Board looks at axing 'home-rule' regs in doughnut

The Flathead County Planning Board began its examination last week of the long-range planning and zoning options for the former “doughnut” area.

County planners have created a list of alternatives to replace interim zoning currently in place in the area outside of Whitefish. The board reviewed the options during a Oct. 15 workshop.

The first option is to allow the interim zoning to expire, which could potentially leave the area unzoned. Or the county could adopt a “citizen initiated” zoning area.

The second option would update the 1996 City-County Master Plan to replace the interim zoning with existing county zoning classifications.

The third option is to update the 1996 Whitefish City County Master Plan based on the 2007 Whitefish Growth Policy.

A “options analysis matrix” listed some of the potential pros and cons involved with each alternative.

Interim zoning in the area was adopted by county commissioners last month, and will expire at the end of one year. Commissioners may extend the interim zoning for up to one additional year.

County Planning Director BJ Grieve said there isn’t a lot of guideline for how to deal with the transition from city to county control of the planning area following the July Montana Supreme Court ruling that gave the county jurisdiction of the area.

“Giving the unprecedented nature of this transition, we will do the best we can do,” Grieve said.

During public comment, several who spoke said they would not favor option No. 1, which would let the interim zoning expire and could potentially leave the area unzoned.

Whitefish Planning Director Dave Taylor said he prefers the third option that calls for updating the 2007 Whitefish Growth Plan and then implementing special county zoning classifications to match permitted uses in Whitefish.

“We don’t necessarily expect you to adopt our plan wholeheartedly, but it’s much closer to the existing uses and development that has occurred,” Taylor said.

While the planning board asked several procedural questions about the different options, no decisions were made about which option the board would like to pursue. Much discussion, however, revolved around finding ways to translate the previous Whitefish zoning into some type of equivalent county zoning.

Board member Greg Stevens said it’s important the county is compatible with the city in zoning the area.

“We can’t put heavy industrial right next to a residential zone,” he said. “We have to be considerate of that, but compatible and identical are two different things.”

Stevens said the dilemma is that the county can’t administer municipal zoning, and new county zoning classifications may need to be created to deal with that issue. He also noted that while the county must cooperate with the city, its duty is to create a land use map that county residents want.

“We need to have those lines of communication so that the city’s desire can be taken into consideration,” he said. “The land use regulations need to be a reflection of what the property owners want to do.”

Board member Noah Bodman asked what complaints have been voiced about the Whitefish zoning in the doughnut.

Grieve explained that many of the complaints from residents have come from what he termed “home-rule” regulations, such as the city’s dark skies ordinance and the water quality protection ordinance.

“Those special provision are what we have heard from land owners about,” he said.

Bodman suggested the 2007 growth plan could be adopted into the county with those “home-rule” regulations removed and the interim zoning retrofitted to become county zoning.

Following the Oct. 15 meeting, another sub-option was added to the option analysis matrix. Under that sub-option, the 1996 master plan would be repealed and then the county growth policy amended to add the future land use map from the 2007 Whitefish growth policy. Then the interim zoning would be replaced with county Part 2 zoning classifications based on the county growth policy.

The planning board said it wanted to get further input from residents of the planning doughnut before moving forward. The planning department is mailing out 4,400 postcards to residents of the doughnut to notify them about upcoming meetings.