Butte-Silver Bow Planning Board Working Session on Zoning Ordinance Update - August 28, 2025
Butte-Silver Bow Planning Board Working Session on Zoning Ordinance Update - August 28, 2025
The Butte-Silver Bow Planning Board held a working session on August 28, 2025, at 5:39 PM to discuss the zoning ordinance update (GENAMD 25-1), which proposes to repeal and replace Title 17 of the Butte-Silver Bow Municipal Code. The board reviewed public comments submitted during the process, focusing on suburban and rural related comments. Due to time constraints, the board deferred discussion of non-conforming uses and other topics to a subsequent meeting.
Consent Calendar
- Minutes Approval: The board approved the minutes from the July 31, 2025 meeting unanimously.
Public Comments & Testimony
- No public comment was taken as this was a working session, but the board considered over 109 pages of written public comments, including a petition from the drive-in theater. Comments from Chris and Jana Sherrill, Mike and Jennifer Flannick, James Ayers, and Gail Hunt were highlighted for the suburban/rural bucket.
Discussion Items
The board and staff, led by Director Crane, discussed the following topics related to suburban and rural zones:
-
Agricultural Livestock: Commenters requested allowing agricultural livestock as an accessory use in rural residential and suburban residential zones. Staff noted a cross-reference with Animal Control regarding animal quantities. The board agreed to further research appropriate thresholds for animal numbers based on lot size, with input from commenter Mike Flanick's suggested tiered system (1-10 acres, 11-20 acres, etc., up to 100+ acres for agricultural use). No decision was made; staff will research and return with recommendations.
-
Passive Recreation (Hunting and Camping): The Sherrill family identified inconsistencies in definitions allowing hunting in suburban zones and camping as passive recreation. Staff clarified that hunting in urban areas was never intended, and camping (including commercial RV parks) may not be appropriate in residential zones. The board concurred with staff to modify definitions to restrict hunting in suburban zones and to study appropriate locations for camping, with emphasis on proximity to services and avoiding residential areas.
-
Electric Fences: Commenters raised concerns about prohibiting electric fences in suburban/rural areas. Staff proposed allowing electric fences for specific purposes (e.g., keeping livestock in) but not as perimeter fencing along front or side property lines, with labeling requirements. The board agreed this was a reasonable balance.
-
RV Parks and Campgrounds: A commenter sought to prohibit RV parks in suburban residential zones. Staff noted the economic value of RV parks near interstate exits and suggested possibly allowing them in commercial or mixed-use zones adjacent to suburban areas, with use conditions such as distance buffers. The board deferred to staff for further analysis.
-
Traditional Neighborhood Overlay: Staff explained that a traditional neighborhood overlay in suburban zones could allow higher density and small-scale commercial uses (e.g., in Buffalo Estate subdivision). The board acknowledged the concept but took no action.
-
Sidewalk Ramp Access: Commenters raised ADA ramp requirements. Staff clarified that federal ADA standards apply to new developments and that the county's ADA coordinator ensures compliance. The board noted this is already required.
-
Unzoned Land and Commercial/Industrial Development: Mike Flanick proposed requiring a zoning application for commercial or industrial development on unzoned land. The board discussed legal implications, potential unintended consequences, and the need for further study. Staff will consult with the county attorney.
-
Rural Centers and Agricultural Zones: Staff reviewed Flanick's suggestions to redefine rural centers (e.g., Rocker as part of urban area), use conservation easement overlays, and establish tiered rural residential lot sizes (1-5, 5-10, 10-99 acres). The board found these reasonable for further consideration.
-
Other Topics: Staff addressed editorial suggestions, including adding "light" to industrial impact statements to protect the drive-in theater, and ensuring development standards for rural lots are less prescriptive. The board agreed to incorporate these into the redline draft.
Key Outcomes
- The board directed staff to research and propose code modifications on livestock thresholds, camping locations, electric fence conditions, and unzoned land zoning requirements.
- Staff will redline the code sections discussed and present recommendations at the next working session.
