A substantial resort housing development on Wisconsin Avenue has gained the approval of the Whitefish City Council after traffic routes in the project were revamped.

City Council Jan. 16 gave its OK to a 102-unit housing project proposed for about 10 acres off of Wisconsin Avenue directly across from Alpine Village Market. The vote was 4-2 with Councilors Andy Feury and Melissa Hartman voting in opposition.

Wisconsin Development Partners requested conditional use permits for the project which is planned for the area comprised of vacant land and the parcels for Big Mountain Trailer Court. The plan calls for 36 multi-family condominiums and 66 condominium cabins that developers have said would likely become vacation rentals.

Prior to the vote, Councilor Richard Hildner said he’s bothered by the fact that the development seems like a missed opportunity to create affordable housing, and plans for nightly rentals that essential equate to 102 hotel rooms means the project will create jobs, but no where for those folks to live.

“I don’t think this is the best thing for Whitefish and I’ve struggled with reasons that would preclude me from approving it,” he said.

The project first came before Council in December, but after hearing from neighbors of the project over concerns about the traffic impacts on an already busy Wisconsin Avenue a decision on the issue was delayed.

Will MacDonald, representing Wisconsin Development Partners, said concerns prompted a new layout for the project that he said is better than the original.

“We heard you guys,” he said. “Whitefish is going to grow and we want to give you the tools to allow that.”

An updated site plan for the project removes the secondary emergency access to the south and creates a loop driveway around the multi-family condominiums with both accesses off East Marina Crest Lane. The plan also now calls for two 18-plexes instead of three 12-plexes — the density remains the same as previously proposed, while the buildings are larger.

In addition, the updated site plan also shows a dedication of 16 feet of future right-of-way expansion along the frontage the project. With the dedication, there will be a total of 76 feet of right of way, which would give the state Department of Transportation enough right of way to develop a three-lane road in the future. Because of the complexities associated with a left-hand turn lane, it can’t be installed at this time and MDT would need to review the entire corridor to determine the type of road improvements, city Senior Planner Wendy Compton-Ring noted in her staff report.

Despite changes to the project, residents of Dakota Avenue continued to voice concerns about traffic impacts to surrounding neighborhoods, specifically pointing out that an extension of Marina Crest Lane creating a connector between Wisconsin and Dakota avenues would increase traffic on Dakota. Though Marina Crest would not be extended with the project itself, a portion of the road would be constructed and a portion of the road to the western edge of the property would be dedicated as right-of-way. Density appeared to be just too much also.

“People in our neighborhood don’t want more traffic because Dakota Avenue can’t accommodate it,” Jan Metzmaker said. “This development is too dense, the buildings are too tall and it doesn’t fit with the neighborhood.”

Rhonda Fitzgerald called the project “mind-boggling.”

“We can’t handle that many vacation rentals in that area,” she said.

Mayre Flowers, with Citizens for a Better Flathead, claimed that the density planned is not allowed under the city’s zoning regulations.

“Numerous residents in the Wisconsin Avenue neighborhood have expressed disbelief that a development of this density is possible at this site, and they’re concerned about the negative impacts this development would have on traffic and transportation, as well as property values, and the character of the neighborhood,” she said.

Replying to a question on the issue of density, Compton-Ring said the property is zoned to allow 10 dwelling units per acre, which matches with the planned 102 units, if approved with the CUP or subdivision. She noted that the project includes three separate lots, so it could include a four-plex on each lot for a total of 12 units as a use by right.

Councilor Frank Sweeney said the city couldn’t make the developer reduce the number of units in the project, and given the what’s allowed on the property it is a “pretty good proposal.”

“This is not an ideal situation and I wouldn’t necessarily want this kind of density or uses that is allowed for nightly rentals,” he said. “However, that’s not how this property is zoned. It’s been zoned that way for a long time, unfortunately.”