Tronstad Meadows Public Comment from Sandy Muller7
r
I'd like to start out my comments in regards to the Developer and it's representatives.
The Developer has spent a year in the planning process without virtually any
communications or correspondence with the public or neighborhood. Dispite his
comments about kitchen talk and listening sessions. Which we're too few to even mention.
Mr. Frank Garner has stated in every public meeting that quote "they have answered all
legal and technical issues and we feet you wilt find no Technical and legal issues" —
although now has admitted and apologized for the error in the application? Please note
that their team, Frank Garner, John Sonju and Sands Surveying have worked with the City
Planners for 1 year in the creation of this application. The City has been at the developers
disposal for every step of this process. There shouldn't be any Technical or legal issues but
we all know that's not the case. Yet he continues to make this statement.
He States- We have reviewed the staff report and agree with its findings. The staff report is a
collaboration between the city and the developer. Straight forward Growth policy,
annexation and corrected zoning and preliminary plan application. This has been anything
but straightforward and please note he change his wording to corrected zoning.
Their Solutions to traffic as related to 93 and Tronstad have been formulate in a last ditch
effort to appease the concerns of the Council and public. Uses statements like Worked
Tirelessly to mitigate traffic solutions. They have failed to address any concerns about
Tronstad Rd. and Whitefish stage. So, What's the outcome of all this. Well, we learned that
there may be no work beginning to mitigate any of these Solutions until after Phase 3 of the
development. Possibly 10 to 20 years down the road.
Has since stated they have made Concessions as a result to the public comments
received. Building heights, Trees and Construction traffic. We find these concessions
merely conceptional with no merit. The developer is making promise's but has made no
attempt to meet with the neighborhood to further discuss them. Nor have they put any of
this in writing.
He's paraphrased a statement from a study conducted by the Montana University. "There is
a significant shortage of housing in the Flathead Valley now and in the Future" lust a
reminder, these are tots he's proposing to add to the supply, not homes. The 380 lots
proposed is not a guarantee that its going to make any impact to the lack of housing in the
near future. It could take 20 years to build out this development. If the developer is so keen
and sure this is going to make such an impact, why are they not building out this
subdivision themselves as did Howard Mann at the Quail Meadows Subdivison. I'm a
Strong believer in Risk vs Reward.
City planners say we have enough water capacity for 2000 more housing units. They are
working on 2 new wells on 4 mile drive. One to be the (largest in its zone). States from a
hydraulic standpoint, we need this well. Council asked the question in the last meeting "if
we Approve the Growth Policy and the Annexation, can we use the water"? Which brings us
to wonder if this Development is more about the need for water than the need for housing?
The Developer has signed a the statement on the Applications that's states "to the best of
their knowledge" Can we rely on this? If the city is not doing their due diligence and relying
solely on the developers team for reliability, how can there be any guarantee that there are
no cracks/ flaws in the application. The people that oppose this Development strongly
believe and think we have proved that there are many inconsistancies and flaws. Way too
many to be ignored. We are hopeful[ that you, our city council, our representatives share
the same doubt.
Question to the Attorney, "can the city Legally rescind the development".
The Attorney didn't respond in certainty on how the city would approach the situation. Too
hypothetical. Said the City would uphold that the Developer is making statements that the
city is relying on. That the developer would be held to those standards. The city would
uphold the requirements and make them/the developer accountable. City Manager went
on to add, in another development there was an infrastructure that was not built to
standard, it was stamped by an the developers engineer and Council ruled it could legally
put responsibility on the developer because of the deficiencies. What we think we're
getting to understand here is the reasons why the city relies on the developer's engineers
expertise and stamps, is that it distances the City from any liability. The City's engineers
should upon review expose the problems and reject the plans, not approve them simply
because they have an engineers stamp from the developer. Take the Quail meadows
subdivision for example, the civil plans were approved by the engineer along with Water
and Sewer. This subdivisions waste was designed to be gravity fed to the City connection
on Tronstad Rd. No pump station required. Apparently, there was a mistake in the Civil
Drawings. The back of the Subdivision was too low and the grade had to be raised to
accommodate the properwaste flow. Without any concern for neighboring plats, privacy,
water run off, flooding, etc. Or requirements to send the design back for review. A decision
was made to raise the back of the development about 5 feet. When it became apparent by
the neighbors, the city was called and came out to address the problems. The approved
civil design of the development originally had both the property levels the same where the
properties adjoined. The city engineer was then informed by Colby Shaw who lives adjacent
to the back of the Quail Meadows development that In years past when the snow pack was
normal, the Konig property would naturally drain through the back of his property and into
what used to be a the 10 acre lot now Quail Meadows. See Photo #5. So, where is the water
supposed to go now? Their solution to mitigate the problem was to form a retention area at
the property line, See photos 3 U. Is this going to be sufficient? Is the retention area large
enough to hold a run off of this magnitude? To our best knowledge there were no
calculations done by either the developer or the citys engineers. They were also given this
photo. Question? Who's liable here, City or Developer? The engineer was asked if the plans
were amended and approved by the city and he stated they relied solely on the developer
and it's engineers. The neighbors put pressure on the city to address this, nothing would
have been done otherwise. The possibility of flooding is stilt a strong reality.
Please take a took at Photo #1. This is a sidewalk at the Quail meadows Subdivision on
Tronstad Rd that stops at the boundary tine of the development right in front of the Tronstad
Dr. Stop sign. You'll also see in the photo that there is a smooth transition. That was not
how they left it. People stilt make jokes about it and wonder if the City's ever going to move
it.
Last take a look at Photo #2 . This is the Pork Chop at 93 and Tronstad. Notice the Right turn
only sign is missing. It along with the Divided Hwy Sign/Stop Sign were mowed down a
month ago. it tayed off to the side of the road for 2 weeks before I took it to the city shop,
then the county shop and finally to the State shop where they put at least the Stop
sign/divided highway sign back. My point is, we are separated far enough from the main
part of the city that no one notices these things. What's to become of this area if this
development gets to move forward?
Thank you all for your time and effort that you have put towards making not only this
decision but all the decisions that have come before you. We hope that with all that has
been brought forth you make a decision that carves the right path for not only for this City
but for the entire Valley.
I
I
m
w
I
�-
s
�s?.. ..�.:.
�
w