A proposed zone change for 62 acres of agricultural land in the former Whitefish “doughnut” area is opposed by the city of Whitefish and a local land-use watchdog group.

The Flathead County commissioners held a public hearing Monday to consider changing the zoning on property owned by Evan Shaw north of the intersection of Montana 40 and Whitefish Stage Road. The change would shift zoning from SAG-10, suburban agricultural with a 10-acre development minimum, to SAG-5, suburban agricultural with a 5-acre minimum. 

Both suburban agricultural zones are intended to protect and preserve farmland and provide a buffer between urban and agricultural uses.

The commissioners took the request under advisement and have not yet made a final decision.

The city of Whitefish previously had planning control of Shaw’s property as part of the 2-mile doughnut around the city, but a Montana Supreme Court ruling last year shifted jurisdiction to Flathead County.

The city of Whitefish and Citizens for a Better Flathead maintain the zone change is not compatible with Whitefish’s urban growth policy as required by Montana law. They also contend it is not consistent with the 2007 Whitefish growth policy and future land-use map that discourages the zoning redesignation of areas outside the city until the city meets a 50 percent threshold on its infill policy.

Furthermore, Whitefish and the Citizens group argue that the zone change also is not compliant with the 1996 Whitefish City-County Master Plan, which the county has adopted. 

The SAG-5 zoning, with one dwelling unit per five acres, “is considerably denser than the ‘important farmland’ land use designation for that property, which would allow only one dwelling per 20 acres,” Citizens Director Mayre Flowers said.

“The city of Whitefish, unlike the county, has put together detailed plans for timing and planning for future growth and infrastructure needs to support the city, as it grows first through more cost-effective infill, and later as it expands its boundaries to accommodate additional growth needs,” Flowers said.

Eric Mulcahy of Sands Surveying, representing Shaw, said Shaw has no immediate plans to develop the property, but having SAG-5 zoning on the property would allow density options for clustering or a planned-unit development.

“The increased densities will help offset the infrastructure costs without creating a subdivision that is out of character in this transition area between urban and rural jurisdictions,” he said.

The county Road Department pointed to a conflict with the city of Whitefish over Kallner Lane, a road that borders a portion of Shaw’s property on the west side. According to comments submitted by the Road Department, Kallner Lane is currently the responsibility of Whitefish, but the city has indicated residential improvements to the west of Kallner Lane are not accessing the road, so the city believes it is not responsible for it.

“We have not pushed the matter but have had discussions with the county commissioners regarding the issue,” the Road Department wrote, adding that the county currently is maintaining Kallner Lane to a point just north of the Shaw property boundary.

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