Missoula council annexes 1-acre Flynn Lane parcel, approves amended development agreement for 170-unit 55+ community

The City of Missoula on April 21 unanimously annexed a 1-acre parcel at 2100 Flynn Lane and rezoned it B2-1 (community business), and separately approved an amended and restated development agreement with the property owners that clears the way for a 170-unit, age-restricted (55+) multi-dwelling development by the Inland Group.

Dave DeGrandpre, planning supervisor with the City of Missoula Development Services Office, told council the annexation tract is “1 acre in size and is described as Tract 1 of Certificate of Survey number 5023,” and is surrounded by existing city limits and city rights-of-way. He said the city’s staff recommended approval of annexation and zoning but proposed two conditions of approval tied to on-site street improvements and right-of-way dedication.

The actions matter because the annexation and the amended and restated development agreement are linked: the development agreement’s amendments are contingent on annexation and rezoning. The agreement updates a 2019 master plan and would allow the developer to consolidate Area C for an active-adult (55+) community and to increase density in that area, in exchange for a cash contribution to the city’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund and required public improvements.

City staff outlined the planning context. DeGrandpre said the property lies within the city’s annexation Area A on the annexation policy map and within the Missoula 2045 land use plan’s "urban mixed use low" place type. He said the city zoning requested upon annexation, B2-1, is consistent with the land use plan and allows a higher maximum density than county zoning (staff noted the city B2-1 maximum can be as high as 43 dwelling units per acre while the county district allows up to 8 dwellings per acre).

On conditions, staff recommended the owner dedicate an additional 9.25 feet of right-of-way along the parcel’s western boundary (to upgrade Flynn Lane with curb, gutter, parking lane, boulevard/landscape strip, sidewalk and street trees). That dedication must occur either within 180 days of execution of the amended and restated development agreement or prior to occupancy of the first new building, whichever comes first.

Developer and project details. John Fisher, representing the Inland Group, described the proposal as an “active adult community for 55 and older residents.” According to the amended agreement and the presentation, the developer proposes a single multi-dwelling structure containing 170 units, up to 40 feet tall, and seeks to increase the density in Area C to up to 30 dwelling units per acre. DeGrandpre said building permits have been submitted for the proposed structures but cannot be acted on until the parcel is annexed into the city.

As part of negotiated terms, the developers agreed to donate $178,500 in cash-in-lieu to the City of Missoula Affordable Housing Trust Fund. Parker (CPDI staff) explained the city’s cash-in-lieu methodology: “We use a price index formula so that . . . methodology ultimately for depending on the number of bedrooms in the unit, it has a certain price associated with it,” and that the city’s in-lieu pricing model was developed in 2023 and is applied to density bonuses.

Council questions and staff clarifications. Councilors pressed staff and the developer on several practical points. Councilor Carlino asked to see Exhibit C (the documentation describing how the $178,500 figure was calculated); staff pulled the exhibit and reviewed it for council. Councilor Farmer asked whether the proposed public greenway would be open to the public and who would maintain it; staff said it is a public-use trail and that maintenance will be performed by the entity identified in the master plan (staff said it will be maintained by the developer/owner under the existing plan until otherwise conveyed or accepted by the city). Councilor Becerra asked how and when the cash-in-lieu payment would be made; DeGrandpre said the $178,500 would be paid as a lump sum prior to occupancy of the residential structure.

Policy mechanics. City staff and a separate staff speaker, identified in the record as Webb, noted that the city’s incentives program (a voluntary density-bonus framework) — not a mandatory inclusionary zoning law — produced the density bonus that led to the cash-in-lieu payment. Webb summarized: developers may opt into incentives the city offers; in this case the developer opted for a density bonus and elected to provide an in-lieu payment rather than on-site affordable units.

Public hearing and votes. The council opened a public hearing; no members of the public made comments in the chamber or online. Councilor Nugent moved the annexation resolution and the amended and restated development-agreement approval; the motions were considered and voted on separately. Roll call votes recorded unanimous approval for both items, with 12 yes votes and none opposed on each measure. The annexation motion and the development-agreement motion were recorded as passed.

What remains before construction. The amendment to the development agreement is contingent on the annexation and rezoning; the developer has also been asked to dedicate the 9.25 feet of right-of-way and satisfy the condition before occupancy. DeGrandpre and staff identified utility service availability (city water and sewer) and public-safety serviceability as factors in the annexation decision and noted the project site is within the city’s utility service area.

Context and background. The amended and restated agreement updates a 2019 development agreement that covered roughly 57.7 acres and included a master site plan with multiple areas (Area A, Area B and proposed Area C). DeGrandpre noted that while much residential development permitted under the original agreement has proceeded, proposed neighborhood commercial uses have not yet been built on the larger site; the amended agreement aims to allow a senior-focused residential component while reserving a separate parcel for future neighborhood business uses.

Councilors who spoke in favor described the project as filling a specific local housing need for older residents and as a potential contributor to housing-market turnover in single-family neighborhoods. Several councilors also thanked staff and the developer for working through outstanding questions.

Formal actions (summary): annexation of Tract 1 of Certificate of Survey No. 5023 and zoning to B2-1 (approved subject to conditions); approval of the amended and restated development agreement (approved) and acceptance of a $178,500 cash-in-lieu payment to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund (payment due prior to occupancy). Both votes were 12–0.

Looking ahead. With annexation, dedication of the 9.25-foot right-of-way and satisfaction of conditions, the developer may proceed with permitting and construction. Staff retained responsibility for tracking the right-of-way dedication and the development agreement implementation schedule.