust. She can’t
                       understand putting more traffic onto a road that already has
                       so much traffic. She is against this project.

APPLICANT’S REBUTTAL   Wayne Freeman said they appreciate all the comments
                       especially the ones acknowledging they have tried to take a
                       unique property and turn it into a good project.

                       Freeman said the mill site was on the north side of Ashley
                       Creek. There was a location on the south side but that is in
                       the highway R/W and is not within the development area. As
                       far as the testing, obviously before you go out and do any of
                       the work you do a number of core samples which they have
                       done. But, before the project goes forward there will be a full
                       scale analysis of sub-soil conditions.

                       Freeman said the high water table has been addressed
                       within the staff comments and they recognize there might be
                       some restrictions on basements in some of those areas.

                       They don’t discount the comments on the water rights in fact
                       that is what they were trying to get to when discussed before.
                       They recognize there are several people involved in that
                       issue. Since they didn’t feel the condition could be met what
                       they were offering was to transfer water rights from another
                       location to make up for the impact of this project.

                       Freeman said the traffic concerns are no surprise. He said
                       the developer will be paying for the improvements
                       recommended in the traffic study and not the taxpayers. The
                       drainage problems that were brought up will be corrected as
                       part of the improvements to Foys Lake Road. They will retain
                       water on-site and release at the rate required by the city.
                       Freeman added the bypass will do a lot to relieve traffic

                                                            Kalispell City Planning Board
                                                  Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                                             Page 31 of 33
                     congestion and noted that was not addressed in the traffic

                     Freeman said this is not Empire Estates. They are more than
                     willing to include the design standards into the conditions
                     and the Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions (CCR’s) for the
                     project. Freeman added height limits are regulated by zoning.

                     Freeman again reviewed their proposal for off-site mitigation
                     for the encroachment of the Ashley Creek 150 foot setback.

                     Freeman said 49 conditions is not uncommon and they feel
                     can be met with the exception of the 4 areas he listed earlier.

MOTION – GROWTH      Hull moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to adopt staff
POLICY AMENDMENT     report KGPA-07-01 and recommend that the growth policy
                     land use designation for the entire 140.5 acre site be
                     Suburban Residential on the Kalispell Growth Policy Future
                     Land Use Map.

BOARD DISCUSSION     Conrad said the board could address the growth policy
                     amendment and continue discussion on the remaining items
                     until the next planning board meeting on May 8, 2007.

                     Hull said he recalled when the neighbors were against the
                     Stoneridge subdivision. Hull noted that this property is not
                     out in rural Flathead County but directly across the street
                     from the oldest part of Kalispell.

ROLL CALL – GROWTH   The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.

MOTION TO CONTINUE   Norton moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to continue
                     the discussion on the annexation & initial zoning, planned
                     unit development and preliminary plat for Willow Creek until
                     the May 8, 2007 planning board meeting.

ROLL CALL -          The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.

BOARD DISCUSSION     Balcom assured the people in attendance that the board
                     seriously considers the public’s testimony at these meetings
                     and their perception that they are not considered couldn’t be
                     further from the truth.

OLD BUSINESS:        None.

NEW BUSINESS         None.

ADJOURNMENT          The meeting was adjourned at approximately 12:20 a.m.

                     The next work session (which is a joint session with the
                     Flathead County Planning Board) will be held on Tuesday,

                                                          Kalispell City Planning Board
                                                Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                                           Page 32 of 33
                          April 24, 2007 beginning at 7:00 p.m. at the Herron Park
                          Community Room, 101 Foys Canyon Road.

                          The next regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning
                          Board and Zoning Commission will be held on Tuesday, May
                          8, 2007 beginning at 7:00 p.m.

/s/Timothy Norton                           /s/Michelle Anderson
Timothy Norton                              Michelle Anderson
President                                   Recording Secretary

APPROVED as submitted: 05/08/07

                                                            Kalispell City Planning Board
                                                  Minutes of the meeting of April 10, 2007
                                                                             Page 33 of 33

To top