The Grouse Mountain Estates Homeowners Association has sued the city of Whitefish over a recent resolution passed by the City Council that stiffened the city’s prohibition of gated communities.

The council passed a resolution in October aimed at strengthening the city’s policy on gated communities by amending the city’s engineering standards and explicitly detailing its prohibition of gates in subdivisions with private roads.

Earlier this year Grouse Mountain Estates homeowners decided to put gates at the entrances of the subdivision, on opposite ends of Mountainside Drive. That decision was spurred by the reconstruction of U.S. 93 West in the Grouse Mountain area, which prompted motorists to drive through the subdivision to skirt the construction zone.

The homeowners association asserted there’s enough public traffic on those private roads year-round to warrant permanent gates. It asked the city for a permit, but was advised no permit was needed, according to a complaint for declaratory judgment filed in Flathead County District Court.

After the association spent $11,700 on the new gates and began installation, Whitefish City Manager Chuck Stearns contacted the homeowners association president to discourage him from installing the permanent gates, the lawsuit noted.

Installation of the permanent gates was put on hold once the city passed the resolution.

“Having no legal authority to prevent the installation of gates, the city attempted to create its own authority by passing [the resolution],” the complaint stated.

City Attorney Mary VanBuskirk then sent a letter to the homeowners association, stating it was the city’s position that the resolution applies to Grouse Mountain Estates and prohibited the subdivision from installing new gates.

A staff report compiled by VanBuskirk in preparation for the resolution noted that during a communitywide planning effort to draft the 2007 growth policy, there was a strong desire by city residents to maintain access to all subdivisions for connectivity throughout the city.

“‘No gated communities’ was one of the key themes identified in the May 2006 survey,” VanBuskirk noted. During several outreach sessions, community residents “expressed their sentiments that there be no gated communities in Whitefish.”

The lawsuit asks the court to declare that the resolution doesn’t apply to Grouse Mountain Estates and stresses that the subdivision has vested rights in a private road that can be closed to the public. The resolution unlawfully interferes and impairs those rights, the complaint further alleges.

Grouse Mountain Estates — not to be confused with the older Grouse Mountain subdivision served by Fairway Drive — was approved for final plat in 1997. As part of the plat, the city certified that roads within Grouse Mountain Estates were private and exclusive.

Language in the plat specifically states that the Grouse Mountain Estates Homeowners Association are entitled to close their private roads to vehicular access by the public.

The lawsuit further alleges that the city resolution is unconstitutional because it violates substantive due process

Whitefish’s prohibition of gated communities dates back to the late 1990s when Iron Horse was developed. At the city’s insistence, Iron Horse private roads remain open to the public.

Features editor Lynnette Hintze may be reached at 758-4421 or by email at lhintze@dailyinterlake.com.