Whitefish is looking to change its zoning code to aid in the development of workforce housing in the city.

City Council Feb. 6 will consider four text amendments to the city zoning code dealing with workforce housing. City planning staff is proposing the changes after being contacted over the past few months about developing multi-family housing and providing workforce housing in the WB-2 secondary commercial zone.

The Whitefish Planning Board gave a unanimous recommendation Jan. 19 to the four text amendments related to the change.

Senior Planner Wendy Compton-Ring noted that the city has been contacted by developers interested in creating such types of housing. She pointed to the Reisch Family Partnership boarding housing project approved last month that could create housing for up to 32 temporary workers.

“We’ve been contacted in the last few months about developing both multi-family and workforce housing in the WB-2,” she said. “There is an immediate need to house workers.”

A workforce housing study, created in a partnership with the city and Whitefish Chamber of Commerce, released in December, showed that Whitefish needs almost 1,000 affordable housing units added to the city by 2020 to make up for current shortage and plan for future needs.

Compton-Ring said while the city right now is only looking at the WB-2 zone to add workforce housing, it may in the future also consider adding the option for that type of housing in the WR-4 and WR-3 zones, which are multi-family zoning districts.

The first text amendment would permit multi-family and workforce housing above ground-floor commercial in the WB-2 zone. The amendment is intended to permit housing above ground-floor commercial as a permitted use. It would create incentives for residential apartments while maintaining commercial uses below, resulting in mixed-use facilities, Compton-Ring noted.

The second text amendment would allow multi-family and workforce housing in the WB-2 zone with a conditional use permit. The WB-2 currently has the most available development land, and there is a greater need for residential units than for more commercial development that could compete with downtown.

The third text amendment looks to provide a parking standard for workforce housing of one parking space per bedroom.

The final text amendment creates a definition of workforce housing as a multi-family dwelling intended for employees — that are seasonal, part-time, or full time — with rooms arranged under one roof with or without an on-site manger. The presence of a communal kitchen and bathrooms conclusively establishes the intent for workforce housing. The housing can be located on the same lot as the employer or may be on its own lot. Included in the definition are bunkhouse, barracks, dormitory and efficiency apartments, but is not intended for rentals of less than 30 days.

The Planning Board expressed concerns about the standard that would only require one parking space per room. Though many said they are worried that’s not enough parking, the requirement was not changed.

Chairman Steve Qunell said he is concerned that the proposed standards won’t provide enough parking for projects.

“The parking ratio should be the same as the number of beds,” he said. “If we say it’s per room and we have eight people in a room we only have one space for those people. We want to encourage people not to drive, however, we also need to make sure there is enough parking available.”

The Planning Board also approved a provision in the text amendments that would allow for an administrative conditional use permit. An administrative CUP, approved only by the city Planning Department, could be used for projects where the workforce housing is being developed with an existing building on-site with the employer.

Board member Rebecca Norton questioned whether administrative approval of workforce housing projects makes the most sense when it could have impacts to other residential neighbors.

“I think [workforce housing] is great, but I’m not sure about the administrative approval,” she said.

Compton-Ring explained that the administrative approval is only being considered because it would only apply to projects in the WB-2 zoning. She said it would not have an impact to current residences because those areas are largely made up of businesses and industrial uses.

“There is little residential in those areas,” she said. “In this area there is an opportunity to expedite it.”

A standard conditional use permit takes about two to three months to move through the city approval process going before Planning Board and City Council, but an administrative conditional use permit takes about 30 days and is reviewed by city staff.

Board member John Ellis voted against the addition saying Whitefish is just beginning to deal with workforce housing projects and there is a need to have greater public review of the projects.

“It’s important to go through the process and have Planning Board and City Council review it,” he said. “I don’t think 90 days is too long to ask for someone to wait to do this.”

Board member Allison Linville disagreed, saying the need for workforce housing is happening now and the city is already behind on providing that for its young professionals.

“I think this is more of an emergency than homeowners realize,” she said. “People moving here need residential housing — 90 days is a long time to wait.”

City Council is set to hold a public hearing on the text amendments on Feb. 6. The meeting at interim City Hall begins at 7:10 p.m.