Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Environment Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents push to protect Area B wetlands and urge housing solutions as Whitefish debates growth plan
Summary
At the Feb. 11 public hearing on the Whitefish growth plan, multiple residents called for protection of wetlands in Area B, while younger speakers and housing advocates urged mixed-use and infill near downtown to address workforce housing shortages.
Residents who live near the site labeled Area B at the edge of Whitefish told the planning commission on Feb. 11 that wetlands, hydrology and access constraints make the parcel unsuitable for large-scale housing development.
Eve, who said she lives at 298 Brimstone, described Area B as a wooded, wet landscape she sees from her window and asked whether the site is the right place for more housing given the habitat and flooding vulnerability. "This is also what I see ... I see the water all the time," she said, urging commissioners to consider alternatives and to preserve quiet spaces and wildlife habitat.
Another resident who said she owns property adjacent to the south parcel described hydrology reports, drone photos and a 2017 flyover in the record and asked for large setbacks and fencing to prevent trespassers from crossing pasture land. She said neighbors want large lots and single-family homes rather than high-density development that could flood lowlands.
At the same meeting younger residents and housing advocates urged the commission to allow enough infill and mixed-use housing near downtown so people who work in Whitefish can afford to live there. Luke Welly said many local workers commute from neighboring towns and that creating walkable, mixed-use neighborhoods could reduce congestion and keep businesses open. "That's why these lots and buildings are vacant downtown: the businesses themselves can't afford to be in these places," Welly said.
Kate, a retired planner with four decades of experience, told the commission she's concerned the timeline is compressed and urged mapping environmental constraints (wetlands, soils, high groundwater) that the Montana code requires before finalizing place-type choices. She recommended the commission consider special-area plans or carve-outs so sensitive areas receive additional study before zoning changes are adopted.
Why it matters: The debate underscores a central tension in Whitefish's growth-policy process: residents seeking to protect environmental and neighborhood character and those advocating for denser, more affordable housing close to downtown. The commission signaled willingness to revisit place-type descriptions and tasked staff and consultants to incorporate additional mapping and targeted text revisions ahead of the public hearing.
