1. Core Area Market Analysis - Willdan Financial Services�v
City of Kalispell
Post Office Box 1997 - Kalispell, Montana 59903
Telephone: (406) 758-7701 Fax: (406) 758-7758
MEMORANDUM
To: Doug Russell, City Manager®
Cc: Tom Jentz, Planning Director
From: Katharine Thompson, Community Development Manager
Re: Core Area Plan and Market Analysis Presentation
Meeting Date: June 24, 2013
The City Council has previously adopted the Core Area Plan as a roadmap for the revitalization
of Kalispell's central, historically industrial, core area. Components of the plan include
relocation of rail line and related business to provide for enhanced redevelopment opportunities
as identified in the Core Area Plan.
In the supplementary steps to the planning effort, Willdan Financial Services has prepared a
market analysis specific to the Core Area which has been included as an appendix to the Core
Area Plan. The market analysis details current economic conditions and addresses indicators for
growth in the Core Area. Additionally, Willdan has provided the City with recommendations for
financing different components within the plan, some of which are already being implemented,
such as the application for TIGER grant funding for the development of the rail park.
Staff will present a brief review of the Core Area Plan followed by a presentation from Willdan
Financial Services of the results of their study of the Core Area.
Respectfully submitted,
Ka arine Thompson
Community Development Manager
Community & Economic Development
- v
•.
.n...N�
.erg
y
iL. ��.
vk e�Y
v
'
wti.sl
Ne 'wewtlr• n.
y
C.Aty of Kalispell. Montano
,*,%/WILLDAN I yoUnding
Financial Services .each
Draft Project Report
Kalispell Core Area Market Analysis
and Feasibility Analysis
Prepared for
City of Kalispell
Department of Community Planning &
Economic Development and the
Kalispell Core Area Steering Committee
Submitted by
Willdan Financial and
Economic Consulting Services
(Willdan)
June 21, 2013
Table of Contents
I. Introduction & Executive Summary
II. Baseline Demographic & Economic Overview
Population
Households
Age Profile
Income Profile
Unemployment and Labor Force
Educational Attainment
Skills Gap
Kalispell Tourism Market
III. Residential Market Analysis
New Housing Construction Trends in Kalispell
Housing Market Sales Prices & Pace in Kalispell
Kalispell Apartment Market Trends
Flathead County Housing Market Trends & Projections
Housing Affordability in Flathead County
Residential Development Opportunity in the Core Area
IV. Retail Market Analysis
Core Area Site Characteristics
Retail Trade Areas
Primary Trade Area
Secondary Trade Area
Retail Competition Overview
V. Office Market Analysis
VI. Business Park/industrial Market Analysis
Key Recommendations
Vll. Hotel and Hospitality Market Analysis
Vill. Opportunities and Constraints: Implications for Core Area Plan
Strengths and Opportunities
Constraints/Threats
IX. Core Area Economic Development Recommendations
Scenario 1 — Status Quo (Maintain Rail in Core Area)
Scenario 2 — Conservative (Limited Expansion of Core Area Retail)
Scenario 3 — Optimistic (Major Expansion of Core Area Retail)
Long -Term Redevelopment Potential
Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 3
7
9
9
9
10
10
12
13
14
14
17
17
17
19
19
20
21
23
23
24
24
25
25
32
33
33
35
36
37
39
40
40
41
42
43
Rationale
43
Recommended Retail Recruitment Strategies
44
Leasing and Management
44
Phasing and Action Items
44
Conclusions
45
X. Kalispell Linear Park Conceptual Plan
47
Introduction
47
Linear Park Layout and Programming
47
Key Regional Trail Connection Points
48
Proposed Linear Park Programming "Bump out' Nodes
48
Street Extensions/ Railroad Crossing Conversions
49
Connection to the City of Kalispell Parks and Recreation Network
49
Linear Park Capital Cost Assumptions
49
Rail Line Removal
50
Linear Park Trail
50
Summary of Construction Costs
50
Linear Park Operating Cost Assumptions
52
XI. Core Area Financial Feasibility & Implementation Plan
53
Summary of Key Findings
53
Annex A: Detailed Assumptions & Calculations
59
Annex B: Public Park/Recreation Development Opportunities — Case Studies
60
Portland Trails, Maine
60
Potomac Overlook Regional Park Nature Education Center, Arlington, Virginia
61
Carolina Thread Trail & Cawtaba Lands Conservancy, North and South Carolina
62
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 4
Index of Tables/Figures
Figure 1: Population Counts and Estimate (2010, 2012, 2017)..............................................................................
Figure 2: Household Counts and Estimate (2010, 2012, 2017)..............................................................................
Figure12012 Population by Age..........................................................................................................................
Figure4: 2017 Population by Age..........................................................................................................................
Figure 5: Income Profile for the City of Kalispell.....................................................................................................
Figure 6: Income Profile for Flathead County.........................................................................................................
Figure 7: Per Capita Income, Flathead County, 1997-2010...................................................................................
Figure 8: Percent Change in Nonfarm Labor Income, Flathead County.................................................................
Figure 9: Flathead County Employment Trends 2005 - 2010.................................................................................
Figure 10: Unemployment Rate, Flathead County, Not Seasonally Adjusted........................................................
Figure 11: Educational Attainment in Flathead County..........................................................................................
Figure 12: Educational Attainment in the United States.........................................................................................
Figure 13: Glacier National Park Visitor Spending (2010 and 2023 Projection).....................................................
Figure 14: Residential Construction Pipeline, City of Kalispell...............................................................................
Figure 15: Home Sales and Median Sales Price in Kalispell (2007-2012).............................................................
Figure 16: Median Home Values, Kalispell Zip Code 59901..................................................................................
Figure 17: Gross Rent as a Percentage of Household Income..............................................................................
Figure 18: Occupancy of Housing Units, Flathead County, 2010...........................................................................
Figure 19: Housing Affordability Index, Flathead County 2007-2010.....................................................................
Figure 20: Average Annual Housing Unit Construction..........................................................................................
Figure 21: Conceptual Redevelopment Alternatives — Residential Development...................................................
Figure 22: Target -Anchored Shopping Center (Highway 93 North)........................................................................
Figure 23: Kalispell Retail Competition Map. ..........................................................................................................
Figure 24: Retail Gap Analysis - City of Kalispell...................................................................................................
Figure 25: Conceptual Redevelopment Alternatives — Retail Development...........................................................
Figure 26: Incremental Residential Retail Spending Power & 10-Year Supportable Retail Development (2022)...
Figure 27: Food, Retail & Entertainment Demand from Glacier National Park Visitor Spending (Square Feet).....
Figure 28: Current Kalispell Office Market Lease Rate Trends..............................................................................
Figure 29: Leads for Rail Industrial Park................................................................................................................
Figure 30: Profile of Kalispell Area Hotel/Lodging Properties.................................................................................
Figure31: Downtown Kalispell...............................................................................................................................
Figure 32: Proposed Core Area Redevelopment...................................................................................................
Figure 33: Current Conditions: Kalispell Center Mall Parking Lot... ........................................................................
Figure 34: Summary of Linear Park Development Costs and Phasing Recommendations ....................................
.. 9
9
10
10
11
11
11
12
12
13
14
14
16
17
18
18
19
20
21
21
22
24
26
28
29
30
31
32
33
35
40
43
......... 45
......... 51
& Feasibility Analysis Page 5
Figure 35:
Kalispell Linear Park Annual Operating Cost Estimates................................................................................................................
52
Figure 36:
Core Area Financial Feasibility Analysis — Summary Results.......................................................................................................
53
Figure 37:
Core Area Plan Real Property Tax Revenue Assumptions —Incremental Taxes Per Square Foot from Similar Redevelopment
Activity...........................................................................................................................................................................................
54
Figure 38:
Fiscal Benefits at Buildout - Summary of Scenarios......................................................................................................................
55
Figure 39:
Core Area Grant Funding Resource Strategy...............................................................................................................................
56
Figure 40:
Potomac Overlook Regional Park Environmental Stewardship Programming..............................................................................
62
Figure 41:
Carolina Thread Trail Park Identification Signage.........................................................................................................................
62
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 6
I. Introduction & Executive Summary
The City of Kalispell commissioned this Core Area Commercial Market
Analysis ("Market Analysis') to assist it in the redevelopment of the
Core Area. The City has developed a vision to revitalize the Core Area
while retaining its character and identity. This Market Analysis will
identify the opportunities to realize the vision, the impediments to
implementation, and provide direction on bringing the plan from
concept to reality.
This study analyzes the plan's impact on fiscal revenues, job creation
(both one-time construction and ongoing permanent jobs), and indirect
spending. It also evaluates the environmental, social, and other public
benefits that are difficult to quantify, but have a positive impact on the
community.
The City's vision is to increase the appeal of the Core Area by:
• Removing the railroad tracks that bisects the Project Area and
replace the tracks with a Linear Park;
Improving and upgrading existing properties to remove the
blighted areas within the Core Area; and
• Developing a compatible mix of commercial retail,
neighborhood services, residential housing and public areas
that meets the needs of residents and fosters a greater sense of
community. In turn, the proposed redevelopment will
strengthen the local economy by increasing the local tax base,
attracting new residents and businesses, creating new jobs,
and increasing tourism.
This report will assess and analyze development opportunities in the
following sectors:
• Retail
• Office
• Business Park
• Hotel and Hospitality
• Institutional
• Single and Multi Family Housing
The report will also identify ways in which public policy can encourage
appropriately scaled new development that will positively shape and
reinforce the Core Area of Kalispell through:
• Retention of existing retailers
• Strategy for the recruitment of new commercial uses
• Impact of any recent and proposed development projects
• Apparent strengths and weaknesses in Kalispell for the
following development sectors;
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 7
Elements that may now (or in the future) support or constrain
the goals of the Core Area Strategy;
The consumers' experience within Kalispell and the Core Area;
Characteristics within Kalispell that have the greatest impact
on development;
Voids and opportunities in the marketplace that will affect
local retailers and national chains; and
Public improvements and public and private investment
strategies to reinforce project goals and objectives.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 8
11. Baseline Demographic & Economic
Overview
Population
The City of Kalispell and Flathead County are both growing. Figure 1
shows that Kalispell had 20,603 residents in 2012. This number
represents a growth rate of 1.70 percent per year from the 2010 US
Census to 2012. Flathead County grew from 90,928 residents as
reported in the 2010 US Census to 94,275 in 2012. The county grew at a
rate of 1.84 percent per year during that time.
The city and county are both expected to continue adding residents, but
the rate of this growth is expected to slow over the next five years.
Between 2012 and 2017 Kalispell is expected to grow its population by
more than 1,200 residents, an annual growth rate of 1.20 percent.
Flathead County will reach a population of 100,620 in 2017 by having
an annual growth rate of 1.35 percent
Figure 1: Population Counts and Estimate (2010, 2012, 2017)
Flathead County 90,928 94,275
Source: ESRI Business Analyst; Willdan, 2013.
1.70%
1.84%
1.20%
1.35%
Households
The 2010 US Census identified 8,638 households in the City of Kalispell,
as shown in Figure 2. By 2012, this number had grown by an annual
rate of 1.53 percent to 8,903 while the population grew more quickly at
1.70 percent per year. Though the population of the City is expected to
grow 1.2 percent annually from 2012 to 2017, the number of
households is expected to rise 1.44 percent to 9,546 by 2017. The city
added households more slowly than population from 2010 to 2012, but
will add households more quickly than population from 2012 to 2017.
Flathead County reflects this trend as well. While the population of the
county grew by an annual rate of 1.84 percent from 2010 to 2012, the
number of households only grew by 1.66 percent per year, from 37,504
to 38,748 in the same period. However, as the rate of population
growth in the county is expected to decline to an annual rate of 1.35
percent, the annual household growth rate will increase to 1.58 percent
per year, bringing the total number of households expected by 2017 to
41,808.
Figure 2; Household Counts and Estimate (2010, 2012, 2017)
Kalispell 8,638 8,903 1.53% 9,546 1.44%
Flathead County 37,504 38,748 1.66% 41,808 1.58%
Source: ESRI Business Analyst; Willdan, 2013.
Kalispell Core Area Market 8, Feasibility Analysis Page 9
IV
As in indicated in Figure 1 and Figure 2, both the City of Kalispell and
Flathead County are expected to add households faster than they grow
their populations. This signals anticipated demand for new housing
starts. Friends and family cohabitating out of economic necessity will
choose to form new households once their economic conditions allow
it. The expected rise in household formation by 2017 indicates both a
strengthening economy as well as reflects a larger national trend of
decreasing household sizes regardless of economic conditions.
Age Profile
Both the City of Kalispell and Flathead County have a larger portion of
the population in the 25 to 64 age range, the portion of the population
that traditionally financially supports the other ends of the age
spectrum. As Figure 3 shows, the population in 2012 in Kalispell that is
in this age bracket is smaller than the same age cohort in the county as
a whole; 50.6 percent as compared to 54.9 percent. The bulk of the
difference in the remaining population comes in the younger age
bracket. In the city, 33.5 percent of the population is under the age of
25 while just 30.4 percent of the county's population is in this younger
demographic. The City of Kalispell is younger than Flathead County.
Figure 3: 2012 Population by Age
City of Kalispell
33.5% 50.6% 15.9%
30.4% 54.8% 14.9%
Source: ESRI Business Analyst; Willdan, 2013.
These trends are expected to continue through 2017. While the
Kalispell is expected to remain generally younger than Flathead County,
both places will cope with an aging population. Figure 4 shows that the
portion of the population age 65 and older is expected to grow. By
2017, the city's retirement -aged population will be 17.5 percent of the
population while the county will have a 16.9 percent share of older
residents.
Figure 4: 2017 Population by Age
City of Kalispell 32.7% 49.8% 17.5%
Flathead County 29.3% 53.7% 16.9%
Source: ESRI Business Analyst; Willdan, 2013.
Income Profile
In 2012 the median household income in the City of Kalispell was
$37,319, as shown in Figure S. The share of households earning more
than $75,000 per year was 19.2 percent. By 2017, the median income is
projected to grow to $41,906, an increase of 12.29 percent, or 2.46
percent on an annualized basis. By 2017, 22.3 percent of households
will earn more than $75,000. The per -capita income is also projected to
grow from $21,768 in 2012 to $24,169 by 2017, increasing by 16AS
percent.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 10
Mr
Figure 5: Income Profile for the City of Kalispell
I 1 •
Median Household Income $ 37,319 $ 41,906 12.29%
Per -capita Income $ 21,768 $ 24,169 11.03%
% of Households earning $75k or more 19.2% 22.3% 16.15%
Source: ESRI Business Analyst; Willdan, 2013
Figure 6 demonstrates that residents of the county tend to be slightly
wealthier than City residents. The median household income for
Flathead County was $42,873 in 2012, and 23.7 percent of the county's
households made more than $75,000 annually. By 2017, the median
income is projected to grow to $50,288, an increase of 17.30 percent
C3.46 annually), and the share of households earning more than
$75,000 per year will increase to 27.5 percent From 2012 to 2017, the
region's per -capita income is projected to grow from $23,242 to
$25,782.
Figure 6: Income Profile for Flathead County
Median Household Income $ 42,873
Per -capita Income $ 23,242
% of Households earning $75k+ 23.7%
Source: ESRI Business Analyst; Willdan, 2013.
Flathead County's per capita income rose steadily from 1997 to 2008,
as demonstrated in Figure 7. This metric peaked in 2008 when the per
capita income for the county surpassed $35,000 in 2010 dollars. When
the economy faltered in 2009, it caused the per capita income levels of
the counts residents to fall for the first time in a decade. In 2010, the
per capita income for the county rose, but still fell short of the pre -
recession figures slightly.
Figure 7: Per Capita Income, Flathead County,1997-2010
$40,000
$35,000
$30,000
$25,000
$20,000
$15,000
$10,000
$5,000
$ 50,288 17.30%
$ 25,782 10.93% Sources: US Bureau of Economic Analysis and Bureau of Business and Economic Research;
Willdan, 2013.
27.5% 16.03%
Nonfarm labor income measures how an economy is doing. Nonfarm
income grew 28 percent between 2003 and 2007, as shown in Figure 8.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 11
Nonfarm labor income declined in 2008 and 2009 as major industries
including construction and wood products manufacturing experienced
upheaval. Some recovery occurred in 2010 as the wood products
industry and construction industry stabilized at lower levels, but the
economy will take several years of consistent growth to fully stabilize
to pre -recession strength.
Figure 8: Percent Change in Nonfarm Labor Income, Flathead County
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
-5.0%
10.0%
13.4`Yo
12.4%
6.3%
7.2% 6.4%
4.2% 5.1%
2.4%
1.1 %
0.2%
-3.0%
Sources: US Bureau of Economic Analysis and Bureau of Business and Economic Research;
Widen, 2013.
Unemployment and Labor Force
Unemployment rates for Flathead County began to climb as the United
States entered a recessionary period in 2008. Prior to that time,
unemployment rates held steady under 5 percent. By 2009, the
unemployment rate in Flathead County had risen to more than 10
percent. Figure 9 shows the trend of rising unemployment rates by year
in Flathead County, Montana from 200S to 2010.
Figure 9: Flathead County Employment Trends 2005 - 2010
50 15%
10%
a 45
c
5%
0
L
H
40 0%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
—Labor Force ®% Unemployment
Source: Montana Department of labor and Industry; Wilidan, 2013.
Figure 9 also demonstrates that while the labor force declined from its
peak in 2008, the labor force did not diminish in the recession to below
the labor force numbers from 2005. This shows that the decrease in the
labor force is not the result of outmigration or retirement, but rather a
diminishment of the number of residents no longer seeking
employment.
Figure 10 shows the not seasonally adjusted unemployment rates for
Flathead County, including their fluctuations from season to season. A
clearer picture of the unemployment trend can be seen by observing
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 12
the linear unemployment on the graph. This trend line shows that the
overall rate has been dropping approximately one percentage point per
year since 2010, when the average rate was around 10 percent
At peak unemployment season in 2010, the unemployment rate was
nearly 14 percent By September 2012, the monthly employment rate
for the county had dropped to 7.3 percent This rate has subsequently
risen, an expected trend given the cyclical nature of unemployment.
However, the overall trend since the beginning of 2010 has been one of
declining unemployment rates in Flathead County.
Figure 10: Unemployment Rate, Flathead County, Not Seasonally Adjusted
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
—Unemployment Rate — ----Linear(UnemploymentRate)
Source: Bureau of labor Statistics; Willdan, 2013
According to the Montana Department of Labor and Industry, the
recession hit the Flathead economy harder than any other major urban
area in the state. The nonfarm labor income decline of 2.7 percent in
2008 and the 9.3 percent decrease in 2009 were the largest among the
counties reported. Flathead County's unemployment rate rose to 11.3
percent in November 2010, higher than any of the other large counties
in the state. These sizable impacts were the result of permanent
closures (such as Columbia Falls Aluminum Company) combined with
cyclic declines in major industries such as wood products, nonresident
travel, and construction.
According to the Montana Department of labor and Industry, it will be
at least 2015 before real nonfarm labor income (an overall measure of
the economy) in Flathead County regains its 2007 peal.
However, the Kalispell economy is undergoing recovery. The evolution
of Kalispell into a regional trade and service center continues to be one
of the growing sectors of the economic base.
Educational Attainment
Educational attainment in Flathead County compares favorably to the
rest of the country for those without a college degree. As Figure 11 and
Figure 12 show, the share of the population over the age of 25 without
a high school diploma in Flathead County is just 8.07 percent compared
to 14.61 percent nationally. Continuing this trend, the share of the
population over age 25 that has a high school diploma or an equivalent
degree but not college experience is 32.1 percent in Flathead County,
while just 28.64 percent of the nation fall into this category.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 13
Figure 11: Educational Attainment in Flathead County
20,221
20,465
17,223
100% 8.07% 32.10% 32.49% 27.34%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007-2011 American Community Survey 5-Year
Estimates, Willdan 2013.
Flathead County also boasts impressive educational attainment for the
segments of the population with college degrees. The share of the
population over the age of 25 with some college or an associate's
degree in Flathead County is 32.49 percent compared to the national
figure of 28.55 percent. Additionally, the share of the adult population
in Flathead County with a bachelor's degree or higher is 27.34 percent,
less than one percentage point off of the national figure of 28.2 percent.
Figure 12: Educational Attainment in the United States
202,048,123 29,518,935 57,861,283 57,694,281 56,973,624
100% 14.61% 28.64% 28.55% 28.20%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007-2011 American Community Survey 5-Year
Estimates; Willdan 2013.
Skills Gap
Despite boasting strong educational attainment, the skill set of the local
workforce in Flathead County does not adequately address the skills
that businesses in the area need. According to a report by Montana
West Economic Development Corporation and Flathead County
Economic Development Authority, a "skills gap' exists in the county.
Businesses have a difficult time finding employees who have the skills
necessary to accomplish the jobs that they provide.
To address this issue, the report recommends elevating the training
resources available for advanced manufacturing in three specific fields:
wood products, technology -oriented manufacturing, and
entrepreneurial manufacturing. Dedicating resources to these specific
industries would educate and attract a pipeline of current and future
workers in the skills that businesses need.
Flathead Valley Community College led a group of public, private, and
educational partners to develop a curriculum designed to better teach
workforce development skills. The private partners provide some of
the resources needed to teach the students, and in return have a better
educated workforce from which to select employees.
The private sector partners have identified that they anticipate hiring
457 employees using these new skills between 2013 and 201S. New
jobs in these fields bring with them new money to the local economy,
fueling demand for redevelopment
Kalispell Tourism Market
The Kalispell economy benefits greatly from tourism spending due to
its proximity to Glacier National Park and to the Canadian border.
