County grants fifth permit extension for bridge

Construction on the bridge was forced to stop at the end of May because of rising levels in Flathead Lake. 

The Montana Lakeshore Protection Act prevents construction from occurring over open water. All work permitted in the Lakeshore Protection Zone must be done when lake levels are low.

The developers of the Holt Drive property in Bigfork, Jolene Dugan and Roger Sortino, applied for a fifth permit extension on May 15.

According the extension request, construction on the bridge is nearly complete, with some concrete to be poured.

The developers’ attorney, Richard Dejana, told the Flathead County Commissioners once they are able to resume construction it should only take about two weeks to complete the project. He also said the remaining portion could be completed without having heavy machinery in the lake bed.

“Can you guys adhere to that, because that’s what you wrote to us?” Commissioner Phil Mitchell said.

The developers were first issued the permit to build the bridge in March of 2011. The legality of the original permit is under litigation between the Community Association for North Shore Conservation and Flathead County.

The last permit extension, which was granted in January, expired June 1, 2015.

The commissioners asked if granting another extension would affect the lawsuit.

Deputy County Attorney Tara Fugina said she did not know if it would affect legal proceedings.

“I’m struggling with approving this,” Mitchell said. “It started before I was here.”

He also stated it is private property and it would not be fair to tell a property owner they can’t complete a project that is almost done.

Commissioner Gary Kreuger said the progress made during the last permit extension showed an effort on the part of the developer to complete the project, and that inclined him to grant the extension.

“It appears that the contractor has made an effort to finish the project,” he said. “I believe that an extension to June 1, 2016, in this case is warranted.”

The commissioners unanimously approved the extension and Kreuger clarified that they just granted a time extension and the permit regulations and requirements are the same.

“The concrete that has to be poured, cannot be poured over open water. I just want that to be clear,” Flathead County Planning and Zoning Director B.J. Grieve said.

Upon learning of the developers request for a fifth permit extension, the Community Association for North Shore Conservation started a petition asking the commissioners to deny the request. The petition had more than 800 signatures before the commissioners met last Wednesday.

In his comments, association chairman Dave Hadden argued that the last permit extension granted in January was meant to be the last.

While the commissioners granted the permit extension for the bridge, they recently denied requests from Sortino and Dugan for extensions to four separate permits to build retaining walls. Those permits expired June 1.

The planning department also recently denied three requests for floodplain permits, which would have constructed three ponds behind the lakeshore protection zone, but in the floodplain.

Before work stopped, the project was cited with three violations. Two violations were cited by the Army Corps of Engineers for constructing a road that put fill in the lakeshore protection zone without a permit, and for fill in the wetlands without a permit. The Corps issued a cease and desist order until the permit situation was solved. 

Flathead County issued a violation for the rutting, gouging and slicing of the lakebed that was caused by construction machinery, which violated their existing permit.  Grieve said that soon after the county issued the violation, measures were taken to smooth the lakebed, both what was still above water, and what was now under water.

Throughout the course of the work there have been several other permit violations. In 2014, when construction initially began, a stop work order was issued because the bridge was built in a different location than indicated in the application. Another violation was cited when authorities learned the structure was 159 feet longer than the permit allowed, though both violations were resolved.

Last week the Flathead County Commissioners granted a fifth permit extension for the bridge to Dockstader Island.

Construction on the bridge was forced to stop at the end of May because of rising levels in Flathead Lake. 

The Montana Lakeshore Protection Act prevents construction from occurring over open water. All work permitted in the Lakeshore Protection Zone must be done when lake levels are low.

The developers of the Holt Drive property in Bigfork, Jolene Dugan and Roger Sortino, applied for a fifth permit extension on May 15.

According the extension request, construction on the bridge is nearly complete, with some concrete to be poured.

The developers’ attorney, Richard Dejana, told the Flathead County Commissioners once they are able to resume construction it should only take about two weeks to complete the project. He also said the remaining portion could be completed without having heavy machinery in the lake bed.

“Can you guys adhere to that, because that’s what you wrote to us?” Commissioner Phil Mitchell said.

The developers were first issued the permit to build the bridge in March of 2011. The legality of the original permit is under litigation between the Community Association for North Shore Conservation and Flathead County.

The last permit extension, which was granted in January, expired June 1, 2015.

The commissioners asked if granting another extension would affect the lawsuit.

Deputy County Attorney Tara Fugina said she did not know if it would affect legal proceedings.

“I’m struggling with approving this,” Mitchell said. “It started before I was here.”

He also stated it is private property and it would not be fair to tell a property owner they can’t complete a project that is almost done.

Commissioner Gary Kreuger said the progress made during the last permit extension showed an effort on the part of the developer to complete the project, and that inclined him to grant the extension.

“It appears that the contractor has made an effort to finish the project,” he said. “I believe that an extension to June 1, 2016, in this case is warranted.”

The commissioners unanimously approved the extension and Kreuger clarified that they just granted a time extension and the permit regulations and requirements are the same.

“The concrete that has to be poured, cannot be poured over open water. I just want that to be clear,” Flathead County Planning and Zoning Director B.J. Grieve said.

Upon learning of the developers request for a fifth permit extension, the Community Association for North Shore Conservation started a petition asking the commissioners to deny the request. The petition had more than 800 signatures before the commissioners met last Wednesday.

In his comments, association chairman Dave Hadden argued that the last permit extension granted in January was meant to be the last.

While the commissioners granted the permit extension for the bridge, they recently denied requests from Sortino and Dugan for extensions to four separate permits to build retaining walls. Those permits expired June 1.

The planning department also recently denied three requests for floodplain permits, which would have constructed three ponds behind the lakeshore protection zone, but in the floodplain.

Before work stopped, the project was cited with three violations. Two violations were cited by the Army Corps of Engineers for constructing a road that put fill in the lakeshore protection zone without a permit, and for fill in the wetlands without a permit. The Corps issued a cease and desist order until the permit situation was solved. 

Flathead County issued a violation for the rutting, gouging and slicing of the lakebed that was caused by construction machinery, which violated their existing permit.  Grieve said that soon after the county issued the violation, measures were taken to smooth the lakebed, both what was still above water, and what was now under water.

Throughout the course of the work there have been several other permit violations. In 2014, when construction initially began, a stop work order was issued because the bridge was built in a different location than indicated in the application. Another violation was cited when authorities learned the structure was 159 feet longer than the permit allowed, though both violations were resolved.