Helena Flats hearing raises familiar issues
The Helena Flats neighborhood plan was tabled until June 1 by the Flathead County Planning Board on Wednesday.
Only about 30 people showed up for the public hearing on the proposal. Nevertheless, the debate touched on the same fundamental growth issues that people are wrestling with all across the valley.
The plan recommends specific land-use designations for a 4,800-acre area east of U.S. 2, north of Rose Crossing and south of Pioneer Road.
The designations include commercial along the highway frontage, with a residential pod along Rose Crossing that would have a maximum density of one home per acre. The bulk of the area, though, would be designated rural residential with a maximum density of one home per five acres.
If approved, the plan would be included in the county growth policy and would serve as the guiding land-use vision for the Helena Flats area.
Proponents said the document offers some guidelines and consistency to growth in their neighborhood, rather than leaving them at the whims of developers.
"I think everyone in the area would love to know what to expect," said Linda Christensen, one of the Helena Flats property owners who helped craft the neighborhood plan. "This will help us retain some of the quality of life we now enjoy."
"We're just average citizens who wanted to come up with a plan for our area and not be overrun by outside interests," Jan Stephens said. "If we can't get a group of citizens together to create a plan, then where are we going to start?"
However, Mike Baer said the proposal went too far in trying to limit development and restrict property rights.
"There are already enough regulations in place to protect water quality in the area," he said. "We don't need any more."
Gary Henry, who owns a one-acre lot, said the five-acre minimum lot size recommended for most of the Helena Flats area could dramatically affect the overall value of a landowner's property - property that may have been acquired for investment purposes.
"This would do away with some people's plans for a lifetime," he said. "It would do away with anyone else's plans to own a little piece of the world. I have a problem with people moving in who want to impose their will on others."
Michael Blend, a builder and developer who owns a business park just south of Pioneer Road, said he supports many of the goals outlined in the neighborhood plan, including maintaining open space and wildlife corridors and protecting the aquifer.
However, he said he felt the neighborhood plan actually worked against those goals by discouraging higher-density projects or creative subdivisions that cluster homes on smaller lots to maintain open areas.
"In order to implement these goals, you need to provide incentives, and this plan doesn't do that," Blend said. "The cluster provisions actually provide a penalty - you'll get fewer lots if you choose the cluster option, so no one will ever do it. It seems like this plan will encourage hodgepodge development."
Given the variety of issues raised during the public hearing, the board voted 5-3 to table the matter until June 1. The delay gives members an opportunity to decide whether they want to amend the plan and mitigate some of the concerns voiced on Wednesday, or simply vote on it as written.
No further public testimony will be allowed when the board discussion resumes in June.
Reporter Bill Spence may be reached at 758-4459 or by e-mail at bspence@dailyinterlake.com