According to the National Park Service 2012 Economic Impact Study,
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 14
more than 2 million visitors spent approximately 110 million dollars in
Glacier National Park and in communities near the park (based on 2010
data). That spending supported 1,695 jobs in the local area. The figures
are based on $12 billion of direct spending by 281 million visitors in
394 national parks and nearby communities and are included in an
annual, peer -reviewed, visitor spending analysis conducted by
Michigan State University for the National Park Service.
According to Glacier National Park Superintendent Chas Cartwright,
Glacier National Park has historically been an economic driver in the
state. The economic impact study demonstrates the substantial value of
the diverse goods and services provided by local businesses to the park
visitor, as well as the role of the park as an employment opportunities
for the Flathead County region.
Most of the spending and jobs are related to lodging, food, and beverage
service (52 percent) followed by other retail (29 percent),
entertainment/amusements (10 percent), gas and local transportation
(7 percent) and groceries (2 percent).
The Canadian visitor market also represents a significant share of the
overall visitor market Canadian visitors travel to Kalispell to shop for
apparel, electronics, household goods, and other retail goods to take
advantage of Montana's lack of state and local sales taxes.
Kalispell also draws a steady business traveler market due to its role as
the governmental hub of the region (the County seat) and frequent
trade shows and conferences.
Taking the Glacier National Park visitor market as an example, the
visitor spending generated by this market segment is substantial and is
an indicator of the source of inflow support for retail goods and
services in the Kalispell region.
Based on 2010 visitation of 2.1 million visitors and an average annual
growth rate of 2.1 percent, Willdan estimates that Glacier National Park
could expect to attract an additional 633,000 annual visitors over the
next ten years. Assuming current per capita visitor spending patterns,
Glacier National Park visitors are expected to generate $37.1 million in
incremental (net new) annual spending by 2023. This potential
redevelopment activity generated by visitor spending in the Core Area
is analyzed further in the retail and lodging market analyses in this
report.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 16
M
Figure 13: Glacier National Park Visitor Spending (2010 and 2023 Projection)
Visitors 2,261,470 2,318,007 2,375,957 2.435,356 2,496,240 2,558,646 2,622,612 2,688,178 2,755,382 2,824,267 2,894,873
Annual Net New
Visitors 56,537 114,487 173,886 234,770 297,176 361,142 426.707 493,912 562,796 633,403
Visitor Spending — Per Capita and Gross Annual
Lodging
$17.45
$40,442,400
$41,453,460
$42,489,797
$43,552,041
$44,640,842
$45,756,864
$46,900,785
$48,073,305
$49,275,137
$50,507,016
Food & Beverage
$9.39
$21,776,125
$22,320,528
$22,878,541
$23,450,505
$24,036,767
$24,637,687
$25,253,629
$25,884,970
$26,532,094
$27,195,396
Other Retail
$14.97
$34,699,325
$35,566,808
$36,455,978
$37,367,378
$38,301,562
$39,259,101
$40,240,579
$41.246,593
$42,277,758
$43,334,702
Entertainment
$5.16
$11,964,825
$12,263,946
$12,570,544
$12,884,808
$13,206.928
$13,537,101
$13,875,529
$14,222,417
$14,577,977
$14,942,427
Gas & Transport
$3.61..
$8,375,275
$8,584,657
$8.799,273
$9.019,255
$9,244,737
$9,475,855
$9,712,751
$9,955,570
$10,204,459
$10,459,571
Groceries
$1.03.
$2,393,375
$2,453,209
$2,514,540
$2,577,403
$2,641.838
$2,707,884
$2,775,581
$2,844,971
$2,916,095
$2,988,997
Total
$51.62
$119.651,325
$122,642,608
$125,708,673
$128,851,390
$132,072,675
$135,374,492
$138,758,854
$142,227,825
$145,783,521
$149,428,109
Visitor Spending
— Per Capita and
Net New Annual
Lodging
$i:4''
$986,400
$1,997,460
$3,033,796
$4,096,041
$5,184,842
$6,300,864
$7,444,785
$8,617,305
$9,819,137
$11,051,016
Food & Beverage
w-$g39':
$531,125
$1,075,528
$1,633,541
$2,205,505
$2,791,767
$3,392,687
$4,008,629
$4,639,970
$5,287,094
$5,950,396
Other Retail
'$94.97,
$846,325
$1,713,808
$2,602,978
$3,514,378
$4,448,562
$5,406,101
$6,387,579
$7,393,593
$8,424,758
$9,481,702
Entertainment
$291,825
$590,946
$897,544
$1,211,808
$1,533,928
$1,864,101
$2,202,529
$2,549,417
$2,904,977
$3,269,427
Gas & Transport
$204,275
$413,657
$628,273
$848,255
$1,073,737
$1,304,855
$1,541,751
$1,784,570
$2,033,459
$2,288,571
Groceries
_r `$1.D3.'.
$58,375
$118,209
$179,540
$242,403
$306,838
$372,884
$440,581
$509,971
$581,095
$653,997
Total
$51.62
$2,918,325
$5,909,608
$8,975,673
$12,118,390
$15,339,675
$18,641,492
$22,025,854
$25,494,825
$29,050,521
$32,695,109
1/ Assumes averaue
annual orowth rate =
2.50%
Source: Glacier National Park Service; Willdan, 2013
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 16
III. Residential Market Analysis
The City of Kalispell commissioned this Core Area Housing Market
Analysis ("Market Analysis") to assist it in the redevelopment of the
Core Area. The City has developed a vision to revitalize the Core Area
while retaining its character and identity. This Market Analysis will
discuss the current state of the housing market in the City of Kalispell.
The analysis provides and overview of residential construction trends
and projections to inform further dialogue on housing production in the
Core Area and City.
New Housing Construction Trends in Kalispell
From 2003 through 2009, the creation of residential lots outpaced new
residential construction every year but 2007. As Figure 14 shows,
Kalispell added residential lots faster than housing units for nearly a
decade. Once the economy slowed down in 2008 and 2009,
construction companies slowed production to meet demand, but lot
developers slowed production even more. As a result, builders
constructed on the existing lots and have been slowly decreasing the
pipeline of developable lots available for residential building.
Meanwhile, the 2012 figures for new residential construction
demonstrate that economic recovery has begun in Kalispell.
Figure 14: Residential Construction Pipeline, City of Kalispell
600
500
400
300
200
100
0 4110 �0 p
■ Lots Created ■ New Residential Construction
Source: Kelley Appraisal report on Flathead County's real estate market Willdan 2013
Housing Market Sales Prices & Pace in Kalispell
The average sales price per square foot for homes in Kalispell was $99,
an increase of 23.8 percent compared to February 2011. The median
list price in May 2013 for single family homes in Kalispell is $249,900.
The list prices increased by 3.15 percent from the previous month.
The price per square foot for listings in this area is $153. However, the
median sale price in February for single-family homes was $169,626,
reflecting an increase of 7.0 percent from the prior month.
& Feasibility Analysis Page 17
Figure 15: Home Sales and Median Sales Price in Kalispell (2007-2012)
400 1 1 $300,000
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
$250,000
$200,000
$150,000
$100,000
$50,000
0 ........................ $-
O Q O O d O O O O O O O
� Housing Units (Left Axis) —Median Price (Right Axis)
Source: City-Data.com; Willdan 2013.
There are currently 547 resale and new homes for sale in Kalispell,
including 36 homes in the pre -foreclosure, auction, or bank -owned
stages of the foreclosure process. There are currently 6 new homes and
46 homes in excess of $500,000. The average listing price for homes for
sale in Kalispell was $351,600 for the week ending March 20, 2013
which represents an increase of 4.8 percent, or $15,983, compared to
the prior month. The high average listing price can be directly
attributed to the 46 homes for sale in excess of $500,000.
The February 2013 median home value in zip code 59901 is $147,500.
Over the past six months, approximately 15 homes sold per month in
the Kalispell market. Reviewing Kalispell building permit and
construction data, approximately 50 new homes have been constructed
annually in Kalispell since 2010. At the current rate of sales and new
home development, it would take approximately 4 years to exhaust the
current for sale housing supply.
The average sales price per square foot for homes in Kalispell has
increased 23.8 percent compared to February 2011. With both the
median list and sales price of for -sale homes in Kalispell continuing to
rise, it would appear that the housing market is improving. In speaking
with the Kalispell Building Department, local realtors and the Flathead
Valley Association of Realtors, local and national housing indicators
point to increased production and demand for housing.
Figure 16: Median Home Values, Kalispell Zip Code 59901
$2DD,00u
$175,000
$150,000
$125,000
$100.000
Mar Sep Mar Sep Mar Sep Mar Sep Mar Sep
2008 2008 2009 2009 2010 2010 2011 2011 2012 2012
Source: Zillow.com; Wilder, 2013.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 18
Housing affordability for renters can be measured by calculating what a
Kalispell Apartment Market Trends resident pays in gross rent as a percent of their household income.
Based on primary market research conducted by Willdan, the Residents paying 30 percent of their household income on rent are said
Appleway Court and Depot Place apartment projects have brought to be living in unaffordable units. Figure 17 shows that in Flathead
renewed life to the rental community in Kalispell. Appleway Court County, 9.80 percent of the renters spend between 30 and 34.9 percent
identifies a 98 percent occupancy rate and leasing at Depot Place of their household income on rent The figure also shows that 36.8
appears to be moving at a brisk pace. There are scant listings of percent of the population spends more than 35 percent of their
available rental units in Kalispell. Current lease rates for traditional household income on rent In total a staggering 46.6 percent of the
apartment communities in Kalispell are approximately $0.85 to $1.25 renters in Flathead County live in units that are considered by industry
per square foot per month. Lease rates for single-family homes or units standard to be unaffordable.
within single family homes dips slightly due to amenities, location and Flathead County Housing Market Trends & Projections
availability. Current rates are approximately $0.65 to $1.00 per square Montana's housing market had a strong year in 2012, with every major
foot per month. Given the nature of the depressed housing market and market across the state reporting an increase in activity as compared to
continued population growth the apartment segment will continue to 2011. The Montana Association of Realtors ("MAR") received sales data
see strong activity. from the eight largest associations in the state, and in all eight there
Figure 17: Gross Rent as a Percentage of Household Income was an increase in the number of single-family homes sold compared to
2011.
Occupied units paying rent
9,591
100.00%
Overall, in the 8 major markets in Montana, 8,579 single-family homes
Less than 15.0 percent
1,454
15.20%
were sold in 2012 compared to 7,051 in 2011, a gain of 1,528 homes or
15.0 to 19.9 percent
1,136
11.80%
21.67 percent
20.0 to 24.9 percent
1,332
13.90%
25.0 to 29.9 percent
1,194
12.40%
"It is very exciting to see the Montana housing market continue to
30.0 to 34.9 percent
941
9.80%
improve," said MAR President Pam Wood. "Every major market in the
35.0 percent or more
3,534
36.80%
state showed increased sales activity in 2012 when compared to the
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007-2011 American Community Survey; Wilidan, 2013
previous year, and that is very important as housing plays a major role
in the overall economy."
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 19
The Gallatin Association of Realtors saw the largest increase in single-
family home sales in 2012, with an uptick of 364 homes sold in 2012
compared to the previous year, for an increase of 33.18 percent The
Northwest Association of Realtors was next with an increase of 307
homes (24.86 percent), followed by the Billings Association gain of 279
homes (15.96 percent).
The average sales price of a home rose in six of the eight markets, the
median sales price rose in seven of the eight markets and the average
days a home was on the market fell in four of the eight major areas.
Those figures do not include townhouses or condos, although six of the
eight markets in the state reported an increase in the number of those
sales as well.
Record -low interest rates and an increase in consumer confidence
played a key role in Montana's housing market improving in 2012. In
relation to housing sales during the first quarter of 2013 there were
159 non -distressed sales in the first quarter of 2013. This compares to
112 in 2012 and 102 in 2011. Although the total number of sales is
nearly the same as 2012, the fact that bank -owned sales are down 42
percent and non -distressed sales are up 42 percent is a significant
indicator that the market continues to improve.
Nearly 14 percent of housing units in Flathead County are vacant for
seasonal use. Another 23 percent are renter occupied with about 56
percent of units occupied by owners. The remaining 6 percent of units
are vacant for various reasons including those properties listed for
rent, for sale, or those having been subject to foreclosure.
Figure 18: Occupancy of Housing Units, Flathead County, 2010
73 housing units
■ Owner occupied
■ Renter occupied
Vacant for seasonal use
■ Other vacancies
Source: ESRI Business Analyst; Wilder, 2013.
Building and electric permits for Flathead County were robust during
the early part of the prior decade, but have declined precipitously since
2007. Single family construction declined nearly 85 percent during that
time frame in Kalispell and outlying areas. According to City staff, single
family construction over the past 18 months has begun to return with
nearly double the permitted new housing units in 2012 as those of
2011.
Housing Affordability in Flathead County
Flathead County remains one of the most unaffordable real estate
markets in Montana. Housing affordability as measured by the Housing
Affordability Index has improved somewhat following the recent real
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 20
10/
estate downturn. Figure 19 outlines the housing affordability from
2007 to 2010.
Figure 19: Housing Affordability Index, Flathead County 2007-2010
100
80
60
40
20
0
2007 2008 2009 2010*
11 preliminary estimates using 2009 Income data.
Source: Bureau of Business and Economic Research; Willdan, 2013.
Residential Development Opportunity in the Core Area
Based on historic trends over the past ten years, adjusted to reflect the
ongoing economic recovery, the City of Kalispell produced an average
of 100 new housing units annually. Utilizing a conservative estimate
and the baseline average annual housing production of 50 units (based
on a 10-year average of 232 units), it is plausible to expect
approximately 1,250 new homes may be constructed in Kalispell over
the next 25 years.
Figure 20: Average Annual Housing Unit Construction
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
280
195
480
375
350
320
185
100
90
75
100
Average Annual Units 232
Source: City of Kalispell; Willdan, 2013.
The proposed housing would include a mix of apartments, Low -Income
Housing Tax Credit units, and a minor component of condominium
units targeted for the latter phase of redevelopment (after year 7 of
Plan implementation). Based on the financial feasibility analysis
detailed in the Annex to this report, it is possible to achieve a sufficient
return on new construction investment if assuming market rate rental
rates of at least $1.10 per square foot It is plausible to assume that
residential construction in the Core Area will continue along current
production rates in the near term with cautious developers achieving
success when delivering units to satisfy pent up demand. Based on
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 21
these parameters, the Core Area Plan assumes that a series of small
residential projects over a seven to ten year buildout horizon as
detailed in the following table.
Given the Core Area's size, opportunity for development and potential
housing product types, we anticipate that the Core Area could expect to
capture approximately eight to 14 percent of that total production, or
105 to 175 units over the 25 year life of the Westside TIF District In
total, this program assumes that the Core Area would capture an
average of four to seven units annually.
Figure 21: Conceptual Redevelopment Alternatives — Residential
Development
Apartments - For Lease
Low -Income Housing Tax Credit
Units
Condominium
Total Residential (units)
Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.
0 25 75
0 40 80
0 - 20
0 105 175
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 22
IV. Retail Market Analysis
This study examines key real estate market and economic variables
(i.e., population growth, household income, consumer expenditure
patterns, employment trends, etc.) to test the potential for retail
development and/or redevelopment opportunities within the Core
Area.
The results of the demographic and economic analysis indicate there is
little unmet retail demand within the Core Area and Kalispell. The
opportunities to expand the Core Area's retail trade exist in the
introduction of additional soft goods retailers and full service
restaurants.
Retailing and shopping habits have changed over the past decade.
Primarily the change occurred due to a shift in lifestyles. In the 1980s
and 1990s going to the mall was the dominant form of shopping. Today,
nearly 70 percent of purchases that are made come from discount
retailers. This trend has established Wal-Mart as the largest seller of
women's ready-to-wear apparel.
Returning to the streets of our local neighborhoods is replacing the
mall experience. Today over 60 percent of consumers prefer to buy
their shoes in a neighborhood store. Today's consumer enjoys having
the opportunity to live, shop and work in their neighborhood.
Main streets are becoming savvy and retailers are now able to compete
with the mall on any level. The average consumer walks by storefronts
at an average rate of seven seconds per storefront. Retailers
understand that they have to make the most of this foot traffic and
advertise their store through window and facade displays. Individual
retailers are employing interesting window displays and unique
merchandising techniques to capture shoppers' attention. Competition
is growing and national tenants are now searching out locations on
main streets.
Presently, the Core Area's existing retail square footage is comprised of
businesses that have limited synergy and cohesiveness. The expanse of
the area, multitude of uses and lack of pedestrian or vehicular
interconnection inhibits the future development of the Core Area.
Core Area Site Characteristics
The study area is generally defined as follows; Highway 2 on the north,
Center Street on the south, Meridian Road on the west and Woodland
Park Drive on the east.
Although there is significant access to the Core Area via Highways 2 and
93, the Highways significantly impact development opportunities and
the walkability of the Core Area. There is insufficient local access within
the Core Area as several of the north/south connectors have been
closed to accommodate railway traffic.
Willdan surveyed local and regional stakeholders to analyze existing
retail conditions. Survey interviews indicate that many of Kalispell's
residents identify the Core Area as lacking sufficient parking, hampered
by Highway 93 and not containing significant synergy amongst uses.
Main Street, as Kalispell's primary downtown shopping district,
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 23
Wr
competes with new retailers often opening stores in the northern
portion of Kalispell, adjacent to existing large scale retail developments
and new housing product.
The northern Kalispell retail developments serve as the primary
regional shopping district in the greater Flathead Valley area. The retail
development is anchored not only by big -box retailers, but also by
discount department stores, hotels, restaurants, and a multiplex movie
theatre. Retailers that can appeal to the demographics of Main Street's
primary trade and serve neighborhood -shopping needs, or create a
unique specialty niche that draws shoppers to the district from beyond
as an alternative to regional shopping centers, will most likely succeed
as an alternative to the regional shopping centers of northern Kalispell.
Retail Trade Areas
The profile of the retail market within the Primary Trade Area shows
that a great portion of the retail establishments are located within a 10
mile radius of the Core Area. The population of the City of Kalispell
comprises 20 percent of the Trade Area's total population, but 53.4
percent of the County's retail businesses are in the 10 mile radius of the
Core Area. These numbers show that Kalispell is a major source of
retail activity in the Primary Trade Area.
There are a variety of neighborhood business districts within close
proximity to the Core Area including the intersection of Highways 2 and
35, Main Street (south of 18th Street), and downtown Kalispell. The
regional shopping centers are located at the northern periphery of
Kalispell. The Core Area is anchored by a number of large retailers and
employers such as the Kalispell Center Mall, Smith's Foods, Albertsons
Grocery, and Super One Grocery.
For the purposes of this study, the market area was split into both
primary and secondary trade areas. The primary trade area consists of
those consumers who shop the Core Area district on a regular/weekly
basis for most of their needs. This accounts for a majority of the retail
expenditures in the Core Area. The study's primary trade area is
defined as fifty (50) miles from the Kalispell Center Mall. The secondary
trade area extends further north into Canada and to the west, east and
south, up to one hundred (100) miles.
Figure 22: Target -Anchored Shopping Center (Highway 93 North)
Primary Trade Area
The primary trade area is delineated by distance, the regional retail
nodes to the north, northeast and south, area population and
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 24
demographics, and the flow of retail traffic in all directions. The
primary trade area residents account for most of the sales of the
convenience and neighborhood -oriented retailers and services located
in the study area. The primary trade area generally accounts for
between 50 percent and 65 percent of sales. However, more
destination -oriented tenants, such as breweries, art galleries and
restaurants, draw from not only the trade area, but also from beyond
the defined trade boundary, as well as from the local business and
tourist population.
Secondary Trade Area
The secondary trade area consists of tourists and those residents who
live in the region surrounding the primary trade area who patronize
retailers within the Core Area, but not as their primary source of
shopping. The secondary trade area is defined by distance. This area
has a current population estimate of approximately 141,500 persons,
which is expected to increase slightly to approximately 149,000
persons, or 5.3 percent by the year 2017. Persons per household are
currently 2.41.
More households in the secondary trade area are owner -occupied (55.4
percent) than in the primary trade area, with the remaining 23.2
percent renter -occupied. The median household income level for the
secondary trade area of $40,154 is 6 percent lower than is found in the
primary trade area. The median age is 42.5 years.
Retail Competition Overview
The retail competition map (Figure 23) identifies the Primary Trade
Area retail competition by type of development. The Core Area faces
significant retail competition in nearly every category. In particular, the
Evergreen and Northwest Kalispell region offer large format retail,
goods and services not readily available in the Core Area.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 26
Figure 23: Kalispell Retail Competition Map
glJ
,3
legend
_j'r
_ °
3
sb ppmg
'yr
swreenx
ftsc.uf,.0
Yp
'"d
• r..xnne
'V
•
•
• C .n Mttd'.aN:Se
s
N
F'.'. i_
NpNlf lmyOrM4vrt
® H6ghOOrI,vOCCMc
F'::eY
•
• Neian�almOES<rts
negaw SNa�ingeenttt
Miles
s
0 0,5 r 1-5 z
2.5
,.vbnese.m
W. a
atop
Source: ESBI Business Analyst,, City of Kalispell; Wilder, 2013.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 26
F
As part of this field evaluation, the project team conducted site visits to
all major shopping areas in and just beyond the defined trade area. The
core of retail in Kalispell is found either on Highway 93 near West
Reserve Drive or at the intersection of Highways 2 and 35. Both of these
retail areas offer several discount and big -box retail stores. In addition
to the regional shopping centers, the Core Area competes more directly
with neighborhood shopping districts.
