Whitefish City Council Declines to Challenge State Law on 60-Foot Buildings Downtown

Following months of discussion, Whitefish city councilors this week opted not to go head-to-head with a new state law allowing 60-foot buildings downtown, which takes effect Oct. 1. 

The city council, however, directed city staff to explore ways to regulate any potential 60-foot buildings through its zoning code in hopes of minimizing the impact of such structures on the downtown or, ultimately, making the task financially infeasible for developers. 

Such changes will likely take place during the city’s major rewrite of its zoning code, which will be done to fall in alignment with Vision Whitefish 2045, the city’s growth policy crafted under the 2023 Montana Land Use Planning Act (MLUPA). City staff hopes to begin reevaluating the zoning by the end of this year, with substantial completion aimed for spring 2027.

In the meantime, developers will abide by the zoning changes adopted in spring 2026, which allows buildings up to 60 feet only if they are fully long-term residential multifamily, or mixed-use with commercial space on the ground floor and long-term residential multifamily on all floors above it. Buildings that include short-term rentals or more than ground-floor commercial are limited to 45 feet in the WB-3 zone and 35 feet elsewhere.

“I think that state law is pretty clear, and I think all of our comments about dealing with mass, bulk, setbacks, and all the things through the zoning process and development processes is our only avenue at this point,” Councilor Andy Feury said.

“I don’t think we have much choice there, but I do think that we should direct staff to evaluate options for bulk, size, and architectural considerations of these buildings, so that they can better fit into our downtown,” Councilor Ben Davis added. “That’s a very complex topic, and we will discuss it at a later date.”

When city councilors gave final approval in May to a new set of MLUPA-approved zoning and subdivision regulations, they added language delaying the 60-foot requirement in all zones until Oct. 1, the state’s deadline, in hopes of finding an alternative solution by then. 

The decision followed concerns from a Missoula state legislator about the requirement’s legality and about Whitefish’s growth policy, which was awaiting final approval.

A March 27 letter from Sen. Ellie Boldman, D-Missoula, asserted the city’s growth policy draft circumvented state guidelines restricting exclusionary zoning practices and inserted conditions that make it more difficult for developers to build 60-foot buildings “by right” in certain zones of the city. Boldman stated she would testify against the city should it be sued over the matter. 

The council reluctantly removed the language in question pertaining to the 60-foot building requirements before adding it back to the document ahead of its final approval. Some councilors expressed that protecting the downtown from the height requirement may be “a hill to die on” for the city.

At Monday night’s regular meeting — the city council’s last chance to address the issue ahead of the legislation’s Oct. 1 deadline — councilors unanimously decided to strike the language in Vision Whitefish 2045 that limited 60-foot buildings, specifically amending its downtown maximum building height from 45 feet to 60 feet. Several councilors expressed a distaste for directly taking on the state, especially with a litigious challenge certainly on the horizon should the growth policy go unchanged. 

“I am disappointed that we’re not going to directly confront the state,” said Councilor Steve Qunell, who has been especially vocal about challenging the new law. “I think when you have to face a bully, sometimes you have to face them square on, and you have to stand up for yourself. We know that allowing 60 feet in the downtown is not a good idea for our city. It’s not just not a good idea. It could be completely destructive to our city. With that said, I also understand that we have to figure out ways to make do with what we need to do otherwise.”

During Monday’s work session, councilors and city staff discussed an array of options to combat the 60-foot building legislation, ranging from directly defying state law and banning 60-foot buildings in the downtown, to presenting health and safety risks the building would pose since the city is currently without a ladder fire truck. 

Councilors also discussed relying on potential legislation from Sen. Dave Fern, D-Whitefish, to amend the height requirement regulation to minimize the impact for resort communities specifically. City Manager Dana Meeker told councilors that Fern has already begun conversations about such legislation with both her and the city of Columbia Falls, noting she thinks Fern is “cautiously optimistic.”  

Ultimately, councilors decided regulating building form, not height, would be the only feasible path forward, as waiting for legislation would take too long and relying on the health and safety argument likely wouldn’t stand up in court.   

“You can look at step backs at the second or third story, third or fourth story; you could kind of, dare I say, wedding cake it if you wanted to,” Thomas Eddington of czb, the consulting firm aiding the city on the matter, said. “You could look at all sorts of different building articulation requirements that start to eat into building footprint on the upper levels to make it more economically challenging. 

“Probably one could argue that if somebody was trying to build that building, it might not be one of the more attractive buildings. Hopefully, it would not be economically viable for them to want to do that, but you can start to stack some of those tools.”

Enforcing setback requirements for buildings downtown isn’t anything new, Planning Director Dave Taylor added.

“I think the 20-foot setback is something that’s viable because that’s something we’ve had in our code for the last 25 years or more for the downtown, so we’re not changing that,” Taylor said.

As part of Monday’s amendments to Vision Whitefish 2045, councilors also approved a “scenic resources” section for multiple chapters in the growth policy. The scenic resources section assesses the community’s characteristics based on the landscape that surrounds it — most notably Big Mountain — and guides future development so that it doesn’t negatively impact those resources within the community. The scenic resources assessment approved by the city council carves out special protection for Central and Spokane svenues.

“I think that one of the really helpful things about the scenic inventory, I’ll call it, is that it will provide Sen. Fern another support for what he is trying to accomplish,” Councilor Frank Sweeney said. “I think it will in fact give us at least an official argument as to why that 60-foot height allowance that they would have in our downtown is not really appropriate.”

[email protected]