The URL can be used to link to this page

1. Council Minutes - Regular Meeting - July 16, 2007A REGULAR MEETING OF THE KALISPELL CITY COUNCIL WAS HELD AT 7:00 P.M., MONDAY, JULY 16, 2007, IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT CITY BALL IN KALISPELL, MONTANA. MAYOR PAMELA B. KENNEDY PRESIDED, COUNCIL MEMBERS JIM ATKINSON, KART GABRIEL, BOB HAFFERMAN, RANDY KENYON, TIM KLUESNER, HANK OLSON, DUANE LARSON, AND WAYNE SAVERUD WERE PRESENT. Also present: City Manager Janes Patrick, City Attorney Charles Harball, City Clerk Theresa White, Public Works Director Jim Hansz, Public Works Deputy Director/ Assistant City Engineer Frank Castles, Fire Prevention Chief DC Haas, Parrs Director Mike Baker, Planning Director Tom Jentz, and Senior Planner Sean Conrad. Mayor Kennedy called the meeting to order and led the Pledge of Allegiance. A. AGENDA APPROVAL Larson moved approval of the Agenda. The motion was seconded. There was no discussion. The motion carried unanimously upon vote with all members present. B. CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL 1. Council Minutes — Re lar Meeting — July 2, 2007 2. ordinance 161_6 — Initial zonin — Flathead Villa e Greens — 2nd Readin Flathead Village Greens is requesting a zoning designation of City R-2, Single Family Residential, on approximately 181 acres located along the west side of Highway 93 immediately north of the intersection of Highway 93 North and Wild Pine Drive. ordinance 1616 passed unanimously on first reading July 2. Saverud moved approval of the Consent Agenda. The motion was seconded. There was no further discussion. The motion carried unanimously upon vote with all members present. C. STUDENT ISSUES None. D, PUBLIC COMMENT Trina Ambrose, 928 5th Avenue East, speaking on behalf of the Eastside Kalispell Group and Kalispell City Council Minutes July 1.6, 2007 Page 1 Thompson Park Project, informed everyone the Thompson Park tennis courts have been resurfaced and trees have been planted along the proposed pathway. She said members would like to rename the Park the Eastside Park with the field to remain Thompson Field. William Manahan, 218 west Bowman, stated he was recently hired to represent Dr. Abbott and feels there has been some unfortunate misinformation provided to the Council. Manahan asked the Council to table the matter until he has had adequate time to properly investigate the issue before any `snap" decisions are made. Doc Dahlquist, Bigfork, also asked the Council for a postponement on the Dr. Abbott issue. He said he is a local inspector and feels every issue can be adequately addressed. Mayoe Flowers, Citizens for a Better Flathead, spoke on the City's recent annexation of Flathead Village Greens remarking that State law requires a services agreement with the developer prior to annexation. Flowers also commented on the Valley Ranch PUD issue the Council struggled with at the June 4 meeting, suggesting the Council amend its regulations to allow for certain preliminary information as a condition of a PUD with annexation with more extensive details to come later. She said comments have been made that the main concern with Valley Ranch were road issues, however, neighboring residents feel the main issues are density and stormwater. E, PUBLIC HEARING 2007/2008 FISCAL BUDGET Mayor Kennedy opened the public hearing. Pro-ponents None. Opponents Done. Mayor Kennedy closed the public hearing. F. PUBLIC HEARING -- GROWTH POLICY AMENDMENT — WILLOW CREEK SUBDIVISION Conrad gave a staff report explaining the industrial designation is no longer appropriate considering the industrial uses on this property have been declining and properties to the south and the west are zoned suburban residential. He said the Planning Board has unanimously recommended the Council amend the growth policy from industrial to suburban residential. Conrad reminded the Council that they are only considering the growth policy amendment this evening, although there are proposals planned for this property that will be presented at a later date. Mayor Kennedy opened the public hearing. Kalispell City Council Minutes .duly 16, 2007 Page 2 Proponents Wayne Freeman, CTA Architects and Engineers, stated the landowner has worked for over a year cleaning up the site to the south and will be working for years on the northern end. He said the surrounding land use to the east is downtown Kalispell and very urban in nature. Freeman stressed the issue this evening is not the zoning, it's a growth policy amendment and he feels the industrial designation of this property has outlived its usefulness. Op onents Mayre Flowers, Citizens for a Better Flathead, commented that an R-2 zoning designation would be consistent with the growth policy, not R-3. She said the growth policy reap and the zoning regulations "doesn't jive", and it's very confusing for the public to go back and forth between the two documents. Flowers said the public needs clarification prior to this going forward. Marylyn Bain, 3350 North Ashley Lake Road, read a letter stating there are several major problems with this property, including several areas of industrial waste fill areas on this property. (Letter is attached and by this reference is made a part of the official record) Joanne Sauter, 581 Stoneridge Drive, agreed with Bain, adding she is also concerned that going from R-1 to R-3 will allow extensive residential development that will adversely impact the schools in the area, which are already full. John Rauk, 125 Stoneridge Drive, noted that people have purchased property all through this area based on the surrounding R-1 designations, which are now subject to change. He said developers can still make money with an R-1. Debra Rauk, 125 Stoneridge Drive, asked if the Council received their petitions and was told they did. (Petitions are attached and by this reference is made a part of the official record) Jeannie Luckey, 341 Stoneridge Drive, echoed the comments of those in opposition, adding there should be a much smoother transition from County to City and Industrial to R-3 is too extreme. Bob Gerbo said he recently purchased property at 40 Stoneridge Place and the reason he picked that area is because it had great views, one acre lots, and everything they wanted to retire. He said the density of an R-3 is much too dense for this area. Steve Luckey, 341 Stoneridge Drive, commented that from a law enforcement view, when you cluster people in high density environments you are asking for trouble. He said greed should not adversely affect the quality of life in this wonderful place. Stacy Schultz, 304 Stoneridge Drive, said she moved into the area three months ago and her children have to attend Elrod School because Peterson School is full. She said the City should talk to the Kalispell City Council Minutes July 16, 2007 Page 3 school district to find out how many more children can be allowed. Mayor Kennedy closed the public hearing. G. PUBLIC HEARING — GROWTH POLICY AMENDMENT -- STARLING Conrad gave a staff report and answered questions, explaining this is a request to amend the growth policy amendment from. Suburban Residential to Urban Residential on a 640-acre project site on Section 3S. He said the Planning Board has unanimously recommended the amendment. Mayor Kennedy opened the public hearing. Proyonents