Figure 24 shows the retail gap for selected sectors in the City of
Kalispell. "Supply (retail sales)" estimates sales to consumers by
establishments. Sales to businesses are excluded. "Demand (retail
potential)" estimates the expected amount spent by consumers at retail
establishments. Supply and demand estimates are in current dollars.
The "Leakage/Surplus Factor" presents a snapshot of retail
opportunity. This is a measure of the relationship between supply and
demand that ranges from +100 (total leakage) to -100 (total surplus). A
positive value represents 'leakage' of retail opportunity outside the
trade area. A negative value represents a surplus of retail sales, a
market where customers are drawn in from outside the trade area.
The Retail Gap represents the difference between Retail Potential and
Retail Sales. ESRI uses the North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) to classify businesses by their primary type of
economic activity. Retail establishments are classified into 27 industry
groups in the Retail Trade sector, as well as four industry groups within
the Food Services & Drinking Establishments subsector.
Several industries show leakage, meaning that demand exceeds supply
in Kalispell. These industries include:
• Lawn & Garden Equip & Supply Stores
• Office Supplies, Stationery & Gift Stores
• Electronic Shopping & Mail -Order Houses
• Vending Machine Operators
• Direct Selling Establishments
• Drinking Places - Alcoholic
Entrepreneurs seeking to open businesses in these sectors can expect
strong sales because the market demands more of those products than
the market currently supplies. On the other hand, the majority of the
retail sectors show a market surplus, meaning that businesses in
Kalispell supply more products and services than are demanded by the
local population.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 27
M
Figure 24: Retail Gap Analysis - City of Kalispell
Total Retail Trade 44-45 $167,662,188 $465,957,479-$298,295,291 -47.1 218
Total Food & Drink 722 $18,399,338 $31,373,987-$12,974,649 -26.1 32
Selected Industry Sectors
Motor Vehicle & Parts Dealers
441
$33,015,495
$77,099,716
-$44,084,221
-40.0
21
Furniture & Home Furnishings Stores
442
$3,945,348
$20,034,592
-$16,089,244
-67.1
17
Electronics & Appliance Stores
4431
$5,340,867
$39,954,533
-$34,613,666
-76.4
13
Bldg Materials, Garden Equip. & Supply Stores
444
$5,998,451
$22,255.978
-$16,257,527
-57.5
13
Bldg Material & Supplies Dealers
4441
$4,932,106
$22,255,978
-$17,323,872
-63.7
13
Lawn & Garden Equip & Supply Stores
4442
$1,066,345
$0
$1,066,345
100.0
0
Food & Beverage Stores
445
$29,041,621
$68,033,296
438,991,675
-40.2
23
Health & Personal Care Stores
446,4461
$9,911,054
$14,897,839
-$4,986;785
-20.1
16
Clothing& Clothing Accessories Stores
448
$9.990,213
$21,491,362
-$11,501,149
-36.5
28
Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book & Music Stores
451
$5.180,219
$29,630,265
-$24,450;046
-70.2
30
General Merchandise Stores
452
$32,637,167
$120,681.834
-$88,044,667
-57.4
7
Miscellaneous Store Retailers
453
$5,657,629
$18,884,029
-$13,226,400
-53.9
44
Florists
4531
$212,133
$1,380,676
-$1,168,543
-73.4
4
Office Supplies, Stationery & Gift Stores
4532
$1,782,795
$1,044,753
$738,042
26.1
5
Nonstore Retailers
454
$4,442,262
$3,155,377
$1,286,885
16.9
3
Electronic Shopping & Mail -Order Houses
4541
$2,418,490
$0
$2,418,490
100.0
0
Vending Machine Operators
4542
$117,545
$0
$117,545
100.0
0
Direct Selling Establishments
4543
$1,906,227
$3,155,377
-$1,249,150
-24.7
3
Food Services & Drinking Places
722
$18,399,338
$31,373,987
-$12,974,649
-26.1
32
Full -Service Restaurants
7221
$8,168,264
$9,202,167
-$1,033,903
-6.0
9
Limited -Service Eating Places
7222
$8,310,535
$20,152,463
-$11,841,928
-41.6
18
Special Food Services
7223
$880,705
$1,246,083
-$365,378
-17.2
3
Drinking Places - Alcoholic Beverages
7224
$1,039,834
$773,274
$266,560
14.7
2
Source: ESRI Business Analyst; Wilder, 2013
Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 28
It is important to note that the retail gap analysis does not reflect inflow
spending from the visitor market, as evidenced by the volume and
location of the Kalispell region's retail supply and continued
development activity during the economic downtown. To illustrate the
spending power of the visitor market, Willdan analyzed data reported
by the US National Park Service, testing projections of visitation levels
and per capita spending by major retail and entertainment categories.
Assuming an average annual growth rate of 2.5 percent (based on 10-
year historical trends), it is expected that the visitor market could grow
from 2.1 million visitors (2010) to approximately 2.9 million visitors in
2022, or an increase of approximately 663,000 visitors. Associated
incremental retail and entertainment spending will further support the
strategy to revitalize the Core Area and attract new retailers. Based on
spending patterns reported by the National Park Service (in 2010
dollars, held constant to illustrate a conservative case), new visitors to
Glacier National Park could be expected to spend $149.4 million
annually by 2022, or an increase of $37.2 million over 2010 retail
spending. Assuming national chain quality annual sales productivity
requirements of $300 per square foot, this spending translates to
support for approximately 295,000 square feet of new retail space in
the Kalispell region.
Taking a similar perspective with the residential spending market, it is
expected that nominal population and household income growth will
also generate incremental demand for new or redeveloped retail and
entertainment space. It is projected that Flathead County's households
will grow from 39,000 households to 45,000 by 2022. Average
household incomes are expected to increase from $42,800 to $60,000
generating $3.5 in incremental gross income in Flathead County by
2022. Based on US Consumer Expenditure Data reported by the
Consumer Expenditure Survey, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics,
September, 2012, approximately 35 percent of gross household income
is expended on food at home (grocery), restaurants, entertainment,
apparel, personal care, and other retail goods. Assuming a conservative
capture rate of five percent of total available county -wide spending
power and retail sales productivity rates of $300 per square foot, the
Core Area could expect to attract approximately 205,200 square feet of
new/redeveloped retail space. Based on these parameters, the
conceptual redevelopment program includes three scenarios for retail
development or redevelopment. The Status Quo scenario assumes no
new retail development; the conservative scenario assumes that the
Core Area will support 77,500 square feet of new retail (location
unspecified). Scenario 3, the optimistic case, assumes that that
Kalispell Center Mall will redevelop and expand and, along with other
new retail businesses throughout the Core Area, will create
approximately 117,500 of new retail space.
Figure 25: Conceptual Redevelopment Alternatives — Retail Development
Retail - Apparel and Soft Goods 0 62,500 92,500
Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service) 0 15,000 25,000
Total Retail (sfl 0 77,500 117,500
Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 29
Figure 26: Incremental Residential Retail Spending Power & 10-Year Supportable Retail Development (2022)
City
of Kalispell Spending
Flathead County Spending
Gross
Gross
Incremental
Core Area
Incremental
Core Area
Household
Retail
Household
Retail Sales/
Retail Capture
Income (2022)
Retail Sales/ sf
Capture Rate
Income (2022)
sf
Rate
Retail Demand Assumptions 2012-2022
596,736,871
$300
10%
3,527,674,063
$300
5%
Grass
Flathead
Spending
Spending
Kalispell
County
as % of
Power by
Gross
Capture of
Gross Spending
Gross
Capture of
Household
Retail
Supportable
New Retail
Power by Retail
Supportable
New Retail
Retail Categories
Income /1
Category
Retail (so
Demands
Category
Retail
Demand
Food at home
10.0%
59,645,000
199,000
19,900
352,595,000
1,175,000
58,800
Food away from home
6.2%
37,149,000
124,000
12,400
219,611,000
732,000
36,600
Household furnishings and equipment
3.2%
18,943,000
63,000
6,300
111,986,000
373,000
18,700
Apparel and services
4.2%
25,189,000
84,000
8,400
148,909,000
496,000
24,800
Entertainment
4.9%
29,084,000
97,000
9,700
171,936,000
573,000
28,700
Personal care products and services
1.4%
8,219,000
27,000
2,700
48,588,000
162,000
8,100
Service Stations
2.0%
11,935,000
40,000
4,000
70,553,000
235,000
11,800
Other Retail Stores
3.0%
17,902,000
60,000
6,000
105,830,000
353,000
17,700
34.9%
208,066,D00
694,000
69 400
1,230,008,000
4,099,000
205,200
1/ Based on US Consumer Expenditure Survey Data by Average Household Income (averaged for Kalispell and
Source: ESRI Business Analyst; Wildlan, 2013.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 30
M
Figure 27: Food, Retail & Entertainment Demand from Glacier National Park Visitor Spending (Square Feet)
Gross Annual Retail & Entertainment Demand
Sales
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 7
Year 9
Year 10
Total Retail Demand (st
Productivity /sf
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
Food & Beverage
$300
72,600
74,400
76,300
78,200
80,100
82,100
84,200
86,300
88,400
90,700
Other Retail
$300
115,700
118,600
121,500
124,600
127,700
130,900
134,100
137,500
140,900
144,400
Entertainment(Amusements
$300
39,900
40,900
41,900
42,900
44,000
45,100
46,300
47,400
48,600
49,800
Groceries
$300
8,000
8,200
8,400
8,600
8,800
9,000
9,300
9,500
9,700
10,000
236,200
242,100
248,100
254,300
260.600
267,100
273,900
280,700
287,600
294.900
Incremental (Net Newl Annual Retail & Entertainment Demand
Sales
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total Retail Demand (si)
Productivity /st
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Food & Beverage
$300
1,800
3,600
5,400
7,400
9,300
11,300
13,400
15,500
17,600
19,800
Other Retail
$300;
2,800
5,700
8,700
11,700
14,800
18,000
21,300
24,600
28,100
31,600
Entertainment/Amusements
$300
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,100
6,200
7,300
8,500
9,700
10,900
Groceries
$300`
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,500
1,700
1,900
2,200
Total
5,800
11,700
17,700
23,900
30,200
36,700
43,500
50,300
57,300
64,500
Source: US National Park Service; Wilder, 2013.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis
401
V. Office Market Analysis
Willdan researched Loop Net and the Multiple Listing Service to
identify the available office properties in the Core Area and downtown
Kalispell. There are currently 16 available office units, accounting for
nearly 20,000 square feet of office space. The type and variety of
available space would lend itself to small professional office, medical,
real estate and financial services.
Given that available properties had quoted lease rates of $4.20 to
$13.20 per square foot per year, the current office lease rates in the
Core Area do not support the costs of new construction. Given the
identified lease rates and number of available properties, the
development of additional office space would not be supported by the
market in the near term and is proposed as potential adaptive
redevelopment and reuse of existing space (substitution of existing
demand). Based on the financial feasibility test detailed in the Annex to
this report, office renovation would require lease rates of between $12
to $15 per square foot and new office construction would require lease
rates of $17 to $22 per square foot.
The current economics of the office market suggest that small format,
independent professional office or medical office could be an attractive
market for a developer in a position to redevelop existing office space.
Accordingly, the Core Area conceptual redevelopment program
includes approximately 17,500 square feet of new or redeveloped office
space over a 2S-year buildout timeframe (assumed for Scenario 2:
Conservative and Scenario 3: Optimistic).
Figure 28: Current Kalispell Office Market Lease Rate Trends
Current Annual Lease Rates /1 $4.20 $13.20
Lease Rates Required for Office Renovation /2 $12.00 $15.00
Lease Rates Required for New Construction /3 $17.00 $22.00
1/ Based on office lease rates reported by loop net of $0.35 to $1.10 per square foot per
month, April 2013.
2/ Based on interviews with local property developerslowners.
3/ Based on interviews with local property developers/owners.
Source: LoopNet; Willdan, 2013.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 32
Wr
VI. Business Park/industrial Market Analysis
To test the supply and demand for a new rail -served industrial park,
the Flathead County Economic Development Authority (FCEDA)
retained KLJ Associates to perform a market analysis and feasibility
study as part of ongoing engineering planning underway. KLJ
determined that based on recent trends, the potential is increasing for
the industrial rail park to create jobs and support new industries
especially as manufacturing and other rail -oriented industries continue
to recover from the recession and expand operations.
The report concluded that service -oriented professions continue to be
the largest employers in the region. However, Plum Creek and Applied
Materials are large scale lumber and manufacturing companies that
lend credence that these industry types can thrive in the Valley.
Table 4 of the KLJ report identifies the top 10 Associate of Applied
Science (AAS) degrees and the top 5 Certificate of Applied Science
(CAS) degrees from Flathead Valley Community College (FVCC) for year
2011-2012. Data indicates that degree earners such as Welding and
Inspection Technology (19), Heavy Equipment Operator (17), Electrical
Technology (9) Small Business Management (6), HVAC (5) and Cabinet
and Furniture Technology (3) are graduates that can support
manufacturing and industries associated with rail.
Figure 3 of the KLJ report indicates that more than 50 percent of all AAS
graduates and CAS graduates have a degree that could service
manufacturing, agricultural/forestry, and rail -oriented industries.
Should potential businesses want to relocate or start-up in the rail park,
they would have a ready and available pool of human capital to meet
and expand business needs.
Table 9 of the KLJ report recreated here as Figure 29, indentifies three
companies with a high likelihood of relocation or expansion, and four
other companies with a medium likelihood of relocation or expansion.
Construction and construction -related industries like lumber and
landscaping dominate this list
Figure 29: Leads for Rail Industrial Park
Cenex Harvest States
Agriculture / Fertilizer
High
HE Simpson
Lumber
High
Northeast Drywall
Construction / Drywall
High
Blackwell Enterprises
Construction / Trusses
Medium
Fastenal
Construction
Medium
Glacier Stone
Landscaping Stone
Medium
Cold Front Cabins
Housing
Low
Countryside Welding
oil Tank Construction
Low
Source: KLJ Draft Industrial Rail Park Market Analysis; Wilidan, 2013
Key Recommendations
• KLJ recommended that MWED and FCEDA should pursue
industries such as Lumber companies, scrap steel, and other
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 33
grain elevators/agricultural uses. In addition, industries
related to creating machinery and other precision instruments
should be targeted for the rail park.
KLJ also determined that emerging technologies such as
electronics and pharmaceuticals and metallic ores/non-
metallic minerals may be viable industries to locate within the
park as long as they can prove a need for rail shipments. If they
cannot prove a need for rail service, the business should not be
allowed.
• KLJ recommended that businesses that would utilize transload
facilities are important to target because of their need to ship
materials via truck and rail. Example industries that could
utilize transload facilities are big box retailers, large good
producers (recreational toys such as ATVs, boats,
snowmobiles), and liquid/petroleum products. Creating a rail
park with a transload operator will help stimulate rail freight
movements for the Flathead County and thus improve
economic development potential for the entire Flathead Valley.
More importantly, the transload operator will market freight
shipments to potential businesses as a viable and economical
option.
• For sale and for lease sites should be created to foster a mix of
relocation or expansion options for potential businesses. While
no 'one size fits all' financial model can be established in terms
of the number of sale versus lease sites, FCEDA should reserve
at Least 25 percent of the sites for each option.
FCEDA should work with the City of Kalispell and BNSF
Railway/WATCO Mission Mountain Railroad to create
development agreements, deed restrictions or similar
owner/lease agreements to foster rail -only industry
development within the park Should a site become available
that does not have access to rail siding, a potential non -rail
oriented business could occupy the site. However, the site may
provide rail -oriented business that may only require
infrequent rail service (two or three times per year) the
opportunity to conduct business without having to pay a
premium for rail siding.
• In addition, as the Valley continues to grow, some industries
may only have a need for shipping rail without having to have
direct access to rail siding on a daily, weekly or monthly
schedule.
• FCEDA should lease out transload operations to a qualified
transloader that has previous experience loading and
unloading rail cars as well as loading truck shipments onto rail
and vice versa. A qualified transloader will improve efficiency
at the park, thus improving relations with businesses in the
park as well as businesses throughout the area.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 34
VII. Hotel and Hospitality Market Analysis
While the industrial trade in Kalispell continues to wane, tourism has
become a bigger part of the Kalispell economy. Tourists are coming to
Montana for many reasons, including sightseeing outdoor recreation,
and shopping. Kalispell is the gateway to Glacier National Park, which
had 2.2 million visitors in 2010. Many of these visitors drive through or
fly into Kalispell on their way to Glacier National Park
In addition to recreation, Canadian shopping tourism is strong in
Kalispell. Canadians make planned trips to Kalispell to take advantage
of favorable exchange rates, no state sales taxes, and retail
establishments like Target, that are unavailable in their country. The
region's tourism activity generates a secondary retail market segment
that further amplifies the primary countywide residential trade area of
90,000 residents.
While this demand would also suggest support for new hotel
construction, data reported by the Kalispell Convention and Visitors
Bureau indicates that there are currently 100 hotel rooms currently
under construction or in the pipeline and it is unclear whether
additional hotel rooms could be supported until this inventory is
delivered to the market and revenue per available room and occupancy
rates stabilize. For these reasons, it is recommended that new hotel
construction be considered as a mid- to long-term opportunity in the
Core Area.
According to the American Hotel and Lodging Association, new
construction cannot be supported until revenue per available room
reaches $180 and annual average hotel occupancy is at least 68
percent. Based on current hotel research data acquired by Willdan, the
average annual occupancy rate across 19 active hotel properties is
approximately 58 percent.
Figure 30: Profile of Kalispell Area Hotel/Lodging Properties
• Aero Inn • Homewood Suites
Kalispell
• Best Western Plus Flathead • Kalispell Grand Hotel
Lake Inn & Suites
• Blue & White Motel
• Kalispell Hilltop Inn
• Comfort Inn Big Sky Kalispell
• La Ouinta Inns & Suites
Kalispell
• Econo Lodge Inn & Suites
• Motel 6 Kalispell
Kalispell
• Glacier Peaks Inn
• Red Lion Hotel Kalispell
• Glacier Ridge Suites
• Super 8 Kalispell Glacier
Park Area
• Hampton Inn Kalispell
• The New Outlaw Hotel
• Hilton Garden Inn Kalispell • Travelodge Kalispell
Main Street
• Holiday Inn Express & Suites • Vacationer Motel
Kalispell
Source: Willdan; 2013.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 35
Vill. Opportunities and Constraints:
Implications for Core Area Plan
In order for the City to implement its vision and remove the railroad
tracks, it must develop a partnership and plan with each of the two
existing businesses that still use rail service. These two businesses are
very important to the City of Kalispell. If the City were unable to
relocate these businesses, then the tracks would not be considered
abandoned and could not be removed. The Flathead County Economic
Development Agency (FCEDA) recently purchased property just east of
the City limits that would be a prime candidate for the businesses'
relocation. The acquisition of this industrial park has injected new
enthusiasm for the Core Area Redevelopment Project as residents see
the vision moving closer to reality. In addition, the City has secured
Federal Brownfield remediation funds to assist with site remediation
and demolition.
The City plans to develop a Linear Park that would replace the railroad
tracks and link Woodland Park from the east to the Great Northern
Historical Trail on the west side of town. This park would improve the
pedestrian and bike access throughout the Core Area thereby
improving safety and mobility. It would also provide the public an
opportune place to gather, socialize and enjoy the camaraderie within
the neighborhood.
The Linear Park would be one component to transforming the
neighborhood into a lifestyle center of activity. Another component to
building the community is the addition of more and varied dining and
entertainment uses. The Downtown and Core Area has a limited
number of dining and drinking establishments that are spread out such
that they do not create a destination area for residents and tourists to
visit. The addition of several establishments within a short proximity
could generate positive energy to grow the entire district One example
may be the creation of a microbrewery tasting room. Flathead Valley
craft breweries produce over 40 varieties of beers. A tasting room
would promote these local businesses while creating a gathering place
for area residents and tourists.
One of the biggest threats to the Core Area Revitalization is the growth
away from the Core Area. Over the past eight years, big box retail has
developed on the north side of town along the Highway 93 corridor.
The scarce availability of vacant, developable land within the City
combined with abundant land on the outskirts of the City has
encouraged suburbanization. The cluster of retailers in this corridor
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 36
401
generates strong traffic patterns, which in turn attracts new retailers
such as Cabella's. If the Core Area's current conditions continue
unabated, this trend will further diminish the competitive position of
Core Area retailers. The City has already lost the downtown movie
theaters when the owner decided to build the Signature Theaters
Stadium 14 Cinema. The City should continue to take proactive
measures to maintain the existing retail base while strengthening and
enhancing the Core Area retail mix.
Strengths and Opportunities
Based upon Willdan's observations and analysis, the Core Area Plan has
significant strengths that will support implementation. These strengths
include:
• BNSF Railway/WATCO Mission Mountain Railroad is currently
working with the City of Kalispell and FCEDA to design a rail -
served industrial park that could accommodate the rail users
in the Core Area
• BNSF Railway/WATCO Mission Mountain Railroad has
indicated their willingness to work with the community and
rail users to identify scenarios where rail service is no longer
necessary through the Core Area.
• FCEDA has acquired a developable site to which rail -served
business could relocate.
• The City already has a Brownfield Program to assist with
cleanup of sites requiring remediation.
The City's history presents a unique identity to the Core Area.
Active private investment in Kalispell retail/dining, small
format office, and new infill housing is underway (i.e., $3.7
million in new construction/renovation for Brannigan's Pub,
Depot Place, etc.).
The City has a vibrant local art community evidenced
throughout the Core Area and downtown.
Woodland Park serves as a key terminus point on the east side
of the proposed Linear Park.
• The recently completed Depot Place housing project
demonstrates that there is demand for higher density,
affordable housing in the area.
