Council tables Lookout Estates

In a rare, if not unprecedented, action Monday night, the Columbia Falls City Council rejected the findings of fact for a residential subdivision and asked for more information.

As a result, a decision on Lookout Estates was tabled until June 4, when council members want better answers about why City Manager Bill Shaw and the Planning Board recommended approval.

Lookout Estates is a 27-lot preliminary plat request for 24 wooded ridge-top acres west of Columbia Falls along Montana 40. To the east lies the Midway drive-in theater and an RV park, and to the west is the Nichols Acres subdivision of five- to 10-acre home sites.

With council member Charlie McCubbins absent and member Don Barnhart removing himself from the matter because of potential business conflicts, the council voted 3-2 to reject the underlying information provided by Shaw and the developer's team.

Council members Doug Karper and Julie Plevel and Mayor Jolie Fish voted against accepting those facts. Members Harvey Reikofski and Mike Shepard voted to accept them.

Then, at the end of the 3 1/2 hours spent on the public hearing and council discussion, Ski Development's proposal was put on hold by a second, unanimous council vote.

Chad Wold, the lawyer for developer Bill Drososki, promised to provide more information on key sticking points - subdivision access off Montana 40 and a dead-end road to the north onto Braig Lane that opens only for emergency use, the subdivision's location in a high-fire-hazard area, any effect its water wells and sewer system will have on neighbors' water supplies, and impacts on wildlife.

Neighboring landowners turned out in force to oppose Lookout Estates on several different grounds. They also had questions about rumors that this is only Phase 1 of Drososki's plans, which have not included any information on the purported Phase 2.

But Drososki's team offered very little Monday night about Ski Development's plan. They had, however, spoken at some length April 10 to the Planning Board when the preliminary plat request was forwarded to the council with 32 conditions of approval.

Of prime concern is the high-speed traffic dangers at the Hidden Meadow Road access to Montana 40.

Nichols Acres residents use that access and argued that, though the Montana Department of Transportation issued a terse statement saying it has no problems with added traffic there, the crest of a hill to the west and the speed of traffic from both directions present major problems for drivers turning in and out of there.

Many wanted developers to use an existing driveway to the east, on the former Dowler land now owned by Ski Development. Land surveyor Sam Cordi, designer for the subdivision, said building a road from that entry would scar the wooded hillside and likely bring other complaints.

To the north, several Braig Lane residents objected to plans that call for Ski Development to extend the lane through to Lookout Estates and install a gate that can be accessed only by emergency vehicles. Drivers will find a way around it, they insisted, and disrupt their neighborhood along the private lane created by easements.

Water supply also is a worry, neighbors say.

Although the development's two community wells will need to draw 80 gallons a minute, according to plans, no recent testing has been done to show that volume of water is even available. One resident said that during the recent drought years, private wells in their area dropped more than 30 feet, indicating that the new development probably would cause trouble, too.

A two-acre community sewer plant is planned on 20 acres that Ski Development purchased to the northwest of Lookout Estates. Shaw said typical life spans for such systems is from 10 to 20 years. When it fails, neighbors fear, its drain field will contaminate their land and water wells.

They also said the "tract housing" density with Lookout Estates' half-acre home sites is out of character with the neighborhood. They asked for lower density that would provide a buffer between the city and the rural area.

And, though Shaw found that the development would have no significant impact on wildlife because primarily deer use the land, neighbors reported turkeys, foxes and even an occasional bear also use that habitat. Those animals would be displaced with the density, they argued.

More issues were raised Monday evening, some of which will be addressed in talks between Shaw and Drososki's team during the coming month.

If the information provided then changes the proposal enough to require what Shaw considers to be fundamental changes in the plan, it would have to go back through the public hearing process.

If not, it will be up for continued council discussion and a decision June 4.

Reporter Nancy Kimball may be reached at 758-4483 or by e-mail at nkimball@dailyinterlake.com