Council rezones California–River Road parcel to B2-3, advancing denser riverfront development plan amid floodplain concerns

The Missoula City Council on April 7 adopted an ordinance rezoning a roughly five-acre parcel southwest of the intersection of North California Street and River Road from a mix of residential and lower-intensity business zones to B2-3 community business, a designation that allows greater building height and density.

City planners told the council the rezoning aligns with the city’s recently adopted land use plan, which designates the site as “urban mixed use low” and encourages walkable neighborhoods with a mix of housing types. Planner Tara Porcari said the rezone request to B2-3 is consistent with that place type and noted that rezonings themselves do not carry conditions; specific requirements such as floodplain permitting and any conservation-district reviews would come at the building permit stage.

Porcari said the site sits in Flood Zone AE, within the city’s 1% annual flood hazard area, which will require a floodplain permit and structures to be raised at least 2 feet above base flood elevation when development is proposed. She also said that review under the state’s streambed protection process (the 3-10 natural streambed act) is performed in coordination with outside agencies when building permits are submitted.

The developer’s representative, Joe Dehnert of IMEG, told council the rezoning reflects policy changes and years of project planning and argued that limited additional height would allow the development team to “build up instead of out,” providing more open space between buildings and the river. The applicant’s illustrative plans shown to the council described roughly 235 dwelling units and about 8,500 square feet of commercial space as one possible scenario; staff emphasized those site plans are conceptual and not binding on the rezoning vote.

During the public hearing, resident and river advocate Vicky Watson urged the council to protect the Clark Fork River’s floodplain and to place taller buildings farther from the river. Watson said, “Please put the tallest buildings as far from the river as possible,” and argued that stronger, clearer riparian buffers are needed beyond the city’s current, sometimes discretionary standards. Jeff Stevens, a nearby resident, spoke in support of the rezoning and redevelopment.

Planning Board reviewed the application and recommended approval on a 6–0 vote with one abstention. Agency comments noted water-main extension needs and encouraged respect for riverfront buffers; Parks staff reminded council of long-term riverfront trail planning and the downtown master plan’s recommendation for riparian space.

Council members discussed concerns about River Road’s current condition and pedestrian access. Troy Monroe, an engineering representative, said that — depending on how the road and trail plans evolve — the city would normally require street and sidewalk improvements adjacent to new development, though some improvements might be deferred if a larger reconstruction plan is expected.

After debate, the council adopted the ordinance by roll call, recorded as 11 in favor, none opposed. The rezoning clears the parcel for future development under city standards, subject to floodplain, building permit and other regulatory reviews at the time a development application is filed.