The public support for the project gives it a higher probability
for success and makes it easier to implement.
• The Kalispell Center Mall owner/operator has indicated
positive support for the Core Area Plan's redevelopment goals
and is a potential source of funding for components of the
Linear Park plan and community gathering place (trail feature)
on the mall property.
The Plan highlights many of the constraints of the Core Area. These
weaknesses include:
The property north of the railroad tracks is underutilized
because it is separated by the railroad track from the
Downtown.
Kalispell Core Area Market S Feasibility Analysis Page 37
0
The lack of investment/re-investment has created blight and
neglected properties.
Many streets within the Core Area are not pedestrian friendly
due to a lack of sidewalks, curbs and gutters.
Traffic Bow through the North -South connectors of the Core
Area is hindered by the limited at -grade railroad crossings.
• There is a perceived parking problem in the downtown area.
Spaces close to retail shops are often occupied by employees
and workers in the area. The two hour time limits imposed on
these spaces to stop employee and all day parking inhibits
customers who would like to leisurely walk and shop in the
downtown area.
• There is a lack of green space, trees and park settings in the
Core Area.
• The Core Area lacks restaurant and entertainment venues. The
distance separating the current establishments and those in
the downtown diffuses the vibrancy versus having the
establishments together in a closer cluster.
• The charm and parking efficiency of Kalispell's Main Street is
diminished by State Highway activity. It is important that the
City of Kalispell continue to lobby for State and Federal
highway funding to finish the $32 million construction of the
Highway 93 bypass to reclaim Main Street as a fully
functioning, safe, pedestrian -oriented, historic shopping
destination.
The City of Kalispell has a great opportunity to move forward and
address these weaknesses by:
Relocating the rail -served businesses in order to replace the
railroad tracks with a Linear Park
• Developing a cohesive building and lot plan design that
incorporates the character from downtown's historical
architecture with a modern appeal.
• Enhancing streetscapes by adding sidewalks with gutters and
curbs, widening existing sidewalks to accommodate patio
dining and improve pedestrian traffic, incorporate angled
parking to increase the amount of available spaces, and
upgrading lighting to improve aesthetics and promote safety.
• Improve city appearances by creating incentives to reinvest in
neglected property, cleaning up alley ways and overgrown
vegetation, enforcing city ordinances on abandoned vehicles
and community decay, and renovating the East Side Rail Bridge
to be a symbolic gateway into the Downtown area.
• Encourage development to create a cohesive neighborhood
with a vibrant atmosphere. The addition of the Linear Park,
high -density housing, and nightlife and entertainment
establishments would transform the neighborhood into a
desirable lifestyle center.
& Feasibility Analysis Page 38
Constraints/Threats
The threats to the vision that the City has laid out for the Core Area are:
The cost may be prohibitively expensive for the City to attain a
suitable return on investment.
• The business owners, FCEDA, and the City of Kalispell must
collaborate on the relocation of the rail -served businesses.
The relocation requires development time for site planning,
construction, and financing.
• If the railroad tracks are not removed, the City would not be
able to fully implement its vision.
• Grant money from the Brownfield Program must be expended
within the funding period.
• If the Flathead Valley Electric Cooperative cannot move the
substation near Woodland Park, the Linear Park plans may
need alteration.
Legal restrictions may inhibit development. One example is the
deed restrictions on the downtown theaters that prohibit their
use to show movies. Another example is the limited number of
liquor licenses. In 1947, the state enacted a quota system that
limits the number of issued licenses based on local population.
These restrictions have raised the value of liquor licenses on
the secondary market into the hundreds of thousands of
dollars.
• The development of big box retail on the north side of the City
along Highway 93 is attracting businesses away from the Core
Area.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 39
IX. Core Area Economic Development
Recommendations
The City of Kalispell is actively engaged in transforming the Core Area
into a destination and hub of activity for its residents, employees, and
tourists. Willdan recommends that the Core Area's retail strategy
should not be to compete with northern Kalispell retail developments
but instead to create a destination that offers something unique and
outside that found in the traditional power center developments.
There is opportunity for the current Core Area merchants to create an
alternative to the existing regional shopping centers. Kalispell's Core
Area is presently a viable shopping and dining destination with
significant potential to increase its retail activity through adaptive
reuse and redevelopment of existing space by capturing a greater share
of tourism spending generated by business travelers and visitors to
Glacier National Park.
We provide a range of potential redevelopment program scenarios and
the interdependent variables impacting the conditions of feasibility for
each alternative in the following discussion. The conceptual
redevelopment program targets identified take into account full
buildout of the Core Area over the 25-year life Tax Increment Financing
District.
Figure 31: Downtown Kalispell
Scenario 1 — Status Quo (Maintain Rail in Core Area)
This scenario was tested to identify the development potential of the
Core Area should rail service continue to operate. Acknowledging the
previously identified impediments of continued rail service to
development of the Core Area, there still is opportunity for
development. To mitigate the impacts of continued rail service,
Scenario 1 assumes that the City will create a cohesive marketing and
development strategy focused on infill development and retention of
existing users. The objective of this scenario would be focused
development and retention of existing retail businesses in the Core
Area.
This scenario assumes that the rail -served industrial park is not
constructed and the rail is not relocated from the Core Area to the new
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 40
park. Consequently, the Core Area Linear Park Plan is not implemented
and redevelopment and reuse is challenged by conditions of access,
blight, and other factors. This scenario assumes that the Kalispell West
Side TIF District generates only the baseline incremental tax revenues
of approximately $407,838 annually over the life of the TIF.
Scenario 2 — Conservative (Limited Expansion of Core Area
Retail)
The Enhanced Core Area Retail will result in adding a slight amount of
retail to fill in the void areas, and will improve the existing conditions
within the Core Area. The void areas are retail tenants that are
underrepresented. They are determined by calculating expenditures,
existing retail square footage and future sales projections. The
Enhanced Core Area assumes the following:
• Rail service through the Core Area will be discontinued.
• A Linear Park has been developed and implemented to capture
the former rail line right of way.
• Street connections previously closed by the rail line have been
reopened.
• Street and sidewalk widths will remain unchanged and that
pedestrian traffic, limited vehicular traffic will continue to co-
exist
• Parking will continue to be limited to city parking lots, parallel
parking on Highway 93 or on adjacent side streets.
• An effective management structure will be established to
coordinate overall leasing, marketing, design, merchandising,
parking and maintenance of the Core Area.
Existing retailers will improve their merchandising, marketing
and management strategies.
Many of the Core Area's businesses could generally increase sales and
new commercial businesses could be supported including men's and
women's apparel, brewery tasting rooms, bakeries and restaurants.
This assumes that the City would implement the removal of the railroad
tracks, undertake extensive streetscape improvements and the existing
vehicular circulation patterns would remain in effect along Main Street.
This model also assumes that the overall Core Area businesses organize
to improve their merchandising techniques and develop an effective
marketing campaign focusing on the tourist and visitor market and to
promote more regular visits from persons outside of the primary trade
area.
Further business development projects that the Core Area could benefit
from include the expansion of its restaurants and apparel categories. By
expanding these two categories, the Core Area could eventually be the
primary destination for visitors to Kalispell and significantly expand its
primary trade area.
Additional pedestrian traffic could increase existing business sales with
appropriate management and marketing. This model assumes that the
same enhancements of removal of the railroad tracks, extensive
Kalispell Care Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 41
streetscape improvements and maintaining the existing vehicular
patterns along Main Street would be implemented. Further, this
assumes the City would be able to enhance its current cultural
entertainment programming in the Core Area.
Scenario 3 — Optimistic (Major Expansion of Core Area Retail)
Assuming the rail is removed and the Core Area Linear Park Plan is
implemented, additional retail expansion is expected to occur. The
needed additional improvements include:
The development of a major new cultural/entertainment-
attraction such as a lifestyle center or regional brewery tasting
room.
• The establishment of a new Flathead County Library
Significant new family -focused attractions that create a welcoming
environment for families with young children, such as play structures,
public art, and small-scale recreational features such as a playground
water feature.
Limited retail expansion could be achieved by expanding a few
segments of the retail district, to encourage people outside of the trade
area to come to the Core Area as a destination for those specific
segments. The most promising segments identified for additional
expansion include apparel and restaurant businesses. By expanding
these two categories, the Core Area could eventually be the primary
destination for visitors and significantly expand its primary trade area.
Additional pedestrian traffic could increase the visibility and sales of
existing business.
This scenario was evaluated to identify the upper limit of the Core
Area's retail and entertainment development potential. Accounting for
existing vacancies and based on the retail gap data reported by ESRI
Business Analyst, the district can support up to 115,000 square feet of
new retail business development over 25 years, assuming the following
major improvements:
Removal of the railroad tracks, extensive streetscape
improvements and maintaining the existing vehicular patterns
along Main Street
The provision of additional parking (on -street, structured or
angled).
The widening of pedestrian walkways and the inclusion of
additional public open space within the Core Area.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 42
Figure 32: Proposed Core Area Redevelopment
Willdan forecasts that the improvements outlined in this model could
significantly expand the Core Area's primary trade area by attracting
both new unique retailing concepts and shoppers from much of the
greater Flathead Valley region.
Long -Term Redevelopment Potential
Assuming the enhancements outlined above in Scenarios 2 and 3 are
implemented, coupled with additional improvements, major retail
expansion could occur. This model is designed to strengthen the
existing retail offered and to expand the variety, and thus the appeal of
the Core Area to a wider market, without losing its existing appeal and
charm. Additional off-street and angled parking along with improved
pedestrian access throughout the Core Area will enhance consumer
appeal, increase accessibility and therefore help sales potential.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis
Rationale
The rationale for the recommended expansion alternatives within the
Core Area is presented below:
The addition of targeted retail, combined with the re -tenanting of the
existing retail, will create a more balanced mix, as well as strengthen
the family appeal of the street to attract the tourist, business and
secondary trade area population.
The use of select national tenants will increase the vitality and
credibility (name recognition) of the retail mix to strengthen the appeal
of the street to visitors and tourists, as well as those living in the
secondary trade area and beyond the defined trade areas.
While the residential demographics of the primary trade area offer a
stable residential base of over 90,000 persons, the median household
income and ratio of rental property reflects the demographic trends of
regional downtowns like that of Kalispell.
Additionally, retail and restaurants have added sales potential in the
area, due to both the existing trade area population and tourists drawn
to the area that are presently underserved by the existing stock of
commercial enterprises.
A healthy mix of national, regional and independent tenants is needed
to maintain an energetic retail district. National tenants add stability to
a shopping district and give the consumer the perception that they can
find a selection of standard items. Local retailers add the unique and
eclectic element to a retail street that malls cannot offer. A successful
mix between the two tenant types develops unique retail with the
convenience of name brand tenants together in a single area.
Recommended Retail Recruitment Strategies
Leasing and Management
One of the most important elements in the success of any commercial
development or redevelopment effort is strategy for leasing and
management of the area. Just as a successful shopping mall is leased
with a targeted tenant mix to maximize sales for all tenants, the leasing
of an urban commercial district must follow a similar lead. The unique
combination and mix of a successfully leased shopping district will
assure its ongoing vitality.
The challenge of managing and leasing a shopping district such as the
Core Area is complex and diverse. Multiple landlords, some absentee,
make implementing consistent street management or complementary
leasing efforts difficult Successful shopping districts, however, are
typically well organized in their efforts to promote, market and attract
desirable tenants.
It is most important that the businesses throughout the Core Area be
organized in a tight -fitting group with consistent and realistic goals.
Well -compensated and qualified individuals should direct such an
organization, much as a successful mall is leased and managed. The
manner of financing such activities is an important part of assuring
joint efforts to this goal. The existing Business Improvement District
(BID) can be an effective tool for this purpose.
Phasing and Action Items
As a means of improving the vitality of the Kalispell Core Area, the
following action items are recommended. Such improvements will aid
in efforts to attract and preserve quality retailers and restaurants in
Kalispell's downtown.
Near -Term (3-4 months)
• Improve merchandising efforts by existing Core Area retailers
and restaurants to enhance visual merchandising of their
product lines and to promote cross shopping among
businesses. Such efforts should include improved storefront
design, window display, lighting, inventory control and choice,
among others.
Development of a management group and appropriate funding
to assure clean and attractive streetscapes, open spaces, and
storefronts.
• A review of existing wayfinding and signage directing vehicles
to the parking surrounding the Core Area and downtown is
encouraged.
Mid -Range (6-9 months)
The enforcement of short-term parking (1 to 2 hours) in
appropriate areas within the Core Area and its side streets to
allow vehicular traffic and to encourage turnover of prime
parking spaces.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 44
The development and implementation of an overall marketing
and advertising campaign designed to expand the trade area
and overall sales.
• The organization of an effective tenant recruitment program to
attract targeted retailers and restaurants to the study area.
Include a common800-phone number and active participation
in the International Council of Shopping Centers and other
trade group activities.
• The installation of permanent directories to be located
downtown to direct pedestrians and shoppers to the Core Area
and various shops and restaurants.
• The creation of an ongoing assemblage of the inventory of all
leasable commercial space (occupied, vacant, and planned) in
the study area with appropriate data including square footage,
lease rates, lease terminations, footprints, etc. This will
facilitate the efficient flow of information to existing and
prospective tenants, brokers, landlords and investors.
• The creation and design of marketing materials, including a
brochure for leasing and marketing purposes, to attract
potential retailers and restaurants.
• The continuation and expansion of study area programming
and promotional activities (i.e., seasonal activities, Holiday
festivals) to provide additional incentives for shoppers to come
to the Core Area's shopping, dining, and entertainment
enterprises.
Long -Range (22 months)
• Expand existing BID or create new BID for Core Area
• Plan for ongoing routine repair and updating of the public
realm.
• Finalize planning, site design and layout for Linear Park
Identify State and Federal funding to complete the $32 million
construction of the Highway 93 by-pass and reconfigure angled
parking on Main Street
Figure 33: Current Conditions: Kalispell Center Mall Parking Lot
Conclusions
Willdan's analysis of the current Core Area's real estate and market
conditions indicate that there is unmet demand for retail and
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 45
restaurant uses. The Core Area's unique combination of holding the
county seat, government employment center, residential and visitor
customer base provides a stable economic marketplace for expansion.
The Core Area has the potential to achieve higher market capture rates
by implementation of the Plan's key objectives of:
Removing the railroad tracks that bisects the Project Area and
replace the tracks with a Linear Park.
X Improving and upgrading existing properties to remove the
blighted areas within the Core Area.
Developing a compatible mix of commercial retail,
neighborhood services, residential housing and public areas
that meets the needs of residents and fosters a greater sense of
community. In turn, the proposed redevelopment will
strengthen the local economy by increasing the local tax base,
attracting new residents and businesses, creating new jobs,
and increasing tourism.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 46
X. Kalispell Linear Park Conceptual Plan
Introduction
One of the primary objectives of the Kalispell Core Area Plan is to
formulate a funding and implementation strategy for installation of the
Kalispell Linear Park ("KLP"). The City of Kalispell's overarching vision
is to further the revitalization of the Core Area by removing the existing
live freight rail line that bisects the town and replace the tracks with a
Linear Park, attracting private investment to upgrading infrastructure,
remove blight, and achieve a diversified mix of infill activity through
new construction and adaptive reuse/redevelopment of commercial,
retail, residential, neighborhood services, and community gathering
areas, and other public amenities.
Willdan provides a summary of the high-level planning parameters
associated with the Linear Park's layout and proposed programming
elements, as well as the underlying capital and operating assumptions
that are the foundation of the park's implementation strategy.
Linear Park Layout and Programming
Based on input from City of Kalispell staff, the Kalispell Core Area
Steering Committee, and other community stakeholders, there is broad
public support for the removal of the existing freight rail line and the
installation of a new Linear Park in Kalispell.
The removal of the active rail line not only provides new commercial
and residential redevelopment opportunities, but also the ability to
reconnect Kalispell's street grid to create a fully functioning,
pedestrian -oriented Main Street community retail destination.
Upon relocation of the rail line, the City of Kalispell is opening
opportunities for private land owners and businesses to strategically
reposition property located the downtown core for redevelopment and
reuse. The City s role is to create the optimal conditions for private
investment through the following key action steps:
• attract the maximum private investment and development
activity with a minimum level of public funding/support
• upgrade basic public infrastructure to provide optimal
conditions for development/redevelopment activity
(sidewalks, street lights)
improve transportation flow through new street crossings
previously blocked by rail activity, better connecting drivers
with employment and commercial activity centers
• safely conned pedestrians to active and passive recreational
amenities by investing in new trail heads at key locations.
After more than 20 years of public debate, the City's long-term
investment in the Kalispell Core Area planning initiative is now taking
the next step in moving towards the active implementation phase of the
downtown rail -served business relocation by the BNSF
Railway/WATCO Mission Mountain Railroad.
The possible subsequent implementation of the Linear Park plan is
strategically structured to, eliminate blight, catalyze private investment
in the downtown Core Area, and achieve substantial enhancement in
the community's amenities.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 47
The following provides a high-level overview of current proposed
layout and programming targets for the KLP:
Key Regional Trail Connection Points
• North & East Connection: Create a contiguous linear
connection via BNSN Railway Highway 2 overpass (the new
"Kalispell Gateway Bridge") between Woodland Park (at the
east end of study area) and Lawrence Park (in the NE quadrant
of city).
West Connection: Connect the KLP to the existing Meridian
Trail Head via a new trail head at West Sth Avenue WN
(connecting hikers B miles out to Kila trail and 4 miles up to
North Reserve).
South Connection: Connect hikers 11 miles south to
Somers/Flathead Lake).
Proposed Linear Park Programming "Bump out" Nodes
• Depot Park: Locomotive climbing equipment at Depot Park:
The City of Kalispell and FCEDA have begun discussions with
BNSF Railway regarding the possibility of donating an out of
service locomotive for public park use. This question needs to
be further explored with BNSF Railway/WATCO Mission
Mountain Railroad and others involved in the rail relocation
initiative.
• Mall Clock Tower Pedestrian Plaza: potential for a developer -
funded and constructed open air farmer's market and creation
of a focal gathering "third place" on privately -held Kalispell
Center Mall property (with potential for capital investment and
ongoing operating support from Mall owner/operator).
Senior Outdoor Fitness Park: proposed at Meridian Road and
Appleway Trail; this facility could be a small scale facility (new
or existing adaptive reuse structure) with outdoor exercise
equipment, and portable vending carts.
• Flathead Electric Co -Op Site Comfort Station: the current
Flathead Electric Co -Op site is underutilized and is strategically
located at a potential trail connection point to Woodland Park
(and - long-term, to the proposed outdoor amphitheater site).
It is recommended that the City of Kalispell partner with the FEC to
redevelop the site to a low-cost/low-intensity comfort station and trail
head. This could be accomplished with minimal capital investment
through a land swap, long-term lease, or shared -use agreement It is
envisioned that the comfort station would include the following
amenities:
• trail head parking lot with city of Kalispell -branded directional
signage (potentially shared parking with FEC)
• Restrooms/healthy snack vending machines
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 48
Solid waste receptacles (potentially to be included in the
Linear Park's new recycling program)
Street Extensions/ Railroad Crossing Conversions
To maximize the impact of regional trailhead reconnection points, the
Willdan team strongly recommends that the Kalispell Linear Plan
include funding to achieve the installation of at -grade pedestrian
crossings and/or street reconnections key intersections where the
streets cross the railroad, as appropriate:
Street Extensions / Railroad Crossing Conversions (requires removal of
tracks and new construction to reconnect street grid):
• S's Avenue EN
• 6th Avenue WN
• 7th Avenue WN
• Wh Avenue WN
Based on discussions with city staff, it is expected that the street
extension costs would be substantial (approximately $2.4 million).
These costs are reflected in the Core Area funding strategy in the
following section. To the extent possible, street extension costs would
mitigated by retrofitting existing rail crossing equipment and power
lines for vehicular/pedestrian crossing use..
Connection to the City of Kalispell Parks and Recreation
Network
The City of Kalispell Department of Parks and Recreation currently
maintains approximately 406 acres of parkland, including 138 acres
dedicated for the Kalispell Youth Athletic Complex. The parkland
inventory includes 321 acres of active parkland and 73 acres of natural
open space. Kalispell also owns 12 acres of undeveloped land. The City
maintains several beautification areas, including roadway greens and
annual plantings, via its Parks Department
The Kalispell Core Area Linear Park Plan offers the potential
reconnection of downtown to several trail heads with connections to
nearby neighborhoods and vehicle parking. The Linear Park would
connect nearly the entire length of the city, providing approximately
two (2) miles in paved surfaces, opportunities for environmental and
recreational programming, and the installation of climbing equipment
at Depot Park, enhancing the cultural heritage of Kalispell's railroad
history.
Linear Park Capital Cost Assumptions
There are three distinct capital components to the Kalispell Linear Park
Plan:
• Removal of the active rail freight line
• Installation of the Linear Park trail/street reconnections
• Adaptive reuse and new construction of facilities and
equipment related to programmed park nodes
Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 49
r
Rail Line Removal
The cost estimates to remove the active rail line is still pending further
input from BNSF Railway/WATCO Mission Mountain Railroad, and
other stakeholders; therefore this cost estimate is subject to change
pending refinement of the Linear Park plan concept.
Linear Park Trail
Based on Willdan's site visits and interviews with city staff (Planning,
Community & Economic Development, Public Works, and Parks and
Recreation departments), the installation of the Kalispell Linear Park
trail is expected to be a low impact construction project.
From a utilities perspective, the city's existing grid of power, water,
wastewater, and roads are in a state of good repair with sufficient
capacity to serve the proposed Linear Park plan's trail/road
connections and minimal active programming alternatives.
