Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
*** 07. Resolution 4587 - Stratford Village Annexation
Flathead Regional Development Office Kalispell, Montana 59901 Phone: (406) 758-5980 Fax: (406) 758-5781 Kalispell Mayor and City Council Narda A. Wilson, Senior Planner Chris A. Kukulski, City Manager Annexation and Initial Zoning of R-4 and RA-1 - Stratford Village Subdivision October 2, 2000 BACKGROUND: In conjunction with the Stratford Village preliminary plat, a request for annexation and initial zoning of R-4, Two Family Residential, and RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment, upon has been submitted. The preliminary plat for Stratford Subdivision, a 102 lot residential subdivision in southwest Kalispell, was submitted concurrently with the petition for annexation and is being forwarded with this annexation for council consideration. Based upon surrounding zoning and compliance with the urban residential designation of the master plan, staff recommended approval of the proposed zoning. At the public hearing two people spoke in favor of and six against the application in association with the preliminary plat, stating reasons of density and traffic, especially in regard to the safety of the children in neighboring areas. The annexation request and assignment of the appropriate zoning classification went before the Kalispell City -County Planning Board for public hearing at their September 12, 2000 and they are forwarding a recommendation for approval of the proposed zoning. RECOMMENDATION: A motion to adopt the first reading of the ordinance assigning an R-4 and RA-1 zoning designation upon annexation of this property would be appropriate. FISCAL EFFECTS: Minor positive effects once fully developed. ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the city council. 4 � Narda A. Wilson Chris A. Kukulski Senior Planner City Manager Report compiled: September 22, 2000 Providing Community Planning Assistance To: • Flathead County ® City of Columbia Falls ® City of Kalispell . City of Whitefish Memo to City Council for Stratford Village Annexation and Initial Zoning September 22, 2000 Page 2 Attachments: Transmittal letter and Petition to Annex FRDO report KA-00-06 and application materials Draft minutes from 9/ 12/00 planning board meeting H: \FRDO\TRANSMIT\KALISPEL\2000\KA00-6MEMDOC A RESOLUTION TO PROVIDE FOR THE ALTERATION OF THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL BY INCLUDING THEREIN AS AN ANNEXATION CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A TO BE KNOWN AS STRATFORD VILLAGE ADDITION NO. 298; TO ZONE SAID PROPERTY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE KALISPELL ZONING ORDINANCE, AND TO DECLARE AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Kalispell has received a petition from Apex 1, LLC, the owner of property located west of South Meadows Subdivision and east of the Burlington Northern right-of-way and described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and thereby made a part hereof, requesting that the City of Kalispell annex the territory into the City, and WHEREAS, the Flathead Regional Development Office has made a report on Apex 1, LLC's Annexation Request, #KA-00-6, dated September 5, 2000, and WHEREAS, the Kalispell City -County Planning Board and Zoning Commission recommended that the territory be annexed into the City of Kalispell, and WHEREAS, said territory is included within and conforms to the Kalispell City -County Master Plan, and WHEREAS, the City of Kalispell desires to annex said property in accordance with Title 7, Chapter 2, Part 46, Montana Code Annotated. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. That all the real property as described in Exhibit A, be annexed to the City of Kalispell and the boundary of the City is altered to so provide, and shall be known as Stratford Village Addition No. 298. SECTION II. Upon the effective date of this Resolution, the City Clerk is directed to make and certify under the seal of the City, a copy of the record of these proceedings as are entered on the minutes of the City Council and file said documents with the Flathead County Clerk and Recorder. From and after the date of filing of said documents as prepared by the City Clerk, or on the effective date hereof, whichever shall occur later, said annexed territory is part of the City of Kalispell and its 4587 stratford village.wpd -1 - citizens and property shall be subject to all debts, laws and ordinances and regulations in force in the City of Kalispell, except that assessments for street maintenance, storm water, and urban forestry shall only be levied upon approval of the final plat of the respective phases of Stratford Village Subdivision, and shall be entitled to the same privileges and benefits as are other parts of the City. SECTION III. The territory annexed by this Resolution shall be zoned in accordance with the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. SECTION IV. This Resolution shall be effective immediately upon passage by the City Council. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND SIGNED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL, THIS 2ND DAY OF OCTOBER, 2000. Wm. E. Boharski Mayor ATTEST: Theresa White City Clerk 4587 stratford village.wpd ORDINANCE NO. 1367 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION 27.02.010, OFFICIAL ZONING MAP, CITY OF KALISPELL ZONING ORDINANCE, (ORDINANCE NO. 1175), BY ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT -A" (PREVIOUSLY ZONED COUNTY SAG-10, SUBURBAN AGRICULTURAL) TO CITY R-4 (TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) AND RA-1 (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT), IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY -COUNTY MASTER PLAN, AND TO PROVIDE AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Apex 1, LLC, the owner of property described in Exhibit "A", petitioned the City of Kalispell that the zoning classification attached to the above described tract of land be changed to R-4, Two Family Residential and RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment, and WHEREAS, the property as described exists as property surrounded to the North by undeveloped and residence, City R-3 and County R-1 classification, to the East by residences, City R-4 classification, to the South by railroad tracks and undeveloped, County R-1 classification, and to the West by railroad tracks, County R-1 classification, and WHEREAS, the petition of Apex 1, LLC was the subject of a report compiled by the Flathead Regional Development Office, #KA-00-5, dated September 5, 2000, in which the Flathead Regional Development Office evaluated the petition and recommended that the property as described above be zoned R-4, Two Family Residential, and RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment, as requested by the petition, and WHEREAS, the Kalispell City -County Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopted the FRDO report and recommended the property as described be zoned R-4, Two Family Residential, and RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment, and WHEREAS, after considering all the evidence submitted on the proposal to zone the property as described R-4, Two Family Residential, and RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment, the City Council adopts, based upon the criterion set forth in Section 76-3-608, M.C.A., and State, Etc. v. Board of County Commissioners, Etc. 590 P2d 602, the findings of fact of FRDO as set forth in Report No. KA- 00-5. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. Section 27.02.010, of the Official Zoning Map of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, (Ordinance No. 1175) is hereby amended by designating the property described in Exhibit "A" as R-4, Two Family Residential, and RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment. SECTION II. The balance of Section 27.02.010, Official Zoning Map, City of Kalispell Zoning Ordinance not amended hereby shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION III. This Ordinance shall be effective thirty (30) days from and after the date of its final passage and approval by the Mayor. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL AND SIGNED BY THE MAYOR THIS 2ND DAY OF OCTOBER, 2000. Wm. E. Boharski Mayor Theresa White City Clerk Flathead Regional Development Office 723 5th Avenue East-Room 414 Kalispell,Montana 59901 Phone:(406)758-5980 Fax:(406)758-5781 September 21, 2000 Chris Kukulski, City Manager City of Kalispell P.O. Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 Re: Annexation and Zoning for Stratford Village Subdivision- R-4 and RA-I Dear Chris: The Kalispell City-County Planning Boa-rd met on September 12, 2000, and held a public hearing to consider a request for R-4, Two Family Residential, and RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment, upon annexation on property in southwest Kalispell. The preliminary plat for Stratford Subdivision, a 102 lot residential subdivision, was submitted concurrently with the petition for annexation and is being forwarded with this annexation for council consideration Narda Wilson presented staff report KA-00-6 and recommended that the board forward a recommendation for R-4 and RA-1 zoning upon annexation based upon surrounding zoning and compliance with the urban residential designation of the master plan. At the public hearing two people spoke in favor of and six against the application in association with the preliminary plat, stating reasons of density and traffic, especially in regard to the safety of the children in neighboring areas. After the public hearing, the board discussed the proposed density and potential traffic. After careful consideration, a motion was made to adopt staff report KA-00-6 and recommend to the city council that the property be zoned R-4 and RA-1 upon annexation. On a roll call vote the motion passed with six in favor and one opposed. Exhibit A describes the annexation boundaries. Please schedule this matter for the October 2, 2000 regular City Council meeting. You may contact this board or Narda Wilson if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely Kalispell City-County Planning Board 4t641-- an A. JO J n A on resident A ress ident Providing Community Planning Assistance To: Flathead County®City of Columbia Falls®City of Kalispell®City of Whitefish Apex 1, LLC Annexation and Initial Zoning September 12, 2000 Page 2 JJ/NW/dw Attachments: Petition to annex and Exhibit A FRDO report KA-00-6 Draft planning board minutes 9/ 12/00 c w/o Att: Apex 1, LLC, 10 East Roanke St., #8, Seattle, WA 98102 Reggie Lyman Lindsay, 601 W. 13th St., Laurel, MT 59044 Jackola Engineering, PO Box 1134, Kalispell, MT 59901 11111111�;-Jir � I Iff'144FIFIN-10, �T* I I DescriptionExhibit A Legal StratfordVillage Subdivision A -TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN .THE SOUTHEAST 'QUARTER. OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTM AND ,IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTFR AND' IN U.S. GOVF.RNMM)T LOT 2 ALI, IN SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 28 NORTH, RANGE 21 WEST, PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, MONTANA AND MOPF. PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING- AT TFIE CENTER QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 19, INDICATED BY A FOUIID 5/8" RE -BAR AND WHICH POINT IS THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE S110019'57"E, ON AND ALONG THE EAST BOUNDARY OF SAID NnPTHFAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER, A DISTANCE OF 528.96 FEET 1'0 A FOUND 5/8" PF.-BAR AND WHICH POINT LIES ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY BOUNDARY OF THE BUPLINGTON NOPTHF.PI1 RAILROAD, 'THENCE N39019'11"W, ON AND ALONG SAID NOPTIFF.PLY RIGHT-OF-WAY BOUNDARY, A DISTANCE OF 2314.91 FEET TO A FOUND 5/8" RE -BAR AND WHICH POINT LIES ON THE NORTH BOUPIDAPY OF SAID U.S. GOVERNMENT LOT 2; THENCE I188®16'27"E, ON AND ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY OF U.S. GOVERNMENT LOT 2, A_ DISTANCE .OF 133.45 FEET TO A FOUND 5/8" RE -BAR AND WHICH POINT IS THE NORTHWE:S'T CORNER OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER; THENCE N88.22' 50"E, ON AND ALONG THE NORTH BOUNDARY OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUAPTf)P OF THE . NORTIIWFST.QUARTER, .A DISTANCE OF L324..4I, FEET TO A I'n,INT WHICH POINT J,S TIM CENTER NORTH ONE -SIXTEENTH COFNRF OF SAID.SECTJON 19; THEM{-F. S00®17'07'E, ON AND ALONG THE EAST BOUNDARY OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUAPTF. OF TIIF NORTHWEST QUARTER, A DISTANCE OF 1 303. 38 FF ET TO T'HF TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. THIS TRACT CONTAINS 30.652 ACRES AND SUB.JEC'1' TO AND TOGF.T'HFR WITH ALL APPUR'T'FUA111' EASEMENTS OF RECORD. PARCEL A OF CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY NUMBER , CONTAINING 15.326 ACPFS AND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE; NORT'HWFST QUARTF,P AND IN U..'. GOVF.RNMEN'T. LOT 2 OF SECTION 19, 'TOWNSHIP 28 NORTH, PANGE 21 WEST, PRINCf!'AI. 11FPIDIAN, MONTANA, FLATHEAD COUNITY, MONTANA AND SUBJECT TO AND TOGETHER WITH ALI. APPURTENANT EASEMENTS OF REC'()PD. PARCEL B OF CEPTIFICATE OF SURVEY NUMBER _, CONTAINING 15.326 ACRES AND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER AND IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER - OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTEP OF, SEI'TION 19, TOWNSHIP 28 NOP9'H, PANGE 21 WE:;T, PRINCIPAL MEPIUTAN, MONTANA, FLATHEAD COUNTY, MONTANA AND SUBJECT 1'0 AND T'OGETHEP, WITH ALL APPURTENANT EASEMENTS OF PECOPD. had the right to go to the Board of Adjustment. 