Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Stevensville moves to align variance process with state changes in first reading of Ordinance 173
Summary
Councilors reviewed and held a first reading of Ordinance 173, which revises town code sections on land‑use variances to reflect changes in Montana law. The modification streamlines steps and places initial decision authority with the zoning administrator while preserving an appeals path to the planning commission.
The Stevensville Town Council conducted a first reading of Ordinance 173, a code update that revises town procedures for land‑use variance applications to conform with changes in Montana law and to streamline the local process.
Town staff and the council said the revisions remove several intermediate steps that previously involved a board of adjustments and multiple public notices. Under the new language explained at the meeting, applicants will submit variance petitions to the town planning administrator; if the application meets the ordinance criteria, the administrator may grant the variance. Applicants who disagree with the administrator’s decision may appeal in writing to the planning commission within 15 business days, and the commission would make a recommendation to the council.
Council discussion summarized the five criteria the zoning administrator must evaluate: (1) the variance will not be detrimental to public health, safety or welfare; (2) the difficulty is due to physical conditions of the property; (3) strict application results in unnecessary hardship to the owner compared with others similarly regulated; (4) the variance will not substantially increase public costs; and (5) the variance will not place the property in violation of other regulations.
Councilors described the change as largely procedural: it reduces paperwork, shortens timelines and places initial decision authority with an administrative official while preserving a public appeal route. The town attorney drafted the language after noting the town had been non‑compliant with state requirements since February 2023, the mayor said during the hearing.
A motion to approve the ordinance on first reading was made and seconded; the transcript contains the motion and seconder but does not record a complete roll‑call tally in the provided excerpt. If adopted after any required publication and a second reading, the revised code sections would replace the previous sections noted in the ordinance materials.
Why it matters: the change alters local review procedures for variances, a permitting step that can affect property owners, developers and neighbors. Streamlining implementation could speed decisions but shifts initial authority from a board to the planning administrator, increasing the importance of clear administrative criteria and an accessible appeals path.
Next steps: ordinance returns for the council’s second reading and final vote after publication and any required notice periods.