The primary capital costs appear to be associated with the street
extensions and the installation of street lights, curb cuts, sidewalks, and
other basic vehicle and pedestrian -oriented infrastructure upgrades.
Summary of Construction Costs
Construction cost estimates are provided in the preliminary
implementation strategy (see Figure 34: Summary of Linear Park
Development Costs and Phasing Recommendations and in the detailed
calculations and assumptions located in the annex to this report). It is
expected that the Linear Park design and construction will be initiated
concurrently with the latter phases of the FCEDA Rail Served Industrial
Park construction and associated business relocation. It is anticipated
that the Linear Park will be implemented in phases, based on
availability of funding as follows (see Figure 34: Summary of Linear
Park Development Costs and Phasing Recommendations for detail):
• Phase 1: Assessment
0-3 Months
• Phase II: Assessment & Cleanup Plan
3-6 Months
• Phase III: Remediation Plan
6-12 Months
• Phase IV: Cleanup
12-24 Months
• Phase V: Park Design & Planning
tbd
• Phase V: Business Relocation
tbd
• Phase VI: Park Construction
tbd
According to current estimates of park costs and available funding
sources, it appears that the installation of the Linear Park is financially
feasible, as discussed in the following implementation section of this
report. Nine percent of total budget for FY 2014 is planned for reserves
(future maintenance). The Parks & Recreation Department currently
holds $280,000 in cash reserves (14.3 percent reserve account). It is
feasible to explore utilizing the reserve fund to pay for small shortfalls
projected in the early years of development.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 50
Figure 34: Summary of Linear Park Development Costs and Phasing Recommendations
Private/ Non- Other Grant
Profit Fundina City of Kalisoell Total Cost
# 1
Linear Park Land/Easement Acquisition
$
$-
$5,000
$5,000
# 2
Linear Park Environmental Remediation
$-
$55,000
$-
$55,000
# 3
BNSF Track Removal
$-
$-
$-
$-
# 4
Park Master Plan
$-
$-
$20,000
$20,000
5
Installation of Shared Use Trail
L
$
$1,423,812
$1,423,812
Subtotal
$-
$55,000
$1,448,812
$1,503,812
Mid -Term: Years 4-6
6
Regional Trailhead Connection Points:
$30,000
$-
$30,000
$60,000
7
Kalispell Gateway Bridge
$-
$112,500
$-
$112,500
8
KLP Trail Feature - Depot Park
$175,000
$-
$25,000
$200,000
9
KLP Trail Feature - Appleway Trail Senior Outdoor Fitness Park
$61,600
$-
$2,500
$64,100
10
KLP Trail Feature - Flathead Electric Cc -Op Park
$15,000
$55,000
$14,000
$84,000
11
Pedestrian Crossing Upgrades (Railroad Conversions) :
L
$-
$1,303,941
$1,303,941
Subtotal
$281,600
$167,500
$1,375,441
$1,824,541
Long -Term: Years 7-10
12
Street Extensions (Railroad Conversions) :
$-
$
$1,074,001
$1,074,001
13
KLP Trail Feature - Kalispell Center Mall Clock Tower Plaza
$-
$-
$-
$-
14
Woodland Park Amphitheater
$-
$25,000
$25,000
$50,000
15
Health, Wellness, Sustainability Programming
L
S-
L
Subtotal
$
$25,000
$1,099,001
$1,124,001
6%
6%
88%
100%
Source, City of Kalispell; Willdan, 2013
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 51
Linear Park Operating Cost Assumptions
Based on the current Kalispell Linear Park Plan concept noted in rough
map graphics provided in this memorandum, the length of the park as
drawn is 17,221 feet or 3.26 miles. Other potential operating impacts
likely to be to Public Works Department to expand solid waste
collection points along trail and/or at programmed nodes (especially if
recycling program is expanded in City of Kalispell). Note that operating
cost estimates for the programmed elements of the Linear Park are
illustrative.
Figure 35: Kalispell Linear Park Annual Operating Cost Estimates
Length (feet)
17,200
Width (feet)
60
total area (sq. ft.)
1,032,000
sq. fVacre
45,560
Total Linear Park Acres
23
Tier 1 Park Maintenance cost/acre
1,200
Annual Maintenance Cost:
$27,182
Source: City of Kalispell Department of Parks & Recreation; Willdan, 2013
The Kalispell Department of Parks & Recreation supports
implementation of the Linear Park; the scale and intensity of uses can
be programmed as part of typical expected growth for parks budget
(combined with reserves); expected annual operating costs the
operating costs for shared use trail and features are within a range that
can be managed and maintained.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 52
XI.Core Area Financial Feasibility &
Implementation Plan
To initiate the implementation planning for the proposed Kalispell Core
Area Plan --- the Kalispell Linear Park - the Willdan Team conducted
work sessions with City of Kalispell staff to collect preliminary data
regarding the individual action steps, cost estimates, and potential
funding sources. Table 12 in Annex A: Linear Park Implementation
Strategy: Sources & Uses of Funding provides a summary snapshot of
these actions steps. Based on a detailed review of the relationship
between costs, revenues and grant funding sources, and proposed
phasing, the Core Area plan is financial feasible.
Summary of Key Findings
• Implementation of the Core Area Plan is vital to the future stability
of the City of Kalispell's tax base.
• The capital costs required to construct the Linear Park are
supported by a combination of grant funding, incremental real
property tax revenues, and TIF funding.
• Other funding sources will be pursued and it's expected that these
would adequately address any projected shortfalls (up to $1.1
million in Year 7 of the most conservative case (Scenario 1: Status
Quo), assuming 1O0% of the street extension improvements are
funded by the TIF. See Figure 39: Core Area Grant Funding
Resource Strategy for a detailed listing of grant funding targets).
• Assuming conservative development activity that would result
from implementation of the Linear Park Plan as detailed by the
market analysis findings, the quantifiable public return on
investment is positive. It is expected that the incremental real
property values would reach between $71,000 and $133,000 per
year at full buildout of the conservative and optimistic scenarios,
respectively.
• The 25-year cumulative cash flows of anticipated development
costs and incremental tax revenues flowing to the West Side TIT
are estimated to be between $5.75 million and $7.91 million
indicating that investment in the Core Area Plan will yield sufficient
incremental tax revenues to the City of Kalispell.
Figure 36: Core Area Financial Feasibility Analysis - Summary Results
Cumulative Values (25 Years- Scenario 1: Scenario 2: Scenario 3:
$Millions) Status Quo Conservative Optimistic
Current TIF Fund Reserves $2.56 $2.56 $2.56
Incremental TIF Revenues (Life of TIF) $9.79 $9.79 $9.79
Real Property Tax Revenues: New
Construction/Redevelopment $- $1.29 $2.16
Rail Served Industrial Park Costs 1 / $(2.68) $(2.68) $(2.68)
Core Area Linear Park Development
Costs Im 3.92 3.92
TIF Funds Remaining $5.75 $7.04 $7.91
Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 63
Figure 37: Core Area Plan Real Property Tax Revenue Assumptions -Incremental Taxes Per Square Foot from Similar Redevelopment Activity
Before Renovation
After Renovation
After Renovation
Business
Property
Type/Description
Total Size
(sf or
units)
Taxable
Value -
Land
Taxable
Value -
Building
Taxable
Value -
Land
Taxable
Value -
Building
Incremental
Assessed Value
(Land +
Building)
Total
Incremental
Taxes PSF After
Renovation
Sykes Supermarket/ Restaurant/Apt
commercial -
multifamily imp
3,466
695
723
1 1,883
4,963
1 3,108
0.90
Sykes Supermarket/ Restaurant/Apt
mixed use- retail,
storage & a is
27,540
2,409
2,814
52.521
47,298
1.72
Sykes Supermarket/ Restaurant/Apt
restaurant
7,466
2,409
4,523
2,738
8,042
7,418
0.99
Sykes Supermarket/ RestaurantlAt
retail
2,700
2,409
1,652
2,738
2.239
1,256
0.47
Appleway Trail Apts
a is
71,320
10,665
83,733
73,068
1.02
Bmnni an'sPub/Restaurant/1
restaurant/bar
13,000
7,243
5,330
1,913
AtoZ /2
retail
7,540
7,414
8,853
9,747
10,120
1,812
0.24
Depot Place Apts
apts
35,607
6,281
15,681
9,400
0.26
Kalispell Center Mall/3
retail/hotel
297,696
103,023
231.119
1 103,023
231,119
256,192
Assumed Averages for TIF
incremental Taxes
Calculations
psi
Retail Development
$0.26
Office Development
$0.24
Apartments - For Lease
$0.98
Low -Income Housing Tau Credit Units
$0.90
Condominium
$1.02
1/ Completed remodel value has not been picked up for 2013 yet. Renovation not complete as of 1/1/13. Full renovation value will be added for 2014 tax year.
2/ value only at 50% complete construction for 2013. This project has also applied for a property tax exemption.
3/ completed remodel value for 2013 still pending review
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 34
Figure 38: Fiscal Benefits at Buildout - Summary of Scenarios
Redevelopment Program
Retail Development (sa
Retail - Apparel and Soft Goods
Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)
Subtotal
Office Development (sj
Residential Development (units)
Apartments - For Lease
Low -Income Housing Tax Credit Units
Condominium
Subtotal
Total Incremental Value/Real Property Taxes
Scenario 1: Status Quo
Scenario 2: conservative
Growth
Average
Incremental
Incremental
Real
Incremental
Real
Incremental
Real
Real Property
Development Taxable
Property
Development
Taxable
Property
Development
Taxable
Property
Tex Values/sf
Program Value
Taxes
Program (a
Value
Taxes
Program
Value
Taxes
$0.26
- $-
$-
62,500
$16,015
$10,998
92,500
$23,702
$16,276
$0.26
- $-
$-
15,000
$3.844
$2,639
25,000
$6406
$4399
- $-
$-
77,500
$19,858
$13,637
117,500
$30,108
$20,675
$0.24
- $-
$-
17,500
$4,206
$2,888
17,500
$4,206
$2,888
$0.98
- $-
$-
52,500
$51,222
$35,175
78,750
$76,833
$52,763
$0.90
- $-
$-
32,000
$28,695
$19,705
64,000
$57,389
$39,411
$1.02
- $-
$-
-
$-
$-
25,000
$25 613
$17 589
$-
$-
84,500
$79,917
$54,881
167.750
$159836
$109762
$-
$-
179,500
$103 981
$71 406
302,750
$194,149
$133.326
Assumptions:
2013 Flathead County Millage Rate = 0.68672
Source, Kalispell Core Area Plan: Wilidan, 2013,
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 55
n
Figure 39: Core Area Grant Funding Resource Strategy
Funding
Grant Program
Due Date
Grant
Match
Proposed Use of Funds/Project Phase
Expected Data of Notification
Source
Amount
Regwired
US DOT
TIGER V
06/03/13
$8.7 million
40%
Construction of mil and road improvements at
September 2013
KalispelVFCEDA Rail Park
US EDA
Public Works
09/13/13
Avg $1 MM +
Infrastructure
Within 25 days of funding cycle
deadline
Montana
Community
Not stated
$20,000
$1 local cash to
Plans for the adaptive re -use and
Not stated
Department of
Development Block
$3 CDBG funds
redevelopment of vacant Industrial areas,
Commerce
Grant
including "brownfield" areas where reuse
may be complicated due to the presence (or
potential presence) of a hazardous substance,
pollutant or contaminant, and any subsequent
studies or plans for remediation required
Montana
Community
$25,000 per
1:1
May be used for construction of infrastructure
Department of
Development Block
job created,
at the Rail Park pending commitment on job
Commerce
Grant —Economic
max $400,000
creation
Development
Montana
Big Sky Trust Fund
Rolling
$25,000
1:1
Planning
Within three months of application
Department of
Commerce
Montana DNRC
Reclamation &
May 15,
$50,000
Yes, no
Planning, environmental site assessments
September of that year
Development
minimum
and writing grant application —perhaps for
Odd Years
mils to trails phase.
And??
and
09/15/13
Montana
Reclamation &
May 15,
$300,000+
Yes, no
Environmental clean-up, particularly along the
Following Legislative Session
Development
minimum
rail line in preparation for building trail
DNRC
Grants Program
Even
Years
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 56
�-r
Funding
Grant Program
Due Date
Grant
Match
Proposed Use of Funds/Project Phase
Expected Date of Notification
Source
Amount
Regwired
Montana
Treasure State
May of Even
$750,000
1:1
Construction of infrastructure. "*Unlikely that
Following Legislative Session
Department of
Endowment
Years
maximum
Kalispell would be funded b/c charging below
Commerce
Program
target rate.
US HUD
HOPE VI Main
07/22/13
$500.000
5%
Grants to small communities to assist in the
Anticipated mid -Oct 2013
Street
renovation of an historic or traditional central
business district or "Main Street' area by
replacing unused commercial space in
buildings with affordable housing units.
US EPA
Brownfields
Expected Nov
$200,000
None
Conduct environmental site assessments in
Spring 2014
Assessment
2013
Kalispell for hazardous substance or
petroleum.
National
Our Town
January
$25,000
1:1
Planning: creative asset mapping, cultural
July annually
Endowment for
annually
district planning, development of master
the Arts
$50,000
Non-federal
plans or community -wide strategies for public
art, creative industry/hub development.
$75,000
Cash and/or
Design: of cultural facilities (adaptive reuse),
$100,000 or
In -kind
community engagement activities,
predevelopment, design fees.
$200,000
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 67
Funding
Grant Program
Due Date
Grant
Match
Proposed Use of Funds/Project Phase
Expected Date of Notification
Source
Amount
Required
Wells Fargo and
Environmental
December
$25,000 —
1:1 cash and/or
Support community -based conservation
Approximately following April
the National
Solutions for
$100,000
in -kind
projects that protect & restore local
Fish & Wildlife
Communities
habitats/natural areas, enhance water quality,
Foundation
promote urban forestry, educate &train
community leaders on sustainable practices,
promote related jab creation/training, &
engage diverse partners & volunteers.
HUD
Choice
May annually
$500,000
Minimum of 5%
support development of comprehensive
Neighborhoods
of project cost
neighborhood revitalization plans which, when
implemented, are expected to achieve three
Cash only
core goals:
1. Housing 2. People
3. Neighborhood. Each application must
focus on the revitalization of at least one
severely distressed public and/or HUD -
assisted housing project. ' Forthis reason,
not a match for the Core Area.
Multiple federal
Strong Cities,
Initiative helping localities overcome
agencies
Strong
economic struggles through interagency
Communities
assistance
Tax Increment
West Side TIF
Rolling
Revitalization, public infrastructure
Finance District
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 58
Annex A: Detailed Assumptions & Calculations
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 59
Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility Analysis
Table of Contents
Table 1: Redevelopment Program Alternatives
Table 2: Conceptual Development Program by Opportunity Site
Table 3: Development Cast Assumptions
Table 4: Financial Feasibility - Retail
Table 5: Financial Feasibility - Office
Table 6: Financial Feasibility - Multifamily Residential
Table 7: Commercial & Residential Construction Cost Assumptions
Table8: Real Property Tax Assumptions
Table 9: Fiscal Benefits at Buildout - Summary of Scenarios
Table 10: Redevelopment Phasing & Tan Generation Assumptions - Scenario 2: Conservative
Table 11: Redevelopment Phasing & Tan Generation Assumptions - Scenario 3: Optimistic
Table 12: Linear Park Implementation Strategy: Sources & Uses of Funding
Table 13: Summary of Linear Park Development Costs and Phasing Recommendations
Table 14: West Side T1F District Projections: Scenario 1 - Status Quo
Table 15: West Side T1F District Projections: Scenario 2 - Conservative
Table 16: West Side T1F District Projections: Scenario 3 - Optimistic
Page A-1 of 33
Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility Analysis
Table 1:
Redevelopment Program Attematives
Kalispell Core Area Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
Conceptual Redevelopment Alternatives Status Quo Conservative OpUmiedc
Retail Development (si)
Retail - Apparel and Soft Goods 0 62,500 92,500
Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service) 0 15,000 25,000
Total 77,500 117,500
Office Development (st)
Residential Development (units)
Apartments - For Lease
Low -Income Housing Tax Credit Units
Condominium
Total
Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.
0
17,500
17,500
0
25
75
0
40
80
0
-
20
0
105
175
Page A-2 of 33
Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility Analysis
Table 2:
Conceptual Development Program by Opportunity Site
Total Opportunity
Opportunity
Opportunity
Opportunity
Opportunity
Buildout Site
site
Site
Site
Sites 11
Ste 1
Site 2
Site 3
Site 4
(Core Areal
Retail Development (A
Retail - Apparel and Soft Goods
Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)
Total
Office Development (A
Residential Development (units)
Apartments - For Lease
Low -Income Housing Tax Credit Units
Condominium
Total
92,500 2,500 30,000 50,000 10,000
25.000 10.000 10.000 5.000
115,000 2,500
17,500 2,500 5,000 - 10,000
75
BO
1/ Core Area wide opportunity sites are assumed to be throughout the pmject area and less than one acre on average.
Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Wiilldan, 2013.
25
40
Page A-3 of 33
Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility Analysis
Table 3:
Development Cost Assumptions
Tenant
Costs per Square Foot - New Construction Hard Costs Soft Costs Improvements Parking Total
Retail Development (sf)
Retail - Apparel and Soft Goods $ 150 $ 30 $ 45 $ 36 $ 261
Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service) $ 175 $ 35 $ 68 $ 36 $ 314
Office Development (st)
$ 75 $ 15 $ 20 $ 36 $ 146
Residential Development (units)
Unit Size
Apartments - For Lease
1,050$
100 $
20 $
2.25 $
26 $ 148
Low -Income Housing Tax Credit Units
I goo $
100 $
20 $
2.25 $
30 $ 152
Condominium
1,,250; $
200 $
40 $
2.50 $
14 $ 257
Assumptions
Parking Cost $ 12,000
Soft Costs (as % of hard costs) 20%
Contingency 10%
Gross building area per parking space $ 350 SF
Parking Revenue $ - Per Year
$ - Sale
Interest Rate 7.5%
Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Willdan, 2013.
