Thanks for the great question, Mark.

It is correct that historic neighborhoods, downtown and walkable / trails ranked high in this quadrant during visioning. However, we interpret this to mean residents put high value on the existing historic neighborhoods and downtown and the importance of ensuring the preservation of as much of this character as possible, and / or new development being consistent and compatible adjacent to and within those areas. For the most part, these areas are north of E. 6th St.  

The area I believe you are referring to is the old hospital property which is an area of very different character. You probably have more design flexibility as there isn't a unified theme here - although I would mention the importance that any development on this property would be a major development and would set the precedent for future design. In that area, visioning comments included trail connections, walkabilty, housing and business incubators, a bridge over the river and even a transit hub.

Please note we will not specifically be discussing land use, housing, design and character until Spring 2025. However, that area is within Segment B of the Hwy 93 South Corridor Plan. I recommend you consult that plan.

Thanks for reviewing all our work! The "quadrants" discussed match the quadrants that are shown on the original flyer for the visioning sessions. That flyer is here:

We wish there was, but this engagement site does not have that ability yet. We will pass that on to the developers of the platform. 

Hi Mallory! Great question!

We absolutely want to get as many people involved as possible, particularly those who might not typically be able to get to night meetings, due to their schedules or any other reason.

We do plan to make some or all of the visioning exercises available on the engagement site. We'll be working on this after the sessions this week. We recommend getting as many as possible signed up to this website, because this is how primary communication occurs. We will send an alert when the online visioning tools are available. At present, we have almost 500 subscribers to the site! 

Wow, that is a lot to digest! We appreciate all these suggestions.  

In regard to taxation, most of taxing authority lies on the County Assessor, although there are rebates or perhaps mill levies we might have available. We have discussed and are still discussing tax implications in regard to housing.

After the growth policy is complete, we are required to review the existing zoning to ensure it meets the growth policy, and if not, the zoning must be updated. We can certainly look at the ideas you are suggesting regarding zoning.

Recent Montana legislation says we have to look at population projections and plan for those projections. It does not give us the ability to "say no" to more housing. Even leaving aside the recent statute changes, saying "no to more housing" is probably not realistic. We cannot bring to mind a city that has done this in which it actually worked, except in cases of an extreme public health, safety and welfare issue, and even in that case, it's a temporary moratorium. Likely this would be a fierce political debate, and would likely not be legal and / or lead to litigation. 

We'll save this and discuss these ideas / feedback when we start working on the housing and land use elements. 

Thanks for your question!

 As a government and public entity, we should not recommend resources or books outside of what have been sanctioned or provided by the City or State. However, we look forward to robust discussion regarding strategies to ensure the City of Whitefish continues to grow in a sustainable manner, accommodates housing for all demographic groups and retains Whitefish character. We have noted this suggestion and encourage you to raise these topics during visioning sessions, discussions regarding the land use and housing elements and they could certainly become strategies or policies in the new growth policy. 

 For those who are interested in urban planning, development, or housing issues, the State of Montana has posted numerous resources on their Community Technical Assistance Home Page .

Good morning, thank you for your question!

We do have a list similar to what you have suggested starting on Page 11 of our Public Engagement Plan (PEP). It goes through all the strategies we plan to engage the public, although it does not have specific dates or events listed. To make the PEP easier to find, I've just linked it in the FAQs as well. We do plan to set up booths for at least several of the community events. 

It is very difficult for us to be “specific” about how the team will use and incorporate public feedback into the drafting of the growth policy this early in the process and only at the level of a general survey thus far.

The feedback of the public will absolutely be analyzed and considered during the process and the public can stay involved in this process step-by-step. All drafts and maps will be posted on the website and reviewed in work sessions and public hearings open to the public. At present, we are looking at existing conditions and collecting and analyzing data. There will be community meetings held in different geographic locations throughout the City, particularly toward the second half of the project when we are focusing on land use and housing. This growth policy is a community plan for OUR community, and it is remiss for staff to bring a Plan to the decision makers, or the decision makers to adopt a plan that does not represent the values of the community. 

The ways public feedback can be incorporated into the drafting of a growth policy are too numerous for us to list or even theorize on at this point. We can use it to determine what the community values, and what the community wants Whitefish to look like and not look like in the future. What is the “community character” of Whitefish and how does Whitefish change, grow and evolve over the next 20 years and retain that character? Public feedback can help us consider what is most and least important to protect, where the view corridors are, what streets are safest and least safe? Where are the constraints to emergency ingress and egress, and how can they be improved? Which areas can best handle growth, which lack the infrastructure or contain other physical constraints that inhibit growth? How should new growth and development be distributed throughout the community? How can each area accept its fair share of growth? How can development occur with the least amount of impact on the neighbors? Where are you seeing wildlife? Where are your favorite areas to walk and what do you like to see and not see? Where can goods and services be located and reduce the amount of driving necessary?

That said, the way the public can best help us is to stay involved and offer us tangible suggestions.   Recent state mandates require us to generate realistic population projections and plan for that growth. As we write the growth policy, it is our responsibility to consider the feedback of the residents, the future residents, the people who used to live here and no longer can, the housed and un-housed, the commuters, the out-of-staters, the service workers, the executives, the developers and the interest groups equally.

Of course! We also share this concern! 

Thanks for bringing this to our attention!

Yes! We are aware of this issue and are actively working with EngageHQ to resolve the issue. We believe it is related to the "reCAPTCHA" button (I am not a robot). At present, we have turned that feature off. Give it a try again and see if it works. Sorry about the inconvenience, we are doing everything we can to make this as easy as possible for everyone.