10Rkn'! The consensus of the Board was that the administrative process was good, it would speed up the process for the applicant, and the Board of Adjustment was set up for the appeal process in case of denial. ROLL CALL On a roll call vote the motion to adopt staff report KZTA-00-1 as findings of fact passed unanimously for the text amendment and was forwarded to the City Council for their consideration. APEX 1 LLC A request by Apex 1, LLC for annexation into the City of ANNEXATION Kalispell and an initial zoning designation of R-4 and RA-1 in southwest Kalispell in conjunction with the subdivision known as Stratford Village Subdivision. STA.FF REPORT Narda Wilson, representing the Flathead Regional Planning Department, gave a presentation on two staff reports; KA-00-6 (annexation and initial zoning), and KPP-00-5 (preliminary plat approval), and asked that the Board handle them as two separate motions. The Board was in agreement. Wilson stated Stratford Subdivision was on the summer agenda, but was pulled so they could acquire the adjoining property. She pointed out the proposed subdivision on a site map. Wilson said that adding the property to the north resulted in a cleaner subdivision design. Staff reviewed the project briefly and noted R-4 zoning for the majority of the project and RA-1 zoning for the fax west comer. She said the potential for duplexes was possibly 20-25%. She reported on roadways, saying the connections of South Meadows area and Sunnyside Drive would be important links in the roadway network of Kalispell. Wilson thought they would eventually come in with a by-pass design that would mitigate the traffic impacts. She said there would be an engineered drainage plan, which was outlined in the environmental assessment. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak on the proposal. PROPONENTS Thor Jackola, 1830 3rd Ave. East, spoke as a representative of the subdivision. Jackola said he hoped to have their favor for the project. He said it was a good addition to Kalispell and met a lot of the needs, primarily geared to affordable housing. He said Wilson gave a good presentation and that he and Jim Burton would be happy to answer questions. Jackola stated that, from the report, they would concur with the density issue, saying that having the density level occur there was quite unlikely, but the developers would like to have the opportunity to place the duplexes as they saw fit in the development. He brought up one other issue, the parkland, and said Jim Burton would address that issue. Kalispell City -County Planning Board September 12, 2000 Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 11 Jim Bur -ton, 1304 3rd Ave East, spoke in favor of the project saying that Mr. Bakers letter addressed the parkland dedication stating the total acreage, rather than the net acreage on the lot. Wilson stated that the staff report corrected that information and parkland was based on area in lots. OPPONENTS Angela Allen, of 1920 South Meadows, was opposed to the proposal. She said she was a homeowner who was extremely concerned about the rezoning. Allen stated they petitioned South Meadows, Ashley Park, and Lone Pine and over 125 people agreed they would like the zoning to be R-3, for single family homes. She stated the traffic as one issue. She said they needed affordable housing, and they knew the neighborhood would be developed, but thought it would be developed with other homeowners who had the same intentions they did as far as participating in the community, the neighborhood, taking care of lawns, and taking care of their homes. She said the density issue concerned them. If all were built as duplexes, which if zoned for they had the option to build however they would like. She said they would have more people per acre with smaller lots and not a lot of yard. She said she would like to see compatibility with neighbors, long term investors who would take better care of their properties, versus people who come in for 6 months to one year then leave. She asked the Board to please consider their request and the petition, which, if they had more time, would have had more signatures. Wilson asked for a copy of the petition for the record. Paula Davey, 1912 South Meadows Drive, spoke in opposition stating her main concern was that the children had no where to walk on South Meadows Drive. She said the neighborhood was very family oriented, with a lot of children and they had no sidewalks, streetlights, or stop signs. She said she was concerned, especially in the winter when it gets dark early, about children not being seen while walking the neighborhood. Davey said the duplexes and apartments would be located directly west of them and south of Lone Pine, which meant that all the traffic would be diverted through both subdivisions. She said South Meadows' only entrance and exit was Beg Park Drive and the extra traffic, according to the staff report, would be 1,000 vehicle trips per day for single family homes. With duplexes or apartments she said it would be well over 2,000 vehicle trips per day. Davey pointed out that the Laker Ball fields were on one side and soccer fields were on the other of Beg Park Drive. She said it was very active and brought a lot more children. Plus, she said the bus stop was on the comer, which brought 20 to 25 children who had to walk home sometimes in the dark during winter, without streetlights. Davey stated she was very nervous about the amount of traffic in that neighborhood. Kalispell City -County Planning Board September 12, 2000 Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 11 Ray Delong, 310 Bismark Street, Lone Pine View Estates. Delong said he would also like to see the area zoned as single family instead of duplexes or apartment buildings to keep it as a neighborhood. He said they knew when they bought it would be developed, but thought it would be kept as single units. His other concern was Denver Avenue, which already had a lot of traffic and was not a safe street. He said if the Board opened it up to apartment buildings or duplexes that cars would be a problem. He said he thought other people had the right to have a house, but wanted to see the land go from agriculture to single units instead of apartments and duplexes. Kelli Herman, 1919 Bluestone Drive, spoke against the project. She said she was a homeowner and mother who wanted to elaborate on the affordable housing issue. She said it was a good way to give a family a start as homeowners. She said all of the area, Lone Pine, Ashley Park, and South Meadows had, even though it was zoned R-4, gone with single family. She said it brought a lot of people to the neighborhood who normally wouldn't be able to buy a house. She said because the areas were residential, single family, it didn't make sense to throw in rental units. Her other major concern, as a mother, was the traffic issue. She said the speed limit was 25 miles per hour, but at her house traffic went 35 to 40 miles per hour. She thought homeowners would be more cautious of how they drove. Marvin Vaughn, 116 Denver Avenue, agreed with all of the traffic problems and said there were not enough access places for apartments and duplexes. He said the whole thing was backwards, they should have put apartments in the front when they designed the whole thing and then single family houses in the back to reduce the traffic. He said he didn't think it was a good idea. Natalie Jones, 850 Denver, spoke in opposition stating they moved to the area from a combined neighborhood, like they were looking to create. She said they found there was a lot more traffic then before they built the duplexes. She said the single family homes created a certain amount of flow and duplexes and apartments would increase that. She said the neighborhood they were in was very small and funneling that much traffic through was not good for them or the