Page A-4 of 33
Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial FeasibilityArelysls
Table 4:
Saudi Familiary-Reail
&tlldi ulYeer
Retail Derdupmam- Gross(Annual
Retail - Apparel and Soft Good
Retail - Restaurant (Deal & Full Service
Subtald Mall M
Retail Development - Net SF Pali
Retail - Apparel and Soft Good
Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service
Subfaml WWI (so
Not Income
Retail - Apparel and Solt Goads
Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service
Net Income
TOW Development Costs;
Retail -Apparel and Soft Goad:
Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Serdce
Subtmel Retail (SP,
Debt
Equity
Imeresl Rate
Term
Down Payment
Petri +Closing Cast
fatal Cash Imeslmanl
Annual Payment
Annual Cash Sim
Cash an Cash Remm
Cumulative Cash Few (for Pay4ackYea)
Return an investment (Cash an Cost) -Yr 17
Assumptions:
Leasing Comes
Operating Costs (% Ravenue;
Stabilized Vacancy Faclat
Source: Kalispell Care Area Plan: Willder 2013
Bull" Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr
Year 1 2 3 4 5 8
30000 WOOD
10000 10,000
40,91)[1 - - - 40,000 -
25,500
COW of TOW of
201 30000 7,830,000
314 10,000 31135,000
40,000 10,955,000
60% $ 6,579,000
40% It 4,366,000
7.5%
10
$ 4,386,000
3% 131,580
$ 4,517,580
3%
25%
5%
33%
($5,205,183) ($658.148) (1658,148) ($658.148)
7,018,522 - (658,148) 21,852 21,852
0% -15% 0% 0%
Page A-5 of 33
Mispell Gone Am Plan FMandal Feari Ana pals
Table 4:
F61alclal Fei - Belall
BulldoWYM
Ratan Containment - Grote (AnnueQ
Retail - Apparel and Soft Good:
Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service
Gub6ffiI Rated (at)
Remll OeYalopmwa - Net SF (Onsioll
Retail - Apparel and Soft Goodr
Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service
subtoml now (90
Nab became
Retail - Apparel and Soft Good:
Retail - Restaumnt (Casual & Full Service
Netlncome
Total Dewdopmem Cams
Recoil - Apparel and Soft Goad;
Retail- Beslauram(Casual &Full Service
Subtotal Retail (s¶
Debt
Equity
Interest Rate
Term
Dawn Payment
POlnta+ Closing Cesft
Total Cash Investment
Annual Paymenl
Annual Cash Flow
Cash on Cash Return
CumuRtive Cash Pow 0mPayback Yea)
Realm an Imeshnem(Cash an Clas) -Yr 17
/wsumptso :
Leasing Costs
Operating Cots (%Reoenue;
Sol VacamY Factoi
Somme. Kalispell Core Area Plan; Will 2013
BuYdout Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr
Year 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
30.000
85% 25.500 25,500 25,500 25,500 25,500 25,500 25,500 25,500 25,500 25.500 25,500
65% 8,500 8,500 8.500 8.500 8.500 U00 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500
34,000 3l 34,000 34.000 34,000 34,0011 34,000 34,000 34,000 34,000 34,000
$11i
$2000 4,080,000 510,000 510,000 510,000 510,000 510.000 51 Tow 510,000 510,000 510,000 510,000
$20.00 1,360,000 17Q000 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000
5,440,OOO 680,000 680,000 Ofil 600,00D 680,000 6110,000 660,000 660000 650,000 680,000
Coati sf Total of
261 30,000 7,1330,000
314 10,DO0 3,135,000
40,000 10.965,000
60% $ 6,579,000
40% $ 4,386,000
75%
10
$ 4,306,000
3% 131,580
$ 4,517,580
1$5,26]83)
7,018,522
3%
25%
5%
33%
($668.148( ($658,148) $658,148) ($656,148) ($658,748) i$658,1481 l$65O1481
21,852 21,852 21,852 21.852 21.852 21,B52 21,852 680,000 680,000 MUM
0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 15% 15% 15%
2113,522 89B,522 .,.:1;576,522
Page A-6 of 33
Kallspel Cwe Area Plan Rnandal Feel Analysis
Table 4:
Pool Reseal - Rated
8aiuputym
AMDembp risat- Gross (Anal
Retail -Apparel and Soft Goark
Retail - Restaurant (Casual 8 Full Service
SpElua l REW M
AM Decelapnnalt-Net $F (On9eng)
Retail - Apparel and Soft Good;
Retail - Restaurant (Casual 8 Full Service
Sul Retell M
Net 1lcame
Reel - Apparel and Soft Gook
Retail - Restaurant (Casual 3 Full Service
Net rearse
Tole Doebi meet Coal
Retail -Apparel and Soft Gera
Betel - Restaurant (Casual 8 Full Service
Subtmal Retail (at
Debt
Fquity
Imerest Rate
Term
Oorm Peened
Poids+Closing Curls
Town Cash Imastmem
Annual Payaned
Annual fah All
Cash on Caen Rehm
GumulaMie Cash Flow 0a PavOsck Yea)
Retum on hrvestrnent (Cash an Coop -Yr 17
Awwnptlons:
Leasing Cask
Operating Cass (% Revenue;
Stabilized Vacancy Fact,
Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Alcor, 2013
Ouldout Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr
Year 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
30,000
85%
25.500
25.500
25,500
255DO
25,500
25,500
25.500
25,500
25,500
25,500
85%
8,600
8,500
81500
8,500
8,500
8,500
8,500
8,50D
8,500
8,500
34,000
34,000
34.000
34,OOD
34,000
34,0110
34,000
34,090
34,000
34,000
$Real
$2000
4,000,000
510,000
510,000
510,000
510,000
510,000
510,000
510,000
MUM
510,000
$2000
11360.000
170,000
170,000
170,000
170,000
170,000
170,C00
170,000
170,000
170,000
5,440,11D
680)BDD
880,000
680,000
680.000
880.000
G80,000
880,ODD
600,000
680,000
GOW of Tee at
251 30,000
1,830,000
314 10,000
3,135,000
40,000
10,985,D00
60% $
6,579.000
40% $
4,306,000
7.5%
10
$
4,386,000
3%
131,590
$
4,517,580
($5265163)
7,018,622
680,000
680,000
600,000
080,000
680,000
680.000
680,000
680,000
680,GD0
15%
-15%
15%
15%
15%
15%
15%
15%
15%
2250,522
2,938,522
3,510522
4,298,522
3%
25%
5%
33%
Page A-7 of 33
Kallspell Core Area Plan Rnanckl Feasibility Mayas
Table 5:
Financial Fe MKY - Office
BtldoutYwr
Difice Development (d)
Small Iormatindependent office
Absorption Assumptions - % of Total
Space Absorbed/ Annual sf
Total Not New Was BiwitV
Retail Development - Net OF (Ugolrng)
Small formatrindependent office
Subtotal Retail (so
Dross Retail Saks (Gross Income)
Operating Costs
Net Leese Income
Annual Debt Service (Mortgage Fernand)
Total Development Costs
Total at
COGY St
Total Net New Office Space/sf
Debt
Equity
Interest Rate
Term
Down Payment
Points + Closing Costs
Total Cash lmestment
Debt Sandoe
Cash Flop
Cash on Cash Return
Cumulative Cash Flow gor Payback Year)
Return an Investment (Cash an Cash)
Assumplkrw:
Leasing Costs
Operating Costs (% Revenue)
Stablllud Vacancy Fell
TOW
Source: Kalispell Care Area Plan; Willson, 2013.
Bulclout Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr
- - 2,500 - - - 10,000 - - U00 - -
2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 12,500 12,500 12,500 17,500 17.500 17,5DO
0% D% 10D% 1DD% 100% 100% 50% 50% 5D% 75% 75% 100%
17,500 - - 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,50D 6,250 6,250 6,250 13,125 13,125 17,500
85% 14875 - 2,125 2,125 2,125 2,125 5,313 5,313 5,313 11,156 11,156 14,875
14,875 - - 2,125 2,125 4125 Z125 5,313 5,313 5,313 11,156 11.156 14.975
Les re RafaW
$ 12 3,060,000 - - 25,500 25,500 25,500 25,500 63,750 63,750 63,750 133S75 133,875 170,500
% of Safes
.13% (3,315) (3,315) (8,315) (3,315) (8,288) (8,288) (8,288) (17,404) (17,404) (23,205)
3,457.800 - - 28,815 28,815 28,815 28,815 72,038 72,038 72,038 151,279 151,279 201,705
17,500
146
$ 2,555,0DO
60% $ 1,533,000
40% $ 1,022,000
7.5%
10
$ 1,022,000
3% 30660
$ 11052,660
($2,233,365)
1,224,435
($223,337) ($223,337) ($223,337) ($223,337) ($223,337) ($223,337) ($223,337) ($223:337) ($223,337) ($223337)
- (194,522) (194,522) (194,522) (194,522) (151,299) (151,299) (151,299) (72,058) (72,058) (21,632)
0% -18% -18% -18% -18% -14% -14% -14% -7% -7% -2%
_- 094,5221 (389,043) (583,565) (778086) :(92&385�
Page A-8 of 33
Kalispell Core Arm Plan Rnenelai F'siIn ft Awtious
Table 5:
Flnanclal Fembility- Office
BuildeutYeer
OIAce Development po
Small formatfmdependent office
Absorption Assumptions - %of Total
Space Absorbed/ Annual at
Total Nd New Dlfice Speoeld
ReW Development- Net SF (Ongoing)
Small format independent office
SubhAel Reteil(4
Gross Palm Sam (Gross Income)
Operating Costs
Nat lease Income
Annual Debt Service (Mortgage Payi
Taw Demelepirwrt Dash
Total at
Cash Sf
Total Net New Office Space/sf
Debt
Equity
Interest Hate
Tenn
Deem Payment
Points+ Closing Costs
Total Cash Investment
Daht SwYiw
cash Row
Cash an Cush Return
Cumula8vx Cash now (hor PaybackYeaO
Realm on Inwesbo:lt (Cash on Cash)
Asmlmptiere:
Leming Costs
Operating Cols (% Revenua)
Slabifaed Vacancy Factor
Told
Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Wlidan, 2013.
BukW Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr
Year 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
17.500 17.500 17,500 iT500 17.500 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,5DO 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 1011% 100% 1DD% 100% 100%
17,SD0 17,SDO 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,5DO 17,500 17,5011 17,500 17,500 17,50D 17,500 17,500
85% 14875 14875 14,075 14875 14,875 14875 14,875 14,875 14075 14,875 14,875 14875 14875 14875
14,875 14,875 14,10 14,875 14,876 14.975 14,875 14.975 14,875 14,975 14,875 14,975 14,875 14AM
Lease Paw
$ 12 3,060,000 178,500 178,500 178,500 178,500 178,500 178,500 178,500 178500 178,500 178,500 178,600 178,500 178,500
%d Sam
-13% (23,2D5) (23,206) (23,205) (23,205) (23,205) (23,2115) 123,205) (23,205) (23,205) (23.205) (23,205) (23,205) (23,205)
3,457,800 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201.705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705
17,500
146
$ 2,%S,000
60% $ 1,533,000
40% $ 1,022,D00
7.5%
10
$ 1,022,000
3% 30660
$ 1,052,660
($2,233,365)
1,22A,435
201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705 201,705
19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19%
(M.2D5)
Page A-9 0133
Kalispell Core Area Plan Flnandal Feaslblllty Analysis
Table 6:
Financial Feasibility - Multlmmlty Residential
Bulldowl
Packsaddle] Development - Lanka
ApaNnents - For Lease
Cumulative Units Available
Absorption Assumptions - % all Tolal
Apartments keened
Net Leasehle Am
Gross Leese Revenue
Operating Costs
Net Operating Income (Before Debt Service)
Total Development Costs
Taal of
CcsV Sf
Teti
Debt
Equity
Intermit Rate
Toren
Dam Payment
Points +Closing Costa
Total Cash Investment
Debt Service
Cash Raw
Carol on Cash Return
Cumulative Cash Flow gor Payback Year)
Return on Investment (Cash an Cash)
RaimingAssumption
Number of Units
Year Selling Commences
Absorption (par Yen)
Average Unit Sim
Net Saleable Area
Leese Ru@Af
Housing Oxupancy Factor
Operating Coal Assunpbone
Leasing Cams
Operating Costs (% Revenue)
Smbilirsd Vacancy Factor
Total
Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Wilder, 2013
1,050
Lease Rate7m7mo
1.05
% of Grass Lease
Revenue
13%
Bulldout Yr Yr Yr Yf Yr Yr Yr Yr
25
25
- - - 25
25
25
25
50
0% 0% 0% 25%
50%
75%
100%
fi3%
50 - - - 6
13
1g
25
31
- - - 6,563
13,125
19.688
26,250
32,813
$
60% $
40% $
7,5%
10
3% $
8
50
75
1,050
1,050
$1 50
100%
3%
5%
5%
la%
12.237,750
82,fi68 165,375 248,063 330,750 413,436
(1,590,908) (10749) (21,49% (32,248) (42,998) (53,747)
- 71,938 143,876 215,814 287,753 359,691
52,500
148
7,768,125
4,660,875
3,107,250
3,107,260.00
93.217.50
3,200,467.50
($6,790,239)
(1679,024)
($679,024)
($679,024) ($679,024) 3679,024) (1
3,1156,604
- @79,024)
(607p86)
(535,14% (463,210) (391,271) (319.333)
0% -21%
-19%
-17% -14% -12% -10%
- (679,024)
(1,286,110)
(1321,257)
Page A-10 of 33
Kalispell Cue Area Plan Finanmal FeaslbllRy Analysis
Table 6:
Financial Feasibllity - Mulesmlly Residential
Bulldout
Yr
Yr
Yr
Yr
Yr
Yr
Yr
Yr
Buldoul Year
Year
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Residential Oevelapment - Units
Apartments - For Lease
Cumulative Units Available
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
Absorption Assumptions - %of Total
75%
BB%
1C0%
100'%
_1W%
100%-:::.
1017%
'.100%
Apartments Rented
50
38
44
50
50
50
50
50
50
Net Leasable Area
1,050
39,376
45,938
52,500
62.600
54500
52,500
52,500
52,500
Lease Ra@/sf7ma
Grose Lease Revenue
1.05
12,237,750
496,125
578,813
661,500
661.500
661.500
661,500
661,500
61
%of Gross lease
Revenue
Operating Costs
-13%
0,590,908)
(64.496)
(75,246)
(851995)
(85,995)
AIM)
(85,995)
l86,995)
(85.995)
Net Opemtlng Income(Besm Debt Service)
431,629
51
575,605
575,505
575,505
575,505
575,505
575,505
Total Development Cots
Total at
52,500
CDW Sf
148
Total
$
7,708,125
Dew
50%
$
4,660,875
Equity
40%
$
3,107,250
Interest Role
T5%
Term
10
Down Payment
$
3,107,250,00
Palms + Closing Costs
3%$
93,217.50
Total Cash Investment
$
3,200,467,50
Debt Service
($6.790,239)
($679,024(
($679.024)
($679,024)
(5679,024)
Cash Flow
3,856,604
(247,395)
(175,457)
003,519)
003,519)
575.505
575,505
575,505
575,505
Cash an Cash Return
-B%
-5%
-3%
-3%
18%
18%
18%
18%
Cumulative Cash Row got Payback Year)
1)".
0.89B.446)
R,322.941)
Mum an Investment (Cash an Comi
Housing Assumption
Number of Units
50
Year Selling Commences
1
Absorption ((oar Year,
75
Average Unit Size
1,050
Net Saleable Arm
1,050
LBase Rate/st
$1.50
Housing Occupancy Factor
100%
Doweling Coss Assumptions
Asking Casts
3%
Opemeng Cass (%Famous)
5%
Stabilized Vacancy factor
5%
Tell
13%
Source: Kit ll Care Area Plan; winter, 2013
Page A-11 of 33
Kalispell Core Area Plan Finarreial Feasibi lly Ardysis
Table 6:
Financial Feasibility - Multifamily ResldetNal
Bulldom Year
Residemlal Development- Units
Aparrel-For Lease
Cumulative Units Available
Absorption Assumptions - %of Total
Aperanenb Real
Net Leasable Area
Grass Lease Revenue
Operating Casbl
Net Operating Income (Bemre Debt Servlae)
Test Development Coats
moral sf
Case St
Total
Debt
Equity
Interest Rate
Term
Denim Payment
Pains+Closing Casts
Tall Cash investment
Debt Service
Cash Row
Cash an Cash Realm
GumulmNe gash Flow Qnr Payback Yel
Return an Immanent g:aeh an Cash)
Houl Annual
Number of Unis
Year Salting Commences
Absorption (per YW
Average Unit Size
Net Saleable Area
Lease Ras/sl
Housing Occupancy Factor
Operating Coat Assumptbrw
Leasing Coss
Operating Costs (%Reseal
Stabilized Vacancy Factor
Total
Source: Kalispell Care Area Plan', Willdan, 2013
Year 17 To 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
101
100%
100%
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
11050
52,500
52,500
52,500
52,500
52,500
52,500
52,500
52,500
52,500
Lease RaRfsf7ma
1.06
1$237,750
661,500
661,500
661,500
661,500
561,500
661,500
661,500
Bel 500
661,500
%of Glen Loess
Revenue
-13%
(1,590,900)
(85,995)
(85,995)
(85,995)
(05,995)
(65,99W
(85,995)
185,995)
(86,995)
(65,906)
575,505
575,505
575,505
575,505
575,505
575,505
575,505
576,505
575,505
52,500
14B
$
7,768,125
60% $
4,660,875
40% $
3.107,250
7.5%
10
IS
3.107,250.00
3% $
93,217.50
$
3.200,46750
($P.7-0239,
3,856,604
575,505
575,505
575,505
575,505
575,505
575,505
575,505
575,505
575,505
18%
18%
18%
18%
18%
1B%
10%
16%
18%
(747,43)
(471 ?3311''•c
03574
,'^,87SOf9" i''u �4 `;;
...
18%
50
1
75
1.050
1.050
$1.50
100%
3%
5%
5%
13%
Page A-12 of 33
Balbpal Cue Area Plan Orendod Fe dit Amayds
Table P.
Oommmm &PmwffwPaueudlon Cat
Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr
Buldbal
Tool Cal 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12
RddD reWW
Paull- Apparel W! Soft Gadv
16,313,000 -
- 6531000 - - - - - 13,050,000
- - 2,610,000
BBbll-3atlemr4 FMWI&Full SWIM)
4,703,000
3,135,000
1,568000
9abmI
21O/0.000 -
- 853.000 - - - - 18,1mom
- - 4,lM=
OMMIDMIUMM
0moolor Leme re0 2,MOOD
365,000
1,461
MOOD
kwaaml Bafteea
AVMTds - Fa Lease 7,768,D00 - 3,884,000 - - - 3,884,000 - - - -
Low Income FbWN Tv Coedit Units 4.872,000 - - - - 4,872O - - - - -
Conoaninium 25,000 25.0D0
SebM 12885,000 - - - 3,111 - - 4,872,OOD 3,884,000 - E51000 - -
Tod Annual Omsiatchon 0 molne18 36,,236,000
Scarce: WWII Cue 0rea Plan; W1114an, 2013.
1,018,000 3,884,000 - - 0,332,000 3,854,000 16,185,000 765,000 - 4,178,000
Page A-13 of 33
3*mM CoreW Plm FYrermbl FOWW* kayd%
TOD 7:
Cmmwdd8Ile"rdYewfi lctlm CM
Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr
stowym T¢ll1Cmi 13 14 15 10 17 18 18 20 21 22 23 24 23
RON Owdom nt
Pelall-ApmWand ShcS 16,313,000 - - - - - - - - - - -
Hdail W tmant (Cmual 3 Full Se*O 4703000 - - - - -
SeOooWRdWlRPi 21.010,000
MND M Wwd
Ommil 2,555,000
xwldm3d Dmkp Wt
Apmtmente -Fer Lmae
Lax-Immne WwM Taa Cmdt lk e
Cmelominium
SUbMi
Towl Anmmd CmmrwWn lmwhwt 38,233.000
3mme: MlWdl Care Pfm Plan; Willdm, 2013.
Page A-14 of 33
Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility Analysis
Table 8:
Real Property Tax Assumptions
Before Renovation
After Rerwation
After Renovation
Business
Property
Type/Description
Total Size (sf or
units)
Taxable Value -
Land
Taxable Value -
Building
Taxable Value
- Land
Taxable Value -
Building
Incremental
Assessed Value
(Land + Building)
Total incremental
Taxes PSF After
Renovation
Sykes Supermarket/ Restaurant/Apt
commercial -
multifamily imp
3,466
695
723
1,883
4,963
3,108
0.90
Sykes Supermarket(Restaurant/Apt
mixed use- Fetal,
storage &apts
27,540
2,409
-
2,814
52,521
47,298
1.72
Sykes Supermarket(Restaurant/Apt
restaurant
7,466
2,409
4,523
2,738
8,042
7,418
0.99
Sykes Supermarket/Restaumm/Apt
retail
2,700
2,409
1,652
2,738
2,239
(1,256)
(0.47)
Appleway, Trail Arts
apts
71,320
10,665
83,733
73,068
1.02
Brannigan's Pub/Restaurant /1
restaurant/bar
13,000
7,243
5,330
(1,913)
To /2
retail
7,540
7,414
8.853
9,747
10,120
1,812
0.24
Depot Place Aide
opts
35,607
6,281
15,681
9,400
0.26
Kalispell Center Mall /3
retaiUhotel
297,696
103,023
231,119
103,023
231,119
256,192
Incremental
Assumed Averages for TIF Calculations
Assessed Value psf
Retail Development
$
0.26
Office Development
$
0.24
Apartments - For Lease
$
0.98
Low -Income Housing Tax Credit Units
$
0.90
Condominium
$
1.02
1 / Completed remodel value has not been picked up for 2013 yet. Renovation not complete as of 1 /1113. Full renovation value will be added for 2014 tax year.
2/ value only at 50% complete construction for 2013. This project has also applied for a property tax exemption.
3/ completed remodel value for 2013 still pending review
Page A-15 of 33
K ail Cam Aran Plan FEW RBesPoapyAmlyse
Tie 9:
Real Benefits at Bupdoel- Summary ofScensafos
Paclea lop wrier Program
Retail Development fall
Retail - Apparel and Solt Goods
Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)
SuUbOtl
DWa Development (30
Pesicleft DeWopment (i
Apartments; -For Lasse
Low -Income lousing Tax Credit Units
Condominium
Su6bblif
TaW teremellhlVa wMW Property Tame
Scenario 1:S ee Ow
SOMM 2: OmminWlve
UWA
Avmage Incremental
Real Prop" Tax
0enloomeas FsmmmWTamab
OereWmert IRrmnenW Tessa
OeebammR kmmmWTeeee
Vehaw
PMOMM W$ Yehle
Rao Pt"TM
Pismo
Vase
RUIRopmryTm
Pmpler"
Vane
Ree Props"Tame
$ 0,28:
- $ -
$ -
62,500 $
16,015
$ 10,998
92,500 $
23,702
$ 16,276
$. 026'
- $ -
$ -
15,000 $
3,844
$ 2,639
25000 $
6406
S 4399
- -
-
77,500
19,858
13,637
117,500
30,108
20,675
$ _'_ 024:
- $ -
$ -
17,500 $
4,208
$ 2,888
17,500 $
4,206
S 2,888
$ 0:98
- $ -
$ -
52,500 $
51,222
$ 35,175
78,750 $
76,833
S 52,783
$ 090:
- $ -
$ -
32,000 $
28,695
$ 19,705
64,000 $
57,389
S 39,411
$ 1,G21
$
$
$
$
25,000 $
21113
S 17,589
- $ -
$ -
84,500 $
79.917
$ 54,SB1
167,750 $
169,836
$ 109,762
$
$
179,50D $
11
$ 71,406
302,750 $
194,149
$ 133,326
Psaarp6me:
2013 Flathead County Millage Rate = _ UAIW2'
Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan, Wilder, 2013.
