Tronstad Whitefish Stage development from Rachel Neumann[NOTICE: This message includes an attachment -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe.]
Dear City Councilors,
I am writing to add my voice to the discussion regarding the Tronstad/Whitefish Stage development. I am adamantly OPPOSED to the development. Here are some of the reasons below.
* We are losing our rural lands. So many people are moving in here that soon we will have high density housing and all open spaces will be gone. I grew up here, and Kalispell has
changed so much since the 80s and 90s that it is almost unrecognizable even now. If the housing isn't here or available, people need to look to move elsewhere. That's the cold hard
truth. It isn't up to the City to make create housing due to demand, especially when the majority of residents do not want it.
* Traffic. I live on Whitefish Stage just north of Schrade. I live on a straight section of the road, yet within the past 5 weeks, we have had 2 vehicles crash into the ditch right
at the end of our driveway in literally the exact same spots, hitting our mailbox both times. Whitefish Stage is busy as is, and with that development, there is only one way to get
to Kalispell itself, and that is to exit south onto Whitefish Stage, since the exit from Tronstad to Hwy 93 has been made into a one way only right turn north onto Hwy 93. Whitefish
Stage will turn into an even more dangerous road with that housing development bringing 300+ more vehicles to use the road daily.
* Why does the City feel they need to annex this development? The property is miles from the City of Kalispell boundaries. Is the City of Kalispell having revenue problems that they
want to overcompensate for? There is a ponzi scheme of city growth polices that seems to be across the board. Is Kalispell one of them?
https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2020/5/14/americas-growth-ponzi-scheme-md2020 <https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.strongtowns.org%2Fjournal%2F2020%2F5%2F14%2Fa
mericas-growth-ponzi-scheme-md2020&data=05%7C02%7Cjfunk%40kalispell.com%7C278a0beb90bb420bad6d08dc6e069619%7C6219d736f71146359cbaff616a81b398%7C1%7C0%7C638507778308528216%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJW
IjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C20000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Ggd5qJDOT5wdLA01AI0q9yMUFx%2BEsPgW6LALxC3pknU%3D&reserved=0> "We have responded to this challenge
in two ways that compound the tragedy. First, like with any pyramid-shaped financial structure, cities tried to overcome insolvency by growing faster. This alleviates the immediate
budget pain but only increases the future hardship. Sequential bubbles over the past four decades in residential and commercial real estate attest to the collateral damage of trying
to grow our way out of this problem using the same experimental pattern of building."
* The City wants to have people move here, yet at the same time the property taxes have increased and the people who have lived here for decades are now being forced to evaluate if they
can live here due to "The Great Taking" taking place with high property taxes and land and houses that is beyond affordable, OR if they even want to live in this metropolis that Flathead
is becoming if they can even afford it. If I didn't have family obligations in the Valley, I would look elsewhere to live. Indeed, the influx of people has left a very bad taste in
my mouth and I know many others are unhappy as well. Why add fuel to the fire? Growing doesn't need to be painful, but we are in a state of extreme pain. And to what outcome? People
like me, if they aren't obligated to stay here, will move away.
My understanding is at the Planning & Zoning meeting regarding this development, nearly all were opposed to this development, yet these bureaucrats decided to approve the development
anyway, despite the many and numerous objections.
Maybe listen to the people who live near this development and vote NO on this development.
Respectfully,
Rachael Neumann
Sent with Proton Mail <https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fproton.me%2F&data=05%7C02%7Cjfunk%40kalispell.com%7C278a0beb90bb420bad6d08dc6e069619%7C6219d736f71146359cbaff6
16a81b398%7C1%7C0%7C638507778308538708%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C20000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=KPcI2MWFPIZO8N8tT%2BnPZlSovgdIRajD3WMFuagig9A%
3D&reserved=0> secure email.
ion. The multiple comments made for several hours against the proposal were irrelevant.
One thing I want to address from my professional vantage point: There is a small but growing body of empirical research showing a correlation of some size between mental health and environmental
stressors as manifested in traffic and residential density. This development, especially in contrast to the more open space environment that many people moving here are attracted to,
will be the creation of more urban dynamics that have been shown to increase anxiety, stress, depression, and more specific health and behavioral risks such as alcohol and drug use,
aggression, incivility, and an increased risk of violence. In my opinion, none of that is even on anyone's radar.
I plan to attend Monday's meeting and comment as it seems necessary. Thank you.
--
Mark Odell, PhD, LCPC, LMFT
GlacierHaven Counseling & Consulting, PC
P.O. Box 9864
Kalispell, MT 59904
406 755 5430
cusҎ言鶓릠⧝岀⧂to ensure that everyone interested in publicly commenting on this is able to do so. At the Planning Commission public hearing, at least 20 people
had to stand along the walls, and another 20 or so couldn’t even fit in the room. Because of this, many people couldn’t hear, and there were some people (elderly or with physical conditions)
that couldn’t be expected to stand for hours, and had to leave. Considering the amount of interest we have now had time to gather, I imagine there will be even more people interested
in this. I’m sure you’re aware of the overflow at that meeting. I would like to know orhoods,ϰ霭Ⴈ⧙岀⧂ion of rural and agricultural landscapes from high-density zoning, and community-focused
decisions benefiting all residents, not just a select few.
This development risks creating an isolated, high-density housing area disconnected from the city’s infrastructure, aggravating traffic issues, and compromising safety, particularly
for families with children.
Please prioritize addressing and resolving current issues within the proposed development before adding new problems.
The lack of adequate infrastructure and clear safety planning are significant concerns. We need solutions that uphold our growth policies and align with Kalispell’s vision for the future.
Voting no on this amendment is essential.
It would demonstrate that our city council is committed to making decisions that reflect the best interests of all residents, not just the interests of an eager individual individual
or special interest,thereby ensuring Kalispell remains a safe, beautiful, and unique place to live.
My family and many others are counting on you to make the right choice.
Please vote no on amending the growth policy for the Tronstad Meadows and Whitetail Crossing development until all concerns are addressed and it aligns with Plan-It 2035 principles.
Thank you for your attention and dedication to our community.
Sincerely,
Emma Lovejoy
68 Jolly Lane
Marion, MT