Board questions readiness of draft

There weren't many people at the Flathead County Planning Board workshop Wednesday about the draft subdivision regulations, but plenty of suggestions were made about how to improve the document.

Although four people spoke during the public portion of the meeting, the board itself provided most of the feedback. Members spoke favorably about a few of the proposed changes and raised concerns about several others.

For example, several board members said they were disturbed by the limited opportunity for public input and suggested that the draft could be improved substantially if a more thorough review were conducted.

"We spent [months] and held multiple hearings on the growth policy, and it's supposedly a nonregulatory document," said Randy Toavs. "This is a fully regulatory document, and there's only one public hearing scheduled. I think there needs to be a lot more public input."

Barry Conger said when he was appointed to the Planning Board in December, he expected hard work and late nights.

What he wasn't prepared for, he said, was "this vaguely patronizing nod to our egos," in which the commissioners ask board members to comment individually about the draft regulations, but don't allow them to do their typical thorough review.

Planning Director Jeff Harris said the process is being expedited because state law requires subdivision regulations to comply with the growth policy.

Given that the commissioners are scheduled March 19 to adopt the new policy, the regulations have to be in place shortly thereafter. Otherwise, the county will have to use the existing, 1984 regulations to continue processing subdivision applications - a legally tenuous proposal - or declare a temporary moratorium on applications until the new regulations are adopted.

However, board member Gordon Cross questioned whether these draft regulations comply with the growth policy.

"The growth policy has more than 200 policies. A lot of those policies should be addressed in these subdivision regulations - but there aren't," he said. "So how do you know we [the county] aren't just as liable if we approve these draft regulations?"

Harris said the draft was based largely on '84 regulations, as well as a set of model subdivision regulations provided by the state. He acknowledged that there "wasn't a lot of time" to make sure it reflected all of the goals and policies contained in the new growth policy.

Besides their philosophical qualms, some board members had concerns about specific changes proposed in the draft.

A particularly noteworthy one was a requirement that two access roads be available for subdivisions in high- or extreme-fire-hazard areas.

During the public comment portion of the meeting, former Planning Board member Charles Lapp said this requirement "will probably have more impact on making land unusable than anything else in these regulations."

"I think we need to be careful about legislating where people can live," said board president Gene Dziza. "We're basically telling people we don't want them to live there because they might hurt themselves."

Harris countered that public-safety considerations alone make this a necessary standard. A number of subdivisions are in areas that only have one way in or out, and all it would take is one fire moving into a draw to trap a bunch of homeowners.

"People need a second way out in case of fire," he said. "It isn't whether someone should be living there, but when. Once a second access is available, then it's fine."

The feedback was not entirely critical of the draft regulations.

For example, board members clearly liked language that would require developers to post a visible notice on property that was about to be subdivided.

The move would be in addition to the typical written notices provided to property owners within 150 feet of proposed projects. It would provide some information about what was going on and how to comment.

The board also applauded a latecomers agreement that would allow developers voluntarily to install infrastructure improvements that exceeded what was required for their projects, and be reimbursed for the added costs later as other subdivisions are built.

Copies of the old and new regulations can be found on the Planning Office Web site, at www.co.flathead.mt.us/fcpz/index.html

A 30-day written comment period on the draft began Feb. 26. The commissioners will also hold a formal public hearing from 3 to 7 p.m. March 28 in the second-floor conference room of the Earl Bennett Building, 1035 First Ave. W.

They're scheduled to take action on the regulations April 9.

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