Loading...
11-10-09KALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 10, 2009 CALL TO ORDER AND' ROLL The regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board CALL and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Board members present were: Bryan Schutt, John Hinchey, Rick Hull, C.M. (Butch) Clark, Chad Graham, Troy Mendius and Richard Griffin. Sean Conrad, P.J. Sorensen, and Tom Jentz represented the Kalispell Planning Department. There were approximately 70 people in the audience. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Clark moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the September 9, 2009 meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. PUBLIC COMMENT No one wished to speak. MITSCH ZONE CHANGE - A request by R. Dick Mitsch for a zone change from P-1 P-1 TO B-2 (Public) to B-2 (General Business) for 2 tracts of land totaling 1.78 acres located on the west side of US Highway 93 South in Kalispell just south of the Kelly Road intersection. STAFF REPORT KZG-09-04 Sean Conrad, representing the Kalispell Planning Department reviewed staff report KZC-09-04. Conrad said this is a zone change request on property located on Highway 93 South which is approximately 2 acres in size. The planning board reviewed this property earlier this year when a zone change took place from B-2 to P-1 to accommodate a potential pre-release center which is no longer proposed to be located on this site. The property owner is now requesting that the business B-2 zoning be restored to the. property. Conrad reviewed the location of the property and surrounding uses. Staff is recommending that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report #KZC-09-04 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the zoning for this property be changed to B-2 (General Business) . BOARD QUESTIONS None. APPLICANT/CONSULTANTS None. PUBLIC HEARING No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Pagel of 31 MOTION Hinchey moved and Griffin seconded a motion to adopt staff report #KZC-09-04 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the zoning for this property be changed to B-2 (General Business). BOARD DISCUSSION None. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. PUBLIC HEARING - SOUTH A request by the City of Kalispell to update and amend the KALISPELL AIRPORT existing "Kalispell City Airport/Athletic Complex REDEVELOPMENT PLAN Redevelopment Plan and Analysis". The proposed plan titled "South Kalispell/Airport Redevelopment Plan" expands the area of the existing redevelopment plan and includes goals and recommendations to achieve the following: * Expansion of the airport * Promote the in -fill development and redevelopment of commercial sites along the U.S. 93 corridor * Promote compatible land -uses adjacent and in close proximity to the airport * Create incentives for development of vacant land and redevelopment of industrial parcels along the U.S. 93 corridor. The proposed "South Kalispell/Airport Redevelopment Plan" boundary can be generally described as areas on the east and west sides of U.S. 93 from 14th Street East south to Cemetery Road. Cemetery Road makes up the southern boundary and Airport Road makes up the western boundary. STAFF REPORT Sean Conrad, representing the Kalispell Planning Department reviewed the plan for the board. Conrad also reviewed the purpose of the planning board's review of the South Kalispell Airport Redevelopment Plan. He said the proposed plan reflects the accomplishments since the original analysis was completed in 1996 and discusses the goals then which included removing the athletic fields east of the airport and extending water and sewer lines down Highway 93 which have both been accomplished. Conrad added there has also been significant development in this area including Rosauer's, the Hilton Garden Inn, the South Tower complex, and the Glacier Toyota dealership. Conrad continued the goals also include incorporating recommendations of airport studies, providing consistency with the city's Growth Policy which was updated in 2003, and reviewing the boundaries of the planning area to reflect all the changes that have occurred within those boundaries. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 2 of 31 Conrad reviewed the proposed boundary of the plan area. Conrad noted the recommended actions within the plan include relocating the airport runway, pursuing additional apron and hangar space to meet projected needs of the airport, and reviewing the growth policy and zoning designations in that area to promote compatible land uses around the airport. The redevelopment plan also looks at promoting iniill development along both the east and west sides of Highway 93 South, conducting environmental assessments and pursuing appropriate clean-up activities and sites with contamination, and creating development incentives for redevelopment of vacant lands along Highway 93 South. In summary the proposed redevelopment plan provides goals and actions to increase the safety at the airport and it also focuses on redevelopment efforts for both commercial and residential properties in the plan area. Public comment received to date includes concerns that this was a plan for annexation of those lands outside the city limits which is not the case. The city routinely plans outside of its boundaries so that if properties choose to annex they can take advantage of any plans that the city is trying to promote in that area and can assign appropriate zoning districts and determine the appropriate land use. Conrad mentioned in the plan itself was a housing analysis that uses the terms "fair, low-cost, poor and cheap" for housing in the study area. There were concerns that properties were labeled with these terms and Conrad noted those terms came from the Department of Revenue and was not something that the staff or consultant designated for those homes. Lastly, Conrad said it was suggested by a citizen who attended one of the plan's open house meetings that the city look at including an industrial area on the west side of Airport Road near the future bypass in the plan to provide incentives for redevelopment. However, after contacting the property owners in that area most of them do not want to be within the plan's boundary. In addition, these referenced properties were not included in the original analysis of the proposed redevelopment plan which would require additional analysis if they were included. Therefore staff suggests that the planning board remove those properties from their recommendation to the city council. At an October 13, 2009 work session the planning board brought up additional goals and actions they wanted to see in the area including to pursue funding for the realignment Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 3 of 31 of 18th Street West and Airport Road; and extending water and sewer main lines to those areas that have redevelopment potential. Staff requests the planning board consider those goals be incorporated into the redevelopment plan. Jane Howington, Kalispell City Manager, said this is an emotional issue and she wanted to separate the discussion into 2 issues; the expansion of the redevelopment area and the city airport. Howington introduced Wade Elder who is working with the city's Community and Economic Development Department specializing in revolving loan and TIF funds. Howington said both she and Elder feel they need to spend some time working with the business and property owners in the South Kalispell area and in the redevelopment district to look at long-range planning. In addition a series of community meetings will be held, throughout the county, to discuss redevelopment. As a side note Howington indicated in discussions with MDT there is an interest to change the terminology of the "bypass" to "alternate route". She added it is important that the route is not recognized as a way to "bypass" our community. Howington continued, a number of citizens in the community, and the region, have approached the planning board, city council and staff and have expressed their concerns about the city airport. She said it often seems in the structured environment of a public meeting that the answers are not forth coming because there isn't debate or a question/answer process. Howington said the city council and staff have heard these concerns and have scheduled a town hall meeting to be held November 30th• The purpose of the meeting is to begin to re -explore what has been going on in the city airport area, what the past legislation and studies have indicated, and the current status of the airport. It will also be. a listening session so that all the information and concerns can be brought out. A second meeting will be held as a follow-up to address the concerns, share additional information, and provide another opportunity for public comments. Then the city council will decide if more meetings should be held and determine how and when they feel they have enough information to move forward with work sessions. Howington said there will be a lengthy process before any action is taken. Howington noted at the next council meeting there will be an agenda item to approve a contract to hire a consulting firm to complete an environmental assessment (EA) on the Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 4 of 31 airport. The city feels an EA is a necessary step in helping the community understand what we want to do and where we want to go. Therefore the city feels we need to move forward with that process in conjunction with the public meetings. Howington said in summary the action before the board tonight is not a time -sensitive action. There are two 2 ways to approach this plan one is through the Economic Development function and the other is the public information gathering and discussion for the airport. Howington said she urges the planning board to take a longer view of the redevelopment area and not make a recommendation at this time. Clark asked the location of the meeting on November 30th and Howington said the meeting will be held at 7:00 pm at the Hilton Garden Inn. She added they didn't feel the council chambers would be large enough. Howington said the format will be a town hall meeting with a facilitator who is not on the city council or a member of the staff. The council members will be in attendance to open and close the meeting and to listen but no council deliberating will take place. PUBLIC HEARING Scott Davis - 448 5th Avenue West - read from a letter which is attached to the minutes. Karlene Khor, 229 7th Street West stated she is a manager of an LLC that owns property on Main Street in Kalispell. She is also the daughter of Command Sergeant Major Hubert and Betty Osorio who reside. at 904 4th Avenue West in Kalispell. Her parents address may be familiar when the light aircraft barely made it over Flathead High School and barely made it over her parent's property to crash into a home across the street. Khor said the location of the airport has already exhibited a danger to those citizens on the west side and to the south and any kind of expansion of the present city airport exacerbates a problem that already exists. She added we were lucky no one on the ground was killed, except for a poor dog, but that may not happen next time. Kohr asked why do citizens live in a town? They live in a town because they want services, police and fire departments that respond, their garbage picked up and they want safety and security to be paramount. She added they also want a government that listens to them. Constituents no longer have faith in their city council members, in their government, in a planning department, because they don't think you are listening. They also think their government is already on a course and no matter what the citizens say their concerns won't be heard. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 5 of 31 Kohr said stringing dialogue out will not turn the attention of citizens away from the fact that they don't feel you are listening to them. We have an airport that isn't safe the way it is now and is it in the right place? Kohr said the neighborhood has already grown around the airport and shouldn't be expanded and we can't afford to have an accident where an airplane doesn't kill just a dog but kills people. Wayne Worthington, 365 Summit Ridge Drive stated he is opposed to the expansion of the airport for 3 reasons. Noise, safety, and the close proximity of the Glacier International Airport. He described the airplane activity over his home from both airports and how the expansion of the city airport and larger planes will create a negative impact on his property. He also described the development around him and the noise that development generates. Worthington said he is concerned with safety and the increased air traffic from the city airport if it is expanded could cause additional accidents. Fred Hammel, 505 7+h Avenue West said with redevelopment and annexation for every $1.00 brought in by property taxes it costs $1.40 in services and the city is actually losing money. Semi trucks are not allowed on city streets except for local deliveries and yet the city council wants us to let planes that are probably as big as semi trucks land at this airport, flying over homes at 140 - 150 miles per hour. Hammel is totally against the expansion of the city airport, he thinks it is wrong. They talk about the safety of the airport but how about the safety of the people who live along the flight path. Hammel said the city airport has been there a long time but the City of Kalispell has been there a lot longer and bigger airplanes shouldn't be allowed to come in. Randy Schumacher, 2009 5+h Avenue East stated he doesn't think the board realizes the large number of citizens who are against this airport. He has a business degree and he specializes in marketing and what he has learned, especially in these times, is you don't expand the city airport when there is already an airport a few miles away. The current city airport is functional and he sees no reason why they would spend taxpayers money, whether city, county or federal, to do something that we don't need. Schumacher asked how many people here tonight will benefit from an airport expansion. Yes the building of the runway will be a boom for construction but after that we will be paying taxes, taxes and taxes and will hear noise, noise and more noise. Tim Wise, 2097 Airport Road stated he has a letter from his brother to enter into the record. (A copy is attached to the Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 6 of 31 minutes.) Wise said his father donated the gravel to the airport way back when and they have been good neighbors. His father ran an independent grocery store here for 67 years (Sykes) and the only reason he survived during those hard times and up until the end was it wasn't all about the almighty dollar. He cared about the people in the community and that is the kind of community he was raised in. When they wanted to expand the airport, his family owns the largest piece of land south and west of there, they didn't show the common courtesy of approaching the family to ask if they wanted to sell or not. Wise said he doesn't think the airport representatives should be arrogant enough to assume what his family will do or force them to do anything. They don't strike him as the type of people he would want to do business with to start with. Wise said they are adamantly against the airport. Phillip Guiffrida, III, 1506 Greendale Court stated he agrees with city