Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves rezoning on Reserve Street despite neighborhood objections
Summary
Council voted 10–1 to rezone three parcels at 1010/1020/1030 Reserve Street from B‑3‑2 to C‑2‑1, aligning the parcels with Missoula’s 2045 land use plan despite neighbors’ concerns about traffic, noise and residential impacts.
The Missoula City Council on Nov. 17 adopted an ordinance rezoning three parcels at 1010/1020/1030 Reserve Street from B‑3‑2 (business mixed use) to C‑2‑1 (community commercial) by a 10–1 roll‑call vote; Councilor Jordan opposed.
Planner John Sand presented staff’s analysis, concluding the proposed C‑2‑1 district aligns with the 2045 Our Missoula land use plan’s limited urban mixed‑use place type and can support additional residential and commercial uses. Sand noted the proposed rezoning reduces the maximum building height on two parcels from 50 to 40 feet (35 feet at certain interior setback points), permits a broader range of commercial uses including automotive‑oriented services, and requires buffering where commercial uses abut residential parcels.
Neighbors testified that the area lacks sidewalks and adequate pedestrian connectivity and that some permitted commercial uses—for example auto repair and tire shops—could create sustained high decibel noise near adjacent homes. Councilor Jordan and others asked staff and the city attorney about the effectiveness and enforceability of the city’s noise ordinance; City Attorney Ryan Sudbury said the noise code is difficult to enforce and that zoning is a better tool to prevent incompatible uses.
Applicant representative Zach Graham stated the intended use for the property is compatible with commercial services in that corridor and offered to answer questions. Staff and several councilors pointed to the Reserve Street safety plan and required traffic impact studies at building permit stage as mechanisms to address access and circulation issues as redevelopment occurs.
The council voted against a motion by a councilor to send the rezone back to committee (10–1). Following debate, the main motion to adopt the ordinance passed 10–1.
Next steps: Future development proposals on the rezoned parcels will require building‑permit review, traffic impact analysis and required right‑of‑way and sidewalk improvements before occupancy; the rezoning itself is a change in allowable land use and does not authorize immediate construction.
