CAO 'steep slopes' could be amended

The “steep slopes” criterion of the

Critical Area Ordinance could be on the chopping block as Whitefish

looks to make the regulation more user-friendly.

Possible amendments to the CAO were

discussed at an Aug. 1 Whitefish City Council work session

regarding the 2010 Interlocal Agreement. Council asked the Planning

Department to look at ways to streamline the ordinance as

“doughnut” planning talks between the city and Flathead County

loom.

Flathead County Commissioner Jim Dupont

told the Pilot last week that changes to the CAO, including steep

slopes and set backs, will be a point of discussion as the two

sides work toward a revised or potentially new interlocal

agreement. The county moved in June to terminate the 2010

agreement, citing the ballot referendum that seeks to repeal the

agreement as their reason for pulling out.

At the work session, city planner Wendy

Compton-Ring gave a full timeline of the CAO starting from 2004

when the city first looked at developing a master stormwater plan.

Mayor Mike Jenson noted that the CAO was a major catalyst for the

county withdrawing from the 2005 Interlocal Agreement.

Councilor Turner Askew asked

Compton-Ring and Planning Director David Taylor which parts of the

CAO could be amended to make it more user-friendly.

Taylor told the council steep slopes

was the area that is most faulty.

“The slope is the most confusing

thing,” he said. “It isn’t serving the purpose intended.”

The steep slope requirement is geared

toward any development site with a 40 percent or greater slope.

“Outside of city limits, it’s not

really preventing anyone from developing, but it’s adding an extra

layer of red tape.”

Eliminating the steep slope requirement

likely wouldn’t weaken the ordinance’s intent because the ordinance

includes other tools to control erosion, Taylor said.

“The most important thing is water

quality,” he said.

Set backs and buffers, he said, protect

water from unwanted erosion.

Compton-Ring noted that parts of the

CAO can be cumbersome for builders, too.

“They have to get a permit for

everything,” she said. “Administrative aspects could be worked

on.”

Councilor Phil Mitchell said he hopes

the county is involved as the city goes through the process of

amending the CAO.

“Whatever comes out of this should be

acceptable by both parties,” Mitchell said.

During public comment, Joan Vetter

Ehrenberg said she thought the CAO had already been through

review.

“I don’t understand why we are opening

it up again,” she said.

Councilor John Muhlfeld said that the

council isn’t trying to “water down the CAO” or to compromise its

purpose.

“It has gone through several amendments

that are positive,” Muhlfeld said. “The purpose moving forward is

to deal with some hot-button topics. It’s a living document.”

He trusts the council will make it

better.

A planning board work session is set

for Aug. 18.