planning in that they need to take one step back and look at everything over again. The way economics are right now he doesn't feel the need to expand or move the airport. They need to look at the property owners who have been paying taxes for the last 80-90 years who live in these neighborhoods. Those are the people who are being put out, the ones who have made Kalispell, and everyone needs to take a serious look at that. He also submitted a letter prior to this meeting which is attached to the minutes. Doreena Wise, 2097 Airport Road said she wanted to address the safety issue again. They almost lost a good portion of their family last year when the plane wrecked on their ranch. The plane crashed between 3 of their houses and in another 20 feet someone could have been gone. It has almost happened more than once. She said it is not like it used to be, there are helicopters buzzing houses one after the other and no one is checking on them. M.J. Inman stated she is Doug and Judy Wise's daughter and lives in Spokane, Washington. She has been following some of the articles and comments regarding the city airport. One of things that she was constantly hearing is if you didn't want to live around this airport you shouldn't have moved there. Inman said the airport has been there for 75 years in one form or another. Well, she continued, her dad was born 92 years ago on that hill, on that ranch and he still lives there today, and he was there first. She thinks it is wrong how they have approached him, no common courtesy they. basically said we want your land. Her father is not willing to sell his land, he is not willing to let you steal his land, and he will fight to his dying breath to save his home. He has done a lot for this community and she doesn't feel he should be paid back this way to increase the wealth of a certain few. She added she doesn't feel the Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 7 of 31 airport benefits the city when there is the Glacier International Airport nearby. Mark Paulson, 1045 3rd Avenue West stated since 1978 he has lived a block north of the high school football field and if you extend the center line of the current city airport northward it runs right through his house. Over that time he has seen the air traffic increase and he has become acclimated to it but that has changed in the last few years with the arrival of twin engine planes at the city airport. Twin engine planes are obnoxiously loud and they literally rattle the dishes in his kitchen cupboard. Paulson said he has been out on the deck talking to his neighbor when it has flown over and he has to stop the conversation until the plane has landed. Paulson continued, simply put, what the city is proposing to do with the airport is wrong. Class B-2 planes include business jets up to 19 passenger and is limited to very light jets but he doesn't know how you limit the size of planes that can land on that runway, it doesn't make sense. For the record in the development plan there is a factual error on page 20, under Section 6 - Airport Improvements; Section A - Airport Design Parameters in the 5th paragraph the last sentence reads, "This type of airport is designed for airplanes with wingspans up to but not exceeding 49 feet." Paulson believes that is incorrect, a B-2 airport allows planes with up to a 79 foot wingspan. Paulson said he appreciates that the city is looking for additional input from the public in this process. Erica Murray, 356 Shelter Valley Drive stated she is also a property owner at 2174 Airport Road which is located just north of the "alternate route". Murray thanked city staff and said she feels they are listening to her as a property owner in recommending that the section that is not currently part of the urban redevelopment plan be excluded from the plan. She added since this section of properties is not in the draft plan additional analysis would be required. She attended the work sessions held and they have been receiving very mixed signals regarding whether these additional properties would have to be annexed in order to receive any benefits of the urban renewal plan, such as housing rehabilitation assistance and incentives for development or redevelopment of industrial property. From everything she has read and heard over the past 2 months the urban redevelopment plan can be the first step into future annexing of their property and it would be a substantial financial burden to her that she does not want to bear even with the consideration of the incentives and the other benefits that may or may not come along with that. Murray thanked the board for their time and consideration of her opinion as a property owner. Linda Solem, 1539 Haven Drive read a letter and a copy is Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 8 of 31 attached to the minutes. Mary Iverson, 1203 4th Avenue East thanked the City Manager for recommending postponing any decisions from the board. Iverson said the citizens of Kalispell have not had their questions answered adequately and up to this point she believes they haven't been properly informed of the intentions of the airport officials. She reminded the planning board that the citizens are all investors and stakeholders in the City of Kalispell and the expansion of the airport affects too many residents to have the plan approved so quickly. She added now awareness is increasing and citizens are becoming more informed. Richard Kuhl, 867 North Main Street said the city is spending millions of bucks to provide an alternate route for large trucks so they don't travel through Main Street. One of the reasons is to have a quieter Main Street and a better of quality of life. However now we are turning around and allowing larger airplanes and an expanded airport and frankly ruining the quality of life for folks in southern Kalispell and even up in his north end of town. He sees no reason for expansion of the airport and he is glad that the city is slowing down and looking at the process in a more detailed manner. Kuhl would recommend as they go through the re -analysis of the entire redevelopment plan they actually chalk out the airport as it exists and plan for what would happen if that was just a vacant piece of land instead of an airport. That is .the kind of analysis that we need and he would recommend. Eloise Hill, 467 6+h Avenue WN said she is in opposition to expansion of the airport particularly for the reasons of safety and because with increased flights there is going to be an increase in noise pollution. She also questions why we are spending the money to increase the facility and space of the airport since recently in the Daily Inter Lake there were photos indicating there is plenty of space at the airport to store statutes and sculpture waiting for installation at the corner of Main and Idaho. Winnifred Storli stated she lived at 3420 Airport Road for 35 years but recently had to move to town because of the taxes and now she can't afford to live there anymore. Storli said the current airport is a wonderful little place where her husband learned to fly and they spent many happy hours going to Schafer Meadows and enjoying the beauty of the Flathead. But now, in this terrible time that we are going through, it is obscene to waste $14 million even though it is a grant from the F.A.A. Storli said she likes the airport as it is and doesn't see any reason to compete with Glacier International Airport. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 9 of 31 Storli said in this valley the aluminum plant has closed, Sykes is no more and we don't have a taxi service so how can we even take people from the jets to Moose's or the fair. What she would like to see in this plan is what long term good is it going to do for this valley and if it will be a real stimulus of jobs and a real help to everyone in the valley not to just a few land owners or a few motels but a plan for everyone here. Storli asked the board to invite the citizens more often to give their opinion. Dave Hoerner, 298 Gosney Crossroad, Columbia Falls stated he has worked at the airport for the last 20 years and he supports it. He has seen a lot of struggles with the airport and none of the money from the sale of land along Highway 93 went back into the airport, most of it went into the baseball fields or other improvements throughout the city. Hoerner is on the Safety Committee and the last thing they want is for someone to get hurt anywhere in town so safety is their biggest concern. There are rules set up and changes have been made such as 3-4 days a week there isn't any flight training at the city airport, there are no touch and goes on runway 31 so that limits the number of airplanes flying over the city. Hoerner indicated the money from F.A.A. is not tax money it is money that we all pay any time we fly in jet airliners and then F.A.A. spreads it out amongst airports around the country. F.A.A. doesn't control the airports after the money has been given to them but there are things that you have to do such as fencing and lighting. Hoerner said he would like to see the airport expand 1000 feet south which would change the flight path so that it wouldn't be over the south end of town and make it safer. Hoerner continued there are 30 full-time people who work at the airport and they aren't getting rich it is just a job. You also have to remember that your children may want to learn to fly someday; the people who work the Alert Helicopter learn to fly at this airport and he added, believe me you will want to hear the Alert helicopter if you are hurt. In addition, armed forces flight training is at this airport or an airport just like it and if we shut down all the little airports where are these people going to learn to fly. He hopes the airport can expand at least with moving the runway out of town. Roxanna Brothers, 786 4+h Avenue WN suggested that the town hall meeting be held somewhere other than the Hilton. The city helped the Hilton build there and her feeling is it is because of the airport and the expansion that they hope to make. Brothers said the Outlaw Inn has been there a long time and they are in need of help and no one is helping them so the meeting should be held at the Outlaw Inn. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 10 of 31 Rebecca Groose-Jones, 630 5th Avenue East said she lives on the east side of town but she is one of those folks who sits in her back yard and has to stop her conversation when a plane flies over but that is the least of her concerns. Groose-Jones said she was involved in the dialogue in the Beacon where there was positive dialogue between aviators and residents. She said she is definitely opposed to the expansion for all the reasons that have already been listed. There are a lot of people who like the gliders going over but not the constant flight school training and touch and go activity. We do not need a town hall meeting where there is one presentation by the advocate of the development and a few questions by those who are opposing and nothing gets done. Groose-Jones suggested a website, i-neighbors.org which is a forum for neighborhoods with issues just like these and presents a place where people can really talk. She added when she was 10 years old there was discussion about a performing arts center, move the fairgrounds, and construct a bypass. Well, she said, she is now 51 so she knows the airport won't be moved right away. However that is not to say that she won't advocate for regulation and moving the airport. She asked if the city's share of $1 million is really where we want our tax dollars going. What about the youth of Kalispell or a city center. Groose-Jones thanked all the city representatives in public service she appreciates their time and she doesn't think they are all in collusion against the citizens. Scott Davis, 448 5th Avenue West spoke again and stated he is concerned because the city is saying they want to talk and explore all of these ideas but then he is hearing the city council will vote on a new EA development for the airport at their next meeting. He asked why the city would want to go ahead with another EA when there are so many people asking why spend that money. He doesn't think the city really wants to negotiate in good faith. Scott Richardson, 1507 lgt Avenue West stated he is the Chairman of the Kalispell City Airport Advisory Council and he is pleased that there is dialogue about the airport. He is concerned however that there are some folks who are creating much ado about nothing. They keep referring to this as an expansion of the airport when it is a reconfiguration. The jets do not want to land on short runways and will continue to go out to Glacier International Airport where they have all the facilities. Richardson said the city airport has not been invested in since the 1960's and it needs to be reconfigured to make it a safer airport both for the public and the pilots. Richardson said he would encourage people to listen to what the pilots are saying and to read the public documents that are out including the site selection study and the EA. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 11 of 31 They indicate the public hearings that have occurred, the reasons some of the decisions have been made, and he added these are not things that have been decided without a great deal of consideration. Richardson said there are 2 issues that he consistently hears and they are valid, the noise and safety. If the airport reconfiguration is completed it will change where the noise is - away from those houses on the north end, which will be a good thing for the residents and by increasing the width of the runways will make is safer for the pilots. Richardson continued the City of Kalispell has already invested $1.7 million in the construction of ramps and the leveling of the airport elevations and private parties have invested an additional $2 million for a $4 million investment. There have been several suggestions for the use of the property and he feels the highest and best use of the property located next to the treatment plant is the airport. The property used to be swamp land, it is wet and foundations continued to settle in this area. He feels it would be a mistake for the City of Kalispell tax revenue and certainly for the private parties who have invested all this money if the airport was to just go away. Richardson said please continue to keep an open mind about the city airport it is not suited for large corporations that are coming in with their big jets, it is a place where a person can talk to an aviator or a mechanic and determine if this is what he wants to do for the rest of his life and get the training for that career. It is a fantastic facility and he supports those folks who don't want to see jet traffic or heavy aircraft out there. Don't look at this as an airport expansion but an airport reconfiguration. Scott Harrison, 2808 Airport Road said he is a pilot and he echoes what Dave Hoerner and Scott Richardson said in regards to the airport reconfiguration. There are 3 issues, noise, safety and economics. Pushing the runway to the south 1000 feet would alleviate a lot of those problems and everyone has to put their heads together to determine if economically this is the best thing. Harrison said he uses the airport for his business twice a month traveling throughout the inland northwest and he has many city residents that work for him. He and his employees support the city by spending their money right here in town. Fred Hammel, 505 7+h Avenue West spoke again and said he has talked to several pilots and this whole thing started with wanting to take down the KGEZ towers. Those pilots told him if it wasn't for the antennas they would have never found the airport during a white out. