Whitefish planners OK compromise on Lion Mountain development

Spot zoning and compromise were the buzz words of the Whitefish City-County Planning Board's Thursday night meeting.

And Whitefish developer Rob Pero found that those buzz words can be complementary or mutually exclusive.

For one project, Pero, his partner and residents compromised on a spot-zone change that originally was contentious.

Pero and partner MK Enterprises planned to ask the board to recommend approval of a zone change needed to build 32 single family houses on Lion Mountain. But the developers deviated from their submitted request Thursday night to reach a compromise with neighbors.

"We're trying to be sensitive to the neighbors," Pero said.

Pero and his partner sought to change zoning of the properties from suburban residential to low-density multi-family residential. Other properties in that area have the higher density designation. But neighbors said they preferred fewer homes and larger lots to preserve the neighborhood's character.

The developers and neighbors agreed 23 houses on larger lots is a good compromise for everyone.

However, the zoning that corresponds with that plan is not a designation found on contiguous properties. If such zoning were granted, the city would be create a spot zone - or granting a change that would benefit only a few people. Spot zoning is prohibited by state law.

The planning board, however, was eager to work out a compromise on its end that would allow the plan but wouldn't violate laws. The compromise: Grant the zone change, but add conditions to the preliminary plat that restrict the developers to 23 homes on larger lots that the zoning designation outlines.

The board voted to recommend to the City Council that it approve that compromise. Most of the neighbors and planning board members said they were satisfied with that plan.

Pero's other project proposal Thursday night, though, was voted down with the reasoning that it clearly was a case of spot zoning. Pero and Charles Herring sought a zone change and preliminary plat approval for properties located at 2010 and 2042 U.S. 93, in the same area as Pero's other project. They wanted to change the suburban residential designation to two-family residential so they could build 29 townhouse units.

None of the contiguous properties have the two-family residential zoning. And there were no neighbors proposing a zone change compromise like Pero's other project. Whitefish planner Eric Mulcahy told the board he considered the proposal a clear example of spot zoning and that approving such a zone change is illegal.

"I've not heard the word illegal in this," Pero responded. "I've heard that he would not recommend it because the zoning next door isn't the same."

Pero told the board that he wouldn't ask them to do anything illegal, so he'll reformulate the request before it goes to the city council. The board voted to recommend denial of Pero and his partner's existing request.

Both of Pero's projects go before the council on Feb. 7.

In other matters, the planning board:

. Approved Douglas Johnson's request for preliminary plat of a subdivision that includes 18 duplex townhouse units.

. Approved Frontier Land and Development Company's request for a planned-unit development and preliminary-plat approval that would allow the company to build 14 duplex townhome units and 14 single-family homes on about 5 acres off Colorado Avenue.

. Approved ordinances that would require developers to install trees in new subdivisions and would establish a formula for how many trees developers must install on certain projects.

Reporter Camden Easterling can be reached at 758-4429 or by e-mail ceasterling@dailyinterlake.com