Missoula City Council Land Use and Planning Committee Minutes

-
Council Chambers (in person) or TEAMS (virtually)
Attend in person: City Council Chambers, 140 W Pine, Missoula MT
Members present:
  • Stacie Anderson, 
  • Mirtha Becerra, 
  • Daniel Carlino, 
  • John P. Contos, 
  • Sierra Farmer, 
  • Gwen Jones, 
  • Kristen Jordan, 
  • Mike Nugent, 
  • Jennifer Savage, 
  • Amber Sherrill, 
  • Sandra Vasecka, 
  • and Heidi West 

1.

  

The meeting was called to order at 1:32 p.m.

1.1

  

Amanda Vermace called the roll.

1.2

  

2.

  

There was no public comment for items not listed on the agenda.

3.

  

Cassie Tripard, Planning Supervisor with the Community Planning, Development and Innovation department, stated there was no new updates. She informed the committee that a representative for the applicant team was present to make some requests. 

Kirby Christian, introduced himself as the representative for the applicant. The applicant and the representative are related. Mr. Christian has questions regarding the conditional use requirements and upcoming legislative changes. He also gave some history of the property ownership. Mr. Christian explained the concerns he has with a few of the conditions of approval compliance. He requested these conditions to be removed and be addressed at the time a building permit is requested. Ms. Tripard explained the requirements and where they are located within the regulations. 

The committee requested visuals of the site plan and when the improvements would be required. The committee sough details on the length of the sidewalk that would be required. It was clarified the sidewalk would be roughly a quarter of a mile long. The committee also discussed the possible development of a parks trail in the neighborhood as it could help with the installation of the infrastructure being required of the applicant. 

Ms. Tripard also addressed the fourth condition of approval. That requirement relates to accessibility for emergency services prior to any combustible construction. Mr. Christian stated that condition was not a primary concern. He touched on his concerns around the sidewalk requirements which focus on cost, city regulations and involvement in the installation process, and the location of the property being a rural area. Danny Oberweiser with IMEG provided the cost estimate for installing the sidewalk. That cost estimate  was around $200,000.00 to $300,000.00 based on the square footage. Further discussion clarified that a postponement is an option and included the pros and cons of that option. 

The committee commented on the connectivity in the area around the property. They also requested more information about the potential development of the area to know if the improvements are appropriate. They also wanted to get more details on the options available with the postponement options and any funding options the applicant may have. Additionally, they requested staff from parks and recreation be available for questions around the trails development in the area. There was also discussion regarding the boundary line relocation.

  • Moved by:Stacie Anderson

    To hold this item over in committee for one week to further discussion and take for final consideration at the City Council meeting on May 15, 2023.

    AYES: (12)Stacie Anderson, Mirtha Becerra, Gwen Jones, Heidi West, Amber Sherrill, John Contos, Sandra Vasecka, Sierra Farmer, Jennifer Savage, Daniel Carlino, Mike Nugent, and Kristen Jordan
    Vote results:Approved (12 to 0)

Tara Porcari, Senior Planner with the Community Planning, Development and Innovation department, informed the committee that there was no new updates or comments received since the public hearing opened. The subject item was scheduled for final consideration 

  • Adopt a resolution to annex and incorporate within the boundaries of the City of Missoula one certain parcel of land described as a portion of Tract 3 of Certificate of Survey No. 6355, located in the northeast quarter of Section 13, Township 12 North, Range 20 West, P.M.M., and being more particularly described in the legal description in this Staff Report, as shown in Exhibits A and B, and zone the property Miller Creek View Addition Planned Unit Development, based on the findings of fact in the staff report, subject to the recommended conditions of annexation approval and subject to an effective date for the annexation and zoning to occur at the time the amended plat for 2021-MSS-SEA-00032 is filed with the County Clerk and Recorder.

Aaron Wilson, planning manager with Public Works and Mobility, provided some answers to questions asked previously. He went over the ADA parking requirements and general parking requirements in the city. He confirmed the city does not have a citywide parking audit. He also went over the parking radius near transit stops and accessibility. Mr. Wilson also gave examples of the mixed barriers they receive when they do project reviews for improvements. 

The committee began asking questions about ADA requirements and accessibility. Daniel Carlino, went over the amendments made to the referral and why these modifications were made. He felt this address all three items in the city's strategic plan; Climate, Equity and Housing. Eran Pehan, Director of the Community Planning, Development and Innovation department, explained that staffs position hasn't changed and would seek to continue the process as laid out. Time limitations was expressed as a big factor for both staff and the consultants. The goal is to have some deliverables by summer of 2023 and would include recommendations on what the best path forward should be. A lot of the discussion circled around the project priorities and the timeline of implementation of the code reform project. Ms. Pehan gave some background on the company that was hired as the consultant for the project. Concerns were expressed about use of times and where the priorities are for the project and how the proposed item could alter the future outcome of the code reform project. There was a mix of interpretations of the request being made and how this effects all those involved with the project. Some of the committee members sough clarification regarding exactly what the proposed motion on the referral was seeking. Ms. Pehan reiterated her desire to let the consultants do what they have been hired to do.

The committee discussed a proposed motion and the process for the proposal. There was concern around the proposed language on the referral and concern over the intended path of the motion moved onto the floor. 

Public Comment:

Chris Chitty, a Missoula resident and infill developer, expressed optimism, excitement in the code reform project but has concerns over the project and lack of staff resources. He would like to see more room for things to happen and embrace it to allow people to be as creative and innovated as possible. He would like to ensure council gives staff and the consultant team very clear directions that would make their jobs easier.

Another public commenter was more prepared to share support for the proposed motion listed on the referral.

The committee held additional questions and comments regarding the motion on the floor. There was a mix of opposition and support of the motion on the floor along with understanding of what councils interpretation of the motion on the floor. Due to time limitation, the item was tabled and will be held over in a future Land Use and Planning Committee meeting.

  • Moved by:Heidi West

    Adopt a Proposal to direct our code reform consultant team and staff to explore alternatives to the current minimum parking requirements in order to support a diversity of housing types and flexibility in project development through the code reform process.   

4.

  

The meeting was adjourned at 3:39 p.m.

No Item Selected