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 12 of 31 Keith Robinson, 1303 4th Street West stated he has been on the Kalispell Airport Advisory Council for 13 years and he has seen very few of the people here tonight at those meetings. Noise and safety are major considerations for the Advisory Board and the airport improvements will create a safer airport. Robinson said he had his first flying experience in the early 40's with a man named Sid Ludwig at this little airport. He graduated from Flathead High School and went to the University of Montana and then he spent 22 years in the Air Force. He got his inspiration from this airport. Robinson continued the property was called mosquito flats and today they still have problems with water. He has a friend who lives across from the airport and she likes it because it provides green space and she can see the Swan Range from her house. In 1986 when he retired from the Air Force and drove into the city limits he couldn't believe there were sports fields sitting on airport property and he thought what a liability that was. And, he added, the money for the new sports complex came from the sale of airport property. F.A.A. will, not control the airport they control the air space and they make sure it is followed. There is more dangerous cargo going down Main Street which is more of a hazard than the city airport. The airport also generates a lot of money. He has seen a municipal airport close and an industrial complex take its place and then the people wished they could have the airport back. Robinson suggested everyone should keep an open mind — sometimes noise is the sound of freedom. Jim Pierce owns Red Eagle Aviation and he is in favor of the airport improvement/expansion. He asked that the planning board make informed decisions based on facts not from people who are emotional and may not have their facts straight and weigh the economic benefits vs. the impact for the homeowners and the noise issues. As soon as he got the first calls last year he implemented a 3 day a week training policy restricting flights in the evening, early mornings and on weekends. Pierce said no one has ever come down and talked to him and he would encourage anyone, especially the board members or council members to come down and take a look at what happens at the airport. When you see the people coming here to visit or just picking up groceries or going to Schafer Meadows they always say they are coming back and this doesn't happen at Glacier International Airport. He has 10 full-time and 5 part-time employees and they all make much more than minimum wage and no one knows that. Pierce said they have done a lot for the noise and noise cannot be eliminated totally but noise can be mitigated by changing the traffic/approach patterns. They also have 2 no fly zones Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 13 of 31 because the homeowners requested that. In closing he encourages the board to sort through the facts and if they want to know something come down to the airport. Peter Gross, no address given, said he wears 2 hats he has a business on Airport Road and owns a business on the airport. He echoes most of the comments in favor of the airport. The realignment of the TIF and the economic development area has more to do with what is going on off the airport than what is going on in the airport. So, he said he would recommend expanding the redevelopment area to include areas of South Kalispell that are blighted. There are abandoned dump sites, wrecking yards, business buildings and areas that do not truly represent who we as a city are yet that is the first impression that our neighbors who come to visit us from the south see. He asked, isn't economic development trying to create a business environment that is encouraging new and revitalized businesses. Gross continued regarding Airport Road now that we have our new "alternate route" it will provide opportunities for tourists as well as residents of the county to come into Kalispell utilizing Airport Road. It is time we take a hard look at that thoroughfare and give it the opportunities that would be given to Highway 93. Gross said he has a small business on the airport and he only employs 2 people full-time but as mentioned before there are 25 — 30 full-time employees at the airport. That truly is economic development, isn't it? Aren't we trying to create an environment on the airport that creates good well - paying jobs, clean industry, and maybe even green industry on the airport? We pump a good bit of money into the tax base. He has owned hangars on the airport for about 8 years and he has partnered with others that have larger developments on the airport all of which pour money into the tax base. Gross said we are all interested in safety and the relocation/realignment of the runway would increase safety. Just because we are pilots doesn't mean we want to kill ourselves. The F.A.A. will not give us the money unless the work would enhance the safety of the airport. If they move the threshold of the runway 1000 feet south the plane wouldn't have come down near the high school but on airport property. We are all talking about safety and we are all concerned about noise and our quality of life. That is why we are here. Gross said we are also here for economic development on and off of the airport and the board needs to get all the facts. So let's put our heads together and create a good economic environment in South Kalispell that will help the Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 14 of 31 entire city. Greg Good, no address given, said he is a business owner on the south end of town and he thinks the TIF plan would be a good idea. He invested a lot of money in his 17 acre property which was blighted and he improved the buildings. In addition the new highway has been a huge improvement. If the TIF goes through it would definitely help businesses create new opportunities. Good said his son learned to fly at this airport and was chauffeuring him around in their airplane and then Good decided to get his pilot license. They spent $15,000 in getting their licenses, they hangar their airplane at the city airport, they spend money having the plane repaired and buy fuel there and they would not have done that had it been at Glacier International Airport. This airport gives a young pilot an opportunity to learn to fly after school and in a small plane without having to learn around larger planes. Good said in addition the pilots at this airport are often asked to help with rescues and other situations to help in the community. RT Adkins, no address given, said he has been a pilot for 32 years and drove a truck for 60 years. Regarding the statements concerning safety on the ground he has hauled in thousands of bottles of beer to this area and asked how many alcohol related accidents have there been in vehicles on our roads. Kalispell has the largest amount of alcohol related juveniles in the U.S. Mr. Davis has asked for a police officer on the airport and Adkins wonders why there are not more police officers at the bars. Adkins said he only knows of 6 people being killed in airplanes in the last 32 years which is an enviable safety record. The people in Kalispell didn't like trucks coming down Main Street so they moved the bypass but the minute they got the trucks off the streets of Kalispell the people were worried about getting tourists downtown. He said think about what you want before you ask for it. Adkins has flown hundreds of people for nothing and he spent $350,000 in 32 years on his two planes, which is stupid, but he enjoyed every minute of it. Adkins said pilots are the safest people in the world - every pilot has to have an examination every 2 years and how many other people have to have that to drive their car. They also have to have "annuals" on their airplane and the commercial pilots have to have one every 100 hours. They are the safest people on earth and aviation is the safest mode of travel on earth. Davar Gardner, 3095 Airport Road said he has been in the valley for 40 years and 35 have either been beside the airport or in the flight path. He has enjoyed the airport and Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 15 of 31 has known most of the operators there. They are all good people who are doing good things and working hard to provide services for this community. Gardner said if you drive Highway 93 you are probably 100 times more likely to get killed than you are flying into Kalispell City Airport. He has seen many serious wrecks especially where it appears to be safe. Gardner said he took his pilot training at the city airport and the safety factor has bothered him for a very long time. Moving the runway would be the biggest factor in increasing safety and leaving the airport as it is would not be the answer. Gardner thanked the board for their time and service. Mike Strand owned Strand Aviation which is on the Kalispell City Airport. He started his business in 1964 and he has now turned over his business to Dave Hoerner. Strand said he owned four twin engine airplanes in the 60's so they have been around this airport for a long time. He also has had helicopters, contracts around the northwest with the Forest Service, a flight school and charter service. He knows the airport very well and appreciates the good comments made by some of the previous speakers. Strand said anytime the board has any questions about the past or history of the airport he would be happy to respond. Charles Lapp, 3230 Columbia Falls Stage Road stated he is here tonight representing his. property on Kelly Road. Lapp said his property is not on the airport it is across the highway and he is not a pilot so the airport is not really the issue for him the redevelopment is. He was glad to hear what the City Manager said about the meetings they are planning regarding the redevelopment of this area and getting the community together which he thinks is awesome. He was told he didn't understand the plan was about expanding the airport so he read through the plan and noted there are several references regarding the expansion of the runway to 4700 feet which he cited for the board. Lapp said this is why the community is confused. Lapp continued what was presented by the City Manager tonight with the public meeting being held later this month should have been the very first step. Here they are in the 3rd meeting, a staff report has been done, the plan has been done and now the mention of the completion of a new EA and then getting together with the community to see what the community might want. Lapp thought the confusion of the community was legitimate. Pauline Shoredahl, 234 3rd Avenue West said she has been concerned about the people in the community, especially the middle and lower class. The upper class in this valley Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 16 of 31 has had plenty of contact with the board members and they always talk about the wonderful economic development - for them. Salaries haven't increased in 10-20 years; we have the lowest salaries in Montana. Low and middle class people have to work 60-80 hours a week to pay rent. Every bit of this dream to expand the airport is stopped by one fact - the people who they want to buy the land from said they are not selling. Shoredahl said she believes what has been going on that the public doesn't know is the way they have been threatening that family to get the land. She believes there has been underground dealings to get the property and is concerned the government is not being transparent. She added include us, keep it transparent, and listen to us. We are not rich and we get left out of this formula every single time. She said how about TeleTech promising to raise the wages to $10 but as soon as they got here the wages were at $7.50 like everyone else in the valley. Every box store works their employees' four hour shifts 3 times a week and this is called economy? The land isn't for sale but she bets they will get it anyway. Dolores Aadsen submitted a letter for the record a copy is attached to the minutes. BOARD DISCUSSION Hinchey said given the fact that events are taking place that will most likely impact the redevelopment plan, such as the open house on November 30+h and the request by the City Manager to hold even more meetings, he feels it is premature for the board to act on this plan at this time. MOTION Hinchey moved and Clark seconded a motion to table the South Kalispell Airport Redevelopment Plan. BOARD DISCUSSION None. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. TRUMBULL CREEK A request by NW Dev Group, LLC for annexation and initial CROSSING PHASE 2 - zoning of I-1 (Light Industrial) and R-3 (Urban Single Family INITIAL ZONING, PLANNED Residential) on a 160.5 acre site. The property is currently UNIT DEVELOPMENT & zoned SAG-10 (Suburban Agricultural-10 acre minimum) in PRELIMINARY PLAT the county. In addition to the zone change the owner is requesting a planned unit development (PUD) overlay district on an approximately 55 acre portion of the 160.5 acre site. The PUD is proposed in conjunction with the R-3 zoning and a subdivision, known as Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2, which would create 176 single family residential lots ranging in size from 4,400 square feet to 10,300 square feet. The project site extends from East Reserve Drive on the south boundary of the site north to Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 17 of 31 Rose Crossing and includes approximately 1,100 lineal feet of frontage on Highway 2. STAFF REPORTS KA-09-04, I Sean Conrad, representing the Kalispell Planning KPUD-09-03 & KPP-09-01 Department, reviewed the staff reports for the board. Conrad said before the planning board is the Trumbull Creek Crossing project. The board will be looking at initial zoning on a 160 acre site along with a Planned Unit Development overlay zoning district and a subdivision request. Conrad reviewed the location of the property along US Highway 2 East/Rose Crossing/East Reserve Drive and the proposed zoning and land uses. The proposed subdivision, Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2 includes 176 single-family residential lots, just over 15 acres of common area, open space and parkland, and a bike/pedestrian trail along the east boundary also connecting south to the trails in Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 1. Conrad noted there were two work sessions on this project and the board discussed the western property boundary and how the lots interface with the light industrial zoning immediately west. A condition was added, Condition #8, which addresses that concern. Conrad continued the second issue discussed at the last work session was the second access into phase 2A. In accordance with the subdivision regulations the developer needs to provide a second access in and out of phase 2A. The first option would be connecting a street with phase 2A through the Granite View Subdivision and back to East Reserve Drive. The second option would be taking Mountain View Drive north through phase 2 and extending the drive up to Rose Crossing. There was a request by the developer if they selected option B it would include an all-weather, unpaved surface. However, the city's Public Works Department