Loading...
PLEASE REJECT - Tronstad Meadows & Whitetail Crossing Public Comment from Kristine HurshAimee Brunckhorst From: Kristine Hursh <ckhursh@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, May 31, 2024 8:40 PM To: Kalispell Meetings Public Comment Subject: EXTERNAL PLEASE REJECT - Tronstad Meadows & Whitetail Crossing Honorable Mayor Johnson & Kalispell City Council Members, My name is Kristine Hursh, 210 Tronstad Road in Kalispell, since early 2000. 1 live with my husband Kevin, our adult son Bryan and his wife Liz. We love our neighborhood very much. Our place in the county has been very enjoyable and the thought of so many homes going in across the street is very concerning. I work at Glacier High School Library and have been working for Kalispell Public Schools for 22 years. I agree that we need affordable housing in the valley for educators, police and firefighters, among others, however this development will not provide attainable houses for them. Our public service workers in the area cannot afford $550k. I am concerned that this developer will only be supplying expensive lots for corporations to build and then rent at high prices or other buyers to offer as short term rentals. That would still not provide affordable housing for public service workers. We would just have congestion and more unaffordable houses. We should not be just building hundreds, if not thousands of houses and have the city sprawling out into the beautiful countryside. People come to the area for the great outdoors, we do not need to have solid houses from Somers to Whitefish, as far as the eye can see. We could go to California, Washington or Texas for that. This plan seems to be very patchwork and checkerboarded. This land is not part of the growth policy right now - please don't rush it along. There are numerous approved developments building houses and many other homes for sale now. Real estate is staying on the market longer also. We could end up with a glut of expensive real estate sitting, with no buyers. This proposed development is very premature. Maybe in future years, it will make more sense, right now it does not. Tronstad and Whitefish Stage are narrow county roads, with deep ditches on both sides, many people end up in them each winter. These roads are not ready for the kind of additional traffic proposed. The developers say that they will "improve Tronstad" (widening with sidewalks), however that is only on their frontage to Tronstad, not the full length, from Highway 93 to Whitefish Stage. All access to the development is on Tronstad. What happens when Tronstad drifts over in the winter? Also - what will this development do with all their snow? There will be added light pollution with the streetlights being proposed, as well. This "improvement" isn't really a benefit to the full surrounding community. Reserve will be torn up soon -we will have heavier traffic on Tronstad and Whitefish Stage. Can't this wait until complete road improvements are made? Right now the 110 acres is zoned for 2.5 acres per home, that would be approx 44 homes. That amount of additional traffic seems more appropriate than the 500+ cars in the existing plan. Voting will happen Monday night for the proposed development. I strongly and respectfully urge you to reject Frank Garner and MT Seven Properties proposal. It is very strange, almost insulting, to me that this development already has a website: https://www.tronstadandwhitetail.com/ The approval for all these changes hasn't even happened yet. Do they think that no one would notice? Please do not amend the growth policy creating city sprawl into our rural communities. There are other places within the existing growth plan that can be or are being developed now. There is a lot of building going on in the valley already. There may be a future need to amend the growth policy, I do not think that now is that time. Please do not annex this 110 acres into the city, this land is almost completely surrounded by rural county properties. It would be a shame to sprawl and checkerboard growth. This land should stay rural in the county. Please do not change the existing zoning. The proposed high density in this setting is so inappropriate. The safety and wellbeing of the existing neighborhood will be irreversibly affected. The existing infrastructure is not able to support this kind of concentration of growth. Please reject the preliminary plat. Again this density is inappropriate for the setting. Look across the highway at Silverbook, that development has some character and visual interest. Silverbrook also has more than one street for access. Again - these will not be affordable for the vast majority of buyers and will only add to the growing traffic problems in north Kalispell. The people buying into the new proposed neighborhood would also be negatively affected by the congestion and premature development on insufficient infrastructure. It would not be a comfortable place to be for some time. Quality of life would suffer. Please reject the full proposal. Thank you for your consideration.