County settles suit over West Glacier subdivision

Flathead County Commissioners agreed to pay Citizens for a Better Flathead and Sharon DeMeester up to $10,000 in attorney’s fees to settle a lawsuit over a subdivision in West Glacier.

In the spring of 2021 Jane K. O’Hara, Douglas H. Parker, Karen Parker Wandel, Luke P. Hansen, Patrick H. Maloney, and Kirsten Kay Svennungsen asked the county to create a new single-family residential zoning district on eight acres of land at 489 River Bend Drive, which is just up the road from the West Glacier golf course.

The applicants, who are family members, wanted to subdivide the eight-acre property into one-acre parcels so they could build homes there.

A zone change was suggested by the county planning office to subdivide the property.

The Middle Canyon Land Use Advisory Board and the Flathead County Planning Board both agreed and passed the plan onto county commissioners with a positive recommendation. Commissioners, in turn, approved the creation of the new zoning district — called the Parker Zoning District — in July 2022.

During hearings on the matter, county planning staff were asked about the possibility of being spot zoning, but it was determined it was not, in their view, because it was, at least in part, close to the already highly developed Glacier View Golf Course area which has condominiums and other residential housing.

Citizens for a Better Flathead and DeMeester, in turn, filed a lawsuit against the county, challenging the process by which the zoning district was created.

They claimed it could open up pathways for other zoning districts in the area that could also do an end-around CALURS and potentially, neighborhood plans across the county.

It also claims that the zone change ignores the county growth policy, as well as state law.

DeMeester also brought up those concerns during the board meetings as well.

Flowers maintained that a solution could be found through the Neighborhood Plan process and the county could do a plan amendment, just like anywhere else in the county that has a neighborhood plan.

“We’re pleased (the county) took this action,” Flowers said Friday. “And we look forward to working with county commissioners on similar issues.”

Flowers noted the case simply points out that the county has to comply with existing regulations. In this case, CALURs and the Canyon Plan.

If they’re to be amended, they need to be done through the appropriate public process, with a comprehensive look at growth and needs for the area, she noted.

County spokesman Stephen White did not return a call seeking comment on the settlement.

Commissioners also did not comment on the settlement after they approved it.