would require that the secondary access be paved under Condition #1g. Conrad noted when they look at subdivisions they always consider connectivity to adjacent properties and the staff report recommends two future 60 foot wide public road and utility R/W's. One across from McKenna Avenue and the other across from Scott Avenue which is included under Condition #34. Conrad concluded with the review of the elevations that were submitted with the development application to give the board an idea of what they could expect the future residential development house types to look like. Staff recommends that the Kalispell Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report KA-09-04 and Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 18 of 31 recommend to the Kalispell City Council that initial zoning of the 160.5+ acre site be I-1 & R-3 and as shown on the zoning district map for the property. Staff recommends that the Kalispell Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report KPUD-09-03 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council the R-3/PUD for Trumbull Creek Crossing be approved subject to conditions 1-22 listed in the staff report. Staff recommends that the Kalispell Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report KPP-09-01 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2 subdivision be approved subject to conditions 23 — 45 listed in the staff report. BOARD QUESTIONS Clark asked how the alley situation was addressed on the small lots and Conrad said that is addressed under Condition #5 of the PUD conditions. The 2 blocks that had the narrow width lots, blocks 6 & 10 shall incorporate alleys meeting city standards in the block design and limiting the vehicle access from the alleys. Schutt asked Conrad to indicate the location of blocks 6 & 10 for the board which he did and then Conrad noted that blocks 11 & 16 were also recommended for alleys to allow Mountain View Drive to be redesigned to allow easier traffic flow. Clark said he had concerns with connectivity to the west into the industrial area and asked how that was addressed. Conrad said at this point staff is recommending that block 5 be redesigned and if the developer still wants to have the connections he would be allowed to do that. However if that is a concern it is something the board can be discuss. APPLICANT/CONSULTANTS Erika Wirtala, Sands Surveying reviewed proposed amendments to the conditions of approval, as suggested by the developer. The requested changes are as follows: LA. Permits the developer one community information center/sales office for the entire Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase II. Builders who purchase large portions of the community may be allowed to construct one or more model home(s) to demonstrate their product. The model homes are temporary in nature. The lot shall be i erk6 ea on a o e P plan. The use of the lot as a model home and sales office shall cease once the lots have been sold. 1.B. Allows the minimum lot areas to be reduced from 7,000 square feet to 4500 square feet. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 19 of 31 1.C. Allows the minimum lot area widths to be reduced from 60 to 45 feet. 2. Uses within the PUD are limited to detached single-family houses except for model homes and the community sales office to be used temporarily. 5. Blocks 6, 10, 11 and 16 shall incorporate alleys meeting city standards into the block designs. Vehicle access onto the adjacent street from the lots within these blocks is prohibited. Garage and driveway access shall be off the alley only. Presentation on amendment to Conditions #5. Wirtala said in addressing the requirements for alleys on blocks 6 &' 10, which were the smaller lots, Mr. Anders thought by dropping 4 lots out of those blocks it would increase the minimum lot width to approximately 51.5 feet and by proposing garage standards they could alleviate the board's concerns with having a row house look or wall of garages. This would increase the minimum lot size to 4500 square feet and increase the minimum lot width to 45 feet. Wirtala said they would be agreeable to having alleys in blocks 11 & 16 which are the long blocks parallel to the large park. 8. (Last sentence) The buffer may include the use of streets, storm water retention areas, open space, landscape buffer or any combination thereof. 12.B. Block 2 shall be modified to continue the existing 20- foot wide bike/ped trail landseape buffer north, through Block 2, to connect with Ashleigh Avenue. 13. The storm water retention areas shall be irrigated and landscaped to create a park -like setting. with a plan t be reviewed and approved by the —Parke and Feereatien Department and Rama4ig Pepa:-itnefA. Pie appreved plan shall installed prier to final lat apgrevv 'ref the phase the storm water -retention area is serving. 17. A landscape plan for the lift station shall be provided to the Planning Department and P-arks and—Feerea-tien for the review and approval. 19. insert 2B in place of 2A. Presentation on amendment to Condition 19. A traffic impact study, that was included in the original proposal, was completed by WGM Group for all 600 lots which were originally proposed. Condition # 19 requires an updated traffic impact study be submitted prior to the final approval of phase 2A. They felt since the TIS had been completed for Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 20 of 31 a far greater number of traffic vehicle trips per day that having one completed for just phase 2A, with approximately 39 lots in the first sub -phase wouldn't change the analysis very much and if it was lengthened out to phase 2B that might provide clearer results and give them a better idea of what the true impacts of the traffic may or may not be at that time. Schutt clarified then the developer is proposing that the recommendations of the TIS be postponed until final plat approval of sub -phase 2B and Wirtala said yes. 35.A. The 100-foot building setback shall coincide with the rear lot boundaries of re adjacent lets back wall of the structure on the adjacent lots. Presentation on amendment to Condition 35A. Wirtala said this condition is referring to the setbacks from the creek that runs along the eastern edge of the property site. Fish, Wildlife and Parks had made a recommendation when they were in the initial planning stages that they could measure 100 feet back from the high water mark to our building setbacks. The staff report asks that they measure 100 feet from the back lot line to the high water mark which changes the plan considerably. Therefore they are asking to go with the setback required by Fish, Wildlife and Parks and they would get the 100 foot setback protection they asked for. 36.a. Water mains shall be designed to provide fire flows as determined by the fire department. Water - mains designed to provide re flows sha11 be installed at apprEwed locations.. 40. All existing and proposed easements shall be indicated on the face of the final plat. T tRity easements for- Gity water and sewer- —sl Ira provided to—allew fer�re legieal extension of -utilities fFem this subdivision to .,dje .-..*. praperties. Utility easements for City water and sewer shall be provided to allow logical extension of utilities from this subdivision to adjoining properties. 41....The sidewalk and boulevard will be modified only to the extent required by the LISPS. It will still allow the sidewalk and boulevard to function normally. Wirtala noted in the staff report under Background Information it notes that after a cursory review by the city staff the developer elected to put the entire project on hold until the project engineer could work out a proposed storm water plan for the subdivision. Wirtala clarified the city asked them to design the proposed subdivision to the storm water regulations that had not come into affect yet and still Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 21 of 31 have not been adopted by city council. She said they then had to completely go back to the drawing board and reconfigure/redesign the project in its entirety to meet these somewhat difficult storm water drainage regulations. It was a tremendous effort and took them a long time so it was not a completely arbitrary and capricious decision. Wirtala continued the garage appearance and location standards was a topic of discussion at the work session and Mr. Anders did some research and found the standards that were applicable to another municipality which they changed to apply to Trumbull Creek Crossing. Wirtala added these standards might also be something the city would consider adopting in future updates of the design standards for Kalispell. Wirtala reviewed the standards proposed. Clark thought getting the proposed amendments from the developer instead of staff was unusual and he added these amendments have apparently not been reviewed by staff yet. Schutt said that can be addressed after the public hearing. Hull asked about the road to Rose Crossing and whether it would be paved and Wirtala said it is the developer's preference that we provide an all-weather unpaved surface however, the staff report indicates Public Works would not approve an unpaved surface so they have the option to chose either proposal A which is to provide access through Granite View Subdivision or proposal B which would be constructing a all-weather paved access to Rose Crossing. PUBLIC HEARING No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION - INITIAL ZONING Hinchey moved and Clark seconded a motion to adopt staff report KA-09-04 and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that initial zoning of the 160.5+ acre site be I-1 (Light Industrial) 8v R-3 (Urban Single -Family Residential). BOARD DISCUSSION Graham asked for the status of the annexation of this property and Jentz said the board is setting the stage for the zoning but it doesn't become effective until it gets through city council who considers annexation along with the recommended zoning. ROLL CALL - INITIAL The motion to approve the initial zoning of R-3 and I-1 ZONING passed unanimously on a roll call vote MOTION - PLANNED UNIT Mendius moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to adopt DEVELOPMENT staff report KPUD-09-03 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the R-3/PUD for Trumbull Creek Crossing be approved subject to conditions 1 - 22 listed in the staff report. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 22 of 31 BOARD DISCUSSION Graham mentioned the staff report states that the Public Works Department is recommending that the alleys be privately maintained. He asked if they would be maintained by the HOA and Conrad said yes. Schutt asked if that is a deviation from how alleys have been maintained in the past and Conrad said no, Public Works, in the recent subdivisions, has always recommended that if there are alleys incorporated in the subdivision or PUD design that they be maintained by the HOA. Further discussion on maintenance of the alleys was held. Griffin suggested the board review the proposed amendments to the PUD and preliminary plat, as submitted by the developer, one by one and ask for staff input on each item. Schutt agreed. MOTION - AMENDMENT LA. Griffin moved and Graham seconded a motion to approve the amendment to condition LA. as proposed. BOARD DISCUSSION Conrad noted staff did have a chance to review all of the amendments and does not have an issue with amendment # 1.A. Schutt asked if the model homes would be identified on the preliminary plat and Conrad said no because they do not know at this time which lot it will be. ROLL CALL - I.A. The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. MOTION - AMENDMENT LB. Griffin moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to approve the amendment to condition 13. as proposed. BOARD DISCUSSION Conrad said the city is already supporting a 4300 square foot lot and if they want to go up to a 4500 square feet lot staff has no issues with that amendment. ROLL CALL - LB. The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. MOTION - AMENDMENT Griffin moved and Schutt seconded a motion to approve the I.C. amendment to condition 1.C. as proposed. BOARD DISCUSSION Conrad said here again staff can support the change from 43 feet to 45 feet. ROLL CALL - I.C. The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. MOTION - AMENDMENT - 2. Griffin moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to approve the amendment to condition 2. as proposed. BOARD DISCUSSION Conrad said staff does not have an issue with this amendment since a sales office has been approved for the subdivision. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 23 of 31 ROLL CALL - 2. The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. BOARD DISCUSSION Conrad said blocks 6 & 10 are the lots that are proposed at 43 foot widths and the developer mentioned they would be expanding those to 51 feet. The concern was when the lot width was below 50 feet the board wanted to see alley designs based on past recommendations. Conrad recommended the following amendment to condition 5: "Blocks 11 & 16 and any blocks where lots are less than 50 feet in width shall incorporate alleys meeting city standards into the block design." MOTION - AMENDMENT - 5. Griffin moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to approve the amendment to condition 5. as proposed by staff to read as follows: "Blocks 11 & 16 and any blocks where lots are less than 50 feet in width shall incorporate alleys meeting city standards into the block design." ROLL CALL - 5. The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. MOTION - AMENDMENT - S. Griffin moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to approve the amendment to condition 8. as proposed. BOARD DISCUSSION Conrad said city staff has no objections to the amendment. Clark said he believes you shouldn't back up residential lots to an industrial area without a buffer and he doesn't feel a buffer should be a "landscape buffer". Schutt clarified that Clark doesn't think a landscape buffer is adequate and wants it pulled out of the list of potential tools and Clark said yes. Clark added you buffer by changing the use not landscaping and the change of use would be a street, drainage, or some physical barrier. Jentz said the condition was meant to allow the applicant a series of options to best fit their subdivision development without having to design the subdivision for them. Hinchey said he feels open space is a landscape buffer. Clark disagreed. Jentz said staff indicated the design that was offered was not appropriate so parameters were provided to address that. Schutt asked if staff is providing any parameters for the width of the buffer and staff said no. Clark asked if Jentz was comfortable with the wording of "landscape buffer" and he said as a combination of tools he is but as the sole tool they would need to provide some specifications for review and approval. Schutt said this board is again being asked to approve a plat layout that has several conditions that will dramatically Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 24 of 31 change the layout and what mechanism would staff use to be certain that the proposed changes meets the spirit and intent of the conditions. Jentz said before they come in with sub -phase 2A of the preliminary plat they will have to redesign their PUD and preliminary plat to comply with the conditions. If after review staff does not feel it is in the spirit of the PUD or the conditions imposed, the city would not accept the plan. Then the developer has an option to go to council for review and final decision or redesign the plan. Graham asked what does moving Stillwater Drive to the west property line do to the stormwater retention calculation. Andy Hyde of Carver Engineering responded by moving Stillwater Drive over to the west you would lengthen Brandon Avenue and Kristin Avenue so in affect you are increasing the amount of impervious area that would generate storm water. Graham asked if it would be a significant increase and Hyde said it could be and it could result in losing some lots. Schutt asked if it is a minor increase in impervious surface by stretching those two intermediate streets and Hyde said yes and they would also have to split up the location of the storm water pond into at least 2 of the block areas or they may end up with 3 different storm water areas on blocks 4, 6, &s 10. Further discussion was held regarding storm water in this area. ROLL CALL - S. The motion passed, as proposed, on a roll call vote of 6 in favor and 1 opposed. MOTION - AMENDMENT - Griffin moved and Clark seconded a motion to approve the 12.B. amendment to condition 12.B. as proposed. BOARD DISCUSSION Conrad said the open space buffer and 20-foot wide bike/pedestrian trail would extend the connection of the bike/pedestrian trail to Ashleigh Avenue and staff is comfortable with that amendment. ROLL CALL - 12.B. The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. MOTION - AMENDMENT - Griffin moved and Clark seconded a motion to approve the 13. & 17. amendment to conditions 13. & 17. as proposed. BOARD DISCUSSION Conrad said staff has no problems with those amendments. Conrad added it will be irrigated and landscaped like in phase 1. ROLL CALL - 13. & 17. The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. MOTION - AMENDMENT - Griffin moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to approve 19. the amendment to condition 10. as proposed. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 25 of 31 BOARD DISCUSSION Conrad explained the location of sub -phase 2A and sub - phase 2B for the board. Schutt asked the developer what effect postponing the traffic impact study would have on the development. Mike Anders of Northwest Dev Group said the thought process was based upon the comments received from Public Works and the fact that work has already been completed at the intersection of East Reserve and Highway 2 East. The traffic impact on that intersection will not be dramatic in the next couple years and with one additional sub -phase of about 39 lots and it would probably be in their opinion, worth the time and energy of updating the TIS at the end of the second sub -phase, 2B when additional growth and development has occurred in the area besides this subdivision. Clark thought it was onerous to put the cost and time into a TIS for 39 more lots and therefore he supports the amendment as proposed by the developer. ROLL CALL - 19. The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. MOTION - ADD SINGLE Hull moved and Schutt seconded a motion to include the STORY ELEVATIONS AND single story elevations and the Garage Appearance & GARAGE STANDARDS TO Location Standards submitted by the developer to Condition CONDITION 3 3 as 3. G. BOARD DISCUSSION Hull asked for clarification on the trellis in Item D of the Garage Appearance and Location Standards and Wirtala said responded. Hull was excited about the garage standards since this has been a major issue with this board and Schutt agreed. ROLL CALL - CONDITION 3 The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. ROLL CALL - PUD The motion to approve the planned unit development of Trumbull Creek Crossing, Phase 2, as amended, passed unanimously on a roll call vote. MOTION - PRELIMINARY Griffin moved and Hull seconded a motion to adopt staff PLAT report KPP-09-01 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase 2 subdivision be approved subject to conditions 23 - 45 listed in the staff report. MOTION - AMENDMENT - Griffin moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to approve 35.A. the amendment to condition 35.A. as proposed. BOARD DISCUSSION Conrad said staff recommended the 100-foot building setback coincide with the rear lot boundary lines because in the R-3 you could get detached sheds or storage buildings within 5 feet of rear property lines. For the administrative Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 26 of 31 ease of insuring the 100 foot setback is met staff is recommending the 100 foot setback and rear property lines coincide. Conrad continued they recommended the same condition for Willow Creek. Conrad said this condition will affect lots in blocks 8 and 14 and added the other areas along the creeks have a greater separation so it won't be an issue. Clark said he doesn't see any variable circumstances to change the setback from the requirements placed on Willow Creek and in fact the setbacks were 200 feet in Willow Creek. Clark said he doesn't see any reason to change the condition. ROLL CALL - 35.A. The motion to approve the amendment to condition 35.A., as proposed by the developer, failed on a roll call vote of 3 in favor and 4 opposed. MOTION - AMENDMENT - Griffin moved and Clark seconded a motion to approve the 36.A. amendment to condition 36.A. as proposed. BOARD DISCUSSION Conrad said staff has no problems with changing this condition. ROLL CALL - 36.A. The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. MOTION - AMENDMENTS - Griffin moved and Hinchey seconded a motion to approve 40. & 41. the amendments to conditions 40. & 41. as proposed. BOARD DISCUSSION Conrad said staff checked with the Public Works Department on these amendments and staff does not see any problem with the amendments as proposed by the developer. ROLL CALL - 40. & 41. The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. BOARD DISCUSSION Schutt said Ms. Wirtala stated they had gone the extra mile to meet the new and improved storm water management plans and he asked if that is delineated correctly in conditions 28 & 29 and Conrad said yes they complete a storm water report and engineered drainage plan that would be reviewed and approved by the city. Schutt said even though those specific standards have not yet been adopted and Conrad said it would seem so. Schutt continued the sewer lines will be built to Evergreen Water and Sewer District standards and then that affluent goes into the pressure mains piped through the City of Kalispell through the interlocal agreement and Conrad said yes. Schutt asked who was responsible for maintenance of those lines and Conrad said he believes it would be the Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 27 of 31 Evergreen Water and Sewer District. Schutt asked if there is a major discrepancy in design standards between the two utilities and Conrad said in talking with the Public Works Department they are pretty much identical and they are in agreement with how the conditions are written. Jentz said to follow up on that the water system is Evergreen Water and designed to their standards and they will maintain those lines and the hydrants are designed to handle the fire flow services in the area. Hull asked if the secondary access must be paved and Conrad said yes. Hull asked if the future 60 foot R/W's are in the conditions and Conrad said yes and he anticipates the R/W's being dedicated in the last sub -phase 2F. Graham said the Police Department has indicated this development will put a strain on their department. Conrad said when the Police Department talked to him they indicated they are not opposed to the city annexing this property but they wanted the planning board and city council to know if the city is going to grow to this area they will serve the subdivision but they need to realize that their department is still understaffed and it would further strain their operations. Conrad said the Police Department also indicated if the property is annexed they will probably be receiving jurisdiction along Highway 2 East and because of the higher speeds along Highway 2 crashes tend to be more deadly. If they do get that jurisdiction it will take more manpower if there is an accident. Graham asked if that is common for all emergency services and Conrad said the Fire Department didn't see an issue with servicing this subdivision. In newer subdivisions they might get calls for ambulance but they don't typically go out on fire calls because it is new construction built to current standards. The Fire Department added it is well within adequate response time from the northern fire station #62. Schutt asked if there will be better coordination with the enhanced 911 station and Jentz said that is the purpose of that program. If it is in the city the Kalispell Police will respond. In the case of a fire Jentz wasn't sure who would get the first response call, the city or Evergreen but it will probably be Kalispell Fire Department because it is within the city's limits. Clark said this conversation doesn't have any relation to the PUD or preliminary plat because this board doesn't rule on the annexation. ROLL CALL - PRELIAGNARY The motion to approve the preliminary plat of Trumbull PLAT Creek Crossing, Phase 2, as amended, passed unanimously Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 28 of 31 on a roll call vote. BOARD DISCUSSION Hinchey said this is a really well thought out development and the developer and his staff should be commended for the years they have worked on it. It is a good project and will make a good neighborhood. Hinchey continued however, he is having trouble as he thinks other board members are with the location of this project as it relates to the City of Kalispell - being 2 - 2-1/2 miles from the closest boundary. Hinchey feels the city is setting itself up by annexing yet another island. MOTION Hinchey moved and Clark seconded a motion stating the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission encourages the Kalispell City Council to proceed with caution on the annexation of Trumbull Creek Crossing, Phase 2. BOARD DISCUSSION Schutt clarified this is not being brought up as anything to do with the subdivision itself but the location. Hinchey agreed and said the board has rightfully approved the PUD and preliminary plat but he has a more basic issue which is the location and the ability of the city to provide services to that location. Clark agreed with Hinchey. The board has performed their function which they were asked to do. However it is premature to annex the property. Schutt said he had similar misgivings when they looked at the Silverbrook project north of town but we knew at the time there were several other projects in the pipe that would fill in that gap which made him feel more comfortable knowing that connection was coming. Schutt added it is much easier, cheaper and more effective to provide services to a contiguous land area than hop -scotching all over the valley. Hull said he was opposed to Silverbrook and he sees some big differences with this project. With Silverbrook the growth boundaries were, in his opinion, artificially pushed out to that area whereas this property is already within the growth policy boundaries. It is contiguous to other urban areas and Evergreen will be a part of Kalispell at some point. Hull was disappointed that the storm water regulations have dragged on so long. He does have some misgivings but the fact that it is connected to other subdivisions and not sitting out in a field in the middle of nowhere he would vote against this motion. Wirtala said the differences with other subdivisions that Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 29 of 31 have been hop -scotched out is that this property also has an industrial component to it - 40 acres - which is the real money maker for the city. It has often been said that residential development doesn't always pay its way however, this would be one of the first developments that comes in that would be subject to $7700 for impact fees for each lot. Wirtala said this is a planned growth where they are asking for annexation of the entire property yet the infrastructure is being added in small components. The Parks & Recreation Department is also requiring, through the conditions of the PUD, that a Parks Maintenance District be established. Wirtala said then Trumbull Creek Crossing, Phase 2 will become a tax district unto itself to maintain and take care of the park system. The HOA is taking care of the alleys, open spaces, stormwater retention areas, and there will be private hauler garbage so it is not city garbage. In addition the Fire Department doesn't feel this subdivision will put a strain on their services. Griffin said although he can agree with some of the things that Clark and Hinchey have said if we are going to draw a line in the sand with the council the board needs to have standards to determine when is it too far out to bring about more cohesive, more serviceable and less expensive services to properties that are annexed in the future. He had concerns about the ability of the Police and Fire Departments servicing this subdivision and hopefully down the road the city will have a better cooperative agreement between all of the fire and police forces in the valley. Griffin said he is voting against the motion because he doesn't think the board is in a position to determine what they want to recommend or not recommend regarding leap- frogging or extending services. He added to single out this particular project for this action is wrong. Clark didn't think this area was part of the growth policy and Jentz said it is. Clark referenced the letter received from Evergreen Fire District which he wanted entered into the record. A copy is attached to the minutes. Hinchey said he stands by his motion and he thinks it has been misunderstood. He is not recommending denial of the annexation but merely stating what most board members have articulated already that they are concerned about development this ,far from the current city limits and they suggest the city council proceed with caution. ROLL CALL I The motion passed on a roll call vote of 4 in favor and 3 Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 30 of 31 OLD BUSINESS: None. NEW BUSINESS: Hull said he was concerned that the board will be pushed out of the airport discussion and he thinks this board is the ideal board to deal with it. He would like to see the board's work schedule include the airport to see what they can do to bring the public in and deal with all the issues. The city was caught by surprise by the number of people who have come out in opposition to the plan and it might have been passed without realizing that. Schutt asked what staff sees as the trajectory of the airport redevelopment plan. Jentz said the city council, rightfully so, is creating a forum for community discussions on the airport which has to be resolved before the board can get back to review and discussion of the plan. Further discussion was held. