Subdivisions north of Kalispell Public Comment from Margaret Davis Aimee Brunckhorst
From: blems@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2024 3:23 PM
To: Kalispell City Council
Subject: EXTERNAL Subdivisions north of Kalispell
Council members,
Yes, those opposed to the proposed subdivisions north of Kalispell off of US Highway 93 raise real
issues about traffic, public safety, etc. However, many of the Flathead valley's growing pains are
caused by Flathead County government and its disregard for a serious Growth Policy and
infrastructure planning.
• The County built and improved roads that never met state standards from the get-go. Many of
these roads have not been eligible for state funding that could have been used for upgrades over
the years.
• Surveying for roads in the County was often haphazard or predicated on adjacent landowners'
wishes. The County has not regarded Eminent Domain as a useful tool to address right-of-way
improvements.
• When the City accepts County roads through annexation, it must eventually secure funds from
developers or taxpayers to make long overdue improvements.
• It is not unusual for the last folks in a new area to want the door shut to others behind them. The
County has accommodated a variety of development proposals from small to large subdivisions on
traditional agricultural lands. It is fair to say that vistas in the valley are unlikely to remain the same
over time.
• The County, water and sewer districts, and the municipalities are all trying to catch up with septage
and wastewater treatment needs. Reduction in agricultural acres has stressed access to septage
disposal sites, and wastewater treatment capacity is maxing out. Bottom line, it is more efficient
and economical to fill these infrastructure needs with well-engineered, higher density systems.
• For those living in previously rural areas and who are not farming, they probably recognize that
there is a limited amount of private land for residential and commercial uses in Flathead
County. Much of it can and will be developed to some sort of non-agricultural use (unless it is
covered by a conservation easement).
The City Council's best stance is to keep long-term options for manageable, quality growth foremost
in its decision making.
Margaret S Davis, homeowner 160 Charlotte, 59901
1