Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Subdivision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board recommends preliminary plat approval for Penwell Bridge Farm subdivision
Summary
The Planning Board recommended that Gallatin County grant preliminary plat approval for a five‑lot minor subdivision designed to preserve most of the 61.33‑acre parcel in conservation while creating five single‑family lots; reviewers noted septic, floodplain and historic‑structure follow‑ups.
The Belgrade Planning Board recommended preliminary plat approval for the Penwell Bridge Farm minor subdivision, a proposed division of a roughly 61.33‑acre parcel into five single‑family lots and a large remaining agricultural parcel intended for conservation.
City planner Hayden (presenting staff) told the board the applicant — a partnership including Dirt Capital Partners and members of the Amalfi(a) farm family — proposes five single‑family lots accessed from Penwell Bridge Road, with shared driveways and individual wells and on‑site septic systems. Staff said the plat is undergoing review by the Gallatin County Floodplain Administrator and the Gallatin County Health Department. An updated staff report corrected technical language (the proposal is a minor rather than a major subdivision) and clarified that the site is in a minimal flood hazard zone on the FEMA FIRMAP (Zone X) though the project team provided a flood hazard evaluation to show future dwellings would be outside the 100‑year floodplain.
Dominic Grant of Dirt Capital Partners summarized the project goals: retain agricultural land, cluster residential lots away from creeks, and work with the Gallatin Valley Land Trust (GVLT) to place a large portion of the property under a conservation easement. The engineer presented technical work including groundwater monitoring and a preliminary DEQ application; staff told the board DEQ/health department permitting for on‑site wastewater will proceed after preliminary plat approval because lot lines may affect septic permitting.
The board asked about lot sizes, access and historic resources. Staff and the applicant said the homestead buildings (some dating to the early 1900s) would remain on one lot (Lot 4) and are not proposed for immediate change; the applicant acknowledged that any future exterior alterations to historic structures may trigger review by the State Historic Preservation Office. Board members asked whether driveways could be consolidated; applicant representatives said the current plan reduces total new driveways and provides fire protection access while preserving agricultural access. The subdivision lies partly in the East Gallatin zoning area and partly in unzoned county land; the proposal follows Gallatin County subdivision regulations and requests no variances.
A motion to recommend preliminary plat approval to the Gallatin County Commission passed on a recorded vote; staff said the application will move forward for county review pending final floodplain comments and health department coordination. The applicant said they continue to coordinate a conservation easement for the largest lot with the Gallatin Valley Land Trust.