Dan Johns, Attorney, commented his firm has represented the Grossweiler's for many years and they began looking at different prospects for the property when the dairy eventually became a "big black hole". He said after speaking to many developers, they kept coming back to the Aspen Group who possess incredible integrity and have been extremely thorough. Johns asked the Council to support the amendment. Greg Stratton, Aspen Group, also asked for Council's support stating significant changes have occurred in the area since the growth policy was adopted and their request is based on the changes: the high school opening this fall, the fall completion of Reserve Loop which would connect this project to Highway 93, and the continuing expansion of the Highway 93 corridor. Don Myers, Aspen Group President and CEO, presented the Council with a brief history of the Aspen Group and summarized some of their recentl projects. He said the company has worked diligently to talk with the neighbors and address their concerns, adding they are extremely proud to be working in this area and are here to stay. Mitch Black, Norris Designs, said he appreciates all of the comments this evening and all of the issues can be addressed when the details are provided at a later date. He said at each phase the Council and public will have time to review the information. Patti Gregerson, Habitat for Humanity, commented this project meets many needs and solves many problems in our community when people want to relocate or move back to be with their families. She said the City has not seen anything like this before and it would be shame not to support it. Opponents Marc Nevas, 1475 west Reserve Drive, read a letter opposing the amendment and provided comments from traffic consultant Bob Horne. (Letter and comments are attached and by this reference is made a part of the official record) Date Marshall, 1475 West Reserve Drive, said she supports Nevas' comments. Kalispell City Council Minutes July 16, 2007 Page 4 Greg Lucasik, Morrison-Maierle, in response to Nevas' criticism that the Public Works Department may waive the required update to the traffic impact study at their discretion, stated traffic study updates will be done following each phase of the project. Sean Morgan, 1405 West Reserve Drive, said he is not against the development but is extremely concerned with the increase in traffic and questioned why the smallest lots have to be located on the exterior perimeter when they should be in the interior. He said if those two issues could be addressed, then he would be a "happy camper". Mayre Flowers, Citizens for a Better Flathead, stated there is no need to change the growth policy when R-2 allows for 4.7 units per acre with a PUD, giving the developers what they want. She also asked the Council to adopt new findings of facts following public comment. Mayor Kennedy closed the public hearing. H. REPORTS/RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUBSEQUENT COUNCIL ACTION Ill. RESOLUTION 5214A -- WILLOW CREEK -- ADOPTING GROWTH POLICY AMENDMENT — OR - RESOLUTION 5214E — WILLOW CREED — REVISING GROWTH POLICY AMENDMENT — OR -- RESOLUTION 5214C - WILLOW CREEK — REJECTING GROWTH POLICY AMENDMENT Wayne Turner is requesting an amendment to the Kalispell Growth Policy 2020 from Industrial to Suburban Residential on 30 acres located at the intersection of Foys Lake Road and Valley View Drive. Wayne Turner has requested an amendment to the growth policy from Industrial to Suburban Residential on 30 acres located on the north side of Foys Lake Road one quarter mile west of the current city limits along Meridian Road. Atkinson moved Resolution 5214C, a resolution rejecting an amendment to the Kalispell Growth Policy 2020. The motion was seconded. Conrad answered questions. Hafferman commented people are going to come and both of these projects are in ideal proximity to the City and is very appropriate for City developments. He said the cost of providing City services is a significant factor and City residents have to subsidize R-1 areas because they are too big. Hafferman stated he will vote against the resolution on the floor to deny the amendment. Gabriel agreed. Kenyon said he doesn't disagree with moving the property from industrial to residential, but this project as a whole seems to be a mess and seems premature. He said he is very uncomfortable approving the amendment tonight because when something starts rolling it is hard to stop. Kalispell City Council Minutes July 16, 2007 Page 5 luesner agreed with Hafferman and Gabriel, adding we need a development life this to offer housing opportunities to people who cannot afford the larger lots. He said it's the natural progression of Kalispell to change this from industrial to residential. Larson sided with Kenyon, stating once the train starts moving it continues to move and he feels once the amendment is approved the changes in zoning are imminent. Saverud agreed, adding that this area will develop with residential but he would like to see more "meat on the skeleton" prior to approval. Mayor Kennedy commented this is a tough issue for her, and she understands the neighbors concerns with high density development, but this is not the time to address the zoning issue. She said no matter how you feel about the zoning, this is not an area that should be industrial and if she lived in the Stoneridge area she would definitely want the industrial removed. The motion carried upon roll call vote with Atkinson, Kenyon, Larson, Olson, Saverud, and Atkinson voting in favor, and Gabriel, Hafferman, Kluesner, and Mayor Kennedy voting against. H12. RESOLUTION 5215A — STARLING - ADOPTING GROWTH POLICY AMENDMENT — OR - RESOLUTION 5215E — STARLING REVISING GROWTH POLICY AMENDMENT — OR -- RESOLUTION 5215C — 5TARI.ING — RE.TECTING GROWTH POLICY AMENDMENT Stillwater Meadows, LLC is requesting an amendment to the Kalispell Growth Policy 2020 from Suburban Residential to Urban Residential on 540 acres described as all of Section 35 which is bounded on the east by Stillwater Road, south by Four Mile Drive, west by Spring Creek Road, and north by west Reserve Drive. Gabriel moved Resolution 5215A, a resolution adopting an amendment to the Kalispell Growth Policy 2020, to be known as the Starling Growth Policy Amendment. The motion was seconded. Conrad gave a staff report and answered questions. Atkinson noted that during public comment it was pointed out that an R-2 zone with a PUD overlay allows for 4.7 units per acre. He asked why then does the developer need a growth policy amendment moving the property to an Urban Residential allowing for 12 units per acre. Conrad agreed that the current zoning designation of R-2 with a PUD overlay allows for five units per acre, but the Suburban Residential in the growth policy only allows for four units per acre and the development will slightly exceed that number. Kalispell city Council Minutes July 16, 2007 Page 6 Atkinson encouraged the Council to vote in favor of the resolution stating the developers have set the bar much higher than many others. Olson commented he feels this is a project that will make the City proud and noted that the developers want the growth policy amendment to give them the latitude to build a quality development. There was discussion