Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Planning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Columbia Falls planning commission outlines fast-track 20-year land-use plan, seeks consultant and public input
Summary
Commissioners reviewed a staff plan to meet Montana's new land-use law, discussed hiring a consultant and a tight timeline (open houses in winter, council workshop Jan. 26, target approval May 18), and heard a public comment urging robust outreach and affordable-housing focus.
Get email alerts on the Land Use Planning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Columbia Falls planning commissioners on Tuesday reviewed staff’s proposed schedule and public-engagement approach to produce a 20-year land-use plan required under the Montana Land Use Planning Act and discussed hiring a consultant to lead outreach and plan drafting.
Planner (unnamed staff) told the commission the state law (adopted in 2023 through Senate Bill 382 and amended in 2025) creates a new 20-year planning horizon and imposes specific requirements the city must satisfy. The planner said the city aims to onboard a land-use consultant by October–November, hold initial public open houses in December–January, brief the council at a Jan. 26 workshop, and target a second reading and approval of the plan on May 18.
Why it matters: The state law narrows some local discretion on zoning and subdivision standards, staff said, and includes changes that affect parking and building heights in certain zones. The planner warned some earlier guidance is outdated after 2025 legislation and urged the commission to focus staff time on items the city does not already meet.
During the presentation staff reviewed technical work underway: wastewater assessments by Morris and Merrill, and water-system modeling by WTM and ATS. Staff said the public works team is finishing a roughly $6,500,000 upgrade to the wastewater bioreactor designed to increase treatment efficiency and modestly improve throughput. The planner also described a longer-term transmission or storage project staff estimated as on the order of $8 million–$12 million over a multiyear horizon, and said consultants will model the effect of adding roughly 100 equivalent dwelling units to the system.
Public participation and consultant role: Staff said the consultant’s scope will emphasize public engagement—open houses, employer and school-district interviews, and online surveys—and will use the city website as a persistent hub for documents and updates. "We will try to get as much public participation in this process as possible," Keegan Steven Fuller, who identified himself as representing Livable Flathead and ShelterWF, told the commission during public comment.
Housing numbers: The planner cautioned that the city’s earlier housing study covered a 10-year horizon and that projections for a 20-year plan will be larger. Citing prior figures, staff said the 2034 estimate for the Columbia Falls ZIP code was roughly 1,400 units and that a 20-year need for the city could be on the order of 1,000–1,200 homes.
Statutory impacts: Staff highlighted 2025 changes that limit the city’s ability to require parking for certain repurposed or deed-restricted affordable-housing projects and noted some commercial and industrial areas may see allowable building heights increase up to about 60 feet in places that previously capped heights at around 35 feet. Staff said legal review with the Montana League of Cities and the city attorney is underway to clarify exact local obligations.
Commissioner reaction and next steps: Several commissioners said the proposed timeline felt aggressive but signaled willingness to be flexible. Staff cited timing of state funding from the Montana Department of Commerce as a driver of the schedule and said consultants who have worked on similar plans around the state may accelerate the process. Commissioners asked staff to prepare a short memo listing which of the 14 statutory requirements the city already meets versus which items will require new work.
The commission took no policy votes on the land-use plan at the meeting. The agenda’s procedural items — approval of prior minutes and adjournment — were handled by unanimous voice votes.

