Highlights  Describe Our Missoula Growth Policy Project  Relationship to Rattlesnake Neighborhood Plan  Next Steps

What is this Community-Wide Growth Policy?  A general guide for the City’s future decisions regarding the physical development of Missoula Consider ways to grow 20 years into the future while keeping Missoula a vibrant, beautiful and livable City Helps to shape the community direction on critical issues and emerging needs Sets common goals for City agencies regarding service extensions, community priorities & needs Guides future changes to development regulation and sub-plans

Study Area

Process  Visioning approach  Gather facts and information (Community Profile)  Moving forward – developing policy for the future  Looking Inward – how to better utilize the systems we already have  Respect existing characteristics, neighborhood plans and issue based plans

Background Existing Characteristics & Projected Trends Land Use, Population, Housing, Economics, Local Services, Public Facilities, Natural and Cultural Community Goals & Objectives Policy Work Strategies for Implementation Including support for more specific plans like Neighborhood Plan Land Use

Link to Neighborhood Plans  Existing Plans Wye/O'Keefe Creek Area Plan, Grant Creek Area Plan, Section 18, T12N, R19W Plan Amendment, South Hills Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Historic Southside Neighborhood Plan, Downtown Riverfront Plan, Fort Missoula Plan, Development Park Master Plan, Rattlesnake Valley Update, Reserve Street Area Plan Update, Butler Creek Area Plan Amendment, Miller Creek Valley Plan, Southside/Riverfront Area Plan Amendment, Joint Northside/Westside Neighborhood Plan, Wye/Mullan West Comprehensive Area Plan, Limited Scope Update to the Northside/Westside Neighborhood Plan, 2009 Greater Missoula Downtown Master Plan, 2009

Goals of the Land Use Map update Vision Statement Draft Goals & Objectives Focus Group Composite Ideas Population Projection Consolidated Descriptions Existing Uses on the Land Existing Neighborhood Plans Demographic Trends Asset Mapping Existing Zoning Land Use Needs Constrained Lands Developable Lands

Proposed Approach Two Key Considerations Keep Neighborhood Plans linked to new Growth Policy (GP) – Recognize general consistency with latitude for some changes (what’s best for today and 20 years out) Develop process for the following – Updating existing plan – Detaching old, no longer relevant neighborhood plans – Developing new neighborhood plans Describe in new GP

Proposed Approach Updating Existing Plans – Attempt to follow new proposed template – Prioritized based on Potential Plan conflicts Degree of Development Activity Severity of new issues Interest from Neighborhood Age of the Plan Retire Old Plans – Consideration based on: No longer relevant Changing times/conditions Age of Plan Majority Implemented Majority incorporated into GP – Staff to make recommendation to Council – Alert associated neighborhoods – Set time frame for expressed interest – If no interest – proceed with resolution to retire Develop New Plans – Attempt to follow new proposed template – Not include Land Use change – Prioritized based on: Severity of issues Degree of Development Activity Interest from Neighborhood

Use of Neighborhood Plans To inform and guide Land Use Existing Neighborhood Plans – Primary tool – GP Land Use Map – Secondary tool – Neighborhood Land Uses – In unzoned areas Neighborhood Plans provide more specific land use direction Updates and New Neighborhood Plans – Describe specific desires, characteristics and how development occurs – Not include specific more detailed land uses (separate Map) In Future – Desire to change community land uses should occur at the community level – As amendment process to the GP Land Use Map – Describe how to amend GP Small Areas Large Areas Regular Reviews every 5 years

Use of Neighborhood Plans To inform and guide Policy Existing Neighborhood Plans – Providing information into this GP process – Background information for City, Agencies, Community, Neighborhood – Neighborhood continues to advocate for elements in the Plan Updates and New Neighborhood Plans – Background information for City, Agencies, Community, Neighborhood – Neighborhood continues to advocate for elements in the Plan

Draft Land Use Map Draft Map

Land Use Comparison

The Rattlesnake Plan Information & Updates Housing – About 2100 households in 1995 – About 2360 housing units in 2014 Population – About 5025 people in 2000 – About 5187 people in 2010 UFDA tracking – 54 new units between 2008 & 2014 – 2% of the City’s new building permits Plan Recommendations Environmental – Background information for City, Agencies, Community, Neighborhood – Neighborhood continues to advocate for elements in the Plan

The Rattlesnake Plan – Key Policies Environmental – Address Air Quality * – Address Water Quality – Rattlesnake Creek – Concern over development on Slopes* – View Sheds* – Open Space corridor along Creek – Preserve Wildlife Habitat* – Address weeds – Support Urban Forest* Neighborhood Character – Lower density to the north* – Higher density to the south* – Consider neighborhood friendly commercial uses* – Support park lands* – Development compatible with existing neighborhoods and natural environment* – Guide by Rattlesnake Valley Planned District Overlay Zone Transportation/Local Services – Improve pedestrian/bicycle network* – Increase transit access – Address emergency access* – Plan for Disaster Mitigation

The Rattlesnake Plan - Implemented Open Space Bond Acquisitions Air Quality standards Hillside development standards Land Use designations Riparian Resource Protection zone Urban Tree Inventory & Management Plan Sewer Extensions General Disaster Mitigation Plan Rattlesnake Valley Transportation Summit Survey

The Rattlesnake Plan – To Do Rattlesnake Greenway Management Plan Continuous Trail along Creek Community Foresty Plan Wildland Urban Interface issues Rattlesnake Valley Planned District Overlay Zone Zone unzoned lands

Summary Consistency Plan remains attached Neighborhood imple

Next Step Continue to track plan development – Early September public review Planning Board September City Council Fall review