concerning traffic issues and Hansz stated the goal is to make sure that decisions made for these critical roads are integrated with all of the traffic issues related to Kalispell. Mayor Kennedy stated she appreciates all of the information brought forward on this project and she believes this is going to be a development the City can be proud of because they are willing and wanting to work with the City and the neighbors. The motion carried upon roll call vote with Atkinson, Gabriel, Hafferman, Kluesner, Larson, Olson, Saverud, and Mayor Kennedy voting in favor, and Kenyon voting against, H13. ORDINANCE 1615 — INITIAL ZONING — VALLEY RANCH -- 2ND READING Gateway Properties, LLC has requested a zoning designation of City R-2, Single Family Residential, on approximately 81 acres located one and a half miles north of the intersection of Highway 93 and West Deserve Drive. Ordinance 1615 passed on first reading July 2 on an eight -to -one vote. Atkinson moved second reading of ordinance 1615, an ordinance to amend Section 27.02.010, official zoning map, City of Kalispell zoning Ordinance, (ordinance No. 1460), by zoning certain real property more particularly described as Tract 2, Tract 3 and Tract 2BC in Section 19, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, Flathead County, Montana (previously zoned County SAG-10, Suburban Agricultural) to City R_2 (Single Family Residential) in accordance with the Kalispell Growth Policy 2020, and to provide an effective date. The motion was seconded. There was no discussion. The motion carried upon roll call vote with Atkinson, Gabriel, Hafferman, K.luesner, Larson, Olson, Saverud, and Mayor Kennedy voting in favor, and Kenyon voting against. H14. ORDINANCE 1617 — INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE --1ST READING Staff is requesting the Council adopt the International Fire Code, 2006 Edition. Saverud moved first reading of ordinance 1617, an ordinance to amend ordinance 1522 adopting, by reference, the "International Fire Code" and the Appendices, 2006 Edition (IFC), with the additions, amendments, and deletions enumerated as set forth on Exhibit "A", as the fire codes of the City of Kalispell, and applicable within the corporate boundaries of the City, to provide a penalty for the violation of any lawful order issued pursuant thereto; and establishing an effective date. The motion was seconded. Kalispell City Council Minutes July 16, 2007 Page 7 Haas gave a staff report and answered questions. There was no further discussion. The motion carried unanimously upon roll call vote with all members present. H/5. MOTION TO DENY REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM CITY BUILDING AND ZONING REQUIREMENTS — DR. DANIEL ABBOTT Dr. Abbott has requested relief from the City's Zoning and Building Codes by offering to purchase a setback easement on the Buffalo Hills Golf Course. Larson moved that based upon the report of the Kalispell Building Department the City Council deny Dr. Abbott's request for relief from City Zoning and Building Codes. The motion was seconded. Jentz gave a staff report explaining an addition constructed to the house and garage at 86 Juniper Bend does not meet the City's zoning setback requirements and was constructed without the required City permits or inspections and he was charged into Municipal Court for these violations. He said Building Inspector Craig Kerzman has inspected as much of the property as possible and prepared a list of existing and possible code violations. Larson commented it's time to move forward with this process and let the Court make a decision. He said the attorney has asked for a delay, but this has been delayed enough and there are significant life issues at stake here. Olson said this is an unusual situation and they should be given one more chance to bring the building to code. Saverud concurred with Olson, stating Dr. Abbot informed him that he was only given four days notice of this meeting. He said Dr. Abbott is out of town and the issue should be tabled until he can be present. Kenyon argued it has been two years and there has been no progress on this issue. He said the problem was created knowingly and a message should be sent that the City will not allow people to do whatever they want and then ask for forgiveness. Larson emphasized Dr. Abbott has had over two years to prepare for this meeting and he has completely disregarded the rules from the very beginning. Hafferman said he would still like to have Dr. Abbott present when the Council makes a decision. In addition, he feels the attorney should be given the opportunity to provide a rebuttal. Hafferman moved to table the issue until the first meeting in August. The motion was seconded. Kalispell City Council Minutes July 16, 2007 Page 8 The motion to table failed upon roll call vote with Hafferman, Kluesner, Olson, and Saverud voting in favor, and Atkinson, Gabriel, Kenyon, Larson, and Mayor Kennedy voting against. There was further discussion about giving Dr. Abbott more time with Jentz and Harball answering questions. Gabriel said she is getting increasingly frustrated with this issue because Dr. Abbott broke the law when he added an addition to his house when he was told he couldn't. Atkinson said some of the Council members want to give Dr. Abbott the opportunity to comply, but he has had all kinds of opportunities to comply with the law and was very blatant about not complying. Saverud said he is not suggesting the City compromise, but he feels the considerate thing to do is to allow him to appear and have his say one last time before a decision is made. Larson said he will have his say, in Court. In addition, he said he feels it becomes a liability issue and he would never give anyone an additional amount of time to correct a life safety issue. The motion carried upon roll call vote with Atkinson, Gabriel, Kenyon, Larson, Saverud, and Mayor Kennedy voting in favor, and Hafferman, Kluesner, and Olson voting against. I. MAYO COUNCIL CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS o Action Mayor Kennedy reminded members the 2nd Annual Montana Summer Economic Outlook will be held on Thursday, August 2 at Grouse Mountain Lodge in whitefish from. 3:00 to 4:30 p.m. Mayor Kennedy commended staff for the insert in the current water bills concerning stormwater runoff, stating it is very informative. Mayor Kennedy also asked staff to work on reminding the public that bicycles need to obey the laws the same as vehicles and they should not be traveling on the sidewalks. Olson complimented the Parks Department for the tremendous job they do with the summer programs and the water park. Patrick complimented the eastside neighborhood for getting involved and partnering with the City on the Thompson Park renovation. Patrick said he has been. talking with Jim Oliverson from Kalispell Regional Hospital and he hopes the hospital will have the gravel parking areas paved before the end of the year. Kalispell City Council Minutes July 16, 2007 Page 9 Mayor Kennedy said she received a phone call that stated the hospital had graded another area for parking that is nothing but gravel. Patrick said he would look into it. J. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 10:12 p.m. ATTEST: Theresa white City Clerk Pamela B. Kennedy Mayor Kalispell City Council Minutes July 16, 2007 Page 10 July 16, 2007 Kalispell Mayor and City Council P.O. Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 Dear .Mayor Kennedy and City Council Members, I would like to comment on the requests by Mr, Wayne Turner for the public hearing tonight. In my objections for the April 10,2007 public hearing held by the City Planning Board, I pointed out several major problems with the property being proposed for the changes, as requested by Mr. Turner. One of the most serious problems involves the land itself As a previous property owner of this property I pointed out several areas of industrial waste fill areas. This fill material was placed in the fanner mill ponds that existed on the area Forth of Ashley Creek and South of Ashley Creek. Fill was also placed along Ashley Creek and on the Eastern boundary of the property. As shown on the historic aerials of the former Forest Products Co. industrial site, that I used as exhibits in my protest. I believe that this information has been passed on to you so I won't dwell on it tonight. Please refer to copies of these aerials that have been attached for your convenience. Mr. Turner has requested a growth policy amendment for this property that 1 believe will also entail a zone change from the current R- I and Industrial zones. The jump to an R-3 with three to four tines more lots will make a very undesirable impact on this rural neighborhood. The staff report, dated July 16, 2007, presented at the City Planning Board public hearing on July 10, 2007, stated on Page I I that the property is described as being; fairly level with the exception of a small hill. If this is a true description of this property we would not see .Exhibit 5.4, as presented. by Mr. Turner, showing a total change of the vary nature of this site. He would have presented a subdivision that was designed to fit the actual contours of this property. The City of Kalispell's Subdivision Regulations require these contours to be shown on the submittal information. This information has not been presented for review by the City Planning Board or the public. The subdivision regulations require specific contour details and per cents of slope that directly apply to the lots, parks, roads and other features of the proposed sub --division. This site should not be approved for a Growth Policy Amendment and Zone change because this property is not suited for an R-3 zone for a subdivision. The only way that this site can meet the requirements is by an extreme makeover. Grading of this site is referenced on Page 26 of the July 5, 2007 staff report. It is stated that "approximately 720,000 cubic yards of cut and 390,000 cubic yards of fill is needed resulting in a net of approximately 330,000 cubic yards of export." At 10 yards of dirt and rocks for a standard dump truck load this would equate to approximately 3 3, 000 truck loads of export material. At the July 10, 2007 public hearing it was pointed out by Mr. Turner's representative that the 720,000 cubic yards figure is wrong because it represents about 10% of the actual amount. I'll let you do the math to understand the possible effect of the statement. It was further pointed out that the exported material will not be moved off of the site because this fill will be moved Forth of Ashley Creek to the former Forest Products Co. industrial site to be used as replacement fill on that area because Mr. Turner is in the process of cleaning up that site. That sounds great until one stops to ask this very important question. where is Mr. Turner taking the fill l and industrial waste from the Forest Products Co. site? Something has to go somewhere, eventually either it will either be removed from the 140 acre site being addressed tonight or from the Forest Products site. If 330,000 cubic yards of export is 10% of the estimate we will see in excess of 33,000 truck loads of fill and industrial waste being removed from the forest Products Co. site to some other location in the county. Supposedly an estimate has been given that the cuts and fills will range from 10' to 3 5' . Will this depth be increased during the process? This is not standard grading preparation for a subdivision. This will be an open pit mining operation that will affect the entire area of the property that has been requested for changes tonight and the 45 acre site to the North of Ashley Creek. This will mean that dust from this site will directly affect Stoneridge to the west, the residential homes to the South, businesses to the North and the entire west side of Kalispell for many years. The air quality rating around the city of Kalispell is already compromised. The negative effect of dust from this site can not be comprehended. It is nay understanding that the city of Kalispell does not allow buildings on filled areas. Exhibit 5.4, as presented my Mr. Turner, shows the entire subdivision sails being affected. If this Growth Policy amendment is adapted and a zone change from R-1 and Industrial is allowed it will create an R -3 island in the middle of rural property that is currently zoned R-1. According to the City of Kalispell Zoning neap, dated May 15, 2007, this property does not adjoin the city of Kalispell. This would be construed as spot zoning. Mr. Turner currently has this property listed for sale with a local real estate office. I would like to read the description of the property as it appears on his listing. "Prime Ashley creekfront development opportunity. 140+1- acres adjoining Stoneridge subdivision. Soon to be zoned city R-3. City services to property line, hilltop lots, fantastic mountain views, owner may consider selling in a smaller parcel at negotiated price. Listing agent related to seller. Property is everything south of Ashley Creek and north of Foys Lame road. Two highway approaches." If you want to increase the real estate value on this property for Mr. Turner's personal benefit you should vote in favor of the requests tonight. However, you have the opportunity tonight to correct a very serious mistake in allowing the Growth Policy changes that will ultimately allow a zone change from an R- 1 and Industrial zone to an R-3 on property that is not physically suitable. Please do the right thing and deny the requests this evening. Thank you for allowing me to present my comments this evening. Sincerely, 4 arllyn_ in creek CUT & FILL PLAN 's"i # L }��ii:a■a ti i i�a a . . � ■ r*` � 1 iir•rr,�ry i[�t a i 4i+.j�•�f�a4 t[t •r*i {.f1a! 11-k r,�_ f� fi.aF'.IaS,r f } atia■i..t a.•aa'. a �r1 ►1 S }s /; all r.{ i.!►: 3" 1 I• i i 1/ • i Y } ah,9,. .►Ira■.F■.ti. 1•Lt of ttl 4fat■yia:.►..rr►; ,►tr,+a►4Fatat,rt '4.4■•Ft+1[r..a■•a■+i.ir1■t■ara.tat 11•� a■a■t: ,ra?1. .T►aa•,a..a :,. ++ a3•a-ri+ar.aa+a.arfr�raJrr�a+a•.r+��: 1�► Jy 1Ja•[t! ►•its +►ai•IaJJr �-1 ? / •.r lfalr a+ra i•arl if1LJ 11r t + [r■r ,salt t.;[■+liil #+#x t ra��i�l taIiF r•Iraa.r►r+•Ft►aa. •►r..ri�' s+i „ l• a Y►• t a i R L J f_ L-' i•[ fY {+ f?f.atrF•,.af.FLi4.a• aasi �L +Frr t.-1,+ ►.. a_aaJ.+aal` i iiii` ► ! �{` •t�ia_t Rl ,�-Iya.�1 tL. LFa+•aJ ii /'.1 / a- �■ +j # y la.la.laaal •Ji•L�i aF•. Jl ... y�a �' aL I Z Z ahrJ•,11J1r1a,r4jj yarl '.+Z 1TJ.1..►#► s►. .r ■ c■ I# T� vi" - eYT�y *. 4 1 11 a .. F_. 11 1 L J. i ► 4 I; { t!talr_a Ja t t 1 i.Jl+.t a•*i 1 i /+Z jxjj f 4}r r++ r■ r1-.la.'tl A'A k 1t a/{++, �'.