children. No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Sipe moved and Hines seconded to adopt staff report KA-00-6 as findings of fact and recommended to the Kalispell City Council that the initial zoning upon annexation for the properties be R-4 and RA-1 as proposed in accordance with the preliminary plat for Stratford Village Subdivision. Kalispell City -County Planning Board September 12, 2000 Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 11 BOARD DISCUSSION Heinecke asked and Wilson answered that they estimated an increase of 1,000 or more, generally 8 to 10 vehicle trips per day, per residence, according to the Institute of Transportation Engineers. Wilson suggested they might consider designating a certain percentage of lots for duplex development and then the developer could designate which lots would be duplex and which would be single family when the final plat came in. She said she understood the neighbors concern about traffic, on the other hand, the ability to create sublots, or townhouses, had been a popular method of homeownership. Wilson thought it might create a more affordable arrangement and brought it up as one alternative allowed with the R-4 zoning. Garberg asked about access from Valley View and Wilson said they would have to create a railroad crossing and the situation that would create was not an option. Garberg said he sympathized with the people in the subdivision and that he was familiar with it. He appreciated their concerns regarding access. He was prone to support the idea of going to R-4, and not recommending RA-1, to help with the density and traffic issues. Rice asked what the percentage of duplexes was in South Meadows and Wilson thought it to be about 25%. P.J. Sorenson said it was not an extensive amount. He said there was a string of them going in on Great View. Heinecke asked and Wilson pointed out the area on a map, which was a 3.6 acre lot. Rice said there were about 48 apartments there. Johnson asked if the remaining portion would be R-4 and Wilson said that was correct. Rice commented that while looking at the vicinity map, it made sense to go R-4 because it had R-4 bordering it now, with R-3 on the north. He thought the street conditions would add traffic problems and that it would be hard to say what percentage would end up being in duplexes versus single family. He said he agreed with Garberg, to not do RA-1, and limit the percentage of duplexes to keep with an R-4 zone. Stevens asked about minimum lot size and said he agreed with Rice, that when he looked at the map he saw R-4 all the way around. He saw a development pattern of single family houses and wondered if there was a more appropriate zone to keep with what was there. He thought a practical and equitable solution would be to zone it single family housing. Hines said there were duplexes where he lived and he didn't have a problem with those, it was the apartments, especially Kalispell City -County Planning Board September 12, 2000 Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 11 with the density and the flow issue. He suggested limiting the number of duplexes and randomly locating them. Stevens said he didn't have a problem with the apartments and/or duplexes, as they were located and thought they would have less impact on the area than single family homes. He said that the R-4 had developed into affordable housing and had worked out well. There was a brief discussion on zoning in the area and the density issue. Wilson asked the Board to consider that RA-1 zoning required a conditional use permit process and pointed out that the neighbors would have an opportunity to comment. She also said that apartments would require additional parking and it would go through a more strenuous review. She said she would be reluctant to say they would max out the density of the 3.6 acres. There was additional discussion on the density and Wilson came up with an estimated 35 units on the 3.6 acre site. She said if it were lots they were looking at 20 or 25 additional lots. Stevens thought an ideal solution would be to have a By-pass road that would access the subdivision and asked if the City Council could approach the State about it. Stevens asked if it was written in stone as a no access and Wilson said, yes. Stevens thought it was a solution they should keep in mind. Wilson pointed out that access from the west would require a 60 foot easement through private property because there wasn't a roadway. Johnson asked if Stevens' comment was a recommendation to the City Council and Stevens said that was where he was going with it. Garberg said it came back to the density and traffic issue and he thought the focus should be on that. Wilson pointed out there was access off the By-pass plan for Sunnyside Drive and Woods Lake Road. AMENDED MOTION Garberg moved and Hines seconded to amend the motion to delete the RA-1 request and recommend an initial zoning of R- 4. BOARD DISCUSSION Heinecke stated opposition to the motion. He thought RA-1 would provide low income housing that was desperately needed. He thought the areas were attractive and provided play ground space and community parking. He didn't think it would add to traffic flow, but decrease it instead. Heinecke agreed that single housing should be in the back, but thought it an awkward piece of land and thought apartments would fit it. Stevens stated he was in opposition to it for the same reasons. He thought the market demand would restrict duplexes and that overall it aligned with his interest of easing the way for Kalispell City -County Planning Board September 12, 2000 Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 11 affordable housing. He said it was a tough battle in the county and he wanted to give it due consideration. He said if Phase 3 went through site review the concerns would be addressed. Garberg said, in support of the amendment, there was plenty of opportunity for affordable housing, and to him it was a non- conforming use to the existing units and not compatible. Johnson stated he was opposed to the amendment because of the configuration of the three acres. He didn't think they would get very many lots on it and thought it was a good use for the area. ROLL CALL On a roll call vote, Stevens, Johnson, Rice, and Heinecke voted (AMENDMENT) no, and Hines, Sipe, and Garberg voted aye. The motion to amend and delete therequest and recommend an initial zoning of R-4 failed by 4 to 3 against ROLL CALL On a roll call vote, Heinecke, Hines, Sipe, Johnson, Rice, arCe (MAIN MOTION) Stevens voted aye, and Garberg voted no. The motion passed in favor and 1 opposed. I APEX ILLC A request by Apex 1 LLC for preliminary plat approval of a 102- PRELIMINARY PLAT lot residential subdivision known as Stratford Village Subdivision located south of Lone Pine View Estates and west of South Meadows and Ashley Park subdivisions. MOTION Rice moved and Heinecke seconded to adopt staff report #KPP- 00-5 as findings of fact and, based on those findings, recommend to the Kalispell City Council they approve the preliminary plat subject to the staff recommended conditions. BOARD DISCUSSION There was a brief discussion by Stevens and Rice regarding restricting the