Commission rejects rezoning near hospital, citing floodplain uncertainty and loss of industrial land

The Livingston City Commission on March 20 rejected ordinance 3058 — a request to rezone two parcels on Alpenglow Lane from Light Industrial (LI) to Mixed Use (MU) — after hours of testimony from residents, hospital representatives and city staff raised concerns about flood risk, loss of light‑industrial land and infrastructure readiness.

The proposal and the staff recommendation Planning Director Jennifer Severson told the commission the rezoning was requested by the property owner and had been recommended for approval by the Consolidated Land Use Board. Severson said the parcels lie adjacent to Livingston Community Hospital and that the applicant identified potential future uses including assisted living, senior housing and workforce housing for hospital staff. "They are proposing to rezone these from the current zoning of light industrial to mixed use," she said during the presentation.

Staff pointed to alignment with portions of the city’s growth policy and noted a consolidated land use board recommendation in favor of approval. Severson also highlighted that parts of the lots lie within the mapped 500‑year floodplain (non‑regulatory) and that the parcels are outside today’s 100‑year regulatory floodplain.

Public testimony and central issues Public comment ran nearly two hours. Nearby residents and advocacy speakers urged caution and urged the commission to delay any rezoning until updated floodplain maps — currently being redrawn after the summer 2022 floods — are published. Citizens repeatedly argued that certifying land for higher‑density residential use where flooding had occurred was premature without the updated FEMA mapping. As one public commenter put it, approving a zoning change before the remap "seems premature".

Others representing health‑care and business interests urged the rezoning as a way to site assisted living and workforce housing adjacent to the hospital. Rick Ojibla, speaking for Livingston Healthcare, said parts of the parcels are developable and that the hospital’s workforce challenges and proximity to the hospital made the site desirable for housing. Chamber of Commerce and hospital supporters also noted potential community benefits and proximity to services.

Staff and commissioners discussed regulatory controls available if the rezoning were approved: building and fire codes, floodplain permitting if the remapped area falls into the 100‑year regulatory floodplain, traffic‑impact studies and Montana Department of Transportation review of highway access. Grant, a staff participant, told the commission the expected draft remapped FEMA flood maps were "available in about 14 months or so," and another staff member said regulatory adoption could follow in late 2026.

Commission concerns and vote Commissioners repeatedly returned to two matters: the pending floodplain remap and the city’s remaining light‑industrial landbase. Commissioner Willich (and others) flagged that the city currently has only a limited acreage zoned for light industrial and expressed concern about losing roughly 12 acres to mixed use. Multiple commissioners also said approving mixed use now could expose residents and vulnerable populations to flood risk if the new maps expand the regulatory floodplain. After discussion the commission moved to reject the ordinance's first reading; the motion to reject carried.

What happens next Because the commission rejected first reading, the rezoning will not proceed as proposed. Staff and commissioners noted the zoning code rewrite planned for later in 2025 would clarify many definitions raised repeatedly in the hearing — including precise distinctions between "personal care center," "adult foster care" and other facility types — and said they expect to bring a draft code update to the commission for preliminary review in late spring with land‑use board review in the fall.

Ending: The rejection does not prohibit the landowner from pursuing other land‑use options consistent with the current light‑industrial zoning, nor does it prevent a future rezoning request if circumstances change; commissioners and staff indicated they would revisit the issue after the floodplain remap and the zoning‑code update.