Loading...
Tronstad Meadows/Whitetail Crossing public comment from Susan Sharp Aimee Brunckhorst From: Susan Sharp <pinnacleflame@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2024 12:04 PM To: Kalispell Meetings Public Comment Subject: EXTERNAL Tronstad Meadows/Whitetail Crossing public comment To: Kalispell City Council Date: October 31, 2024 1 am writing to share my concerns about the proposed Tronstad Meadows/Whitetail Crossing subdivision. I do not see how merely reducing the number of housing lots by 25 addresses the concerns that were raised when this subdivision first came before the Council earlier this year. These issues of safety on Tronstad Road and other issues remain: • Putting a light on the corner at Hwy. 93 will not resolve the problems already on Tronstad Road: blind spots, the narrow lanes with deep side ditches, and impassable snow drifts in the winter. Adding the traffic from the proposed subdivision to this already marginally safe road will not benefit anyone. • The developers claim the water issue has been satisfactorily dealt with. My questions back to them are these: has the irrigation well the developers plan to use for water to the subdivision been adequately tested? Have tests been run to show whether the well will produce enough output for the development? Has the legal issue been settled concerning the private citizen who earlier claimed she had rights to the well? Will this development affect the wells of surrounding homeowners? • When the original proposal to develop this lot came before the Council, I wrote a letter stating my concerns about the City making decisions that directly impact County residents. I'll will share it again here since it is still relevant: My main concern about this proposal centers around lack of representation by the current landowners surrounding this proposed subdivision. We are county residents and therefore are not able to vote in city elections. As a result, we have no input into who is elected to the city council, nor what the city develops as a "master plan" Yet, it is the very City Council who will make the decision to arbitrarily change the zoning regulations and existing covenants in order to further their growth plan agenda. My family and neighbors purchased land in this area because of the rural nature of the community. The County understood this and that's why covenants were placed on the land to maintain this rural environment. Why should the City have the right to wipe it all away and impose their urban guidelines in their place, especially since you do not represent the current surrounding landowners? It's not right and it's not in keeping with American values. I realize that growth is inevitable, but growth in harmony with existing protocols is a much better approach. Why not consider keeping the existing covenants and approving a subdivision which will maintain the rural nature of the community? That will also eliminate the problems that will ensue with a high density subdivision. 1 In closing, I personally feel that the developers' plans to reduce the housing lot number by 25 is merely a token attempt to appease the neighborhood and push the proposal through. Wouldn't it be better if the developers actually sat down with the neighbors and worked out a plan that would benefit both sides? Why not suggest it as a Council? Susan Sharp 2859 Whitefish Stage, Kalispell 2