Surveyors ding commissioners for subdivision decisions

The Flathead County commissioners got an earful last week from several local surveyors who are upset by recent decisions related to major and minor subdivisions.

About a dozen surveyors came to the commissioners' chambers on Thursday. During the morning public comment period, they said they didn't much like the steps that are being taken or the way they've been implemented.

"I'm concerned about some of the actions you're taking," said Tom Sands with Sands Surveying. "Maybe you guys ought to study this [Montana Code Annotated]. I think you're stretching the legal envelope."

Specifically, Sands and three other speakers criticized the decision to eliminate the preliminary plat waiver for minor subdivisions, as well as the decision to require an improvement district waiver of protest for all new subdivision proposals.

The preliminary plat waiver is intended for minor subdivisions (five or fewer lots) that have minimal impacts on local services, public health and safety, and the natural environment. It's granted by the Flathead County Planning Office, after consultation with the developer or property owner and their representatives - which typically includes the surveyors.

Although the waiver includes specific conditions that a project must meet, it allows developers to shorten the review process and proceed directly to final plat approval.

However, the commissioners eliminated the waivers because of some recent abuses, meaning all minor subdivision plats must now go through commissioners for approval.

Sands said that could add another 45 days and as much as $1,500 to the approval process - something many small property owners can't afford.

"We're asking you to be a little lenient on people who need to sell some of their property in a short time period," he said.

Interim County Administrator Myrt Webb pointed out that the waiver was pulled after the property owners in two recent cases blatantly tried to avoid the major subdivision review requirements by splitting their projects into multiple minor subdivisions.

"We had a couple of minors come through that the commissioners really didn't want to approve, but we were stuck with them because they had waivers," Webb said on Thursday. "Two of the commissioners said they didn't want to see any more of that, so that's what I told the planning office."

As Commissioner Gary Hall put it: "We were made aware of some abuses and we wanted to send a message. We aren't trying to make it hard on the landowners who are [requesting waivers] for the right reasons, but on the ones who are trying to sneak in majors."

Surveyors also questioned the way the improvement district waiver of protest issue has been handled.

The planning office recently started adding the waiver as a condition on new subdivision plats. The exact wording of the condition is still a work in progress, but it's intended to make it easier for future commissioners to create special improvement districts in rural subdivisions.

The districts would be formed to pay for things such as road improvements; the waiver means property owners couldn't protest or block their creation.

Sands suggested that if the commissioners really want to impose this condition, they should formally amend the county subdivision regulations, rather than simply add language to subdivision plats on a case-by-case basis.

"If you're going to change the policies in your own regulations, you need to go through the right procedure," he said.

Reporter Bill Spence may be reached at 758-4459 or by e-mail at bspence@dailyinterlake.com