The Kalispell City Council on [date] voted to conditionally approve the North Meadows preliminary plat and to grant three variances that drew sustained public opposition focused on Ashley Creek.

Planner Donnie Macbeth described the application (applicant: Roger Foley) for a 12.13‑acre subdivision at 1859 South Meadows Drive proposing 44 attached townhouse lots (22 parent lots). The submittal included requests to reduce the 200‑foot impaired‑stream setback for Ashley Creek to roughly 100 feet in some locations, extend cul‑de‑sac length to about 870 feet and increase block length to about 900 feet.

Macbeth said the developer’s geotechnical addendum recommends a 30‑foot setback from the slope crest to protect slope stability and that the layout keeps structures outside slope‑stability areas. He said the planning commission recommended approval subject to conditions and that the proposed common open space and parkland dedication would partially address park requirements.

Neighbors and conservation advocates urged the council to deny the setback reduction. "Ashley Creek is a heavily impacted stream…[but] it's an important movement corridor for wildlife," said Jacqueline Pipolo, citing Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks (FWP) recommendations and the city's 200‑foot standard for impaired streams.

Several residents recounted landslide history near Rimrock Court and warned that reduced buffers and road alignment near the creek could threaten bank stability and wildlife habitat. Others highlighted pedestrian safety and missing sidewalks along the stub of South Meadows Drive near the new access point.

Developer and engineers argued that strict application of the 200‑foot setback would make the property essentially undevelopable because the existing street connection and engineering standards constrain where a public street and required turnarounds can be placed. Toby McIntosh (Jocol Engineering) said many proposed lots meet or closely approach the 200‑foot line and that post‑entitlement permits (DEQ, conservation district) would assess bank work if needed.

Council deliberations were divided. Councilor Hunter moved to reject the buffer reduction variance, arguing staff had not received the required scientific documentation demonstrating protection of wildlife, water quality or riparian functions beyond the geotechnical report. Several councilors emphasized infill and housing supply considerations and the fact that the fire department reviewed emergency access and requested residential sprinklers for homes served by a single access.

Councilor Dowd recused himself because of prior contact with neighbors on an earlier iteration of the project. The motion to approve the preliminary plat with the requested variances ultimately passed by roll call with a recorded split (four councilors in favor, three opposed, one recusal). Staff said additional engineering, permitting and conditions will be required during final plat and building stages.

The council’s decision allows the applicant to proceed to engineering and permitting phases but leaves outstanding conditions: final parkland dedication, detailed geotechnical and stormwater plans, and any required 310 or DEQ permits to address stream impacts.