Planning board passes plan

The revised Lakeside Neighborhood Plan cleared another hurdle last week as it was recommended for approval by the Flathead County Planning Board in a 4-2 vote.

A crowd of residents packed into the conference room on the second floor of the Earl Bennett Building in Kalispell on Wednesday, Sept. 15, for the public hearing on the plan. This revision and update to the 1995 plan has been in the works for the past three years after an update was mandated by the adoption of the county's growth policy. The 185-page document before the planning board was the 27th version of the plan, which had been worked on by the Lakeside Neighborhood Plan Committee and the Lakeside Community Council.

County planner Andrew Hagemeier reported that in written comments received prior to the meeting, 61 expressed support of the plan, two were opposed and four commenters weren't opposed but gave statements. Three agencies also commented on the plan, including Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks, which sought for less density in certain rural residential areas for wildlife reasons.

In addition to letters of support, LCC chair Keith Brown said that a petition that circulated in the community regarding the plan collected 364 signatures in support of the plan.

Brown said many hours and discussions went in to the development of the plan. Brown said that though the process of developing the plan was a "pressure cooker," he didn't believe those who worked on it received any more pressure from developers than other groups.

"A feel like from a community council standpoint, there is broad support for the plan," Brown said. "You're not going to see 100 percent support. I don't know if that can exist for this sort of plan. We've had a lot of fierce debate. I feel very confident all different views and all different slices have been considered."

Those who spoke out for the plan at the meeting noted that it was a "compromise" and a "middle-of-the-road approach."

Jim Spaulding, husband of the LNPC chair Debbie Spaulding, said he himself was skeptical at the beginning about the plan but recognizes that it is a tool to balance the desires of development and the need to protect the aspects of the area the community considers important.

"I was one of those who said, 'Don't tell me what to do,'" Spaulding said. "I understand the neighborhood plan and wholeheartedly support it. If person is to sit down, read and understand the plan, I don't understand why they wouldn't support it… This is a plan I can live with because it's well thought out and fair for all."

Council member Brent Hall noted that the plan is non-regulatory and is a step in the right direction.

"This is a plan — it's not etched in stone," Brent Hall said. "It's not the law and things can change. All in all, I think the committee did an outstanding job and I wholeheartedly support the plan."

Representatives from Plum Creek Timber Co. and the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation both spoke in favor of the plan.

Opposition to the plan centers around either those who want no plan or no zoning of their property and others who are concerned about the levels of density allowed in the area in the plan.

Some like Mark Unruh expressed opposition to the way they felt the plan infringed on private property rights. Unruh, who has property at the north end of the Lakeside planning area, said he purposely bought his property because of the lack of zoning in that area.

"I'm against the plan," Mark Unruh said. "It takes way too much control of private property."

Mayre Flowers, representing Citizens for a Better Flathead, applauded the committee for its efforts but said her organization had remaining concerns regarding what she perceives as a disconnect between the goals and policies of the plan and the outcome that would follow from its allowed densities. She urged the board to send the plan back for consideration to look more closely at the density issue.

Bruce Young also expressed concerns about density, particularly with the suburban mixed future land-use designation given to the area south of Lakeside around the Lakeside Club. He questioned whether the higher density in the area further from the town center was appropriate, especially given high slopes, the nature of the soil and other environmental concerns. The issue saw much debate before the plan committee and the council about whether to change a portion of that area to the less dense designation of rural residential after the Lakeside Club developers withdrew their preliminary plat application for phases 5-9 of the project last fall. In the end, the designation was left with some changes to the description.

"The neighborhood plan isn't official but one that would have strong influence on future decisions by county commissioners," Young said, suggesting a need to look at that aspect of the plan and lower the densities.

Brown later noted after the public hearing portion of the meeting ended that comments were all of a similar vein to what had been heard during prior meetings and discussions.

"I haven't heard anything tonight that hasn't already been considered or already been aired," Brown said. "The spirit of the way it was put together was that everybody had a voice."

Planning board member Jim Heim said he was in support of his version of the plan.

"I think it's time to move ahead," Heim said. "It's not perfect. It's not cast in concrete. It doesn't make anything happen. If somebody wants to do something with their property, there are all kinds of hoops to jump through. I'm in favor of moving this forward."

Board chair Gordon Cross said his biggest reservation with the plan was the issues surrounding the Lakeside Club densities.

"I've certainly been wrestling with that a great deal," Cross said. "My opinion is that I'm willing to go with the decision the people down there made. I certainly don't know how I would have decided had it been my choice. They know more about it."

Board member Mike Mower said the plan appeared to be a reasonably conceived vision for the community.

"At least in my opinion, the plan represents a vast majority in the neighborhood, though that's not everybody, clearly, it represents a strong majority," Mower said.

When it came down to the vote, Cross, Heim, Mower and Marie Hickey-AuClaire voted in favor of recommending approval of the plan to the Flathead County Commissioners.

Both Bob Keenan and Charles Lapp opposed it.

Board members Frank DeKort, Jeff Larsen and Marc Pitman were absent from the meeting.

The plan will now head to the Flathead County Commissioners who will have the option of holding a second public hearing but are not required to. Once the commissioners make a decision, there will be a 30-day written comment period at the end of which they can chose whether or not to adopt the plan.

Copies of the plan are available at the Flathead County Planning and Zoning office or online at http://flathead.mt.gov/planning_zoning.

The plan is also available at http://lakesideplan2008.com.