lots to single family. They both agreed it would be too restrictive, but Rice thought it was a good idea to put a percentage indicator for duplexes based on other subdivisions. Stevens objected, saying that any changes in the zoning laws should 'be advertised, a public hearing held, and ran through the City Council with the appropriate reasons to do it. He wasn't sure it was legal. He thought they were creating a whole new zoning classification and it wasn't advertised as such. There was discussion about the Boards ability to put verbiage on the plat. Garberg said he didn't think it should be standard operating procedure, but there were cases where it was advisable and a useful tool. He said he would support it and also support a percentage limitation on the project. MOTION TO AMEND Rice moved and Garberg seconded to add condition 18, to limit 25% percent of the lots to duplexes. BOARD DISCUSSION Stevens objected to the motion stating it would be very bad public policy to start changing zoning regulations. He thought Kalispell City -County Planning Board September 12, 2000 Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 11 Y. LINDSAY REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND INITIAL ZONING OF R-4 AND RA-1 FLATHEAD REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT #Ki i 2000 A report to the Kalispell City -County Planning Board and the Kalispell City Council regarding the annexation and initial zoning of R-4 and RA-1 on property in southwest Kalispell. A public hearing has been scheduled before the Kalispell City -County Planning Board for September 12, 2000 beginning at 7:00 PM in the Kalispell City Council Chambers. The Planning Board will forward a recommendation to the Kalispell City Council for final action. This report evaluates the appropriate assignment of a City zoning classification in accordance with Section 27.03.010(4) of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. The developer has petitioned annexation and initial zoning concurrent with an application for preliminary plat of a 102 lot residential subdivision in southwest Kalispell known as Stratford Village Subdivision. The applicant has proposed a zoning classification of R-4, a Two Family Residential district, and RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment. The property is in the County zoning jurisdiction and is zoned County SAG-10, a Suburban Agricultural district. This property will be annexed under the provisions of Sections 7- 2-4601 through 7-2-4610, M.C.A., Annexation by Petition. The preliminary plat for Stratford Subdivision submitted concurrently with the petition for annexation will also require consideration by the city council. A. Petitioner andOwners: Apex 1, LLC 10 East Roanke St, #8 Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 322-5977 Reggie Lyman Lindsay 601 W. 13th Street Laurel, MT 59044 (406) 628-1020 Technical Assistance: Jackola Engineering P.O. Box 1134 Kalispell, MT 59901 (406) 755-3208 B. Location and Legal Description of Property: The property proposed for annexation lies west of South Meadows and Ashley Park subdivisions, south of Lone Pine View Estates subdivision and east of the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way. The purpose of the annexation and zoning is for a 102 lot residential subdivision known as Stratford Village Subdivision that has been filed concurrently with the annexation request. The property proposed for annexation can be described as Assessor's Tracts 6, 6LA and 12BA located in Section 19, Township 28 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. C. Existing zoning: The property is currently in the County zoning jurisdiction and is zoned SAG-10, Suburban Agricultural. The suburban agricultural district is intended to serve as a buffer between agricultural uses and more intense urban uses. In this instance, however, the SAG-10 zoning has served to maintain this tract for future development such as that being proposed. D. Proposed Zoning: City R-4 zoning has been proposed for most of the lots in this subdivision with the exception of an approximately 3.5 acre site near the northwest comer of the property which is being proposed for RA-1 zoning, Low Density Residential zoning district. Both of these zoning districts allows duplexes and single-family dwellings as permitted uses. The RA-1 zoning district requires a triplex or greater to be reviewed as a conditionally permitted use. Minimum lot size for the both of these districts is 6,000 square feet for duplexes and single family plus and additional 3,000 square feet for each dwelling beyond a duplex. E. Size: The area proposed for annexation and zoning contains approximately 30.66 acres. F. Existing Land Use: Currently this property is being used for agricultural purposes and is otherwise undeveloped. It is intended for a residential subdivision, Stratford Village Subdivision. G. Adjacent Land Uses and Zoning: The area is characterized by single-family and duplex residential development on lots in the area to the east and single family homes on the lots to the north. North: Undeveloped / residences Lone Pine View Estates; City R-3 zoning and County R-1 zoning. East: Residences (duplexes and SFR); City R-4 zoning. South: Railroad tracts and undeveloped; County R-1 zoning. West: Burlington Northern railroad tracks and large parcels to the west, County R-1 zoning. H. General Land Use Character: The area to the east is developed at an urban density and is residential in character. To the west of the railroad tracks, are large parcels that have single family homes on them. L Availability of Public Services: Full public services can be provided to this site and will be done in accordance with the City of Kalispell's Extension of Services Plan and in accordance with Kalispell's Design and Construction Standards. The statutory basis for reviewing a change in zoning is set forth by 76-2-205, M.C.A. Findings of fact for the zone change request are discussed relative to the itemized criteria described by 76-2-203, M.C.A. 1. Does the requested zone comply with the Master Plan? The property is designated by the Kalispell City -County Master Plan as "Urban Residential" which is defined as allowing two to eight units per acre. The M 2 3. GI 5 proposed R-4 and RA-1 zoning designations are in general compliance with the master plan designation for the area provided that some of the lots within the subdivision are developed as single family homes. At full build -out at a maximum density the proposed subdivision would exceed the urban residential limits of eight units per acre and be closer to about ten units per acre. This however is highly unlikely considering the present real estate market and as is reflected in the adjoining R-4 zoned subdivision to the east where most of the lots are single family with some duplex and townhouse units. The proposed zoning is in substantial compliance with the master plan designation which anticipates a mix of single family and duplex dwellings and higher density if adequate open space is provided. Is the requested zone designed to lessen congestion in the streets? Once the proposed subdivision which has been filed concurrently with this