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at approximately 11:00 p.m. WORK SESSION A work session was held following the regular meeting to discuss the following: 1. Zoning Ordinance Update NEXT MEETING The next regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, December 8, 2009, at 7:00 p.m. in the Kalispell City Council Chambers located at 201 First Avenue East in Kalispell. The next work session of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, January 26, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. in the Kalispell City Council Chambers located at 201 First Avenue East in Kalispell. Bryan H. Schutt President Michelle Anderson Recording Secretary APPROVED as submitted/corrected: `2, / �09 Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of November 10, 2009 Page 31 of 31 W4,1,�A 6,jay Kalispell City Planning Board Meeting: Introduce myself and address, I'm a member of the Quiet Sky's committee, we are a group of people with a Varity of views of this issue. The following represents the views of many but not all our members. Good Evening Planning Board Council Members thank you for this opportunity to express our concerns with regards to the: (Request by the City of Kalispell to update and amend the existing "Kalispell City Airport/Athletic Complex Redevelopment Plan and Analysis.) We the Residents of this community would very much like the Planning Board Members to re-evaluate or put on hold this request from the city, until such time that the newly elected Mayor and the New City Manager and our City Council Members had time to respond to the residents of our community about these matters, and be able to re-evaluate this old and out dated plan. Many Residents of our community feel the purpose of the "Kalispell City Airport/Athletic Complex Redevelopment plan is strictly for and only to promote the expansions of the City Airport and we wonder if this idea is in the best interest of the community. In fact, we doubt that this idea is in the best interest of the majority of the city residents. We believe it's just an underhanded way of getting control of the 80 acres needed and the power to control and the ability to use condemnation of people's property to expand the City Airport into a F.A.A. funded and controlled B-2 Airfield, which the Residents and Taxpayers of this City and County do not want. The cost of such adventure to the city with the involvement of F.A.A. is estimated to be well over $ 750,000.00 that's (2002 estimates) its closer to 1.5 million now. Since we have to pay 10% percent of that Grant. Included in this plan are the 39 assurance the F.A.A. will demand upon us. We (The City) will not be able to have any noise ordinances at the airport, no control of flight times, no control of what type of aircraft that can land or take off, no control of Government aircraft activities, Whatever income derived must be shared with F.A.A., must give them property for their operations, These are just a few examples of the problems with the 39 assurances, they go on and on. We lose all the way around and all control of this land and Airport. Some of us do not believe that the Airport expansion is the "Highest and Best use of Public Property and Resources". The present D.Q.T. off -cited -revenue generation study claims of 24 million dollars a year of the present Airport is totally flawed, and based on erroneous information that our airport has 43,000 operations a year. No realistic evaluation has been done to quantify this or the possible 3 5 million if it were to become a B-2 airport -as made reference, to by the airport manager at the last meeting. The 2002 E.A. stated that the calculated economic benefit to the community was on the order of $ 2M per year. (Display doc) Even doubling (that's exaggerating) that each year don't even come close to $24M -$3SM. And the E.A. appraised the radio towers at $ 500.000.00 in 2002, what are they going to cost now? The Residents and Taxpayers are asking the New Mayor, the New City manager and the New and remaining City Council Members, (The New administration if you will,) to re-evaluate for a choice of options for economic evaluations of what's the best use for this track of land and the costs to us. That best serves the city and its people, not just the minority of people that presently use the airport. The people of Kalispell do not want a bigger airport, with larger and louder aircraft, more noise and dangers and pollution, we don't want more Government control and fewer rights pushed on us. Suggestions: Some have suggested to leave the City airport as it is, but under new management. Charging landing and takeoff fee's, parking fees, Fines, Rental and lease fee's, etc. Rules and regulations of type of aircraft, times of flight, In addition it is imperative that the city: removes training facilities, and retains full ownership and control like our city parks, Golf course, and their facilities. Some suggest take the F.A.A. funding, but move the Airport east of town. Gary Gates, of the F.A.A. office in Helena, has stated to me that this is possible. And GPI feels the same way and willing to professionally manage it. (Hand in letter) Just need E.A.s and Site Selection Studies done and a willingness to go that direction. The Kalispell City Airport Site Selection Study and Feasibility/Master Plan Study, show's alternate sites that would cost up to 50% less for this F.A.A. funded airport. (Hold up Site Selection Study and Final Draft of Feasibility/Master Plan Study.) Some suggest just move it to GPI. They are willing to accept the planes. That's a free -bee, cost nothing to the city. Some suggest selling the Airport property for redevelopment. That would produce large amount of revenue and a good property tax base, without encompassing more land. Estimated property value of this track is 20 plus million in today's figures. In support of our hotels and motels and tourism, some suggest to sell to developers with plans for Cultural Center Buildings, Museums, Indoor Ice rink, Public activity plaza with shops, Year Round Water Park for our kids, etc, etc,. Thus getting a bite of the tourism dollars and enhanced the beauty of our city. There are many possibilities to attract tourism dollars, but we must consider them carefully and comprehensively. Just a note: In the E.A. the F.A.A. was asked; Has F.A.A. set an upper limit for their financial participation? A. Not a hard dollar figure, but they will set a "Common Sense" limit. They routinely spent $1M- $ 2M for complete reconstruction or new airport construction. They probably will not dedicate $1 OM to this or any other single airport improvement project. (Display doc). We respectfully ask you to have the New Mayor and Council Members to consider all options for economic development for this track of land. Thank You, Here's a copy for the records Kalispell Citv Aiwort Final Environmental Assessment Answer: No. The FAA is advocating purchasing or controlling land (leases, easements, etc.) for an airport that would accommodate the entire small aircraft fleet. However, the City could build a shorter runway or stage construction of additional runway length over time, if that's their desire. Two lengths being discussed are 3500' (supporting 75% of the small aircraft fleet) and 3700' (the current length), both of which would significantly discourage jet traffic. Building to the "ultimate" 4700' (100% of the small aircraft fleet) would allow many additional business jets to use the facility.. The choice of runway length ranging between 3500' and 4700' will be entirely up to the City. Comment: An affected landowner feels RPA has grossly underestimated the cost of acquiring the land necessary for airport improvements. He thinks the report's $5M is more likely to be $16M to $20M. Claims a Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) purchaseforHighway 93 bypass right-of-way went for $6.50/SF. Response: Preliminary costs were based on historical sales in the immediate region. Four costs for typical property types were estimated, then properties were pigeon -holed by type. to provide good quality relative prices, but are by no means assessments. of the property values. Valuations of affected property will be more accurately established based on future work by real estate specialists on RDA's project team. Quests 'tip rap do . ' a • n� prdbably-will-net dedicate $10M.to,.tlus or any other single a rt ithpra ement Question: Are FAA Airport Improvement Program (AIP) funds allocated for Montana spent exclusively in Montana? Answer: Yes. n. leanA AH" �'und`s�l�us4 rchasie�`for the°aiii�pa��rt?` lit upfront. The FAA prefers.thatiall .of..the..propesbeunder airport control, thenhave_the.aiiport owner'. `an FAA grant for reimbursement. This way the%Ak knows what the firhaY Eosts are,;rathet tlian beiirg-comnmitted to a mopngtarget:' They;need not benvolyed in what sometimes becomes a . F.. protracted` acquisition process until it is complete. Comment: MDT is currently punning a settling pond near Ashley Creek (near where the apron is shown on the proposed site drawing) with a storm drain pipe connecting underneath the planned runway. Response: Collected contact information for coordination: K. C. Yahvah, Hydraulics Kalispell City Airport Final Environmental Assessment Answer: There are proposed takings, or partial takings, from 35 parcels owned by 18 different parties. Comment: If a group of landowners put together a "package" for land acquisition, it is possible to satisfy the federal relocation assistance regulations and get the "best deal for everyone." Response: Any method of acquiring the land that satisfies the federal Uniform Relocation Act should be eligible for FAA reimbursement. Question: How much would the radio towers need to be lowered? Answer: The towers are 325 feet tall and would need to be lowered 175 feet to alleviate their calculated penetration of the proposed airport's horizontal surface. Questions and Comments from the 6:00 p.m. session: Question: What issues were raised at the meeting earlier today? Answer. RPA staff and others with interests in the project provided a brief summary of the items discussed at the 3:00 meeting. Question: Will John Stokes ( the radio tower owner) be cooperative? Answer: We have met with Mr. Stokes to discuss options that would produce acceptable outcomes for both the city and the station owner, but no compromise solution has yet been reached. @r... Whai.happens:,ifa.landowner.d`osn'iv�anrita,aell? Answer: If the project progresses, the City must demonstrate the "need" for the affected property, have the property and improvements appraised, and have the appraisal reviewed by a second appraiser. A reconciled appraisal and review appraisal determine the `fair market value" for the property and improvements. If the landowner is unwilling to sell, the City could then take the case to court for condemnation. If "need" is demonstrated by the City and accepted by the Court, the land can be used for the better public good. "Value" would then be subject to a second phase of the Court's review and the outcome would be to pay the court determined costs for any residences or businesses affected by the condemnation. Question: If this ends up being a protracted, multi -year project are we assured of continued funding? Answer: The FAA doesn't `pull the rug out" from under ongoing projects. The Citywould be expected to complete an FAA grant pre -application that would show a planned phasing of the project over time. The FAA would have the option of committing Kalispell City Airport Final Environmental Assessment Question: Is Glacier Park International Airport supportive of development at the Kalispell City Airport? Answer: Yes. Most of GPIA's revenue comes from their commercial operations, not from GA activity. Kalispell City Airport serves as a reliever airport for small aircraft., activity at GPIA. Small cargo planes currently divert to City Airport when GPIA is fogged in. Some portion of General Aviation pilots will prefer to use the city airport rather than interact with GPIA's new control tower. Question: What is the minimum length runway the FAA will allow? Answer: The FAA has not mandated that the airport be constructed to serve 100% of the small aircraft fleet (4700' length), only that the City control enough land to build to that length should they wish. The VAA has acknowledged that building to 3500' _the small aircraft fleet) or 3700' (current length) would be a way to °'`&9&� rage use by larger aircraft. 1dcana severaagacalculated the economi�benef't , ►eto the community -of the Kalispell City Airport to lie on the'ordek`0f°$'%1�'peryea Pilots using the City Airport were asked to complete a form detailing how much money they spent while in Kalispell. Comment: The plan is to make the new airport seif-supporting using hangar fees, fuel flowage -fees, etc. Comment: We have all been contributing to the>AIP pot of monies through fuel taxes, I think it's time for some of that moitey-to, be spent here in Kalispell. Comment: In just the last couple years, 5 multi -thousand dollar hangars have been built elsewhere when their owner's first preference was Kalispell City, because of the undecided status at the city airport. Question: What is the future of General Aviation? Answer: We are experiencing a renaissance in general aviation. After changes in the manufacturers liability laws, we are once again manufacturing aircraft in the US. Sales of new and used aircraft are increasing. The numbers of student pilots and flight instructors are on the rise. Comment: The City could fund and improve the airport as it stands. Response: Without modifications to meet FAA standards, this airport will not be eligible for federal funding assistance. The $1M commitment by the City would only provide a finite lifetime to the airport. Question: What is the chance of lowering/removing the radio towers without a fight? Kalispell CitYAhiwrt Final EnvironmentalAssessment COM[MEENT OR STATEMENT opportunity to be eligible for federal funds. In the Federal Program for Airport Improvements, up to 90 percent of all eligible work is funded by the federal government, and the remaining ten percent needs to be funded through local funds or through state aeronautics funds. To this point, Iin not sure if Bill or Dan had mentioned, but the proposed action that we addressed is roughly 7 ,million dollars. veq.thing tvas eligible, roughly $7 to come from;the local C4, nor rom.state aeronautics farads, and -a remaining 6 million -plus dollars would come from Federal Aviation Trust Fund monies. It's important to note that the federal dollars are earmarked dollars from the Aviation Trust Fund. They come from ticket taxes that we all pay when we buy airline tickets and also from aviation fuel taxes. The local funding, of course, is money that you)re well aware of where it comes from. And also, state aeronautics money is similar to the Federal Aviation Trust Fund money in that it is available through their grant loan program, also coming from aviation fuel taxes. And, finally, the last concluding statement I want to make is that this is your city airport and it is certainly in your hands. as to what decisions need to be forthcoming. What we've presented up to this point are the steps and stages that you need to have before you to make good decisions. And also, they are the requirements of the federal government in order to participate in their federal program. So with that, I guess it's going to be open for public comment; not necessarily question and answers, -but we would certainly be willing to answer questions probably at a later date than this evening. And if people want to contact myself, Phillip F-12 RESPONSE W1, Flathead Municipal Airport Authority 4170 Hwy. 2 East • Kalispell, MT 59901 • Phone (406) 257-5994 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Page 1 of 1 Fwd: Kalispell City Airport From: Steve Eckels (eckels@guitarmusicman.com) Sent: Mon 11/09/09 6:43 PM To: Scott Scott (maxwelisnortsnort@hotmail.com) Begin forwarded message: From: Steve. Engebrecht@faa.gov Date: November 9, 2009 4:11:44 PM MST To: eckels(a)guitarmusicman.com Cc: Gary.Gates(a-),faa.gov Subject: Kalispell City Airport Steve - Please be advised that FAA will not sign the assurances that you previously forwarded to Gary Gates of our office. Steve L. Engebrecht, P.E. Civil Engineer Helena Airports District Office steve.engebrecht .faa.gov PH (406) 449-5279 FAX (406) 449-5274 CITIZEN ASSURANCES OF PROTECTION REGARDING THE PROPOSED CITY AIRPORT EXPANSION Approved by roll call vote of the Quiet Skies Committee on 10/21/09 Drafted by Steve Eckels, Spokesperson Quiet Skies Committee Government officials: please sign and return to - PO Box 584; Kalispell, MT 59903 Whereas the Federal Aviation Association has asked the city to sign off on 39 assurances to protect the federal investment in airport expansion, we the members of the Quiet Skies Citizen Committee are asking for six assurances to protect citizen interests before any expansion takes place. This document is a non -binding resolution that states the city,. county and federal officials are willing to assure the following protections. Failure to sign the document means that the city, county and federal government are not able to assure these protections, and will be interpreted by the citizens of the Quiet Skies Committee as a negation or non -guarantee of the protections the citizens are requesting. The City, County and Federal Aviation Administration assures the public: 1. The expansion of the airport will result in noise that is equal to or less than the current amount of noise. 