Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kirkpatrick Gallatin rezoning advances on first reading after debate over pedestrian access
Summary
Councilors approved first reading for the Kirkpatrick Gallatin rezoning, a large residential planned development in the south end of the city, after debate about traffic, density and whether to allow pedestrian access to an existing neighborhood. An amendment to remove pedestrian access failed; first reading passed 4 yes, 1 abstention, 2 no.
The Gallatin City Council voted to advance the Kirkpatrick Gallatin rezoning on first reading Tuesday after extended debate about density, traffic and neighborhood access.
Councilman Alexander introduced the ordinance for a planned residential development described in the ordinance as roughly 154.83 acres with a preliminary master development plan. During discussion Alexander, whose district includes the site, said the project amounts to “342 units on 154 acres” and expressed concern that the city repeatedly is approving dense projects in the south end without first building roadway capacity.
Several council members and residents questioned traffic impacts on Lock 4 Road and nearby intersections. At least three residents who spoke during the public-comment period earlier in the meeting urged the council to slow rezoning and development because of flooding, traffic and impacts on wildlife; their remarks referenced the Kirkpatrick proposal by name.
A specific point of contention during the council discussion was whether to allow a pedestrian-only connection between the new development and the existing Nicole Circle neighborhood. A motion to amend the ordinance to remove all access — both roadway and pedestrian — to Nicole Circle was moved and seconded. Planning staff clarified the history: a prior decision removed the roadway connection but had included a pedestrian access; that pedestrian access remained on the preliminary plan unless the council removed it.
The council voted on the amendment to remove pedestrian access and the amendment failed. On the ordinance first reading vote the council recorded four yes votes, two no votes and one abstention; the clerk announced the motion passed first reading.
Planner/ staff member Rose told councilors the pedestrian access had been included previously to allow residents in the area to walk to adjacent sidewalks and trails where sidewalk networks are incomplete.
Council discussion repeatedly returned to traffic and infrastructure concerns rather than design details; a council member said the city must be careful not to keep reacting to development by retrofitting infrastructure afterward.
Because this was a first-reading approval the ordinance will return for additional readings and any further conditions or changes that the council elects to add. The public record includes multiple public comments earlier in the meeting opposing further rezoning and citing flooding, traffic and quality-of-life concerns.