annexation and initial zoning request has been developed, traffic in the area will increase. However, infrastructure will also be extended and will serve the homes within the subdivision. This zoning designation and subsequent subdivision will not lessen congestion in the streets in the area, but is anticipated to occur as development of the area continues. Will the requested zone secure safety from fire, panic, and other dangers? Adequate access and public facilities are available to the site in the case of an emergency. There are no features related to the property which would compromise the safety of the public. New construction will be required to be in compliance with the building safety codes of the City which relate to fire and building safety. All municipal services including police and fire protection, water and sewer service is available to the area and will be extended as part of the development of this subdivision. Will the requested zone promote the health and general welfare? The requested zoning classification will promote the health and general welfare by restricting land uses to those that would be compatible with the adjoining properties and providing a place for new housing in the community. Will the requested zone provide for adequate light and air? Setback, height, and coverage standards for development occurring on this site are established in the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance to insure adequate light and air is provided. 6. Will the requested zone prevent the overcrowding of land? As previously noted this area has been master planned for urban residential development which generally falls within the proposed R-4 and RA-1 zoning designations. All public services and facilities will be available to serve this subdivision. An overcrowding of land would occur if infrastructure were inadequate to accommodate the development in the area. This is unlikely to occur. 7. Will the requested zone avoid undue concentration of people? Minimum lot standards and use standards as well as subdivision development standards will avoid the undue concentration of people at the time the property is developed. 8. Will the requested zone facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, and other public requirements? All public services and facilities are currently available or can be provided to the property. Development should be encouraged in areas where these services are available. 9. Does the requested zone give consideration to the particular suitability of the property for particular uses? The proposed R-4 zoning district is consistent with the surrounding zoning and land uses in the area and gives due consideration of the suitability of this property for the permitted uses in the district. The proposed RA-1 is generally consistent with the density anticipated in this area and has the same overall density standards as R-4 zoning, i.e. one dwelling per 3,000 square feet. 10. Does the requested zone give reasonable consideration to the character of the district? The general character of the area is small lot residential development. The same type of development can be anticipated to occur on this property and will be consistent with the character of the district. 11. Will the proposed zone conserve the value of buildings? Value of the buildings in the area will be conserved because the R-4 zoning will promote compatible and like uses on this property as are found on other properties in the area. 12, Will the requested zone encourage the most appropriate use of the land throughout the municipality? Small lot residential development should be encouraged in areas were services and facilities are available such as is being proposed on this parcel. The proposed zoning is consistent with the master plan and surrounding zoning in the area. The proposed City R-4 zoning is similar to the existing to the east of the site and is a continuation of the same pattern of development. There may be some concerns about too many duplexes being developed in the subdivision. However, past experience has demonstrated that the duplex development in these subdivisions is generally 25 percent or less of the total number of lots. The proposed RA-1 zoning near the northwest comer 0 of the property pushes the density limits anticipated for this area and the type of development anticipated to occur. However, there is an apparent need in the community for some property that can be developed with apartments. Apartment zoning is extremely limited in the planning jurisdiction which limits housing choices for many people. The extension of municipal services to the subdivision will be in accordance with City standards as part of the development of the subdivision that has also been proposed. Adequate access is available to serve the property and any future development will be consistent and compatible with existing development in the area. Public services and the facilities serving this subdivision will be extended and constructed in accordance with the City of Kalispell Extension of Services Plan and the Kalispell Design and Construction Standards. M;431490 1 bI* Z 0X"i It is recommended that the Kalispell City -County Planning Board adopt Staff Report #KA-00-6 as findings of fact and recommend to Kalispell City Council that the initial zoning upon annexation for these properties be R-4 and RA-1 as proposed in accordance with the preliminary plat for Stratford Village Subdivision. H\... \REPORTS\KA\99\KA00-6.DOC M E Flathead Regional Development Office 723 5th Ave. East Room 414 Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406)758-5980 Fax: (406)758-5781 AWA,1C-%A-77PA1 � IIVII-711Z- PIYWV�� PETITION FOR ENDM T NAME OF APPLI 01'rwyb-�� 3. CITY/ STATE/ ZIP:_ 4"t:(zl /V)- 004�- PHONE: 4. INTEREST IN PROPERTY: 6 VA 64f S. ZONING MAP AMENDMENT: ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT: IF THE REQUEST PERTAINS TO AN AMENDNENT TO THE TEXT OF THE .-e ZONING REGULATIONS, PLEASE COMP LO E THE FOLG: 7111ET A. What is the proposed zopirrg-text amendment? li 1�'AU 0 11.10WAIRWItRivil-A' t awfou"i A. Address of the property: B. Legal Description: &60kki A /I- (Lot and Block of Subdivision; Tract #) (Section, Township, Range) (Attach sheet for metes and bounds) C. The present zoning of the above property is: J4jp i 4 Wn IV D. The proposed zoning of the above property is: R E. State the changed or changing conditions that make the proposed amendment necessary: �ghwk-w�0/7 A. Promoting the Master B. Lessening congestion in the streets and providing safe access C. Promoting safety from fire, panic and other dangers D. Promoting the public interest, health, comfort, convenience, safety and general welfare E. Preventing the overcrowding of land F. Avoiding undue concentration of population G. Facilitating the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewage, schools, parks and other public facilities H. Giving reasonable consideration to the character of the district 2 ljs U BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL PETITION FOR ANNEXATION TO CITY COM E NOW the undersigned and respectfully petition the City Council of the City of k' edispell, requesti*g city annexation of the following