� ; .1l} 4►/FF ltf+t } # s * r y•; �/ 4a. ri: .aaai ra•rtrv.{• }+aia 11 l i!L•+4 tr,■a•J•, 1 LjFFFF(■■4y}} } 4 ta•,t.l i►f/e•'t/•r 4 � yr*[{4i [� ��7L�: �� x:x� it i#l3;/still; tt 1 t 1•.R a l■ a t 1 f Y►`! l i•}} t.aa•+.1./L►..^rar.r•►#,, � � ; �• T !�"�ti� � �� #t#{'ii��t►flflfliyT��4 � +� Y � } t \ 1 a [ 1 i r a . a l t a _ { t ` ! .. 4 • � � � � 1 ■ � ^ j � � � �/ � 3 � � ■ � I ' � r � � � S i . � � ` 1 . � 1 aaLl}r.al.faiLr•aJ ! t j T ` /■■■ t+ ••{i■ a�f ��-rr� ��-•1.r...a,[■.aa..• "J�t�t��#1 �i �Isrj ��• � [ �� #��t`r� .��;� • a�i.�� „ •a� j jj44 ■ a a a :Lyl l,i rf L.-�F..• la.a1 ((�{`` yy r% f ( ;# s w is• tit it'i�tiniii��wtf.a fY. L#aiS•Itsr tJ ltt t - rc�+t t rr 1 • �i' �� l�F A I�a 1 •��Y 1 � 1 � � � � �� f a � 1 r## �• .7 r t "��• �3�i�t � A��}t�i I I�.� 3�► �Jt l:.;f{f�?`�r Il�r�#+��¢��i��}�.it#� �� '�#�� .+ � ►,a t j t t �.wad .,, i,:t}tR1#'�`t� s. f � � � � � s f �_ � 1 � ■� i�iiil rFr a t.r+1w.�. r. a�y r �� *y�- •� �. , r�ri+i�1 1�'i;#fy�� a ��i :.3 k � �nr.r�st�.jt#•T y'Mfr �� {t�� r7 �if+r�Y f#5 .�# } `�{ � '• , 3tt rai�r4�� iagqt�at#�[I � � ;'s �' ff ► i�...•�- '�Y ., ;..Z� �i. .4. '� rfit#I1Z `.'►tfST7 t:7! + t�. �# s1'J: 41•i�ra.t �t a i ��':••�, i t �3 f:t `� k . �►• ltjj}} f + � * •�YM■ •• ` � ,{f �rr"-o;' ■�+►a.a.--i'`�� #, #41-��+�*f i� = �r : i.. `Ftoll . et-Ir's l ,a �:-. iiii {{f III1 `=*rr f { r a.l 4:-Llrr 1 j 4f- wanes rr7 .iT-Jr ,11■ L 'S L t.ri..aa•.'.i.r►c•._� - h• [a i irk i �I� }:4+►n.rl tl%t•LJ•Ja411. f.17+ r" I,r '. t aa►.►t1 •r.•. iF4L�ilr-Y ►•'r Lka �lt • Ti+-rwr S if Lily et 1 +1 1 tr. i4- `#i< s jr ftr.a,..a1i a•F.•. f rs 1.a-r. 'A .•, ra:ta.�la taf.•. i;.• r�.[[[ 7F I■ r i►H1tt�� 11.1. r.r.Ik t•ar.tir.,L 1•.a! /7 �."rJ •..iRF .r 46 a., _ ...---1L.,1r,✓�� *Ii ,�41ij l ++ tJly Ila# Rl.vr ., 4v •fh as r+a■• Iz4 iJ4 s.rt .. :. a,►1,J +• a-..,•\a,L_ x,..+.Ja•ir:. r:if ra.rtllLi a►,; La i•[- v.r i 1 ii yl+a1�;14h141r►ara.ti:'`*trfA•/jT+►T}t;a `•1tw.Ft_F.la'. :,1•+-�.rJ.ia ��-'�rRi ar{.. t.r.►'.� xr•.rw i v l•rri ► a r l tiif►a.at li L•►+.■ } I r�� Fa +rr4aa,, f r�ii:..._.a.'.ra•+r.rya!rai..•LI-.aitl.al.t•`+rrr•..Jrrr..r r i. i tF.R L t I r'•.F .1 y 3rlal 1■. ►/►rF ar'tir•L►t,lJ►. 4'1141Y rtrrlr.� Irt /artLl••.�•ff'.. far•r•■ari ■ataarlrar►r-; �....•••w +•1* r L,4,■ clil tirl ss► ir.;�a w"1 ■ .}l`•Fi•'w.a1r .. L:■.1t.1of..1Jw V'.F R*r#,4}�� lit' ■wfrf. ► 7fR• ••+••; rF i` C•Rfrwfta.+..r.., R► '�+ I ■IFi I,#1 /a`,.a rrMfae.tia: aaF +'X \'T:. tl••+r►►rx '1 t.lt' i.tyF+•.Y.►f.aar r.=: :•�•�--:'+'•■err. l;.•: ILvr. �y:; a Jal t;i►/ i�-l..]r/rra�.altari■rl.•a:F:►•twrrarr!�/r•ff•-a/+1 :F•rx II►.•w*+.f ar rtt.1, rlii#r^tl .•t t.ta^1•..a *��, 'r# fill #r►aa•►■.Irt 19f t,ra t f■r rt►f ► Ifaatil; tars •,JA {�,y '.s. r�.,.r tial+f #r1 •rr►rr:■rof r+r tY a f t�■v6 frR ir-11r/t■r. ai4_Z-r#a', i1 r:•!1,/,�t►•f r+l f..►/17•/!#+t-ff;a it Lk 1!+••'tr.. .L.f►rika all. iy : far, .-ta al ,aaa .aLvaitL'*i 1•ti. rrK #ar•#rrTr,Jw+fL�►■tar.-... ..,.. ...... r•f.r7.t. �r'�� .•L` at}1 +�a a*44tj+'"t!.. a=� Lra a<•rw+f►•f►J+ar•tar.rria..w•rra+r#te:ir■rrrrly►wrrrZ�►irr►..tort-:+•.at t,ra ar 'L..•i,: y r\r+a.N73" ft a.tr■r J ;usp•ra.rrrl;a ia,ar+R►aw..ar.rfrr.rrarfr rrfrt*si1F►r#• ■it.r•.n;l•,•i aL ra�la?..Fts1 �,1i faai fa- r.a 1a►a.yftlt. �i::ZrT t ■r.►.rra~All -'f*'r4- Trgt 71 r�trf ,r ar.Laa• t.rr►r+rrrirrrrrT■rr*■f+ar1 .�Z{x ►: -wffcrTaR. 11a r t: L I� t J ! T! e• i 1+ it • i/# r r r r. l 4 •. / 1 �}. W f}► r a r i f i r r/ 1/ i l i f l Y f!< r F i f f►*► 1 1 1 r.• • 1•• 2 4 A l. i 1. �� l at ;.,, l� f t i tJ • a s■,� J Lila ■f • t ►v tr aaVa nai !1/wr rl;*>r ►y.L\/i rl�fi f l&0 *1 itr4lf ra lr tJ/irt■ f/ a: L r.,. •1 - ■ 'ti■i tXl ,7.=t - aYa y.r r* •:■kV,10'r fl t.•!#1r �L r.rwr.r�la-4#4Ffv wr rti!■rr.Iw7f6 r■+ir#ar a►tr. ,,+r L•t �l...ri }n.i iH .4 ► Lr•r•.,{ ►ai'. H, 1 # •• FWri ►■!.■ a.'•.!' r7 a•r•+•f #f#fr#ar1Y ■Yt1at/!!a/. i$r■Tr.af/!Y ■l. 4f1''rar. i'A41YLA f 'ja■■1 Fr ra.■►•{� ►irrif tr{aaf•raFi►t 1t,l r•yr •Ir:f•'+� ff.�± r 7.w►Yw'^.2t_1 .f .`-.ik R-Y 1F+ 1.FC •1 ."..\ly /.lai.•1r f•.ar►'i� 1.a+ra•Lra.'■at•Frz• ► .a;•.atlara■IJ •r■� rI+■wt•••��,•r ;ii��r: a.fre.- ..., _.�.I_.. .3t� Inr -�' tr#,.rr/art..t .r:s:•w aYa-.akla*y+:•t■ra!�ar f!rt•LLitiala.ta; s4S, mp :: ■ twat{•ri+tfrtr.+■rr ►rf■/J�fr�:fires_�.I�.>f- •l�rrTe/►r!r•ill�ra,rlr;■a■Jt: t11r1 Its, r..}lIr+JL:.a _;.al.aitlkiJyyy.�y�taajxFrF F 44k f1 illy►a.�r 6Ill f�ra4atft rYVrrr/=1.1[wf we, Pis. r`_Yf ratf=��1••r.aTarM!■1rFrr vr. .[{►rlMflr.[•�33kY1 �w K X'{i..M M1/,Rrl�fY,-■ITl iF„a_a,•••••• r.t[l tty/*0r .it •Rf .•...�r;lr.ra.t R?R ■!, lhw Irr►It. .. •xr/rf TtI YYf.♦;;i 1�'. •r*\sta.►!11 •a.rrr, i iaT-�T/i7tt:.Li.i If A a; t l r f+•.,..ror }$1 a -.r**-ii • { ��i'■r'\.r1 F:f.• i a{t■r,ia►a.:. Trtaa*/aaaa aa .t LaiL .aL 4.e•t� „' r`l r+r■c1r:z az tIr ,v:i�;'J•r+rarfl rr+l 1 a#rirs ar4a4F' fraarrJ ,►ftl+..�•.a,.!i fi7J ti+.yac taa a,l .. a;:�: a a Tr7arts• r. Ya1fa4j;■YrY/�w+ irI a,i'r,w,�a•i*rylW!a}$Fr•� � l►ar3;f•L�i rFll ilalLe /-tIrIk t '.erli.......r•..,aa4i`i►ri`�#r!•l><_:.'L.%ri}+:.1■ r}*r1' •►st• FF is - T �Z a r-1Ly • L k 1 i r 4 F• R,*. N`i 1 / t a! , 1 IF j . r r • «i •. a s , i aJ-r +•? til r 1 4^r• .i.\►•1.Arf;r#w'-t�}i+it f ::# • , t� �t11 �ggar,r►a.rrar !rati. .r;r.tf ! r • i r • r r..t } ► * a • a f'.�! t x i ! a ■ • a . . r r •* r ay.} r] JI 13�!j.+y j3 1 i r H r•at Ill Irrrr■ +ayr af�a a-,/r■tr rf rr ■•Lr F► / ii{� r��i��tii+17• r;[►Y r� 1 4 le }ri} i f' T■tZ■f ►! •a +I■ ■ 7 R.L1f.+LYf' •T ►►!'•7iis+Y:arY 1171:F r i�1. 1� ► `�:{+• it 4rRa. laJlrl :Y :Ii,r■■R y.KSi 1 Rjy yyy ►a� it t4 t a iji}+t *}.��r +_.. 1 a4a, l/�{ju �► �'�-1 i�r� +i��i�{i*lrL:rrr�w a•l iri .•..Trr .i*/ t: I*ii■r{+■#► jry �t♦lji.' IF *r xif�lli !� 1{ali4+ram iYvr�J: +_*iJl}T■+w:+:r[IJI:+l if tf i� ► �' II�f+Ii ifs*! t}��/+a.JfT+} ,ice +f..ryrTip.�l4fi� ra�i•{ial.a:•rl >•[aJaFl�• r _. +a i�la[41raFatt�2lI! #� ,r.r Willow Creek Cut & Fill Plan Red =Cut, Blue = FIII ,2"MT July 6, 2007 Kalispell Planning DepartzM 17 2nd Stet East Suite 211 Iali�pell, lT9W 1 Attention; Tom Jentz JULH D 10 2007 0 LISPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT We the undersigoed, given the ruW dwacta of ow iwish to offrWly profit any ages in the cat zm mg detnity or R-1., 1 M2 CoUnty and inclUdM in dw proposed pwiect known 4s Willow crc&1t can be deed as Trams 1, 1 Alt 1 B, 1. BA,, 113B, t D., 1DA, 1 E, I F'-0 I FA, IFBr 7AB w;thin. the N 112 of the S 1 motion 13, TownWp 28 i, r Range 22 W. P. M. M., Flaffmd County, %mbza- This protest is elusive of the Application For Growth Policy Am (G A), peen For Amwxation and Initial Zonin& Applkation For Planned Uuft t (PM)Major SubdMsion PreUmbiaty Ply Application.. The 1 .5 + =e siw is located on N_ fL N. Foys I ak Road. An addi400al growth policy amendment from hdustriW to Suburban ResideraiW on a 24 =e potion (note that" 24 acres lie$ umdemeath the proposed by -pm and includes why Ashley Creek floodplain ad some undevelopable land all adja " to and east of ft wposed willw Cre& DeveloPMOM that was irmdvertentlY left 014 of the original application submissions by the applkwt).We all own lots widiin ISO feet, Plow rem to Montana Cade AroiomW 2005 as fellows: 76-2-305_ Edon of zoning repMom - protem (1) A reguMon, restriefion, and boundary may be wgpplemenR4 ehanged4 modified, or repealed* 1pmvisions of 7 -2-303 relative to public ad offieW naice apply ek to all changes and