2. The .expansion of the airport will result in greater safety to people on the ground. 3. The expansion of the airport will not have a negative affect on Kalispell's "charm factor" or property values. 4. In the event of a crash, the city and federal government will assume financial liability for damage or injury to people on the ground. Why should people on the ground be responsible for accidents that they have nothing to do with? 5. The city will generate money from the airport in the form of reasonable take off and landing fees. The money will be reinvested in the airport -affected zone to upgrade neighborhoods. (There is a fee to use the Buffalo be Golf Course. Why should we not charge a fee for the use of the airport? There would be a city office at the airport to collect fees and answer complaints). 6. The city will re -zone and/or regulate touch-and-go flight paths to reduce noise before the expansion takes place. Mayor: Date; City Manager; City Attorney: Gary Gates: FAA Airports Division: Date: Date: City Planning Office: Date: Date: KALISPELL CITY AIRPORT - S27 P. O. BOX 1997, KALISPELL, MONTANA 59901 406-250-3065 airport_kalispell.com September 10, 2009 Thank you for your letter, I will attempt to explain the main parts of the airport budget for you, if I can. An Enterprise Fund is a fund that must operate on revenues it generates each year on its own. The City does not put any money into it or take money out of it. ` It is a separate enterprise. The sewer fund, water fund, garbage fund, and the airport fund are all enterprise funds that must operate on their own revenues. If they need more money, they must increase their fees. The airport budget is just under $10_Q000 and it all comes from fees generated by the airport. That is why I said that taxpayer funds were n'- o'Tinvolved in the is rpo mug . Actually, the airport fund pays the City over $18,,000 eachyear for services like insurance, legal, data processing, etc., so we actually help the City out a little. If I wan Public Works to do something on the airport, I must pay them. If I want Parks Department to mow grass, 1 must pay them with airport funds. However, the airport budget is a little more complicated than that because the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has agreed to fund 95% of the 1O`"o redevelopment of the Kalispell City Airport. We have done some needed upgrades over the past five or six years and the FAA has agreed to pay us.for that work. However, they stated from the beginning that we, the City of Kalispell, must remove the KGEZ radio tower from the airports protected airspace before we can be reimbursed for any upgrades since the towers are considered a hazard to aviation operations. We were in negotiations with KGEZ up until he filed for bankruptcy this Spring. We are now waiting for the federal bankruptcy judge to tell us what will happen to the radio station in the future. I am required to put these receivable in the budget for the airport because we intend to use the funds to further improve the airport. Those are the funds that Councilman Hafferman referred to in his comments Tuesday night. If I can be of further assistance, please let me know. 0 Fre eis ' er Kalispell City Airport � r This letter is from Debra and Randy Wise who reside at the south end of the city airport. We would like to say that our family ( the Wise's) have lived at the south end of the city airport for 5 generations spanning over 100 years, and we would like to keep it that way for the next 100 years. It has never been in our family's thoughts to sell any of our property, but to simply enjoy this part of out heritage. We defiantly do not believe the city of Kalispell has any right to expand and take over at others expense what we, our parents and grandparents worked so hard to acquire over the years so that a few people can have their way, when they have other options that are more practical and cost effective. Such as Glacier International Airport or relocating to an aria that wishes to sell their land. As far as the planes following their flight pattern...... according to the airport manager Mr Lestico when planes fly out south they are to travel south towards the radio towers and then turn east. When landing they are to turn at the towers and head north directly to the runway. Yet it has been our observation that more and more planes have decided to take a shortcut and bank directly over our house and shop which are located approximately 700 feet west of the runway. This is both in departure and landing. At no time are they to fly over any of our homes to the west but they do. As far as the helicopters I guess they have no rules ....or respect. Kalispell Police Department stated no one has jurisdiction over the air..... and the airport manager has no control over planes or helicopters.... he passed the buck on to Red Eagle aviation who has no control over the students or instructors. Having said this, it is our opinion that this airport is somewhat out of control and only seems to be getting worse every year with both taxpayer money and lack of respect for others. Thank You Debra and Randy Wise November 9, 2009 Committee Members Kalispell City Planning Board 201 1"Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Dear Planning Board Members, I would like to first take this opportunity to thank you for all of your hard work and public service. I am submitting to you this letter of opposition to the proposal to enlarge the planning area coverage for the Kalispell City Airport. I am submitting this by letter as I will not be able to attend tomorrow nights planning board meeting for public comment. There are many concerns that have yet to be accessed by the Mayor and City Council as it pertains to the city airport. Their have also been some recent changes to the office of Mayor and one City Council member. I would like to ask for you to table any motions pertaining to the city airport or surrounding land needed for the expansion of such airport. We need to give our new Mayor, City Manager, and City Council Member time to reevaluate and address community concerns in regards to this Airport reclassification and expansion. I am concerned that any steps you take as Planning Board Members may open a door that will allow the current Mayor, City Council and AirportManager to steam roll through the process and ram home this before the community's concerns are addressed. Some major concerns that I have in regards to the reclassification of the Airport into a B2 Airport revolve around property values, noise pollution do to increased traffic and aircraft size, and the overall safety of our community. I do not have any issues with the current state of the Airport or businesses that reside their. I am only against the expansion and reclassification of the airport in addition to government control superseding the needs and wants of our community. I look forward to speaking with you at future meetings and would like again to thank you for your dedication to the future of our City. Sincerely, Phillip Guiffrida III 1124 3rd Ave West Kalispell, MT 59901 11/10/09 To Whom It May Concern, My name is Linda Solem and I have been a homeowner at 1539 Haven Drive since 1992. During my time at this address, I have enjoyed living in the open spaces of South Kalispell. As I reflect on my perceptions of the Airfield in South Kalispell, I can remember a time when planes did not take off before 8:00 am and stopped flying around 9:00pm. The gliders are fun to watch. However, this past summer, activity at the airport has had a negative impact on my activity in my own yard. More planes are flying over at lower altitudes which increases the noise. This increase noise has interrupted reading the paper outside in the cool morning hours as well as interrupting picnics in my back yard during our wonderful summer months. After reading articles in the Daily Interlake, my observations of increase volume and frequency in flights were affirmed. The size of airplanes and engines/motors also increases noise. I believe there are many residents in South Kalispell who were not aware of the decision you were making as well as the impact it will have on the quality of our lifestyle. I appreciate the work that has taken place, however; I strongly believe that much of it was completed without the residents knowledge and impact. Please postpone this decision. If a decision to expand the airport is made; it will be difficult to restrict the activity, type of aircraft and airport use. If you need to contact me for any reason, I have listed that information below. As a Committee/Board, please take the time to deliberate and seek additional input before a final decision is made in regard to the South Kalispell Airport. Sincerely, Linda Solem 1539 Haven Drive Kalispell, MT 59901 755-7442 I / l, i I1r „Windows Live Hotmail Print Message rage i of A ” FW: to News Editor for release From: Scott Scott (maxwellsnortsnort@hotmail.com) Sent: Thu 11/05/09 9:29 AM To: edit@dailyinterlake.com To News Editor, The Daily Inter Lake �ECE��ED KALISPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT Quiet Skies Committee to Present Airport Concerns to City Planning Board. The Quiet Skies committee will present the following concerns regarding the City Airport to the city planning board at its meeting on Tuesday, November 10, 7:00 PM @ City Hall. All citizens who share similar concerns are encouraged to attend Tuesday's meeting and to contribute ideas and statements. Not all think the T.I.F. program is heading in the right direction for the city. Message to the city planning board: 1. We question the wisdom of extending the airport runway, which would accommodate larger and louder airplanes. Is this the "highest and best use" of public property and resources? 2. We want a reduction of aircraft noise and an increase of safety for people on the ground 3. We question the use of F.A.A. funding of an extended runway at the current location, if that funding reduces our ability as a city to regulate the airport 4. We want all airport decisions put on hold until after the new mayor is in office and has the time to review them with the city manager and council members. 5. We want an economic re-evaluation of this 74-acre site. Alternative ideas include: a. Hockey center, a cultural center for Pow -Wows and arts Windows Live Hotmail Print Message rage L of L programming, an indoor water park, museum, tourist rest -stop and visitor center, and fair grounds. 6. We are concerned about condemning our neighbors' properties for an expansion of an airport. 7. We like the idea of moving the airport to one of the other locations with F.A.A. funding. 8. We support full time city officers/representatives being stationed at the airport 24 hours a day to charge take off and landing fees, to answer complaints, and monitor all activities. (Currently the airport is unsupervised) 9. We ask for a signatures on the 6 assurances of: less noise, greater safety, property values, city liability in the event of a crash, fees for take offs and landings, and 24 hour on sight supervision. Signatures include the mayor, chairman of city planning, city attorney, city manager, and Federal Aviation Administration representative. 10. We ask for written public explanations of council member's decisions regarding airport issues. 11. Residents are willing to help get this done and work with Mayor and Council members. For more information contact Scott Davis at...... 448 5th. Avenue West Kalispell, Montana 59901 406-752-1523 Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft's powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now. Bing brings you maps, menus, and reviews organized in one place. Try it now. Bing brings you maps, menus, and reviews organized in one place. Try it now. Find the right PC with Windows 7 and Windows Live. Learn more. E W E E!1V0R.:20191 November 2°d, 2009 Good evening Mayor and City Council Members. KALISPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT My name is Scott Davis; I live at 448 5t', Avenue West, Kalispell, Montana. I would like to speak to the issue of the F.A.A. -involvement of the proposed rebuilding and expansion. of the Kalispell City Airport. This letter contains excerpts from Mr. Lex Blood's letter to the Council on March 7th 2005. And I have been.given permission by Mr. Lex Blood to do so. Lex and I and many others, have been interested in the City Airport situation for over 10 years now, as various steps in the rehabilitation process have been studied and discussed. Discussions have usually involved a group cansisting primarily of members of the Airport Advisory Board and City ,Council and airport managers and staff. Lex's and my. previous questions and comments were directed toward the obvious and serious concerns of resident safety and noise disruption. Both issues extend:wel:l beyond the physical limits of the Airport, .as we are reminded . i n August of 2005 crash of a plane on the west side of Kalispell= just 41ocks from the High School-. And another crash on the south end this summer. We have been very lucky that there have been no residential ;deaths by downed ai rc.raft. But: lack does `run ou`t, are we doi n9. ' to thebest - p revent . � t Even if low.fly ng planes don't crash. they always make not se that i s parti cul ar.l y i rri.tati,ng fn the high traffic p'eri,od of ;summer, just ;as eve' ee expecting to {enjoy .openi.ng our win, ows and`e'njoying our back yards. -Also Somewhat 1es obvious, but very real is the property values -'.suffer J.n areas of di mini,'shed safety, security, and increased noise as those of .us ,who l i v&, on the East and ' West and South sides of ..Kal ispel 1;:, and the fear the elderly- have expressed of low flying aircraft, `..'the numbers are in the. thousands . And now the Council has :ok a l of of new isllis Lh L place aI ounU U11t CL .r poi L !L b iffl, ._ •. _ I'11% YE!F L i =` jai `S t.i L.S1 9 S!=...i• l.7L LJ.S 4 YLS 21l1'�l.f�VS Ull - 4 L.L' L JJ'�^.LJ LS'L ? 