Court Battle Continues Over Whitefish Subdivision

Litigation continues over a proposed subdivision located north of KM Ranch Road. The suit, which names both the Flathead County commissioners and the Flathead County Planning Board as defendants, is over the Baker 80 subdivisions, a 16-lot, 80-acre development approved by the county commissioners in 2021. 

The future development was the source of several contentious meetings as residents of the neighboring Whitefish Hills Village Subdivision argued against Baker 80 being allowed to utilize privately maintained subdivision roads. The county’s approval granted access through two such roads over opposition, interpreting them as public easements.

In preliminary plat documents, primary access to the Baker 80 subdivision is to be via Whitefish Village Drive and Prairie View Road to the north of the property. Whitefish Village Drive is a privately maintained but public road with a 60-foot right-of-way in the adjacent Whitefish Hills Village subdivision.

Alternative access to the Baker 80 property is possible via Prairie View Road south to KM Ranch Road, but while a county easement exists there, the road is not fully constructed and would require nearly 3,000 feet of new construction as opposed to roughly 100 feet if Whitefish Village Drive is utilized.

In its first cause of action filing against the county, the Whitefish Hills Village Homeowners Association argued the county does not have the authority to mandate that subdivision roads serve as primary access to new developments.   

During the commissioners’ hearing to approve the Baker 80 plat, they found that “information provided appears to demonstrate that the Whitefish Village Drive was intended to replace/realign a portion of an existing public right-of-way known as Brady Way,” offering access to the property through the Whitefish Village subdivision. Attorneys for the Baker 80 owners argued that the initial road abandonment of Brady Way was carried out incorrectly, leading to the current interpretation that the subdivision access is legal.  

In a letter submitted to the county commissioners earlier this month, the homeowners’ association claims the development is out of compliance with its permits. The letter details alleged building of access to the Baker 80 property from both the north and the south that do not match with submitted engineering drawings on the preliminary plat. 

There was a hearing before Flathead County District Court Judge Amy Eddy on Oct. 18, after the Beacon went to print.