Committee votes to leave Lakeside Club designation

NOTE: This article contains a correction.

The Lakeside Neighborhood Plan Committee voted 5-2 to leave the designation of what was Eagle's Crest phases 5-9 the same with changes to the description after deliberating for more than a month on whether to change the portion of land from suburban mixed to rural residential.

This vote came after two other proposals failed before the committee at the Dec. 14 meeting. Vice-chair John Ulrich, in calling the question for the vote, said the time to make a decision had come.

"I don't think anyone is going to sway anyone else any more than they already have," Ulrich said. "Let's get it done."

A motion by committee member Bruce Young to change all areas of Eagle's Crest, also known as Lakeside Club, including undeveloped lands, to rural residential did not succeed and a motion by Ulrich to change areas of the Lakeside Club that are not phases 1-4 to rural residential died in a 3-4 vote.

"It does allow a little more significant proof on the part of the developer to come back through the public to scrutinize it," Young said of changing the designation. "If we are going to err we should, err on the side of caution."

Young said he did not see the approved motion as being cautious in protecting Flathead Lake or Lakeside.

Member Barb Miller said it seemed as though people were assuming developer Trevor Schaefer, who is also a member of the committee, would go back on his word with his proposed compromises.

"I think he has been very honest with us," Miller said. "I'm not going to sit here and say that he's lying."

This debate about whether to change the designation of a portion of the Lakeside Club came after developers withdrew their preliminary plat application for phases 5-9 in October.

The initial land use map in the draft Lakeside Neighborhood Plan showed all areas of Lakeside Club with their own designation of suburban mixed since higher densities in that area had already been approved by the Flathead County Commissioners. Some members of the committee have since sought to change that area on the map to a rural residential designation, like much of the area going out from the Lakeside town center.

The maximum density for rural residential is one unit for every 2.5 acres with a planned unit development if zoned. Without a PUD, it would be one unit for every 5 acres.

The first four phases of Eagle's Crest are already in process or have approval.

The proposed changes to the description of Lakeside Club and of the definition of suburban mixed came out of a subcommittee the LNPC formed to look at possible alternative solutions. They include many of the compromises Schaefer proposed at a November meeting to address members' concerns.

The changes include reducing the maximum dwelling or commercial units in all phases from 1,026 to 941. This brings the maximum density to one unit for every 2.4 acres rather than 2 acres.

The other significant change is in regards to commercial development, which under the revised suburban mixed designation is acceptable on paved roads if it is a associated with a golf course or airport. This is change from a more blanket statement that allowed neighborhood commercial services such as a convenience store, coffee shops, a UPS, interior design and other related services.

The definition of suburban mixed also purposely does not include the use of PUDs, which would allow increased density.

A section was added to the description of the Lakeside Club stating that the developer supports guidelines for future development of any remaining phases including maintaining higher densities in areas closer to U.S. Highway 93 and lower west of phase 4, imposing deed restrictions so all phases maintain the overall density of one unit per 2.4 acres, implementing zoning in support of the neighborhood plan at this same density and continuing the use of covenants that specify guest houses cannot be leased.

Prior to votes, several members of the public expressed concerns about the process, saying that in changing the area to rural residential the Lakeside Club could still pursue higher density with PUDs but would be required to go through a more rigorous public process.

"This isn't a question of being in favor of density up there or not – it's about process," said Kate McMahon, a Whitefish consultant who presented to the group at a previous meeting on behalf of Citizens for a Better Flathead.

Mayre Flowers, also with Citizens for Better Flathead, said the proposed build-out of the area, which includes Lakeside Club, exceeds the plans' housing needs projections past 2020.

"Analysis was not done for this kind of density," Flowers said.

Flowers also said the plan's ability to regulate whether PUDs can be used in suburban mixed or not is questionable.

Andrew Hagemeier, a Flathead County planner, said the Planning Department's interpretation right now is that the plan doesn't change the regulations, which allow PUDs.

"The plan couldn't override the fact that it's in the regulations," Hagemeier said.

Hagemeier suggested that another alternative would be including in the plan working to create a new zoning regulation that doesn't currently exist to meet the needs and desires for the area.

Several residents continued to express concerns about the effects of development on the quality of Flathead Lake.

"It's a travesty what's going to happen (to the Lake) if he is going to build," Fran Ruby said. "That's an important issue here."

Members also spent some time discussing conflict of interest before voting on the issue.

Keith Brown, chair of the Lakeside Community Council which created the committee, read from the council's code of ethics, which stated that members could be recused by the group if they have a financial or personal interest in the issue. Brown suggested that both Schaefer and Young may have conflicts of interest, but turned the decisions over to the committee.

Schaefer voluntarily recused himself as the developer of the project.

Young was previously involved with the lawsuit through Flathead Lake Protection Association against what was then phases 5-9 of Eagle's Crest.

Young argued that he did not have a personal or financial interest because the suit, which is now moot, was about the public having a right to timely information and the right to make comment and as not personal.

Some members said the lawsuit itself suggested a personal interest.

Others said the definition of a conflict of interest seemed unclear in Young's case.

"I feel personal interest is too much of a gray area," Spaulding said. "We can only take Bruce's word."

The council voted 2-3 on a motion to recuse Young, who was then allowed to vote and participate.

The LNPC will meet next Jan. 11, to discuss other suggested revisions to the plan from Citizens for a Better Flathead.* They will give an update on progress to the Lakeside Community Council on Tuesday, Dec. 29.

The committee has been working on revisions since a workshop with the county Planning Board in early October.

*Correction: In the original posting of this article, the date for the next Lakeside Neighborhood Plan Committee meeting was incorrect. They will meet again Jan. 11.