Page A-16 of 33
Kalispell Core Nee Plan Financed FearalWly Analysis
Table 10:
Recenclopnea Phasing Max 6enardon Aaeanpt!"-Sewmalo 2
Caaax®oIB
BWW AYW
Real Oewloparers
Retail - Apparel and Soft Goods
Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)
&* WRaW(60
Olica Oe1ecpmant
Raddental Development - UnBs
Apartments - For Lease
Lm-Income Housing To Credit Units
Condominium
TOW Un$s
Reaxleldtal 0aMWnWt-a
Apartments - For Lease
Lou -Income Housing To Credit Units
CUOdomedUm
TOW Ul
Masterminds! Red Property Tarlbuaaes
ROWI Oelalopmenl
Retall - Apparel and Son Golds
Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)
Subb"
Oft Berdopment
Res derelal Daelopment
ApaMrena - Far Lease
Low -Income Housing To Credit tads
Condominium
Sul
kernel Real Property To Remain
Qsnule6Ye 7arRerealw
112013 Flathead Goal Millage Rate =
Scums: Kalispell Cora Area Plan; Will 2013,
Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr at at Yr Yr Yr Yr
62,500 2.500 50,000 10,000
15,000 10.000 5.000
77,500 - - 2,500 - - - - mom - - 15,000
17,500 2,500 10,000 5,000
50 25 25
40 40
90 _ _ _ 25 _ _ 40 25
9050 52,500
80p 32,000
5;250
B4,500
ToValoe PSF
/1
$ less
$ 0124
a 098
S 086
$ 102r
6867%
26,250
32,000
26250
$ - $
- $
440 $
- $
- $
- $
- $
- $
8,798 $
- $
- $ 1,760
$ $
- $
- $
$
- $
$
- $
$
1,760 $
- $
- $ 880
- -
440
-11
-IIIIII
$
10,556 $
- $
- $ 2,639
$ - $ -
$
413 $
- 3
- $
- $
11850 $
- $
- $
825 $
- $ -
$ - $
- $
- $
17,588 $
- $
$
- $
17,588 $
- $
- $
- $ -
$ - $
- $
- $
- $
- $
- $
19,705 $
- $
- $
- $
- $ -
$ - $ - $ a52 $ 17,588 $ - $ - $ 21,356 $ 17.W8 $ 10,556 $ 026 $ - $ Z639
1,35$504 $ 852 16440 3 18440 $ 16440 $ AM $ 57,383 1 67,941 68,766 60,766 71AOB
Page A-17 of 33
KWlspol Core Area Ran Rival Ru aldlllyAni
Tabe1R
RaWalopmem Phi &Tau GenBmtlan Assumpacos- Scenario 2:
croswvdn
BuldoutYear
Rda00eaeopmem
Ratan - Apparel and Soft Goods
Retail - Reslaumm (Casual & Full Sandra)
Office Daelopmem
ResWWU Deaxsp nMA- Wit
Apartments - For Lease
lm Income Housing Tax Crack WRs
Condominium
TOW Units
RwMentiW Dovdopmi- d
Apartments - For Lease
Low -Income Housing Tax Credit Wits
Condominium
TOW Units
Inmern6eW feel "fly To Plawmas
Read DeHeopmem
Retail - Apparel and Soft Goods
Read - Restaurant (Casual & Full SwAce)
$uld"
DMse DewoRnent
RoWdN0Y DN*PR nl
Apsmnenm - For Lease
Low Income Housing Tex Credit 0nns
Condominium
Bubi
Ammd Red Property Tax Re4enues
CumuMoTARevemass
112013 Redhead County Millage Rare=
Source: Kalispell Cue Am Plan: Wlltlan, 2013.
Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr
TwValua PSF
/1
026 $ $ - $
$ - $
- $
- $
$
$
$
- $
$
- $
- -
- -
-
-
-
- $
- $
- $
- $
'$) 0.24 $ - $ - $
- $ - $
- $
- $
- s
- $
- S
- $
- $
$ 0,9B $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $
$ 090 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $
$ 102 $ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -. -_.$ --_-_$_ - $ - $ - $
-
s
71,406 71A06 71406 71406 $
71406 $
71,406 $
71,406 $
71,406 $
71,408 S
71M 71,408 $
71.406 S 71,406
66.G7%
Page A-18 of 33
Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility Analysis
Table 11:
Redawalmment Phasing &Tax Generation Assumptons - Scenario 3: Optimistic
Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr
Bull Year
Retail Development (e$
Retail - Apparel and Soft Goods
Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)
Subtotal Retail (a)
Off Ire Development (A
Residential Development (Unls)
Apartments - For Lease
Low -Income Housing Tax Credit Units
Condominium
Total Units
Reaidental Oevelopment 1=$
Apartments - For Lease
Low-income Housing Tax Credit Units
Condominium
Total Untie
Incremental Real Property Tax Revenues
Retail - Apparel and Soft Goads
Retail- Restaurant Casual &Full Service)
Subtotal Retail (sf)
Subtotal
Office Development
Residential Development
Low -Income Housing Tax Credit Units
Condominium
Total Units
Subtotal
Annual Real Property TBx Revenues
Cumulative Tax Revenues
112013 Flathead County Millage Rate =
Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan: Willoan, 2013,
T(FW Builoout 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
17,500
75
80
2,500
10,000
5,000
Tax
Vslue PSF
/1
$ 1026`: $ - $ - $ 440 $ - IS 5,279 $ - $ - $ - $ 8,798 $ - $ - $ 1,760
S 0.28. $ - $ - $ - $ $ 1,760 $ $ $ $ 1,760 $ $ $ 880
$ - $ - S 440 $ - S 7,038 S - $ - S - $ 10,558 $ - $ - $ 2,639
$-': ».024. $ - $ - $ 413 $ - It - $ - $ 1,650 $ - S - $ 825 $ - $
'$"'Z 0.98r $ -
$ -
$ -
IS 17,588 $ - $
- $ - $
- $ 17,588 $ - $ -
IS 17,588
$:+':..0.90. $ -
$ -
$ -
$ - $ - $
- $ 19,705 $
- $ - $ - $ -
$ 19,705
$ 1.02:: $ -
$ -
$ -
$ - $ $
- $ $
$ - $ 17,589 $
$
$ -
$ -
-
17,558 - $
- $ Ill $
- $ 17,588 $ 17,589 $ -
$ 37,293
$ -
$ -
$ 852
$ 17,688 $ 7,038 S
- $ 21.356 $
- $ 28,145 $ 18,414 $ -
$ 39,932
2,292,245 $ -
$ -
$ 852
18440 S 25479
25479 $ 46,834 $ 40,834 S 74,979 $ 93.393 $ 93,393
S 133,326
68,67%.
Page A-19 of 33
Kalispell Gore Area Plan Financial Feasibility Analysis
Table 11:
Redevelopmerd Phasing & Tax Generators Assumptions - SCsnar
Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr
Bulkiii Year
Retail Development (sU
Retail - Apparel and Soft Goods
Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)
Subtotal Retail (A
Office Development (0
Residential Development (Units)
Apartments - For Lease
Low -Income Housing Tax Credit Units
Condominium
Total Units
Residential Development (so
Apartments- For Lease
Low -Income Housing Tax Credit Units
Condominium
Tahl wits
III
1,050
800
1,250
Tax
Value PSF
Monumental Real Property Tax Revenues
11
Retail - Apparel and Soft Goods
Retail - Restaurant (Casual & Full Service)
$ 0.26 $ - $
- $ - $ - $
- $
- $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - E -
Subtotal Retail (s0
S 0.26 $ $
$ $ $
IS
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ -
$ubtaw
$ - $
- $ - $ - $
- $
- $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
Office Development
Residential Development
Low -Income Housing Tax Credit Units
Condominium
Total Units
Subtotal
Annual Real Property Tax Ransom
Cumulative Tax Revenues
l/ 2013 Flathead County Millage Rate =
Source: Kalispell Care Area Plan; Widan, 2013,
E 0.24 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $
E 0.90 $
- $
- $
- $
- $ -
$ - $
- $
- $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ 0.90 $
- $
- $
- $
- $ -
$ - $
- $
- $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ -1.02 $
$
$
- $
- $
$ - $
- $
$
$ $
$ $
$
- $
- $
- $
- $
$ -
- $
- $
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$
- $
- $
$
$
$ $
$
$
$ IS
$ $ -
$ 133,326 $ 133,326 $ 133,326 $ 133,326 $ 133,326
$ 133,326 $ 133,326 $ 133,326 $ 133,326
$ 133,326 $ 13%326
133,326 $ 133,326
66.67%
Page A-20 of 33
Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility Analysis
Table 12:
Liner Pak Implementation Strategy: $Dorcas $ Wes of Funding
Potential Funding
Sources
Omer Gram
Other Gram
PrNate/Non-Prottt
Funding
CIM of Kalispell
Private/Non-PmIB
Funding City of Kalispell
Phasing
Core Area linear Park improvement
Unit TM
Unft Gam
I&Ita
Total CM
(%of Toul)
I%of Tomg
(%of Tphg
(1s41b
(fatal S) (row $)
(so year)
Summary of Sources and We of Funding
$4,452.354
6%
6%
88%
$231,600
$247,500 S3,923,254
1 Umr Pak WrafTasaram Pnawsdsn
BWRoµ Iy avms IXaaRWdawlers feed in Clay of Kalial
re rag bm" merfammp
legal Fes $
5,000
1 $
5AW
0%
0%
100%
SO
SO $5,000
1-3
2 linear Park Fmemnrrei 6111emerba%n
Pham1 S
51000
1 S
5,0110
0%
100%
0%
$0
$5,00G SO
O'IrkmNnmW asessurrenl
Phasell S
50.000
1 $
5C,W0
0%
100%
0%
$0
MOOD $3
1-3
$
55.000
$
- $
58000 S -
BNSF rsrwLS$ rtcytis raps S Bs 11 rod 17.20D $ - 100% 0% 0% $0 $0 SO 1-3
4 Pakmster Plan
Smeics S 20.000 1 $ 20.000 0% 0% 1DD% S3 SD S2C.OD0 1-3
Page A-21 of 33
Kagapee Care Area Ran Fancied Feaabilgy Anaiyab
Tabb 12:
unaer Pork llnplam6gadon Shell Scheme& Uses of Funding
PomrnW Fuoding Salaam
Other Grand
Other Great
FrNate/ Non Profit
Funding
city Of Ke I
NMI NomProBt
Funding
Cry of $all I
Phaeln9
Core Area Llnanr Park lmuroaament
UnIt Time
Unit Goof
Units
Total Cast
1%Of Taff
I%Of Tamp
iofT taq
(TOW $)
(row $)
(Foblm
(Pinyear)
Summery of Spureas and Uaes of Funding
$4,452,354
6%
6%
88%
$281,600
$247,500
$3,11".254
5 Installadbnof Shared Use Tell
Shared al fall anedruchon(concrele)
$Alrlearh If
45.00
17,200 $
T74,000
0%
0%
100%
$0
$0
$774000
dlghllrg-Poke
$Hole If
4,400
45 S
isill
0%
0%
100%
$0
$u
$19l
Lbera - Bull
SrOdbrd $
2200
45 $
99,000
0%
0%
100%
$0
$0
$99OM
Electrical wiling
Selnearit If
1.74
17.200 $
MON
0%
0%
10D%
SO
$0
11300W
4-6.
Intel
'.iit $
030
619.20D $
111l
0%
0%
lDD%.
SO
SO
S1115160
Sol $ask
$yagft $
0.19
Still 0 If
114,552
0%
0%.
100%
$0
SO
$114552
These 80arennhb
'. smwit $
1.31
If 17.200 IS
22,500
0%
0%
1Op%
$O
0
Ill
-150ft
11
1,423,B12
$
— $
1,423812
6 Berjdel Trailhead Cra lnn Polnan,
Thing lmploynnenls to NGude
Tell banres to hackers: gra6lginevinDfawal site amergka (seating). biased signal 8 warbling lunded by pumb and private ovonal rightayspom shill
Neth $ Fast Canneebn: COnnav: Wmdland Park $Iawreare Park via BN Highway 2wepma [Kallapell Safeway H96WI
4-6
West Cormier: Connect the Wall Trail in the Win Iran vm a now ball herd at Want Sill Avenue yM
South Connector: Cenral the KIP m Sere"Halheed Lake
S4roilmed $ 15.000 4 $ 60.000
50%
0%
50%
$30000
$0
$30001)
] Kalispell Galexay Brbge
Matins Irnawemenb $Mt S 100 600 $ 6QOOD
0%
IN%
0%
SO
$0000
$0
teeing $dims, it S 125 330 $ 37.500
0%
100%
0%
$O
$37.600
-. $O 4-6..
talks!soll Wsipn S 15.000 1 If 15.00D
0%
100%
0%
SO
$15.000
$0
aigrette $ 112.500
SO
$112.500
) SO
B WP Traglof
kepINPek
Initial ®bmcannese ipreand by Bnan
$Aomi $
150A00
1 $
1M.00D
150%
0%
(N6
$
150,ODOiff
$0 $
-
rramd
h�n.
n, s¢uriry, amenitles teantlaS,
two. security,
park sitepat
Shlle $
50,000
1 $
50,000
50%
0%
50%
$
2$000
$0 S
25,000 4-6
salads onsts
8lnorpretigve dgwge rags
8
200,OOD
If
175,000 $
- S
25,000
9 WP Trail Real- Apphwvay Trail Senior Oubmr Rims Park
Instigation of market sblbn amelgian:
legal lees $
2,500
1 $
2,500
0%
0%
100%
$
SO S
2,500
site acaerlton two conked to nOn-prafia
$hide S
33,600
1 IS
MAN
100%
0%
D%
$
33.6W
$0 $
-
camor Ifterear, equirweend M
Sung, S
9,000
2 $
111=
100%
0%
0%
$
law
$0 $
- 4-6 -`
ranhooma iahoml blew)
SNallwod $
5.000
2 $
10,000
100%
0%
0%
$
10,000
$0 If
waylindirg slpnagelhailmnd
S
64.150
$
Gil $
- $
2500
10 winegrowers Flathead Eleenic Cal Pork
Phase I B I Erninn ere rs!
Is
5.000
1 $
5,00D
0%
100%
0%
If
$
5,000 $
Phase lll$ U Enamona dal
$
S0000
1 If
5(.00D
0%
100%
0%
$
- $
50,000 $
land acWldlhn(donation or excherge TB0)
$!acre S
-
2 S
-
100%
0%
aiP
If
$
$
46 -
weakness
Sn 14 $
15,000
1 $
15,000
100%
0%
0%
$
15'" $
$
parking lyolareey to he shared with FEC) IS
$1polirg on $
10.000
1 If
1000D
0%
0%
100%
$
- $
$
Tol
tmilhead
9
4.000
1 $
4,OOD
0%
096
100%
$
$
$
4000
$
M,00D
If
Ill If
55,000 $
140p0
Page A-22 of 33
Warned Core Area Plan FnancWl Feasibility Analysis
Table 12:
LRmm Park IlnPwmema8on SbetegT: Sourl & them of Funding
Potenbal Funding Sources
ONm Grant
OUsr grant
PrtmW/Non-PrAn
Funding Cry
of l(alls0e11
PMeta/Non-Pmgt
Funding
City of Kellvell
Final
Case Area Llnesr Park l_mgroyement
Umt TYm Ung Cost
Units
Total Cut
Ce Of TOM
Mof TO" (%OfTowg
(raw 0)
(raw 11
Raal$1
(Plan YO O
Summery of Somme WUms of Funding
$4,452.354
6%
6%
88%
$281,500
$247,5(0
$3,923,254
lji�atlmgiammtlg Wruj:
11 Petlepulseb
Pedanensamy fineam (armsNg Bgpsf at.
.ra rims)
SNAvmm EN
$7ero51ng $ 596,850
1 $
595.650
0%
0%
100%
S -
$ -
$ 598,850
JNAwnm VrN
ywmirg $ 705,691
1 $
705A91
0%
0%
100%
$
S
$ 70]08091091
710
1 $
1,303,941
$ -
S -
$ 1,303,941
(MAMuem
ymassirm
629,460
1 S 529,460
0%
0%
100%
$ - $
- $
629,460
Bm Avem¢IM1N
1boser4l S
444,541
1 S 444,541
0%
0%
100%
3 $
$
444,541 7-10
S 1,014,001
-
$ - $
- $
1,974p01
13 IgP T2B FmWm- Nalapep Cmler Mal Cbtls Tower Plaza
sVeNsmpeuP9radmam pedmlrwnpWm
Nd
tbdMe
100%
0%
0%
3 -
SO $
-
tlev,:kpermutrmre5ccrkWwmmmins:fim
and
lreded
Ira
ma
106%
9%
0%
$
y s
7-10
inmdonla, Ina mrmninetl y91e $50,000 1 $ 50.000 0% 50% 50% $ - S 25,000 $ 25= 710
PB:mcBng Rmzotaclm-PMaeemmrxegr vackant Canter
BN S -
100% 0% 0% S
- S
$ -
PmfmOubeam3msds-mretm qr medcW mnmmiry SfArurdy Career
Nd $ -
100% U% 0% $
- S
$ - 7-10
Pmm.Vana gPam SAthily Center
gal $ -
100% 0% 0% $
$
$
$
S
S -
es BNGP net of imn value ri be daermimtl.
arn to kengi8cn
2J nearness,
2/Unear erkarea tenter as Wnp-Wrm Imse wrth All Families LLC for censercmmdons
e
3/linear Park area assumaz', cnglh
17,2
wldlh
no 6o
IOWl area (sq. k)
1,0,560
m_IVaae
4545,523
saes
23
Tim Park aWlemmemsVeua
1,200.00
Annual Malrmrence Coal:
ZI,182
4/ParkWA mats polBMlalfy Wmcd bYge�d trmn BmndW laSa/aiy
W Amwwav Seror Fit ee8 Center assumes rase eslimeWs omaimd Ink Ularmil Atluams lMll.
S.rsrem.
Source: City of kaliseli BNSF BaAvayMATCO Mission M mmin Palmed; FlaNmd sagely Emiomc Omelea ent Anthony-, Men, 2013
Page A-23 of 33
Table 13:
Kalispell Core Area Plan Financial Feasibility Analysis
Summary of Linear Park Development Costs and Phasing Recommendations
Linear Park Environmental Remediation
BNSF Track Removal
Park Master Plan
Installation of Shared Use Trail
Subtotal
7 Kalispell Gateway Bridge
8 KLP Trail Feature - Depot Park
9 KLP Trail Feature - Appleway Trail Senior Outdoor Fitness Park
10 KLP Trail Feature - Flathead Electric Co -Op Park
11 Pedestrian Crossing Upgrades (Railroad Conversions)
Subtotal
13 KLP Trail Feature - Kalispell Center Mall Clock Tower Plaza
14 Woodland Park Amphitheater
15 Health, Wellness, Sustainability Programming
Subtotal
Source: City of Kalispell; Willdan, 2013.
Private! Non-Profd
1P
$ 175,000
$ 61,600
$ 15,000
$ 281,600
Other Grant
55,000 $
$ 20,000
$ 1,423,812
$ 112,500
$ 55,000
$ 167,500
$ 25,000
$ 2,500
$ 14,000
$ 1,303,941
$ 1,375,441
Total Cost
$ 55,000
$ 20,000
$ 1,423,812
$ 1,503,812
$ 112,500
$ 200,000
$ 64,100
$ 84,000
$ 1,303,941
$ 1,824,541
$ $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $
$ $ 25,000 1,099,001 $
50,000
1,124,001
Page A-24 of 33
Kohl Com Am Plan FlnenNal FesslaltayAANysis
Table 14:
Weal Side TF Mind Pr*ctlms: Smnedo 1 -Soon Om
anplemffWm Year
TIF YEAR
Bass, Year Value
Onm1h Rare
Testae Properly Veto
Total
lueso e
Increment
BpWg Desolater Payment
Ranalnhrt TIF Revenues
6YIm1196ve Value
OunenlTlFVaNe
QlmUNIM Val6ntuft cunentTlq
Come Area Plan Cos%
Rai Served ln&% ial Pate
Core AmLb mr Park
Suamal
Owe Area Plan FlramSa Fezal Anall
BF Fund {Balance Fomard)
Incremental TIF Revenues (baseline)
Incremental Tares: New De /Rarkuelopmam
Rail Solved Industrial Park Costs
Core Area Linear Park Costs
TIF FW* RSMWkg
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 292D 2021
0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
11,551,896
MLIMA
407.838 815,670 1,223,514 1,631,352 2039,190 2447,028 2,854,866 3AZI04 SM.542
3,020,649 3,478,487 3,99i,325 094,163 4,854001 5,3011,839 5,797,977 ORM515 6,883,353
(2,676454)
(41,500) (1,303,941) (1,074,001) (25,000)
Qxmm e
2562811
2,562,811 2,970649
702,033
(336,941)
38,897
405,235
(490,868)
(1,157.031)
(774,193)
9,788,112
407,838 407,838
407,838
407,838
407,838
407,838
407,838
407,838
407,838
(2,676,454)
- (2,676,454)
.
139232541
- -
(1,446.812)
(30,000)
(41,5D5)
(1,303,941)
(1,074,001)
(25,000)
-
5,751,215 $
297g64R $ 702,033
(888,941) $
X897 $
4IM235 4
mom It
0,157,0m) $
M19% $
WAR
2013 Flathead County Allage Raw = 0.68672
Sourm. Kalispell Care Area Plan; Wilton, 2013.
Page A-25 of 33
(eapeg Coe Area Plan Financial Feastellay Analysis
Table 14:
Wedsldew restrict Nations: Sceccdo 1 - Blame Duo
hnMamenhtlon Year
TIFYFAA
Bw Yam Value
GnxAh Rate
Taxable Properly Value
Tom
Incmaee
Increment:
BmIti g DeMopor Payment
Remaining TIF Rmw
CunuMAc Value
Cimem TIF Value
CumumB.e Value Occluding camera TlF
Care Neer Ran Coss
Fell Send Industrial Park
Cme Area MnemPads
SuMuaI
Cam Neer Han Financial Feae6bAna"
TIF Fund (Balance Forward)
Incremental TIF Revenues (Baseline)
Incremental Taxes: New Dw/Rederelapment
Rail Saner Industrial Pant Costs
Cam Neer lunar Park Costs
TIF FUMs Romadnhg
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 18
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
11,661,896
(50,000)
(50,000)
(50,000)
(50,000)
50,000)
150,000)
(50UD0)
(50.000)
407,830
407,836
407,838
407,838
407,838
407,83E
407,83E
407,838
4,076,380
4,400,218
4,694,050
5,301,894
6,709,732
s117,570
6,54,408
6,883,246
2,562,811
7,141,191
7,599,029
8,056,867
8.514,705
8,972,543
B,4 D=
8,888,218
10,346,057
(2,676,454)
(3 923 254)
(6,599,708)
CumdiSNe
2,562,811
(366,355)
41,483
449,321 857,159
1,264,997 1,672,835 2.080,673
2,488,511
9,788,112
407,838
407,838
407,838 407.838
407,B38 407,83B 407,83B
407,838
(2,670,454)
-
-
- -
- - -
-
(3923254)
-
-
-
- - -
6,751,216 $
41,483 S
449,,321 $
857,159 S 1,264,997
1,672,E35 S 2,DSO,673 S 2,488.511 i
2,RII&M:
Aseump8ow
2013 nalhead County Millage Pale = 0.8R672
Source: Kalispell Care Area Plan', Willdan, 2013.
