07-15-85 Street & Alley Comm MinutesJuly 15, 1985 PUBLIC HEARING, 5TH AVENUE WEST PROJECT 7:30 P.M.
0 (HELD DURING THE COUNCIL MEETING)
Councilman Paul Palmer chaired this hearing. The entire Council, DPW
Hammer, Parks Superintendent Drent, and Mike Frazer, engineer for the project
were in attendance, as well as about 30 individuals interested in this issue.
Mr. Frazer gave an overview of the purpose and scope of the project and
C. Palmer asked for responses. These responses are listed below.
Martin Huggins, 500 blk: Four feet on each side will not make a 41' wide
street. Five feet on each side would but would take out all the trees in the
process. Compromise by taking 3' on one side and 5' on the other and save the
trees on one side. Seventh was redone using only 3' per side.
George Rhodes: The newer trees will have to come out. There is considerable
truck traffic on 5th. In favor of the projectbut against taking out the trees.
' James ?, 1044 5th Ave: Concerned about truck traffic. Stop sign is only
an ornament. Indicated a sewer problem. Complained against paying for curbs.
Wayne Battles, 100 blk: We''ll give you the parking - leave the trees.
Everyone is used to parking in back. Will sidewalk be torn up? (No)
Steve Breck: Why widen for increased traffic flow? Parking on two sides
would be an advantage.__
• Karen Breck: She is for decreasing traffic and 5th Ave and 4th Street
corner traffic control because of the school children.
James Patter representing Herlocks: For the trees. Consider one-way traffic.
Roy Ross: Save the trees. One way traffic.
Rick Hall, 436 5th: For the trees. Parking on one side of the street
not used now - save the space.
Craig Hess: Forester,_disagrees that the trees have outlived their useful-
ness. They, with attention, will provide shade, reduce noise and air pollution.
Don Ross, 810 5th: Where he is there is curb on his side but not on the
other - why replace curb and gutter when City could take space needed from the
other side where there is no curb?
Dora Ross: Parking by High School on both sides is necessary.
Marlene Allen: Can't get rid of the High School - so leave us our trees.
Against cost to taxpayers for curbs. Truck traffic increasing. City is railroading
us for the railroad. Restriction on trucks not posted. Speeding is a problem
and it is going to get worse.
• 115 5th: Save trees on at least one side.
•
•
PUBLIC HEARING, 5TH AVENUE WEST PROJECT
July 15, 1985
Page 2
Monte Mandarino, 136 2nd Street: Had a foretaste of traffic when Main
Street was redone. For the trees. Improving sewer and water doesn't necessitate
widening the street. Trees are very special part of Kalispell.
Gay Modrell: For the trees. Concerned about traffic and F.I.F.T.H. patrons.
Bill Whitter, 3rd Avenue East: When the trees were removed from 3rd the
residents didn't get any part of them. The residents care for the trees the
City doesn't. Replace trees on private property rather than on the ROW.
Norma Jean Gates: Keep 5th as is. Trees have stopped two cars from coming
into house. Concern about eliminating snow in winter with a wider street. Concern
for Elrod children with the traffic.
F. T. O'Boyle: Two foot green strip on urban plot map from way back.
Collection streets laid out - 6th shows as a collector as well as Center - use
them instead of 5th. Too much traffic on 5th. Truck pollution. Asked for
traffic count on 5th. Leave as it is!
C. Palmer indicated that all the responses would be considered at a meeting
of the Street and Alley Committee at 3:00 P.M. on July 24, 1985. The public
is welcome. The Committee will make a recommendation to Council so that a decision
can be made concerning 5th Avenue West.
ajg
STAT NENT OF TOM AND LINDA TURLOCK CONCRRNING 5th AVE. WEST
• CITY COUNCIL VIEETING; JULY 159 1985
For the last couple of months, we've heard rumors that 5th Ave. W.
was going to be widened to improve access to the new mall, and we've
noticed survey marks along the sidewalks. We've kept asking our
councilman and checking the paper to find out when we, taxpaying res-
idents of the city of Kalispell, would get our chance to say our bit.
So Friday afternoon we find out that we have until Monday night to
prepare remarks to defend our neighborhoods This isn't much time for
the people of modest means who have been living for years on the west
side of Kalispell, making it such a desirable place for a mall. We
don't believe that the mall developers got just one quick chance to
make their wishes known!
Eight years ago the city asisted with low interest home improvement
loans so the area could be "spruced up" —they seemed to want this area
to be a better place to live. Now they say they want it to be an
efficient traffic corridor. Traffic problems aren't solved by more
• cars and larger roads. If this was the solution, Los Angeles wouldn't
have traffic problems!
The proposed 10-foot widening of the road means 5 feet would be added
to each side of the road —an area to the middle of the existing side-
walks would be devoted to cars. This, of course, wipes out the trees
which, according to the city's Public Works Director, "are shot, ... in
bad shape" and have "outlived their usefulness". We hear this argument
every time officials want to cut doun our city's trees. The 5th Ave. W.
trees haven't "outlived their usefulness" —they still provide greenery,
beauty, and shade. If they were replaced with little ones (as was done
on 3rd Ave. E. near Center St.) those trees wouldn't have any usefulness
for many years. With such callous attitudes towards our neighborhood's
amenties, perhaps it's some public officials who have "outlived their
usefulness"; When making a more efficient traffic corridor on the
east side, streets weren't widened at the expense of the trees in those
more affluent neighborhoods —one -ways were created. Has this option
been considered for 5th and 6th Avenues West? Or was that just an op-
tion for the east side —maybe their trees hadn't "outlived their
usefulness%
(2)
• The final straw in this issue is financing. The city proposes to use
tar, money for the project —we are supposed to pay for the privelege of
living in a neighborhood gutted by the city, where the oar will reign
supreme. Do the city officials actually believe that most people want
to live beside a major through —way and that they will actually help make
it happen without protest?
So, in conclusion, we ask the council to maintain the integrity of our
neighborhood by not widening the road and thus gutting our neighborhood.
One —ways are possible and more traffic could be handled at a lower cost.
We also ask that they listen to the advice of an expert on trees who can
help them refurbish the trees along 5th Ave. W. so they can regain their
"lost usefulness". Neighborhoods are what make a city exist and good
city officials try to help them improve —they donft tear them apart.
Tom and Linda Hurlock
417 3rd "at. W.
• Kalispell, MT
0
0