Land use board backs zoning code update, asks staff to study riparian setbacks and low‑density/agricultural district

The Livingston City Land Use Board on Oct. 14 voted to forward the latest draft of the city's proposed zoning code update to the City Commission, accepting staff'recommended text edits while asking planning staff to research riparian setback distances and to propose a low‑density or agricultural zoning district for the commission's consideration.

Planning staff presented a staff report that highlighted several tracked changes to the draft code, including edits to the use table (clarifying where assisted living, supportive/transitional housing and co‑living are allowed), a clarification on adult foster care limits tied to state licensing, language aligning assisted‑living allowances with supportive/transitional housing, added preference language for native/drought‑tolerant landscaping, provisions on laying hens (no roosters; limits to be aligned with the county sanitarian), height measures for Light Mixed Use and R2 districts (allowing up to 40 feet in certain PUD situations), and an administrative path for parking waivers tied to short‑term rental licensing.

Board members expressly asked staff to research riparian setback best practices and legal considerations before the commission hearing. Staff said the current draft includes a 10‑foot no‑construction buffer from the ordinary high‑water mark for perennial streams but noted public comments proposing much larger buffers (examples cited in public comment included 150–300 feet for some waterways). Jennifer (planning staff) said she and the city attorney had discussed legal authority to adopt riparian setbacks but asked for additional time to research case law, floodplain mapping and what comparable jurisdictions have adopted.

The motion, made by board member Bailey and seconded by Frank, directs staff to return the code with the following additions for the City Commission packet: (1) additional research on riparian setback distances with recommended distinctions between the Yellowstone River and smaller creeks (Fleishman, Billman), and (2) research and a draft for a low‑density/agricultural zoning district or approach that could be applied to large eastern parcels identified in the city map review. The motion passed on a roll‑call vote.

What the vote means: the board did not adopt a final numeric setback nor a new map; rather, it approved the staff'recommended text edits and asked staff to perform additional analysis and bring recommended language and options to the City Commission for final decisions. The board also signaled support for handling short‑term rental parking waivers administratively through the zoning administrator at licensing, subject to showing on‑site parking where possible.

Next steps: staff will update the publicly posted draft to reflect the board's recommendations and add the additional analysis requested for riparian setbacks and a low‑density/agricultural district when the item is transmitted to the City Commission. The commission will receive the board's packet, public comments collected to date, and the additional research before making a final decision.