real property into the City of Kalispell and to remove the following real property from the ,sr" va /Lw— Rural Fire District. The etitioner (s) requesting City of Kalispell annexation of the property describe( herein hereby mumially agree urith the City of Kalispell that limmedialely upon annexation of the land all City of Kalispell municipal services will be provided to the property described herein on substantially the same ba is and in the same manner as such services are provided or made available within the rest of the municipality prior to annexation. Petitioner (s) hereby sl to that there is no need to prepare a Municipal Annexation Service Plan for this a -inexation pursuant to Section 7-2-4610, M.C.A. since the parties are in agmemer t as to the provision of rntinicipal, services to the property reqiiested to be annex d. 4L Dated this day of 2000, LEGAL D !' SCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE ANNEXED: PROPERI�'ADDRESS: -FrctJS 64-, GI i 1q T-ZW OWNER PLEASE RETURN THIS PETITION TO CITY CLERK'S OFFICE CONSENT TO ANNEX AGREEMENT AND NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL FROM RURAL FIRE DISTRICT TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of A u!7 e,-t y0oa by and b tween 'rz i L.1�_ hereinafter PARTY() OF INTEREST (TNCLUD-S OWNER(S), LIENHOLDER(S), OR CONTRACT SELLERS) AND THE CITY OF KALISPELL, Flathead County, Montana, hereinafter CITY, WITNES ETH: That or and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar and/or other good and valuable considers ion to us in hand paid, and certain promises, mutual terms, coveimnts, provisions, conditions and agre ments, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the PARTY(S) OF INTERS: T, do(es) hereby consent to, and hereby do waive any and all right to protest, which we may have or t after acquire in regard thereto, any attempt or proceedings made or to be made by or with the const t of the City of Kalispell, Montana, to annex to and make a part of said City of Kalispell, more par?cularly described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and which, by this reference, is made a part hereof. The P TY(S) OF INTEREST do(es) further herein express an intent to have the property as herein d scribed withdrawn from the s ' Fire District under the provision of Section 7-33-2I27, Montana Code Annotated; and that incorporated into this Consent to Annex A xeement is the Notice requirement pursuant to said Section; and that upon proper adoption of an ordina ice or resolution of annexation by the City Council of the City of Kalispell, the property shall be detrac d from said district. THE ARTY(S) OF INTEREST fuuther agree(s) that this covenant shall run to, with, and be binding t on the title of the said real property, and shall be binding upon our heirs, assigns, successors in interes , purchasers, and any and all subsequent holders or owners of the above described property. This I ity hereby agrees to allow PARTY(S) OF INTEREST to hook onto the City of Kalispell sewer sv: em. IN TT.13TIMONY AND WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and affixed our seals this 1 144� day of mot,.2 . PARTY(S) INTERES CITY OF KALISPELL City Manager ATTEST Finance I hector APPLICATION MATERIAL PETITION NO.: BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL JUN 12 2000 OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL �,-- PETITION FOR ANNEXATION TO CITY F. R. D. ©. o� Kalispell COME NOW the undersigned and respectfully petition the City Council of the City of Kalispell requesting city annexation of the following real property into the City of Kalispell and to remove the following real property from the sr»13 MRural Fire District. The petitioner (s) requesting City of Kalispell annexation of the property described herein hereby mutually agree with the City of Kalispell that immediately upon annexation of the land all City of Kalispell municipal services will be provided to the property described herein on substantially the same basis and in the same manner as such services are provided or made available within the rest of the municipality prior to annexation. Petitioner (s) hereby state that there is no need to prepare a Municipal Annexation Service Plan for this annexation pursuant to Section 7-2-4610, M.C.A. since the parties are in agreement as to the provision of municipal services to the property requested to be annexed. Dated this /,Z day of Ju-n-e- , 2000. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE ANNEXED: PROPERTY ADDRESS: �ra�s (o LAB IZBH in S'ec. 19 T�SN Ku hi c- L (� OWNER PLEASE RETURN THIS PBT4T GN T- ^T'"" CLi, CONSENT TO ANNEX AGREEMENT AND NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL FROM RURAL FIRE DISTRICT TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into thisJZ day of by and between___ - /—mcdscu PARTY(S) OF INTE "ST (INTtLUDES OW1 SELLER(S) AND THE CITY OF KALISPELL, WITNESSETH: hereinafter ER(S), LIENHOLDER(S), OR CONTRACT Flathead County, Montana, hereinafter CITY, That for and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar and/or other good and valuable consideration to us in hand paid, and certain promises, mutual terms, covenants, provisions, conditions and agreements, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the PARTY(S) OF INTEREST, do(es) hereby consent to, and hereby do waive any and all right to protest, which we may have or hereafter acquire in regard thereto, any attempt or proceedings made or to be made by or with the consent of the City of Kalispell, Montana, to annex to and make a part of said City of Kalispell, more particularly described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and which, by this reference, is made a part hereof. The PARTY(S) OF INTEREST do(es) further herein ex% ress an intent to have the property as herein described withdrawn from the; V� Fire District under the provisions of Section 7-33-2127, Montana Code Annotated; an that incorporated into this Consent to Annex Agreement is the Notice requirement pursuant to said Section; and that upon proper adoption of an ordinance or resolution of annexation by the City Council of the City of Kalispell, the property shall be detracted from said district. THE PARTY(S) OF INTEREST further agree(s) that this covenant shall run to, with, and be binding upon the title of the said real property, and shall be binding upon our heirs, assigns, successors in interest, purchasers, and any and all subsequent holders or owners of the above described property. This City hereby agrees to allow PARTY(S) OF INTEREST to hook onto the City of Kalispell sewer system. IN TESTIMONY AND WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and affixed our seals this I day of PARTY(S) OF INTEREST CITY OF KALISPELL City Manager ATTEST: Finance Director STATE OF MONTANA ) W County of Flathead On this day of , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public for the State of Montana, personally appeared ; Lumala, Lm sue., known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my Notarial Seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. % ..gotta,,.. I STATE STATE OF MONTANA ) ss County of Flathead a Reo injtat 8 ®expires OF, On this day of , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public for the State -of Montana personally appeared and ,the and respectively, of ,the corporation that executed the foregoing instrument, and the persons who executed said instrument on behalf of said corporation, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my Notarial Seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. Notary Public, State of Montana Residing at My Commission expires STATE OF MONTANA } ss County of Flathead On this day of , before me a Notary Public in and for the State of Montana, personally appeared CHRIS A. KUKULSKI and AMY 14 ROBERTSON, known to me to be the City Manager and Finance Director of the City of Kalispell, a municipality, that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged that such City Manager and Finance Director respectively subscribed, sealed and delivered said instrun.e..t as the free and voluntary act of said municipality, for the uses and purposed therein set forth, and that they were duly authorized to execute the same on behalf of said municipality. IN vdi T ivESS 'w HER.EOF, 1 have hereunto set my hand and affixed my Notarial Seal, the day and year first above written. Notary Public, State of Montana Residing at My Commission expires NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Ot .. O Zoning Text Amendmentto AllowExpansion of • s,n•. n• Uses Stratford Village Subdivision Annexation and Initial Zoning of R-4 and RA_ 1 Stratford Village Subdivision Preliminary Plat - A 102 Lot Residential Subdivision Park Bottling Co Annexation and Initial Zoning of TransportationMontana Dept of Annexation of ... 93 to ,♦ Reserve D,. The regular meeting of the Kalispell City -County Planning Board and Zoning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, September 12, 2000 beginning at 7:00 PM in the Kalispell City Council Chambers, Kalispell City Hall, 312 First Avenue East, Kalispell. During the regularly scheduled meeting of the planning board, the board will hold public hearings and take public comments on the following agenda items. The board will make a recommendation to the Kalispell City Council who will take final action: 1. A request by Louise E. Swanberg for amendments to the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 27.25, Nonconforming Lots, Uses and Structures. As proposed, non -conforming uses and / or structures may be allowed to be expanded subject to a obtaining a non- conforming use expansion permit. Expansions of a non -conforming use of 25 percent or less would be subject to a nonconforming use expansion permit issued as an administrative condition use permit. Expansions of a non -conforming use more than 25 percent but less than 50 percent would be subject to a nonconforming use expansion permit following the procedures established for a conditional use permit. This amendment would potentially affect all areas within the city of Kalispell where non- conforming uses exist. 2. A request by Apex 1 LLC and Reggie Lyman Lindsay for annexation into the City of Kalispell and an initial zoning designation of R-4, Two Family Residential, and RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment, on approximately 30.66 acres. The property proposed for annexation lies south of Lone Pine View Estates, west of South Meadows and Ashley Park subdivisions and east of the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way. The property is currently in the County zoning jurisdiction and is zoned SAG-10, Suburban Agricultural. The purpose of the annexation and zoning is for a 102-lot residential subdivision known as Stratford Village Subdivision that has been filed concurrently with the annexation request. The property proposed for annexation can be described as Assessor's Tracts 6L, 6LA and 12BA located in Section 19, Township 28 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. 3. A request by Jackola Engineering on behalf of Apex 1 LLC for preliminary plat approval of a 102-lot residential subdivision known as Stratford Village Subdivision. The subdivision contains approximately 30.66 acres with 1018.7 acres in lots, 8.9 acres in roads and 3.1 acres in common area. Most of the lots within the subdivision are between 6,000 and 8,000 square feet with one lot containing approximately 3.57 acres that would be used for low -density apartments. New public roadways will be extended to serve the subdivision. A request for annexation into the City of Kalispell has been filed concurrently with the subdivision with a request for R-4 zoning, Two Family Residential, and RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment, upon annexation. The property proposed for subdivision is located south of Lone Pine View Estates, west of South Meadows and Ashley Park subdivisions and east of the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way in the southwest part of Kalispell. The property can be described as Assessor's Tracts 6L, 6LA and 12BA located in Section 19, Township 28 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. 4. A request by Park Bottling Co. for annexation into the City of Kalispell and an initial zoning designation of I-1, Light Industrial, on approximately 4.00 acres. The property proposed for annexation lies on the south side of Kelly Road and east of Highway 93 approximately 1,000 feet. The property is currently in the County zoning jurisdiction and is zoned I-1, Light Industrial and B-2, General Business. The purpose of the annexation and zoning is so that the property owner can obtain City water to service additional hydrants needed for a proposed expansion to the existing warehouse building. The property is located at 100 Kelly Road and can be described s Assessor's Tract 7-OB located in Section 20, Township 28 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. 5. A request by Montana Department of Transportation for annexation into the City of Kalispell and initial zoning on approximately 12.00 acres. The property proposed for annexation is the Highway 93 corridor that lies between the Kalispell Youth Athletic Complex on the south and West Reserve Drive on the north. The property is currently in the County zoning jurisdiction and is zoned in accordance with the zoning that the highway adjoins. The purpose of the annexation is so that the property in the city limits along the Highway 93 corridor will be contiguous to the city limits of Kalispell. The property can be described as Tract I on Certificate of Survey No. 7860 located in Section 36, Township 29 North, Range 22 West, and Section 31, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana. Documents pertaining to these agenda items are on file for public inspection in the Flathead Regional Development Office, 723 Fifth Avenue East, Room 414, Kalispell, MT 59901, and are available for public review during regular office hours. Interested persons are encouraged to attend the hearings and make their views and concerns known to the Board. Comments in writing may be submitted to the Flathead Regional Development Office at the above address prior to the date of the hearing or you may contact Narda. Wilson, Senior Planner, for additional information. Thomas R. Jentz Planning Director