Monthly Archives: March 2011

Taylor W. Anderson

Mar. 8, 2011

HED: Missoula City Council hears from strong rezoning opposition

It was standing room only for Monday night’s city council meeting as residents discussed a proposal to rezone and develop an area between Russell and Reserve streets in Missoula.

The council didn’t vote on the issue, however, and instead sent the ordinance back for committee discussion on Mar. 16.

What was established at the meeting was the overwhelming size of residents against the proposed ordinance to rezone an area that includes Steve Sann’s property on Catlin Street.

The crowd came mostly in opposition of the proposal to develop Sann’s property into four affordable apartment complexes for 71 units. The buildings would also be 45 feet high, 10 feet taller than the current standard for residential buildings in the city.

Opposition included mostly residents in the surrounding neighborhoods hoping to keep the neighborhood the way it is. Sann and supporters have proposed to rezone the area from its current allowance of 16 units per acre to 43 units per acre.

The switch would coincide with neighborhoods adjacent to the property, which currently allow 43-per-acre, proponents said.

Not so, said multiple speakers, mostly homeowners, who said that Catlin acts as the divider.

The highlight issue of the night didn’t seem to be people as much as it was traffic, though both were at the heart of debate. Residents said adding the units could triple the population of the area, which would irritate the traffic problem near Russell and Third streets near the Good Food Store.

Homeowners in the area also said the streets are too narrow as they exist, and an increase of car flow wouldn’t help that problem.

James Hoffmann, the architect in charge of the development, designed the property to include 30 percent more parking than the city requires, which he said would help the car problem. He and Ken Jenkins gave a combined presentation at the meeting in which they showed models of the two, three-story and two-story buildings.

Backers of the project want to create more affordable housing to the estimated 50 percent of Missoula that doesn’t own a home.

Proponents also noted the city’s approval of paving the Milwaukee Trail System, which runs behind the area, which they said would alleviate car traffic.

Opponents, mostly property owners, argued that the buildings would take from the character of the neighborhood, that they wouldn’t provide enough park space for children in the new buildings, and that homeowners didn’t purchase the property thinking it would become overcrowded.

Nate Sann spoke on behalf of his father’s property. Sann lives in the area and said he helped design the project with his neighbors in mind.

“I looked at this as a benefit to the community, I didn’t realize so many people would be opposed to it,” he said. “I didn’t hear from but one renter (tonight) because none of these people are looking for housing right now, they all own their area.”

Sann promised his friends and neighbors that he would fund the building of a park to satisfy some of the complaints, as long as the city promised to maintain it later.

That may not be good enough for some, including Councilmember Renee Mitchell, who said she campaigned for city council because of a similar issue that affected her neighborhood.

“I know where these people come from, in a close-knit neighborhood like that, they feel threatened by an immense change,” Mitchell said.

If the majority of speakers had their way Monday night, the proposed ordinance would have been voted against and halted, which could have happened. But it’s up to the city council, which will deliberate more and must vote in a super majority in order to approve the proposal.

“My understanding is we’re going for a rezone or it would stay the way it is, and if those are my two choices right now,” she said before a pause, “just come to the next meeting.”

If the council eventually decides not to rezone the area, Sann said he’ll likely cancel the project, citing his wish to provide housing for less than $900 per month.

“I am not going to stand behind doing a 16-unit complex because we would have to build it so shoddy that I wouldn’t want to be a part of that,” he said.

-30-

#####