Board suggests North Fork plan revisions
By MICHAEL RICHESON / The Daily Inter Lake
The North Fork Neighborhood Plan is back in the hands of North Fork residents after the Flathead County Planning Board suggested numerous revisions at a Wednesday night workshop.
The North Fork Land Use Advisory Committee will now make changes in the hopes of earning a positive recommendation from the Planning Board.
Board members had concerns about subjective language throughout the plan, especially after the Montana Supreme Court
The North Fork Neighborhood Plan is back in the hands of North Fork residents after the Flathead County Planning Board suggested numerous revisions at a Wednesday night workshop.
The North Fork Land Use Advisory Committee will now make changes in the hopes of earning a positive recommendation from the Planning Board.
Board members had concerns about subjective language throughout the plan, especially after the Montana Supreme Court's recent ruling that made all of Flathead County's planning documents regulatory.
The court found that a provision in the zoning regulations stated: "In cases where a neighborhood plan, addendum to the Master Plan, or other adopted document contains aspects related to zoning and is under the jurisdiction of these regulations, the provisions that are more restrictive shall control."
Referring to the North Fork plan, Planning Board member Mike Mower said: "I'm still not clear if this document will end up being regulatory or philosophical. That makes it very difficult when we don't know the ultimate use of the document."
Flathead County is currently working on a text amendment to its zoning regulations that will make the growth policy and neighborhood plans non-regulatory. The amendment could take effect within the next three to four months.
"The [planning] staff and the county didn't intend for the growth policy or neighborhood plans to be regulatory," Planning and Zoning Director Jeff Harris said. "The Supreme Court decision changed that because of wording in the zoning regulations."
Part of the board's hesitation stemmed from the fact that although neighborhood plans aren't intended to be regulatory, the zoning based on those plans is regulatory. The growth documents therefore carry regulatory weight when it comes to regulations that implement the plan.
"We still don't know what the outcome will be," Mower said. "Maybe this will be fixed in 90 days, or maybe there will be lawsuits and it's five years from now. We have to review this like it's regulatory because today it is."
Jerry Wernick, a longtime North Fork resident who runs a private school, said that the subjective language concerning "negative impacts" should be stricken from the plan.
"I've always supported our planning and zoning efforts," Wernick said. "The planning by nature was nebulous and subjective. We didn't worry about it because [implementation] would have to go through the zoning debate first. The Supreme Court makes that null and void."
Harris said that even if the plan contains ambiguous language, any activity in the North Fork will have to comply with the zoning.
"We'll review the plan, but it's really the regulations that we'll go to," Harris said.
The original North Fork Plan, which was adopted in 1992, was the basis for the zoning district that was created in 1998.
Larry Wilson, who has lived in the North Fork since 1947, said the goal of zoning already has been achieved and the neighborhood plan is a vision the residents want for their community.
"It took us 20 years to get to the zoning regulations, which is what we wanted," Wilson said. "If this is currently regulatory, why don't we just suspend the plan and maintain the zoning and come back when the issue is resolved?"
"We didn't write the plan to get into a debate with the Planning Board. If the plan has to agree with your personal philosophies, then you should have written it."
By the end of the meeting, the Planning Board had discussed everything from lot size to road traffic to the expansion of utilities.
North Fork residents and board members each thanked each other for the chance to clarify language and to work together. Planning staffers and North Fork residents will revise the plan and bring it back to the Planning Board for recommendation.
Reporter Michael Richeson may be reached at 758-4459 or by E-mail at mricheson@dailyinterlake.com.