WHITEFISH — Members of Whitefish’s business community and local property owners are voicing concern over Flathead County’s plan to invite so-called “commercial sprawl” along the city’s south entrance, and have unified in an effort to curb “eyesore” development at its southern gates.
City officials held a public hearing at the Dec. 5 Whitefish City Council meeting to gather public input on a request to amend county zoning and allow future commercial development on 490 acres of land south of the intersection at U.S. Highway 93 and Montana Highway 40.
The land, which is within the jurisdiction of Flathead County, is currently zoned agricultural. Developers of the plan say the area is suited for a wider array of commercial uses and the zoning changes would make it congruent with the southern commercial section of Whitefish.
While such a zoning change could pave the way to allow offices, light manufacturing, and other retail opportunities at Whitefish’s southern doorstep, it might also elevate a level of commercial garishness that the community has long worked to stave off, critics say.
The majority of the concern expressed last week centered on the potential for the southern corridor to bristle with “commercial sprawl,” a concept that critics say conflicts with the city’s growth plan, and which rankles downtown business owners and community members worried that such a deviation would detract from the appeal of a city center characterized by small, local shops.
Meanwhile, business owners purchased just outside of the city’s limits complained they’ve been mired in a zoning limbo that has devalued their properties, hampered their growth and left them grappling with an uncertain future.
The debate underscores an ongoing dispute over Whitefish’s “doughnut” zone, a two-mile belt girding the city’s outer edge that the county now controls.
Although parts of the county’s proposed plan would align with Whitefish’s design and infrastructure standards, the overall proposal could conflict with the city’s vision, which has previously opposed significant development in the southern entrance.
Rhonda Fitzgerald, the owner of the Garden Wall Inn in downtown Whitefish who also serves on the University of Montana’s Institute of Tourism and Recreation Research committee, said the potential for unchecked southern growth could undermine Whitefish’s streak of individualism and create an unsightly business district anathema to the quaint corridor’s aesthetic.
“The further south we go with this cancer, the more problems we will have down the line,” she said of the zoning change.
Whitefish City Councilors Andy Feury and Jen Frandsen both raised concerns about the potential for infrastructural development along the southern corridor that would slow commuting times for workers who travel between Whitefish and Kalispell, while councilor Richard Hildner asked simply for the county to consider the city’s input.
All three councilors, as well as Whitefish Mayor John Muhlfeld, thanked Flathead County Commissioner Phil Mitchell for attending the meeting.
“I hope we can extend an olive branch, and extend it in a way that the city and the county can work together and make the olives grow,” Hildner said.
Dave DeGrandpre of Land Solutions LLC is scheduled to present a draft plan before the Flathead County Planning Board Jan. 11. The plan seeks to change the zoning for a section of land along U.S. Highway 93 stretching one-and-a-half miles south of Highway 40. The land, which is within the jurisdiction of Flathead County, is currently zoned agricultural. Developers of the plan say the area is suited for a wider array of commercial uses and the zoning changes would make it congruent with the southern commercial section of Whitefish.
Whitefish Planning Director David Taylor is preparing a letter that captures Whitefish residents’ concerns about the plan for county officials to consider.