amendmeaU. (2) An a€aendmm may not become effective excqA upon favorable vow of two-thirds of present and voting rnembm of the city or tam couch or legisWive body of the tntmicipality if a prat agkinst a cage pumaam to =bsectioo (1) is sib by the owner of 25% cw mm of-, (a) the area of lots includM cite: or (b) dwse lots 150 feet from a lot included in a pfoposed change. NAM C Cal f L - - 7sa-ss&/ 155 spry 2115 7 - 9;? (V (0 a a,5 7 -;L4 6 R -a,57,..,(0(0;�, hU Phankkg Deputme Y,4�% MT 59901 A tisndo: Tom Jentz zoom led known as WiDow Crfti.It=1e &=iWasTracts I,IA1,1JR,I 11313,10,IDA"113pIF,IKVD, 7AR 1 !2 of dm S 1 /2 Section 13, Township W. Rwap 22 W.1*. A W Phidmd sty,Monum& This pmOM is fixMhc of'the Rcation for Gmwtb Pafty Ammdmmt (GPAX Petm For and I� Zonin& Appficatim For FWnwd * Sub&�vWm �. Fbt AMHoWlm IU 140.5+ am sftelis' WNW an N. FL N. Foys Lake RmA An fim I0ftsbal to &bftm RaidkmtW on a 24 am pudion (note 1W ffis 24 a= Iles propom�d byjxm ad inchmits wedmu&j Ash*CM& &XKfphdn and som uakak"ble d all to ad cut of the Mpmood WHIew *0 was ` left out of t "WW applkarkm mbm� by the Rcaat).We AU ovm lots whin 150 feeL aft 7sz-s5 61 &I1 1 _me, -7 ' #� PJ July 6, M7 Kaliil Plannft 172nd.Sbvd Bag, SuiW211 KafispalL Mr 59901 Aftsnftt Tom JeDM We to umlerstga4 gNan of o' veighbwhwd, wish to OfficiaRY Pmtest wW dUMM is the v==t d * or R-Is 1-2 County a h ded in M wawa 'ill w k. It = be dwn%ed as `Irkb I3 IAI, 18, IBA, IBIS, in, IDA, IE, If# IFA" 1FB, 7AB wits the N 112 of t S 1 Secdo.13, Towns* 29 N. RMF 22 W- P. NrL Mo CWnty, MOnUu L Thb protest L's incIusmi of the Apples For Chowth Policy Amendalima (GPA), Peddon For Anv�� and 1hitial 7a& & AppplicafiM For Amnod lit t (PM)Vmd ]Wa* &�MvWm fte~ iPit ameaftent to Subwban Raskhmtial an a 24 acre pxtion (n " this 24 acm lies hod allRO=MttDaad cast offt pmposed Wflbw Creek Develeft Out Of the odgmal applkadm submissions by the appii t�We all own lots w thin I -50 feet Jul fig 2007 KaUspoll Pbmh% DepubaM 17 2nd SbeftF=4 Suite211 Kalispe% iT 59901 D E6��MC�D JUL 1 0 2007 LISPED. PLANNING DEPARTMENT We te undasigned, gim ft rurW of Oa Beighbodmod, v&b to OfWWY Fvtmg my &iMn in Cam. It cm to descril+d as Trams 1,1A1,1B,1BA2 1RB9 ID, I IAA,1Z 1Fw 1FAt IFBv 7AB wMin the N 1/2 of'the S 1■2 Secdon 13, Township M RaW 22 W. i ■ K X!P Fktbmd meaty, MWWm lu pry ts inclusive Ofthe Applicafim For Gard Pair OP4 � Fear 'on and hitia Zoniq& Appkadm For p'bmned M),aW Ma . , P"muHimmy PWt Appian. IU 1 .;5+ me sita I$' locawd on N. H. N. Foys Late Roe& An 'fipaHcy undue ft ix posW by -pus a As * Cka& floodplain an smm wxkvelopable lmd aU to aw Oast of aw mposw WmOW crcek vewbpmaot aw was r kft of ft orioW applicahm suf minim by tbo appucant)oWe an own los within ISO fmL '7b�-I Qco '/lS5 -Dsys 7f i -' � '-S '3 f -r ..-W J ! Z-� `"Sr 7 4, - R -;P.,/ &) 05 July 6, 2007 Kalispell Plowing ng t 17 2n d Street Eat Suite 211 Attentic ; Tom Ientz WO the un&rsigwcL givw to rum dwacter of am neighbothwd, wish to officially protect any changes in the gent zoning density o�r R 1,1-2 County aM iachuW in the pmposed project kwwn as Willow Creed. It can be descrn'bed as Try 1 y 1 Al v I B, I RA, I BB, I Ds,1 IAA, I E} 1 F, I FA, I FB, 7A S w bin the 1 f2 of the S 12 Section 13, Township 28 R Rmge 22 W. P. N. M, FWhead C=1y, Mom• This protest 'is Mlusive offt Applica6on For G wth Polity Amendment (GPA), Frxidon For Ammation and Initial Zon' Appficd on For Fined Unit DevdWpmmt ("iD)AM Major Subdivisiou PreRmimy plat Application. Ilie 140,S+ acm site ls locaWd on N r H. T "I Road. Ao additional wth policy smendmmt from Indu&WW to Sahmim ResidenUW on a 24 am porthm ( to dW this 24 mores lies underneath dw proposed bye and inchmies wetlands, .Ashley Lek floodpWn and some undevelopable land all adj a=t to and eat of the W dkyw Creek Dewlopment dud ww kodyWently left out of the ongmal applicatio a submissions by the applicant),We all own low within 150 feet, LOT # NAME It'll &Wft9 air '- »..ter rl 15 45-1- (,(3"7 .�, I 56 -.1 b�1 q Kalispell P[mu .ing Department 17 2nd Street Fast, Saute 211 Kalispell, NIT 59901 Attention: Torn Jentz We the underslgn4 given the ru l character of our neighborhood„ wish to officially protest any changes in the current zon hag density or R.M 1, 1-2 Copy and included in the proposed project known as Willow Creep It can be descnbed as Tracts 1, 1 A 1, 1 B} 1 BA, 1 BB, 10, 1 DA, I Es 1 F, 1 FA, 1 F% 7AB within the N 1 of the S 112 Section 13, Township 28 N. Range 22 W. p. M, M., F lidwad County, Montana. This protestis inclusive of the Applicab ors For Growth Poll A somftent (GPA), Petition For Annexation and CY Initial Ong, Applxewion For Planned Unit Development (PUD),and Major Subdivision PreUaniulry Plat Application, Thy 140.5+ acre site is located on N. H. N, Foys lie Road. An additional growth policy amendment fxorn 1.ndustrial to Suburban l sidential on a 24 acre portion (nowt the this 24 ages lies underneath the proposed by-pass and includes wetlands, fey Creep flowiplain and some undevelopable land all adjacent to and east of the proposed 'willow Cmek Development that was inadvertently left out of the original application submissions by the applicant).We all own lots within 150 feet, Please refer to Monte Cow Ammated 2005 as follows~ 76-2-305. Altemtion of zoning regulations - protest. (1) A regulation, restriction, and boundary may be amended, supplemented, changed} inodlfi4 oT repealeil, The provisions of 76-2-303 relative to puhlie hearings and official notice apply equally to all changes and amendment_ (2) An amendment may not become effective except upon favorable Vote of two-thirds of present and voting members of the city or town council or legislative body of the municipality if a protest against a change pursuant to subsection (1) is sib by the owners of 25% or more of: (a) the area of lom included any imposed change: or (b) those lots 150 feet from a lot included in a proposed change. L[YC dl NAME ADDRESSMM PFfJNE /Z S i616.1two ps, 75Z k era es. or 4L 11S;AjiKeJ OV, P. V(p �c ko I M r've t ■ � W � ,- •ly &4k a ft f Ve Ro Xv ILI r• 1 f , a y 1 YL 3 &J July 6, 2001 KASPoU Pbrmft Dqmftwa 172ndMred FB* &Abc211 Yja ""tL wr 59901 the undefsioa4 the oft vAsh to OfficidlY POOted wkY dhw� tt owca � sty Or fL-i i 1-2 � and � � the �` as � 1,1Al,1% 1�A„ 1Baa 1D, IDA7 iE, iF, I �� 7� er n the��. It yam► a P. K Cm*o Mom, TbU ftfflW ` AppHcofim For Plumud Uft Dvw&Vomt (PW�RM M4* ftb&VMOn Fft&WIMY Plo amoodment IrdomW to Subwtm pesideadd co a 24 wepordon (noft tit tt U 24 w" ties md wet bloldsor As it CM& � � ' " �O�Jt u�d�n� by -pant � • �f d aM � to a oft W � DewkpvcO tim final appikatim W=Miom by *e appUcm)-We aR a" W *Wn 150 fiwt MARC L. NEVAS 1475 West Reserve Drive Kalispell, MT 59901 406-756-2332 June 25s 2007 Honorable Mayor and Council of the City of Kalispell coo City Manning Dept. 17 2na St. fast, Suite 211 Kalispell, MT 59901 Dear Mayer Kennedy and Councilors: My name is Marc Nevas, I live at 1475 west Reserve eve. and I am one of the neighbors situated directly north of the proposed Starling :Development. I aim spewing on behalf of myself and a number of my neighbors who could not attend tonight's hearing. We are not opposing the development of our neighborhood, only we are requesting that you follow the wisdom of your own Kalispell City Growth Policy. The Kalispell