Clashing visions for future of 93 West corridor

Deciding on a vision for the future of Whitefish’s west entrance continues to be a struggle as conflicting opinions tussle over whether the corridor should transition toward more commercial development.

City Council on April 20 made a number of key decisions regarding the specifics of the Highway 93 West corridor plan. However, it chose to continue the public hearing and make a final vote on the plan at the May 4 meeting. Councilors John Anderson and Andy Feury were absent from the meeting.

The plan lays out future land uses from the Veterans Memorial Bridge to Mountainside Drive, and is an addendum to the Whitefish City-County Growth Policy.

The plan recommends the south side of the area remain multi-family residential with some light commercial uses. The north side of the highway, however, has been tagged as “mixed use transitional,” while the Idaho Timber property is an “industrial transitional district.”

Steering committee member Ann Shaw Moran said she has concerns about the potential growth that could happen under the plan in the area north of the highway in the subdistrict that runs from the Veterans Bridge to Karrow Avenue. Neighbors will continue to rally against growth in that area, she noted.

“The whole area is largely residential,” she said. “If you adopt this, you will be setting the area up for conflict.”

Jay Wolfe, who lives on West Second Street, said the plan is progressive.

“Everyone thinks the corridor is housing, but most people who want to buy over there aren’t looking for homes because it’s noisy with traffic,” he said. “For those owners who want to pursue something other than residential this is a good plan.”

Rhonda Fitzgerald took issue with the plan saying it encourages commercial growth along the corridor when retail activities need to remain downtown.

“Some of the proposed uses for this corridor are already in the (downtown zoning),” she said. “People do not want bars in their neighborhood.”

Chris Hyatt disagreed saying that sometimes it is necessary for a business to get its start outside of downtown, where rent is often less expensive, before relocating to downtown.

“When I started a ski shop we couldn’t afford to be in downtown,” he said. “Then when we could, we moved downtown.”

Zoning districts

Many residents have voiced opposition to the transitional zoning districts. The two proposed districts are designed to only be applied in that corridor.

WT-3 is intended for transitional development including high-density residential, professional offices and light manufacturing. The zoning could be applied to the area along the north side of Highway 93 from Karrow Avenue to the Veterans Bridge. It is not designed to be applied to any other area in Whitefish.

WI-T is intended to allow for gradual transition on vacant sites that were traditionally heavy manufacturing to clean industries and business incubators. There are no specific areas for where this zoning could be applied.

Council briefly discussed, but ultimately decided against, removing the proposed zoning districts from the plan.

Councilor Jen Frandsen questioned inclusion of the proposed zoning districts in the plan.

“It wasn’t clear at the beginning of this process that we were looking to consider zoning changes,” Frandsen said. “I’m uncomfortable with offering two new zones at this stage.”

Councilor Frank Sweeney concurred, saying that while he knows there will be changes, he wanted further vetting of the zoning.

However, City Manager Chuck Stearns warned against the idea. The potential zoning districts would still have to go through the planning board and be approved by council before they could be added to the zoning code, he noted. Individual property owners would also have to apply to the city to be re-zoned.

“If you get rid of the zones, you might as well throw out the whole process,” Stearns said.

Microbreweries

Including alcohol production in the proposed zones quickly became a sticking point for council.

U.S. House Rep. Ryan Zinke in 2012 proposed creating a microbrewery on his property on the north side of the highway.

Zinke, who served on the steering committee, ultimately withdrew his proposal, but the request began discussions about the need for a corridor plan.

Zinke addressed council Monday praising the corridor plan for creating more restrictions on development on the south side and allowing the north side of the highway to be a vision for artisan manufacturing and retail.

“I will still come back with a microbrewery proposal,” he said. “I will still give access to the river and restore the riverbank.”

The north side of the highway, including the area of Zinke’s proposed microbrewery, is the area where the WT-3 zone is designed to be applied.

Council wrestled with whether alcohol production would be allowed in the two proposed zoning districts.

Council tied on a vote and Mayor John Muhlfeld broke the tie that made alcohol production a conditional use in the WI-T zone, but not allowed in the WT-3 zone. Councilors Jen Frandsen and Richard Hildner voted in favor, while councilors Frank Sweeney and Pam Barberis voted in opposition.

Later in the meeting, Muhlfeld asked council to reconsider the vote. In a 3-2 vote, the motion was approved to reconsider the previous vote. Councilors Frandsen and Hildner voted in opposition of reconsidering.

“I have always thought that a microbrewery is an appropriate use in this area (north of the highway),” Muhlfeld said. “I have seen examples where strict development standards as part of a conditional use process can help mitigate some of the concerns the neighbors may have.”

Frandsen asked council to wait until the next meeting to reconsider the issue, so that it might be decided without a tiebreak from the mayor.

“I would urge us to wait until the next meeting when the full council may be present to make a decision on this,” Frandsen said.

Councilor Pam Barberis then made a motion to allow alcohol as a conditional use in the WT-3 zone, but the motion died for a lack of second. Council will have to address the issue at its next meeting.

Decisions made

Council made a number of decisions on the specifics of what would be allowed as permitted uses in the two proposed zoning districts and one boundary change to a sub-district in the corridor plan. Those included:

• Short-term rentals are not allowed in WT-3.

• Coffee shops and sandwich shops are a conditional use in WI-T, but not be allowed in WT-3.

• Nursing and retirement homes, and community residential facilities are a conditional use in the WI-T zone.

• Professional artist studio and galleries are a conditional use in the WT-3 zone.

• Bed and breakfast lodging is a conditional use in the WT-3 zone.

• Colleges, businesses and trade schools are a conditional use in the WI-T zone.

• Private railway cars with living accommodations are allowed to park on rail lines for not more than 30 days on the rail spurs on the Idaho Timber property.

• The lot coverage for properties in the WT-3 zone is set at 50 percent.

• Council turned down a request to add grocery stores, not exceeding 4,000 square feet, in the WI-T zone.

• Council decided that one section of what is known as Area B should be a part of Area A. The section was on the south side of Highway 93 east of Good Avenue to the Veterans Bridge. Area A is designated for residential use, along with existing professional offices. Area B, north of the highway, is designated as gradually transitioning from single-family residential to other uses such as professional offices and personal services.

One item remained undecided at the end of Monday’s meeting.

WGM Group, the city’s contract planner, recommended a couple of items be added to alleviate concerns for strip development or buildings out of scale with the residential context of the neighborhood.

That all new structures with a building footprint of 7,500 square feet or greater or expansion of buildings to the same size, be subject to a conditional use permit. Council asked city staff to return with more information on the addition.