- The board postponed discussion of non-conforming uses, landscaping, lighting, signage, short-term rentals, and urban zone comments to the next meeting.
- The next working session was scheduled for Thursday, September 11, 2025. Meetings will likely occur every two weeks to move the process forward.
- The meeting concluded at approximately 6:45 PM.
Meeting Transcript
All right. Thank you for bearing with us. I'll call this meeting to order. Today is August 28th at 5 39 p.m. First, we'll take a roll call of members. Mike McLeod, Matt Steitzer is present, Julie Jackshaw, Bart Riley, Josh O'Neill, Mark Garf, Margot Enns, and Maisie Salser. All right, so we do have a quorum tonight. Next we'll approve the minutes from the July 31st meeting. If everyone had a chance to review the minutes, does anyone have any corrections? Okay. We'd entertain a motion to approve the minutes. Thank you, Mr. Riley. Second. Thank you, Mr. Garf. All in favor, say aye. Aye. All right. Meeting minutes from July are approved. All right. Um this is not a public hearing. Uh this is a working set public working session meeting. So for the folks out there tonight, um, we can't take your public comment tonight. So moving on to other business. The agenda item tonight is the zoning ordinance update. The board consideration of public comments submitted to the planning department regarding GENAMD 25-1, an application by Butte Silverboat Planning Department to repeal and pull it replace Title 17 of the Butte Silverbow Municipal Code known as a zoning ordinance. Uh this agenda item will include consideration of public comments, deliberation of a comment's merit and applicability, and direction to staff to incorporate proposed modifications into the code for further consideration. So we've reviewed all the comments that we've received from the both the written comments submitted as well as the comments submitted in the public hearing. So we've kind of loosely grouped those comments into um several buckets. So the first bucket we're putting in is um suburban and rural related comments. And then next we'll do um non-conforming use comments. We we likely will not get to all of the the topics this evening. So we're gonna we're gonna end tonight's meeting at seven o'clock, try to wrap up um co discussion about 10-2, and we'll like if we don't finish up. We likely will not, and we'll uh set uh date for the for the next working session. So tonight we'll consider rural and r suburban and rural related comments. Um folks that had submitted comments related to those topics were Chris and Jana Sherrill, Mike and Jennifer Flannick, James Ayers, and Gail Hunt. Um in the non-conformities bucket we have we had many comments, um, but specifically Jen Hansen, Holly Hansen, Lynn Joanhart, and Kim Wilson. So at this time I would turn it over to Director Cranen's staff to walk us through the first bucket of suburban and rural related comments, thank you, Chairman Steitzer and members of the board. Uh as you recall at last uh at our last meeting, uh there were significant comments that were provided by the public and many comments that have been shared with us in an informal way during the public process as it relates to um consideration of matters that are suburban or rural in nature. And in the public comments that we received, we had approximately a hundred and ten pages of comments that we received in addition to um a petition by um the drive-in. But we thought that it would be a good opportunity for us to begin to sort of parse through the comments that relate to the suburban and rural areas of Butte Silverbow to begin talking about some of the concerns that were mentioned in the last meeting and that we have received in our written commentary. And there was an omission that was reflected in the code draft that does not permit the use of agricultural livestock in those zones that would be in the future rural residential or suburban residential. And their letter in this particular category discussed the need to allow agricultural livestock as an accessory use in those rural and residential and suburban residential areas to maintain the existing uses of the neighborhood. I think that some of the concerns that we have heard as it relates to the potential of this use being approved in those zones is that there might be a concern about the number of animals that might be on a property. And to that end, we have a cross-reference within the code and collaboration with the Butte Silverbow Animal Control Department that would dictate quantities of animals that might be appropriate for certain sizes and scales. To that end, um Mr. Flannick offered similar commentary that I think we'll get to here in a while that discusses the need for those thresholds when determining the number of animals that might be permitted so that you are maintaining sort of the sort of pastoral landscape as opposed to it being a more commercial operation. And so not insured of the procedural element here, I would open it back up to the council or the the board's concurrence of that position for staff to draft such a change or to hear comments from the board. Okay.
openpublica.com