growth policy contains some specific language on growth policy P y Strategy, - - y,.. Update amendments. In the Implementation Strafe �n section 3. �rro�vth_I�olic LT Amendm!pnt, strategy "e ' reads, Evaluation criteria should inclide consistency with the goals and policies of f the growth policy, state law and other established policies adopted by the city council as well as a demonstrafion of the public need and supportfor the change, the proposed change is the most effective means of meeting the need and there is a benefit to the public rather than henejWng one or a few property owners at the empense r�, f others. (Emphasis added.) Clearly, the Starling project benefits the developer and the seller of the property, but at our expense. Section 5. General Growth Policy Amendment, strategy CILe" states that when an amendment is made for a development proposal, the wnendrnent application should include a convincing showing of need; and neighborhood compatibility. The amendment application for Starling demonstrates neither. We fail to see how a convincing shoving of need has been accomplished. Without the Growth Plan Amendment the Developer can build 2,560 units of housing. What is the convincing shoring of need to build 3,000 units as opposed to 21, S o` If Kalispell and Flathead County had a pressing shortage of lots there might be compelling need, but according to a recent newspaper article there are 26,000 lots approved in Flathead County. There is clearly no compelling need for more lots in this area other than the developer has requested it. ''without the Growth Policy amendment it will take the developer 17 gears to sell out rather than 20 at a rate of ISO units per year. Also, we fail to see that there is neighborhood compatibility, at least not from the neighborhood to the north; and we should know, we are their neighbors. Instead the densest development with the smallest lots and hones and a commercial center are placed directly adjacent to our homes and not more central into the development. Placing a commercial center adjacent to single family hones on rural sized lots is not neighborhood compatibility. It is the opposite. The Second Issue I will address is the mysterious disappearing of the Analysis of the Traffic Impact Study by the Department of Public 'works. Page 22 of the Planning Staff Report Section 8 States: Sumnwvy and Recommendations ations in the traffic impact sturdy sus that given the long period of time over which Starling is expected to be developed and occap4 the traffic study should he aped on a regular tarsi& The PuMe t. has reviewed tip gaffif+act sfuj& and will require the appropri&e ndfigadon. as each pka of tke project develops, recommended c€ nAWon of apprord wouM require " impact study far each phase of the project. Here in front of you is the largest development proposal ever in the history of Kalispell and as of 3 : oo this afternoon there is no written evaluation of the traffic study by the Department of Public ''works. What happened to it, where did it go? Is it available to staff and not to the public? Frankly I am quite intrigued by this and a bit perturbed. It was not available for the Planning Board Ming on May 22 and it is now July 16th and it is still not available_ How can you possibly evaluate this project and it's 10mpact without and evaluation of the `I'IS? How can you approve a Growth Policy Amendment that will generate even more traffic without an evaluation? And where is the public access to this information? It is 7:00 p.m. on the eve of the approval. or denial of the Growth Plan Amendment for urban level development on a parcel of land the size of all of downtown Kalispell and do you know where your Department of Transportation's evaluation of the TIS is? I don't Now another mystery. on May 22 the conditions above were amended by the following sentence: The uhe Wokrhs Lkrartment may wm' e the required update to the traffic 0mpact study at their d srr n. I'm not trying to be flip here but it seems that this whole process is going forward with no thought as to the evaluation of the impact of traffic on this development ... none, nada, zero. I am going to step out of my role as neighbor for a minute and talk to you as a citizen. No matter where I live in this beautiful and enchanted galley of ours, this most valuable resource, one of my greatest concerns as we grow is the careful and thoughtful planning and execution of plans in regards to traffic. So I am not only concerned about the traffic generation of this particular development, but background traffic also. As a citizen as well as a neighbor I would implore you to evaluate this and all future TI S with great care and consideration. Do not rush for approval until you are satisfied that that the mitigation for the next twenty years of increasing traffic generation is planned for and funded. Igo not, I repeat do not waive the required update to the traffic impact study at the discretion of the Department of Pubk works. Do not allow us to be the next Missoula by not planning; now for traffic in the future_ I and my neighbors have a different point of view than most of'the public that have spoken in front of you regarding this development and that differing point of view comes from these factors: we are not builders, designers engineers nor Montana Deal Estate Brokers that will have any direct or indirect benefit from this project. We are the immediate residential neighbors directly impacted by the development who will suffer loss both financially and to the semi rural lifestyle we have enjoyed up until now. Please understand that we are not opposing development in our neighborhood. we are not saying "Not In My Back yard.." Our message tonight is: Given that development will happen in our back yard we ask that you follow your own Kalispell City Growth Plan. That is 1. The amendment should cone from a cownc � r s win of need 2. The amendment should evidence wig bores co rtibility 3. Lnfonvation re &n publis hearin s to men t r sals and sty recommend adons should be available with q4 ate dime or review and con videration_ 4. And finally, from page 71., 1he extent and tkgr~ee of public involvement should depend an the scale ,of ` the project or propose` changes. A gwneral growth. Ml i a amen&nertt, neighborhood plan or maj'or changes to land use designations may include collecting opinions, assessing community needs, and' inventory of services and resources and pro►&ng tie oppor tun4 for nwaninV"u1 public involvement As I have stated in nay earlier presentation, we have been shut out of public participation, particularly at the level of meaningful public involvement at the time of Planning board consideration of this project. Now it night seem that the train is on the track the juggernaut is gathering steam and it is too late to make any meaningful changes. But not so. It is not too late. bake sure there is a convinci g showing of need, insist that the project is compatible to it" s neighbors,, and see that all concerns regarding mitigation of traffic are met now and at each phase into the future. Thank you. Marc L. I evas NOTES of TRAFFIC STAY BY BOB HORNS • At the very beginning, the TIS lists three objectives, the third of which is, "Identification of roadway improvements that may be directly