Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Missoula council hears extensive public input on 2045 land use plan; staff amendments sent to committee
Summary
After a two-hour presentation and more than two dozen public comments, Missoula staff outlined the proposed 2045 land use plan’s place types, housing capacity and implementation steps; council referred staff-recommended edits to the land use planning committee for further work before a December 16 vote.
Missoula city planners presented the proposed Armazula 2045 Land Use Plan at a public hearing on Dec. 9, outlining a strategy to expand housing capacity, refine place and street types, and align the city’s zoning and subdivision codes with the 2023 Montana Land Use and Planning Act.
"This plan is yours," Mayor Andrea Davis said at the start of the hearing, stressing the years of outreach that shaped the document. Planning staff told the council the plan is intended to replace the city’s 2015 growth policy and provide a framework for a future unified development code.
In a detailed presentation, associate planner Madsen Mathias described the plan’s land use strategy and housing analysis, saying, "the proposed land use plan significantly expands housing capacity, adding room for about 50,000 more homes," and that the plan aims to provide a baseline capacity roughly 2.8 times projected need by 2045. Staff noted the plan also includes place-type descriptions, street types, and implementation actions timed over 1–10+ year horizons.
Staff emphasized compliance with state law and the new Land Use and Planning Act (2023), which shifts when public participation must occur and requires municipalities to align plans and codes. Planning supervisor Ben Brewer summarized materials in the council packet, including the resolution to adopt the plan, a staff report documenting changes since public review, and appended engagement and technical documents.
Councilors asked detailed questions about how the plan addresses safety and infrastructure constraints. On wildfire and evacuation in the Rattlesnake neighborhood, Brewer and staff said they consulted the Office of Emergency Management, Missoula Fire and Police and adjusted the place type in constrained pockets to "limited urban residential" to account for evacuation limits caused by block patterns and topography. Councilor Bob Campbell raised concerns about ingress/egress under emergency scenarios; staff replied that the change reflected layered analysis of hazard and suitability maps.
Councilor Daniel Carlino asked whether mixed use designations could appear in more neighborhoods and whether the plan risks perpetuating segregation by leaving large areas as low-density. Staff said place-type choices balanced infrastructure readiness, block pattern and environmental constraints and that zoning will be the vehicle to calibrate exact capacity and uses.
The hearing drew extensive public comment from scores of residents, neighborhood advocates and organizational representatives. Common Good Missoula, YWCA, Pro Housing Missoula, architects, disability advocates and homelessness-service leaders generally praised staff outreach and urged adoption while asking for two specific edits that staff already recommended: removing a qualifying clause in the Greenways description (p.101) and adding an implementation action to "develop incentives for universal design and visitability" (p.118). Common themes in public comments included support for more housing, concern about displacement and compatibility language, parking and infrastructure readiness.
The private owner of the Old Post Hospital at Fort Missoula asked that his parcel not be constrained by an "open space" designation; staff and council clarified that the civic place type does not preclude private development and that zoning and overlays will determine allowed uses.
After discussion, Councilor Mike Nugent moved a resolution to adopt the Armazula 2045 Land Use Plan and place-type map and to repeal older neighborhood plans (with certain master plans retained). The council agreed without objection to refer the motion back to the land use planning committee for a working session on Dec. 11; staff said the council could act as early as Dec. 16. No final adoption was completed at the Dec. 9 meeting.
What’s next: the land use planning committee will meet Dec. 11 for a working session on potential amendments; the council anticipates formal consideration and possible action on Dec. 16.
