Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Density topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Montana interim committee hears competing views on housing density from cities, builders and nonprofits
Summary
Local officials, builders and housing advocates told the Local Government Interim Committee on Sept. 25 that zoning tools, infrastructure limits and construction costs shape where and how denser housing can be built; panelists offered proposals and cautioned that solutions vary by community size.
The Local Government Interim Committee on Sept. 25 heard a full-day set of panels and public comments on House Joint Resolution 30, which examines housing density across Montana.
Local elected officials and planning staff described how municipal zoning, infrastructure capacity and local priorities affect where higher-density housing is feasible. David Fine, manager of the Bozeman Urban Renewal Program, reviewed Bozeman’s use of renewal tools to support infill development. Jeremy Fadness, contract planner for East Helena, and Jordan Green, chief administrative officer for Deer Lodge, described how small cities balance growth, public services and local regulations.
The committee’s vice presiding officer, Rep. Alanah Griffith, and other members pressed panelists on practical barriers to density, including sewer and water capacity, permitting timelines and local political constraints. Kelly Lynch of the Montana League of Cities and Towns framed municipal concerns about unfunded mandates and the need for flexible state guidance rather than one-size-fits-all rules.
After a midmorning session, an afternoon panel brought builders and housing providers into the discussion. Ron Bartsch of Sussex Construction and Adrianne Cotton, who represents the Montana Building Industry Association and the Helena Building Industry Association, emphasized development costs, labor shortages and the difficulty of achieving lower per-unit prices without scale or public subsidy. Jacob Kuntz of Helena Area Habitat for Humanity and Kaia Peterson of NeighborWorks Montana presented nonprofit approaches, including affordable homebuilding and community land trust models, and urged attention to financing and long-term affordability.
Public commenters offered contrasting perspectives. Tanner Avery of the Frontier Institute urged policy changes to expand housing choices; Nathan Dugan of Shelter Whitefish and Joe DeFilippis of the Montana Housing Division emphasized shelter capacity and housing-service coordination as immediate needs for vulnerable residents.
Committee members asked follow-up questions about regulatory tools that could be deployed at the state level, the role of incentives or grants to offset infrastructure costs, and differences between policy approaches in growing urban centers versus smaller towns. No formal recommendation or vote on policy changes was taken at the meeting.
Next steps: the committee will retain HJR 30 on its interim agenda for further consideration and follow-up materials; several members requested additional information on infrastructure cost estimates and model ordinances.
