Setback debate continues

Arguments flew back and forth about riparian setbacks Thursday at the Flathead County Planning Board workshop.

More than 100 members of the public attended the meeting that drew heated debate from both sides of the aisle.

The public workshop, held at the fairgrounds, was the public's opportunity to weigh in on the county's proposed riparian setbacks to be included in Flathead County's subdivision regulations.

"There is no scientific backing for these regulations," Jeff Larsen said. "I would expect if you adopt these regulations you would have data for each of those waterways. You don't have that data."

"I don't think we need to protect our water from anyone in this room. It's the developers. Those are the people we want to protect our waters from," Ben Long said.

At the start of the workshop, Planning Director Jeff Harris outlined the proposed setback policy.

The county's large rivers, including Flathead, Stillwater, Swan and Whitefish, would prohibit structures to be built within 250 feet. Smaller rivers, including Ashley Creek from Smith Lake to Flathead River and the Pleasant Valley Fisher River would have setbacks of 200 feet. All other perennial streams would have setback requirements of 100 feet.

According to the policy, where the 100-year floodplain is wider than the riparian setback, the setback will be extended to the 100-year floodplain mark.

"When the next 1964 flood happens, let's not look back regretfully on the setbacks we almost adopted," Brian Peck said.

According to the policy, "Areas within a municipal sewer-service district providing sewer service to a proposed subdivision are exempt from the setback requirements."

A number of uses would be allowed within setback areas according to the proposed setback. Those uses include: Recreational structures such as docks and boat ramps, stream bank stabilization, and limited crossings such as roads and driveways.

The proposed policy also allows for variance exceptions.

"Riparian setbacks are a zoning issue, not a regulation," Russell Swindle said. "So why are we talking about it? It's illegal and it's not going go pass."

Representatives from the Flathead Basin Commission and the Flathead Lake Biological Station gave presentations to the board. U.S. Fish and Wildlife and the Department of Natural Resources are expected to present at the next workshop Nov. 1.

Although public comment on both sides of the issue was fairly even in quantity, comments opposing stream-side setbacks were met by loud applause from the audience.

Some other public comments included:

"We are all concerned about the mining proposed in British Columbia," said Rachel Potter of the North Fork Preservation Association. "While we are clearly not doing enough. You can bet they are watching what we are doing to protect our waters from north of the border."

"I will challenge the legality of these regulations," Rick Breckenridge said. "This is a personal attack on me. So put this thing in the trash can where it belongs."

"If the water is polluted, people are going to leave," said Pat Arnone. "We need to give up a little to save a lot."

Reporter Amy May may be reached at 758-4459 or by e-mail at amay@dailyinterlake.com