Page A-26 of 33
Kalispell Cone Area Plan Pomndal FeaslbillMAnaWs
Table 14:
West Site TIF District Projections: Barbara 1 - Stelm Quo
Implementation Year
]IF YEAR
Base YemVan
(0a44h Rah
Taxable Pmpmly value
TOW
Increase
Increment
Expiring Developer Payment
Remalnag TIF Farina
Cumulative View
CuneMTIFValue
Correlates Value lindwlln0 correct TIF)
Care Area Plan Career
Roll Send 1n0ecl0al Park
Core AreallnearP&k
SublmM
Care Am Plan Financial FaM4MNealpls
TIF Fund ((Balance Forward)
Increnranrm TIF Resarns (Baseline)
Incremental Term: Nees Ceallmseve[opmen
Rail Served Industrial Park Costs
Cam Area Linear Park Costs
11F Feel Rival
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036
0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
11,551,896
(50.000)
(50,00%
150,0Om
(50,000)
(50,000)
(50,OOD)
00.00
407,838
407,838
407,838
407,838
407,830
407338
407,833
7.341,054
7,748,922
8,15B,760
8,504,598
8,972AW
9.380274
9,788,112
2XZ811
10,803,895
11281,733
11,719,571
12,177,409
12,835,247
13,093,0%
13,650,923
(2,676,454)
(3923254)
A599,70Bj
Guntim"
2.562,811
2,898,349
3,3D4,187 3,712,025 4.119,863 4,527,701 4,935,539 6343,377
9,788,112
407,830
407,B313 407,83E 407,838 407,838 407,838 407.838
(2,676,454)
-
- - - - -
(3,923.254)
-
- - - - - -
6,751,215 $
3,304,181 $
3,712,0P5 $ 4,119,863 S 4,527.701 $ 4,926,539 S 5,343,377 S 5,751,215
Assam wire,
2013 Rameaa County Mllage Rate - 0.68672
Source: Kalispell Core Area Plan; Wildan, 2013.
Page A-27 of 33
NWgfe0C eA Phn Fr fflF IIIMA Woe
Me 15:
Weel $Ma TF OYMM ka)w5wuo, Saen Wo 2 - ConumAM
PW Yr.
TFI
B Yw YYue
6 We
Tmble Plop"Yalue 11,S1,BS8
TeW
1'.
nemmmt
EW d.R Oewhper PWr
Ib *g TF Maw
CumuWMYeha
C .MTFYMee 25@Ai1
Oumandre Value@,e Wlnpeuo Tq
407,838 BIkm 1,22$.514 IA31M 2.09,1W 2.447= 2454MO 3282704
2.W.W Sma. 7 3786825 4,194,183 4,W2W1 WAN 5,417,97 5,B25,515
Ca Am PWlRwoWFpabftA4Wo9
Oam*m
TFWnditle.Fa 4 S
2,582.011 $
2,W,Sll $
2$n,849 S
702033 $
(33808q 8
58.189 $
Inemmmhl TF Pemloee(Ree Ie)
970$112 $
4W,838 $
407AB $
407,8M S
407838 $
4W,638 $
Irf ffltel Tm :New 00Al bpmenl
1,287,W6 $
- $
- $
852 S
18440 $
18,449 $
NallS lneWllMPelk Cable
(2.M.454) 3
-
(2,616,454) S
- $
- $
- 3
GeffmllnwP AC
(3.923.2541 $
$
S
(lA48812 $
(34OM $
(4150q S
TF Ponds HemeWn9
7MUIS $
2$]Oan S
702A33 $
Mom $
551M S
412P68 $
As..I .
2013FhIbeWCa*Mlh WM=
0bB822
Saulm:NMepep CaeAm Phn; WPMen, W13.
442,968 S (434169q S n,081,063)
407.838 $ 407,838 $ WAS
1B,440 $ 39,7W $ 57.M3
$ $
Pape A-2B of 33
Wsol Bore Area Plan PuarwffiI FmNltt An*y
Tech 15:
Wep51$a TF OWM PrepWcn: SOMtt10 2- CenearMM
PYnW.
T6 VEAR
Base YearValue
6mwNRda
Tamale HaRaMYahre
TOW
nmemant
B*Wry lanerPry d
ReaaWWVFRe.n.
W .leWYe VaI.
cprremnPVW.
Cu6ubtlae Value QntlWin9 curem T$j
fareW.Hm R.FasW$ k.W
n NW(BeW Farwad)
MaemenW TIF R.m (B.1W)
Mememel Ta :New OwRieE Oprrmnt
CoreA ¢ Lhear Pal Pah B49a
Cora Wm Lal.r Pak Coble
WFun6e Remelnn9
11A51,B36
2662All
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1B 18
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 w 202E MR 2030
A 0% 0% 0% A 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
3,B70,512 4.B1B3B0 4,486,218 4,OKM 5A01,804 5,709,M 8,117,570 5,525,408 6.933248 7,341A54
Q2q.353 6.641,191 7,".M 7,458,887 7AKM5 %M,643 8,6R0.9B1 9A6g219 9A96A57 9A03A95
Oare9tl1.
$ 2,562,Bll $
i6mm1) $
045AB2) $
331,542 $
M8,1M $
1,287390 $
1,766,633 $
220.M $
2725,121 S
3.204,384 S
3.663,808
9.M.112 $
407.MB $
407,83B $
9C,838 $
407838 f
407A38 $
497,838 $
407,A16 $
467A3B $
407,838 $
407838
1,287,098 9
67,941 $
KN6 $
66766 $
71,406 $
71,406 f
71,406 $
71,406 $
71,406 $
71p0B $
71,406
(2,676, 54) $
- $
- $
- $
- $
$
- $
- $
$
- $
-
f3923.2541 $
- $
- $
- $
- $
- $
- $
- $
- $
- $
-
'7.0g313:..S
MAP
-M A42
A6B,10, $
1,287AW $
1,795,633 $
2.245A77 $
2.723,121 $
3AB4,364 $
3.683,60E %
4,162A51
Amgpu=
M13 FW .d Ca" Maape Rae= $898/2
Warta: Wepel Wra Wee FYB WMd.. 2013.
1§9e A-29 W 33
U40 Cm Nee Plea FWm tW FenUftA elyaM
T&d 15:
NYeI &tle Tff ONMM ProJactlmu: &aurl9 2 - Cmuervetlw
Plan Yr.
TFVFPA
GU Pww
TamUhlnPm
6m . No
aay Vekrn
TM
Mmen e
MmemeM
ft M.IBTIF Poyment
Remalnlrq TlFReremu
cwlwB VYM4
CuuunFVuce
CuMetlre W lee 6nduB1A curaM nq
Cme W Plan FMm d) AmNaN
IF Wna 81aWce Fawxtll
Memeri W TF Nauenuro �meFe1
Maam4mel TMceM: New Davfiekrebpment
BaesMmMaMAWau PeacCras
Cou Area hear Park Coos
nF WnavPerrebkq
W
21
22
29
24
0
m
2W2
2W9
2A34
2W5
2098
A
094
0Ye
n
0%
O
1y651,BW —
12218,SB9
12218,599
12,218599
12,218599
12218.599
12,218.09
12.218.599
12.218599
12.218599
12.218.599
12218.99
12.218599
666.7W
666.703
666.708
W6.7W
668703
666,M3
457,838
457,838
457,8W
457,8W
457,838
457.W6
W,000)
MAR
MAW80oc)
MAM
MAO
4W,8W
407,08
407,836
407,838
407,838
407,838
7,748,922
8,1587W
&5 km
B,T12A38
9.368274
%MB,112
2,662A11
10AI1,733
10,719,671
11,127,100
11,536,247
11,MA5
12,35%=
Clenuuk2
$ 2,562,811 $
4,152,&51 S
4,642,N5 $
5,121,339 $
5,600,582 $
6,09,826 $
6,559,070
9,788,112 3
407,838 $
407,W8 S
4W,82 8
407,8M 8
407,83B $
407,83B
1,287,M $
71,Q6 $
71.W6 $
71,406 $
71,4W $
71,406 8
71,406
T..WB,313
AMUW
M RMtlreaa CgM6VWlw P21e= ll B
Smme: Bu "ll CAre NMe PMn: MU 2013,
Page H�30 M 33
6WWWI Care Am PM FlemMal N"W*Arms@
Tells 18:
W SWWCBB1A1ftjMWOSw 3-0pI
%m W.
1FIFAR
fiwYw Velue
BwMRW
Tsr01a %aPe�bNAm
Told
Au FryIT4 Cwe menl
NmMIry IFH.Reerue
WmuNW.Vtlue
Pm TFV.W.
WmWe Niue On[Y61nA4 TR)
Wre M6fhnC
R61I8RNAAWIM061m
Cw Mr UFwhM
aml
11A61,6$8
2,562.811
WAS 816,67B 1,226A11 1,831,362 2,O.W,IM 24471M 2,684A66 8,262,704
MO." R816,47 3,M6AN 4,194,1B8 4,602.0M $.OWAW 5A1W 6AMb16
R.616454) R.616,4547
13,023,2N3 IIA488127 IMP (41W0 UIPMP41) 11M40M1 MO
�b66,MB1 R.616A51) IT�� 21 flII.NN 141.SOW 1136i.9111 fl➢id 0611 . LtlW
Care MU PAn%nreW FrWWiq AUIpF
WrYM
R FNbel6n(amei0
S
2W88.112 $
2,562,811 $
2,910,649
A
$
10$.838 $
d01A3B
.WTlA.enum(BaWine)
IremenW imu'.Nr0eMletlwNpnert
$
$
2.158,919
2.676,49) $
$
Ril BaveAYtlm®I PeM Wsm
$
12.616,4547
-
Q6I6,4541
CRekr WmPek Cstls
$
13923 2591 $ $
$
11FftnN RarMA
MUM $
2AM.649 6
M.M
" W, 9
o�V",
O.M72
mo,2
Mom $ P'Som1 $ MASS 3 450,006 $ 020,61%S (1,039,MT7
407,e98 $ 40i838 $ 407 MB $ 407,8M S 407,838 $ 401,836
852 $ 1844o $ Z479 $ 254N S 46,834 $ 46,Su
$ a s s s
4488I4 a fJ0,W01 $ [41$oW $ (1 a0a941] S 1,074,001) f QS,OOm
Pe aA310133
?MVBII NmN PYn Fhanc%l Fre Illa'PMly&
TEN 15:
W.k See ¶F Rbbw PBoleNon.: 3umalo 3 -NthWk
PMYr.
iFIFM
RBBBYBRM
gm Tm,
Pupey Nlu
T6Yl
hmemem
2M10n90NBINUPo6m601
R0meh091FR0wnue
a 0 9MVFRvame
W0
N.M.re Nme Qnmwh9 Bumm Tlq
WeM PW W&
RM SanW IWINYI P®k
CaaRm LheW PeN
aemM
64re MaPMnF FeuWSb Me59k
IF WnOWaMpFmgMrM J
nmWNnTmoam9BWBu9ceJ
nmY119Bsixxe: R]4' 0%4ktl W iµNnl
Ihi Scree YNeEw PW Vb
Corebee Lisa Polk Crae
TIFM6R mm
11,661,M6
2.5R2e11
R$764Eq
P9232641
W.M9,i0B1
9,61g5@ 4.0Te,9M 4AN.216 4,M . M UMM 5.TM.7n 61117.570 UMAO0
@=.an e,e4l,1N 2A46029 7,459,Be2 7105o.706 9.N24tl 0.600,061 91066,219
N wWft
S 2,5M,011 S
ISIO,D5) S
p27,4591 S
373,R4 S
875.005E
1,416,10 $
1,99.333 S
2,490,497 $
3,On,6M
$ 9,109112 $
407,n0 $
07,Bn $
401330 S
40I.036 $
407m $
47,030 $
401,030 $
407SU
S 2IM 919 $
74,979 S
0330 S
93.393 S
133,326 $
1333N S
133.325 $
133926 $
1333n
S R,676454 E
- $
- $
- $
- $
- $
- E
- $
-
S 139232541 $
$
$
$
$
$
S
$
7410.1M 5
RUAR 5
3n.774 S
US= 5
1.416.1M E
1.9513M 5
2.M.497 S
3A3Im 4
: ):3,6M.964.
RuugtlonB:
2013Fb Cw MlmeR - em"
3 :9aw Wrap aAwwllk§n.2013,
Page AS2of33
FedapNl Cw. bee Plan Financial FmMllry Amanda
TaN, 1&
Vdsl Via IF 0Wk1 ftj. p :$wnado 3-opftsdc
R.W.
T6 Man
6¢w Ya%,WW
6toem nn
TmNa PnPom Klu
TohJ
mw.wa
mO
Fyklwlry ,TFRan Ppnwit
Rem.mmpnFRmru.
6a.Mfflw Vale
6a94rei calla.
C9Rnlv6w VOW. pndWing omatd 719
Eon Alw Pan Con
Rell Served lnkemel Pak
We Am Linear Pak
9uemml
Len Arw Pfm FFlenoW iwN0Bdy1461p1e
t6 FW BYnw Fomatl)
livemnW sRMPaw pluelmq
6v¢ Rail a,M kaAXaNa ePwaHk Q
,na
kaatkmPMma
IF Fund, wrnmp PliwN
11,551,8BB
2,552,811
Q816AU)
130232541
1B,5BB,]00)
C hfillw
R anptl6v
ID13FatliwBCwNankea RYem O.atlT2
Sdew', 8akpell Cae Nea Pb.WRl�n, 2013.
619331246 7A41,W4 i,]N,922 B,1BB.IW S.M'a86 8Al2,438 B,3&],274 6,78&112
9Aeep67 9,903,895 toAil,i39 10,111571 11.127A09 1t A06,24] 11A43A86 12A6oA63
3580,824 $ 4121999 $ g663, 152 $ 5,204,915 1 5,I0.5p79 $ 6MM3 $ 8,021,807 $ 7368,9]0
Q7838 $ 4078A8 $ 407B30 $ 407.838 $ 407.839 $ 407,898 $ 407,838 $ 407,838
133326 $ 133326 $ 133326 $ 133,326 E 133,326 $ IMA26 $ 133,326 $ 133326
Page A33 of 33
Annex B: Public Park/Recreation Development
Opportunities - Case Studies
The Core Area is centrally located to substantial open space, parks,
designated wild life areas and recreational areas. Woodland Park is a
valuable community amenity, providing the community with active and
passive recreation offerings.
if the rail tracks were to be removed, the Core Area is poised to be
Kalispell's central connective spine, providing safe pedestrian and bike
trail access to regional trailheads to the North, South, East and West.
To evaluate a range of potential programming uses for the proposed
Kalispell Linear Park, the Willdan project team conducted case study
research to find examples of low -capital intensity, revenue producing
public amenities that could be developed within strategic "bump out"
nodes within the park plan area.
Willdan conducted research to identify relevant examples to develop a
profile of the capital investment costs, operating costs and revenues,
annual attendance requirements for such a public amenity. Willdan
researched a range of conceptual uses to develop case study examples
of facilities which might be determined appropriate as redevelopment
concepts including:
Nature Education Centers
• Events Venue/ Outdoor Pavilion Facilities
Greenbelt Trail Services and Amenities
Based on Willdan's review of the potential land uses and the City of
Kalispell's objectives to create a low -capital and low operating cost
approach to furthering the revitalization objectives of the Core Area
Plan, the following case study profiles were researched to provide high-
level "Lessons Learned" for the City's consideration of future
improvements to integrate the Linear Park land to adjacent
commercial/mixed uses:
• Portland Trails, Maine
Potomac Overlook Regional Park Nature Center, Arlington,
Virginia
• Carolina Thread Trail & Cawtaba Lands Conservancy, North
and South Carolina
Portland Trails, Maine
Willdan evaluated several greenbelt park/trail systems in the United
States to evaluate the typical services, amenities, and operating
structures. The Portland, Maine Trail maintains a 50-mile network of
trailsinGreater Portland. Portland Trails offers "Lunch & Learns" to
businesses and organizations in greater Portland in which staff travel
to area businesses or they lead a Guided Trail Walk to educate
employees about Portland Trails, the trail network, current projects.
Portland Trails is also involved in school ground greening projects for
students. Portland Trails collaborates with the Portland Public Health
Department on a worksite fitness program for employees of area
businesses.
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 60
*
Last year over 1,000 people from 15 companies participated in the
program. The purpose of the program is to encourage the use of the
trails and awareness of the urban open spaces available for recreation
and alternative transportation. The campaign markets Portland's
opportunities for exercise in a scenic environment. Portland Trails also
offers a range of events open to the public including guided trail walks
with historical background, information on flora and fauna, and the
trail -building process among other topics.
Potomac Overlook Regional Park Nature Education Center,
Arlington, Virginia
The Potomac Overlook Regional Park (PORP) Nature Center, managed
by the Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority, was established to
provide residents and visitors with direct access to local historic and
natural resources. The PORP site features unique interpretive exhibits
housed within the nature center and woodland trails that lead through
natural areas. Potomac Overlook Regional Park offers three miles of
wooded trails and staff -led experiential learning programming just five
miles from the center of Washington, D.C. The buildings and grounds
are free and open to the public year round.
The PORP Nature Center was opened in 1974. The initial capital
investment costs were not available as the Nature Center facility is a
1,500 square foot preexisting reconverted historic bungalow house.
Capital costs for maintenance and repair construction of the current
park shelter/comfort station, auditorium, outdoor amphitheater and
pavilion, and solar energy conversions is estimated at $100,000.
Annual operating costs are approximately $265,000 (primarily for staff
costs), of which approximately $20,000 is committed to annual capital
costs for path maintenance, way finding, marketing, and signage.
With annual attendance in the range of 25,000 visitors generate
approximately $40,000 in operating revenues, primarily from birthday
parties, weddings, canoe trips, and auditorium/shelter rentals.
Elementary school groups also visit the Center as part of curriculum
field trips for a modest fee.
The park is anchored by its nature education center, a retrofitted mid-
20th century home from which PORP staff operate a range of
community and environmental stewardship programs.
The Nature Center includes a wide range of interconnected
sustainability education programs/messaging boards, including:
• Energerium: The main floor exhibit is devoted to exploring
the interconnectivity of energy and living systems.
• Auditorium: The bottom floor auditorium holds up to 50
people (open for birthday parties and other private functions)
and features plant and animal exhibits.
• Environmental Stewardship and Cultural Programs:
Several environmental organizations, including Arlingtonians
for a Clean Environment and the Arlington Regional Master
Naturalists, are regular park stewards. In addition, the Nature
Center regularly hosts school groups, scout groups, and local
companies in educational programs including:
• Volunteer Work Days (monthly, first Saturday) with indoor
and outdoor projects around the park
Kalispell Core Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 61
• Annual Earth Day Celebration (April 17) where volunteers
plant trees and milkweed for monarch butterflies
Open House & Heritage Festival (May 2), including music, food,
exhibits, and games
Free Summer Concerts (starting May 22) offering Saturday
evening performances.
Figure 40: Potomac Overlook Regional Park Environmental Stewardship
Programming
Carolina Thread Trail & Cawtaba Lands Conservancy, North and
South Carolina
Another example of a potential public investment that would serve to
leverage the City of Kalispell's natural resources is the use of trail head
and park branding/identification signage along the Carolina Thread
Trail in North and South Carolina.
Carolina Thread Trail is a network of regional trails that covers 15
counties in North and South Carolina. The goal is to link regional
attractions, provide a place to experience a wide range of recreational
activities such as walking, bicycling, and picnicking. Since the project
was announced in 2007, local businesses have donated $50,000 in
signage and services. Because the project uses many existing trails,
some of which are already branded with their own community's
identity, the challenge became identifying the Thread Trail in
cooperation with the existing identity - not instead of it.
Figure 41: Carolina Thread Trail Park Identification Signage
Area Market & Feasibility Analysis Page 62
0
Working in conjunction with the Carolina Thread Trail, the Catawba
Lands Conservancy, and a local designer the project team designed and
installed multiple sign types to be used along the trails to further the
trail community brand. The City of Kalispell should consider the Core
Area Revitalization Plan process as an opportunity to adopted a refined
community brand that could be further extended throughout the
Kalispell Linear Park trail and the downtown Main Street, purposely
connecting to a range of the proposed redevelopment options and
programming opportunities by providing way finding, "wellness'
information, recycling and sustainability messaging, or other
community services (potentially at the Meridian Road/Appleway Trail
comfort station).
Based on a survey of a community trails in the United States reported
by Rails to Trails (www.railstotrails.org), the trails can serve as a
connector to a wide variety of income generating services and
amenities, including:
Restaurants Water
Grocery Stores Restrooms
• Camping Sites Phone
• Bike Shop Repair/Bike Rental Internet
• Vending/Retail Souvenirs/Gifts
• Visitors Bureau Medical Services
Shuttle Parking
These uses provide a range of capital and operating intensity
alternatives that could be employed at the proposed Meridian
Road/Appleway Senior Recreation Comfort Station. The higher the
programming/staffing intensity, the higher the need for quality
branded wayfinding signage throughout the trail system to drive traffic
(and earned revenue) to the center.
& Feasibility Analysis Page 63