attributable to the proposed development." How can the city determine what those are if they haven't even finished their review of the TIS?!? It is highly unusual for a city _r-_and city anywhere to be amending their growth Policy for a square mile of land without completing a review of the traffic impact. study. • Just FYI, the 2005 ADT on W. Reserve is 41,575. • Trip Generation: while this project is touted as a "mixed use community", the TIS can only come up with 4% internal trips (6% in the very late phases). That's not even one trip per unit per day internalized to the development. Does the traffic engineer not expect people to avail themselves of all these coffee shops, news stands, and other "neighborhood commercial" facilities? If it were truly a mixed use "community", one would think that the percentage of internalized trips would be much higher. Then too, what of all the pedestrian and bikeway connections? Is anyone expected to use there? Council should look into this further and try and figure out what the city is actually getting. Also, the TIS assumes no "pass -by" trips. This seems odd given that there are non-residential land uses shown on both W. Reserve and Stillwater Road. If they aren't intending to attract diverted trips, why did they locate these non --residential uses where they did? Here again Council should be sure of ghat the city is getting with this project. • Future Traffic Conditions: Assumes a growth rate in background (non site generated) traffic of 1.7 to 3.8% based on data from MDT. This MUST be checked over tine! Periodic TIS updates CBOT be waived. But, how can these background traffic growth rates be so low given the HS and all the commercial development in the area? This doesn't seem right. • Page 52 and at least two other places in the TIS: Recommends regular updates "to maintain a realistic understanding of traffic patterns and volumes..." The TIS DOES NOT say, "Future phase by phase TIS updates may be waived . " • Level of Service (LOS) and Future Improvements: The roundabout may experience stress as early as 2012. Volumes on W. Reserve may exceed the initial 3-lane recommended improvement. (They why did the TIS recommend a 3-lane improvement?) • Massive improvements are needed for W. Reserve/Hwy 93, including a passible grade separated interchange (cost unknown). • Evaluation: Doubling of area traffic by 2025. • At the very beginning, the TIS lists three objectives, the third of which is, "Identification of roadway improvements that may be directly attributable to the proposed development." How can the city determine what those are if they haven't even finished their review of the TISM It is highly unusual for a city„ ---and city anywhere-- to be amending their growth Policy for a square mile of land without completing a review of the traffic impact study. • Just FYI, the 2005 ADT on W. Reserve is 41,575. • Trip Generation: while this project is touted as a "mixed use community", the TIS can only cone up with 4% internal trips (6% in the very late phases). That's not even one trip per unit per day internalized to the development. Does the traffic engineer not expect people to avail themselves of all these coffee shops, news stands, and other "neighborhood commercial" facilities? If it were truly a mixed use "community", one would think that the percentage of internalized trips would be much higher. Then too, what of all the pedestrian and bikeway connections? Is anyone expected to use then? Council should look into this further and try and figure out what the city is actually getting. Also, the TIS assumes no "pass --by" trips. This seems odd given that there are non-residential land uses shown on both W. Deserve and Stillwater Road. If they aren't intending to attract diverted trips, why did they locate these non-residential uses where they did? Mere again, Council should be sure of what the city is getting with this project. • Future Traffic Conditions: Assumes a growth rate in background (non site generated) traffic of 1.7 to 3.8% based on data from MDT. This MUST be checked over tune! Periodic TIS updates CANNOT be waived. But, how can these background traffic growth rates be so low given. the IDS and all the commercial development in the area? This doesn't seem right. • Page 52 and at least two other places in the TIS: Recommends regular updates "to maintain a realistic understanding of traffic patterns and volumes..." The TIS DOES NOT say, "Future phase by phase TIS updates may be waived." • Level of Service (LDS) and Future Improvements: The roundabout may experience stress as early as 2012. volumes on W. Deserve may exceed the initial 3-lane recommended. improvement, (They why did the TIS recommend a 3-lane improvement?) • Massive improvements are needed for W. Reserve/Hwy 93, including a possible grade separated interchange (cost unknown). ■ Evaluation: Doubling of area traffic by 2025. Just generally, I have never seen a TIS use "MDT data" to make assumptions about the growth of background traffic. Usually, background traffic is projected based upon what is going on in the area. In the case of NW Kalispell, there's a whole lot going on. Look not only at all the commercial development that has occurred in the past five years, look at what is projected to occur with "Bucky's mall" and the completion of the commercial development between Stillwater Road and US 93. I would have expected a more thorough analysis of background traffic growth. Background traffic is the key unknown that will drive future improvements. Site generated traffic is easy. Hope this helps. Petition of Protest July 16, 2007 Honorable Mayor Pamela Kennedy and the Kalispell City Council 312 1 't Ave, East Kalispell, MT 59901 Re; Protest of proposed R-3 zoning; Marling development Pursuant to Sec. 76-2-3 05, FICA, we the undersigned., representing 25 % of the owners of properties within 150 feet of the property known as the Starling development, described as Section 35 of Township 29 Nordl, Lange 22 West, do hereby vigorously protest the requested R- 3 (Urban Single -Family Residential) initial zoning for this property upon its annexation to the City of Kalispell. After exammmg the application materials, including the PUD site plan., it is clear to us that all of the developer's and. City's objectives can be met with R-2 (Sm'gle-Fanudy Residential) zoning, Printed Name Signature Address Phone 1 •� { . '� f � �� . � � � � � � yf L4.. r� � r '� C.1't'• � �'�,�...:..� f � 1 �� it�J�• if � k-..'�,�. j �� %� S �'--{ r i w-y r� J-- {' OZ) 4-6 Petition of Protest July 16, 2007 Honorable Mayor Pamela Kennedy and the Kalispell City Council 312 1st Ave. East Kalispell, MT 59901 Re: Protest of proposed R-3 zoning; Starling development Pursuant to See. 76-2-305, MCA, we the undersigned, representing 25% of the owners of properties within 150 feet of the property known as the Starling development, described as Section 35 of Township 29 North, Range 22 West, do hereby vigorously protest the requested R- 3 (Urban Single -Family Residential) initial zoning for this property upon its annexation to the City of Kalispell. After examining the application materials, including the PUD site plan, it is clear to us that all of the developer's and City's objectives can be met with R-2 (Single -Family Residential) zoning.