9 Y Jl9i„.D �' Lj L Lin J i UL11 L::0 Ti.ChE.�J , [.�! VFUS SA3 U L i'l LJLl ld.JUIIl l! L, !li... L k 4J • �J iJvf-. i'!LAlA lip r! V6.VJJ a _ _ WLL i l i Vt:- Lv L-AF-a-HU LEIW a..e� LLiAL nily fie 1 iilflti t-6i� . ! T f`S -Ps. T F`S a -- E i '`" I a P U I i y a te' TES '- - ;` 3 i -"" T Ti %i t I Fi - 3" L`+ i Z U I -- ' L I W E . ! V! L!'!L i.! L� !-'6d l E.lV! L Y9! ! ! VL lilt JLS!'7 11 l..lSLl VI! -V I' l LJ VN! LLJ Ci!!L4 '9 �--2,eg.z'LRe E=i= a iTv -=-C" : tEF kae—p a i.rza ek ---�d'LE?E!`9 i u++-= 9 II"FFI %J F,. LLS LL .y.�_Uf.lJ l%A. AF —3, L!A ldLVaL !lSLVIII;.JILLL' V! L•v'Lu.1 t� !Sa✓JLLl.L Yii i?i"=' eiav L. 3UIa u' I -71C n s o-vv, ih/L'i r�@I't-i {-i ut i - -0 eFc�s LLVlItiS!! !V 6AdS[A4 i J ! J . !"EJ !!!J `l7 Y9L IJLi L E�1RLJ L !-4JlS � !IJ LlSL d ii ic!!V �= r�:--` r_-! ^,H �:> '-�-''4 �.-`:'C e%n :l TIN a:'s �ii6 -!N —a we, <-: . _ ... JFL6.'!i_S 9 SASIE6J '�.!! V�LLL LJ \!!1 LSV99' LIiLy iA! L 79Vd !!lLdVa - Let'-s look at the basics: 1. The Airport- land is owned by the City of K.al i spel l . It belongs to all taxpaying residents. The City presently receives no taxrevenue from this land and a small amount from improvements. The question is, airport property being used to its highest and best use? 2. This is a choice piece of real estate. The approximately 73 plus- acre tract lies between the reconstructed U.&-. 93 and the Airport goad, with recently installed utilities, and near to the New Kalispell Ryprass. The tract is approximately the length of our entire main street and as wide as from 1st Avenue, East to lst . Avenue. West. All mast the size of our down town area. 3. I'm not aware of any new reap estate appraisal of the airpart Property is available, but a review of reports prepared for the airport reconstruction. and discussions with local realtors., indicates that that tract has a value of`up to 20 million dollars ih around 2004 and 2005. And in a 1999 Morrison-Marie.le report that was €grossl low -end valued put the-.prope.rty value in excess of 8 million doll ars (tea years ago) . This i s no longer a 74 acre cow pasture on the far ouiskirts.of Kalispell! 4. Today, with the exception of some improvements on the property., the city receives no tax revenue or net income from the present, use. If you had an asset worth let's say 20 plus million dollars., wouldn't you -expect even a minimum of 3%. Do the math, $600,000 annual return.. 5. Despite off -cited, claims of significant off -site revenue generation, no realistic evaluation has been done -to quantify this. Airport backers contacted the economics department at FVCC years ago regarding conducting such an economici,evaluati.on, but as far as I know no study was done. 6. The biggest gap in this entire scenario is that while there has been extensive study given to various sites for this Airport expansion, there has been no evaluation of the best and highest use for this land. Such a process would include an economic evaluation of a, -number of potential development possibilities, including the present airport. With comparative information -in . .hand, the City and the Taxpayers can make an informed decision. A sale of any or all of this.property would yield a double return -revenue from the sale and tax revenue from development. t 7. There also seems to be a false choice out forward, either this airport, at this location, or no city airport. In reality, there are alternatives. One is basically a free -bee; Glacier Park Internatfonal has stated its ability and willingness to serve all General Aviation needs now furnished at the. city airport. They are required to do so by Federal Regulations. In addition, a couple other total relocations were considered by Morrison-Mariele and Peccia reports. Each cost less, up to 50% less, than the proposed reconstruction and would still receive FAA grant funding as well. After a request by the City to GPI to manage the Kalispell Airport, an internal report done for the GPI board also recommended a total relocation just a few miles east of Kalispell. This information was included in a letter to the city in 2004, with specifics of an offer to manage such an airport.. Any relocation would leave the city of Kalispell with a choice 74 acre parcel for sale or development. Also there are federal grant moneys available for such development. S. I have read that Kalispell is the only city on Kontana that is served by both a large commercial aviation airfield and a general aviation airfield. This :includes Missoula, Butte, Helena, Great falls, Bozeman, Bi l 1 i ngs , Sidney; and West Yellowstone. Makes you wonder, .doesn"t. it? What they known that we donst 9. Has the City adequately assessed the opinions of the City Residents? it doesn't look like it. As fair back as I997, . (I2 years ago) Mr. Gabbers Of the Airports District Office of the F.A.A. in Helen, Montana, writing to Kalispell] City Manager Mr. Krepps, cites the essential need .far such assessment from it residents, the tax payers them self's. A full and easily understood fact sheet and, r estionnaire should be circulated after the range of alternatives i.s- developed and economic cos-t/benef is of eaeb have been evaluated. 'taxpayers have a .reasonable right to know and have a consequential voice in hoer their assets are be -tag util-tzed, I . particularly in matters of. such magnitude, both financially and for the fire growth of -the the city. Has this been done? I'd like to see this fact sheet and questionnaire and the res-ults please. C�' As of last week; I was informed by the F.A.A. that the City of Kalispell has to do a new / complete environmental assessment (E.A.) as the shelf life of one is only 3 years. Also the city of Kalispell needs to do a new site selection study for F.A.A. involement, because of all the new subdivisions and development of the land around our city airport. They said we.are back to square one. To sum this up. I would say that the city.has a significant gap in it performance of due diligence.with regard to the decision on the future of this tract of land andthe potential costs and/ or benefits to us all. You as the City Council are the trustees of the city, assets. We, the taxpayers, expect and deserve a thorough evaluation of all options before such future commitments are made. And hopefully this upcoming election will produce such results. Thank you; here is a copy for the record, PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PUD CONDITIONS: LA. Permits the developer one community information center/sales office for the entire Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase H. Builders who purchase large portions of the community may be allowed to construct one or more model home(s) to demonstrate their product. The model homes are temporary in nature. The let shall be idei#i fie of r-&vised PUD plan. The use of the lot as a model home and sales office shall cease once the lots have been sold. B. Allows the minimum lot area to be reduced from 7,000 square feet to 4500 square feet. C. Allows the minimum lot area widths to be reduced from 60 to 45 feet. 2. Uses within the PUD are limited to detached single-family houses except for model homes and the community sales office to be used temporarily. 5. Blocks 6-,4-9, 11 and 16... 8. "...the buffer may include the use of streets, stormwater retention area, open space, landscape buffer, or any combination thereof. 12. B. Block 2 shall be modified to continue the existing 20-foot wide bike/ped trail landscape b,north, through Block 2, to connect with Ashleigh Avenue. 13. The storm water retention areas shall be irrigated and landscaped to create a park -like setting with a rl& to be reviewed and appr-eved by the Pails and Reeier`ttieia DepaAmerA and Pl - o D r ,.4 + The appr-eved .,.1., s1- a4 b-e insta4led pr-ier- to final plat appr-eva4 of the phase 17. A landscape plan for the lift station shall be provided to the Planning Department a Parks and R do Depa tffi for the review and approval. 19. insert 2B in place of 2A. PRELIMINARY PLAT CONDITIONS 35 A. The 100-foot building setback shall coincide with the rear 1e+>^,,,,,,,1afies e the adjaeeat back wall of the structure on the adjacent lots. 36. a. Water mains shall be designed to provide fire flows as determined by the fire department Water- mains designed + r,-,,v4de ,,,;,..;,,..,,ffi f,.o flows_ s>,,» instaHed at appr-evedleea4 a 40. All existing and proposed easements shall be indicated on the face of the final plat. Utility easements f_r City shallate- and sewer- - .be p y;de + allo w " i w uujviuuig �ivl„iv Utility easements for City water and sewer shall be provided to allow logical extension of utilities from this subdivision to adjoining properties 41. ...The sidewalk and boulevard will be modified only to the extent required by the USPS. It will still allow the sidewalk and boulevard to function normally. Garage Appearance and Location Standards For Trumbull Creek Crossing Phase II 1. The following standards apply, except when a garage is located behind the primary structure or the garage is side or rear loading. a. The garage shall i. Not be located closer to the street than the dwelling, unless the exterior wall of at least one room of habitable space shall be located closer to the street than the garage door. I Not occupy more than 60% of the width of the fagade of the structure for a two car garage. iii. Minimize the appearance of the garage by complying with at least two of the following standards: A. Set the garage an additional two feet further from the front property line than the fagade of the dwelling B. Provide individual garage doors, not to exceed 80 square feet each, for each parking stall. C. Any individual garage door may not exceed 50% of the width of the structure fagade. Any garage opening width beyond 50% of the primary structure width must be set back at least 2 feet further from the front property line than the fagade of the other garage volume; D. Provide a decorative trellis or other feature that will provide a shadow line giving the perception that the garage opening is recessed. The feature shall be provided across the top and along the width of the garage door(s) and shall be at least 12 inches deep and 6 feet tall. 1 i s. I T a 3 i r7$ yM1 i� %ayut x �I tt M 40' The Kennewick 1 Plan number 121099 PATIO • This charming home has much to offer despite its modest size. • Adjacent the foyer, double doors I cLo introduce the flexible den/bedroom. VAULTED VAULTED • An impressive vaulted great room 13/0 XB 12/4 19/6 GREAT 11R/8 I with a warm fireplace offers plenty 3ATH of space for active family living and entertaining. _______________ ___________ • The centrally located island kitchen o` opens to the dining room and great DIN Rhf 10/6 x 9/0 KIT room. BR N 10/4 x 9/3+ R o • The vaulted master bedroom features _ �_ o a walk-in closet and private bath 00 � complete with oversized shower. • A laundry closet is conveniently D w located off the full bath, which is .BATH shared by the two bedrooms. GARAGE * This home is designed with 2 x 4 FOYER 19/4 x 19/4 I exterior wall construction. BR/DEN 11/8 X 10/0 FLOOR PLAN 1192 SQUARE FEET H 0 M E 0 E 5 1 6 N I N C Tel; (503) 624-0555 Fax; (503) 624-0155 7165 SW Fir Loop, Suite 104 Tigard, Oregon 97223 w w w. s u n t e I h❑ m e d e s i g n , r_ ❑ m 3 ) FI °t�y�m�` -�_��..� � EVERGREEN FIRE RESCUE 2236 Highway 2 East (P.O. box 5008) Kalispell, MT 59903 (406)752-4636 Fax (406)752-1540 Thursday, November 5, 2009 Bryan Schutt, President Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission P.O. Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59901 RE: Trumble Creek Crossing I am writing to express concerns related to emergency services to the area in question. This area is far outside the boundaries of the City of Kalispell — in the middle of the southern portion of the Evergreen Fire District (EFD). The existing Trumble Creek subdivision (57 lots) is under the protection of EFD for EMS (two minute response) and fire (three minute response) calls. When the City enforces the waivers to protest annexation and the election to withdraw from a fire district received on the existing subdivision, the responses times would significantly increase. If the City built another fire station near the development, it would most likely be located within 2-3 miles of Evergreen's Station 81 or 82. Stations 61 & 62 are three miles apart and they are each about 3.5 to 4.0 miles from EFD Station 81. EFD station 82 is 4.5 miles north, at Birch Grove and Hwy 2 East. Additionally, existing Trumble Creek properties are assessed their proportionate share of the bonded indebtedness for Evergreen's new station 81 until the year 2029. Likewise, phase II and future developments will incur some indebtedness (MCA 7-33-2129). In the future, CAD based dispatch would send nearest available EMS and fire units. Though EMS is covered by user fees, fire protection costs are taxpayer supported. EFD could be providing fire protection to existing municipal locations, i.e., Village Greens, Village Loop, Edgerton School and other surrounding developments, as well as future municipal areas without compensation, or consideration. Currently the City and EFD travel through each others protection areas to respond to respective calls, whether EMS or fire. This is prevalent along the section of Whitefish Stage Road, south of West Reserve Drive, which begs the question, Is this a responsible arrangement for providing EMS and fire services? Page 1 of 2 Ten to fifteen years ago, the relationship between EFD, Kalispell and the Kalispell Fire Department (KFD) was uncooperative, maybe even hostile. The Kalispell and KFD relationship with the other rural fire districts would be described with the same words and to some extent continue to this day. During the last five years the working relationship between EFD and KFD has improved tremendously, primarily because they have needed to rely on each other for EMS backup and support. The fire side of the picture has benefited also, but the interaction on the fire side is less frequent. EFD is staffed 24 hours providing 24/7 ALS and fire services with 21 paid full-time and part-time personnel. The responders have worked together to develop the same/similar protocols, supplies, equipment and practices to make expectation somewhat seamless because of the number of times they are supporting each other on responses. This period of cooperative spirit has occurred during a time when EFD has not felt its jurisdiction and revenue sources to be threatened. At the least, Trumble Creek Phase II and any future developments may threaten revenue sources for EFD operations. A dependence/reliance of backup and support has developed between EFD and KFD — a relationship that can be fragile and requires careful understanding for the safety of the communities to which we have each become responsible. Brutal transparent discussions and honesty need to occur in areas of overlapping jurisdiction — what's more important — revenue, jurisdiction, safety, response times, and/or who's the customer? EFD has developed a strong training program for EMS/fire services. KFD has benefited from individuals that got their start in the EFD. Immediate annexation or annexation without consideration to EFD will undermine the efforts of the last few years. Thank you for your time considering these issues. Craig Williams, Fire Chief Evergreen Fire District Xc: Kalispell Planning Board and Zoning Commissions members Kalispell Mayor and City Council members Kalispell City Manager Representative Jon Sonju — HD 7 Page 2 of 2