County plans for interim doughnut zoning
Most landowners in Whitefish’s two-mile
planning doughnut would rather have Flathead County Commissioners
control their planning. Results from a survey sent out this fall by
county commissioners show that 1,234 votes were in favor of county
control and 471 favored city control.
With that information, commissioners
have decided to take back jurisdiction of the doughnut and
instructed the county planning office to begin preparing an interim
county zoning district.
“[The survey] points us in the
direction to go,” Flathead County Commissioner Jim Dupont told the
Pilot last week. “The doughnut residents have spoken about what
they want.”
The survey asked doughnut landowners,
“Who do you prefer to regulate your property for zoning and
planning purposes?” Voting choices were for Flathead County
Commissioners or for Whitefish City Councilors. Of 3,525 survey
ballots mailed out, 1,705 were returned. Each property owner in the
doughnut was mailed a survey ballot. If a property owner had
multiple parcels of land, they received multiple ballots.
The manner in which survey votes were
tallied is being questioned by some.
Mayre Flowers of Citizens for a Better
Flathead disputes the validity of the survey. She notes that one
address received as many as 58 ballots and that 840 addresses
received three or more ballots. Flowers says for more accurate
results the county should have put the survey question on the
recent election ballot.
“The survey methodology used by the
county is so flawed that the reported outcome... should be seen as
suspect and far from the fair and verifiable results that could
have been obtained, if the county had put this question on a ballot
for voters, as provided for under state law,” Flowers said in a
press release. “How the mailing list was compiled for this survey
card vote is nothing short of mind-boggling.
---------
While Whitefish city representatives
argue that the 2005 Interlocal Agreement is possibly now in effect
following a majority vote on a ballot referendum to repeal of the
2010 Interlocal Agreement, Dupont said the 2005 document is not an
option and that the county will resist it.
City attorney Mary VanBuskirk was to
meet this week with the county’s attorney to see where each side
stands regarding the 2005 agreement.
Dupont said last week the county would
be open to discussions with the city about planning ideas for the
doughnut. A City-County Planning Jurisdiction Interlocal Agreement
Committee meeting is to be scheduled soon, he said.
Whitefish City Councilor Bill Kahle
said at the Nov. 21 city council meeting that committee
representatives he’s talked to agree that a meeting is
necessary.
“I think it’s important we keep our
proposed meeting,” Kahle said. “They also think it’s important we
get together again.”
Dupont noted that some of the survey
respondents indicated they don’t favor county oversight because
they don’t think the county has planning or zoning regulations in
place. He says that perception is inaccurate.
“We have neighborhood plans and land
use advisory committees all over the county, from the Canyon to
Bigfork,” he said.
---------
Even with the status of the 2005
Interlocal Agreement up in the air, the county has moved forward in
the process of reclaiming jurisdiction over the doughnut. Flathead
County Planning Director BJ Grieve said commissioners decided at a
Nov. 21 meeting to create an interim county zoning district to
replace Whitefish zoning outside of the city limits.
This will be done by drafting a map
that replaces the existing “W” zones with the closest equivalent
county zone that does not “down-zone” the property, Grieve said,
and generally complies with the existing 1996 Whitefish City-County
Master Plan.
A meeting is planned for Nov. 28 to
discuss guidelines for reacquiring jurisdiction in the area. A
public comment hearing will also be scheduled.
If commissioners eventually approve
adoption of the interim zoning district, Grieve notes, it will only
be in place for up to one year, with the option for a one year
extension.