Livingston commission advances Northtown Planned Unit Development after lengthy debate, adds conditions on water loop and short-term rentals

The Livingston City Commission on Tuesday approved first reading of an ordinance to rezone about 20 acres on the North Side to a Planned Unit Development that would allow a mix of studios, one- and two-bedroom apartments and roughly 12,850 square feet of neighborhood commercial space.

The rezoning would enable the Northtown PUD application, which proposes 240 dwelling units across nine buildings clustered on about 20 acres currently zoned R‑2 (medium‑density residential), with roughly 63–64% of the parcel designated as open space and one building (closest to Scenic Trail) containing ground‑floor commercial space. The applicant requested a six‑foot height variance (40 feet requested vs. 34 feet normally allowed in R‑2) tied to preserving open space and minimizing earthmoving. After presentations by city staff, multiple technical consultants and the developer, commissioners approved the ordinance on a 4–0 roll call vote, but added several conditions addressing infrastructure, traffic mitigation and use restrictions.

Why it matters: Livingston’s adopted 2021 growth policy calls for a broader mix of housing types and neighborhood‑serving commercial services. Supporters said the PUD would add studios and one‑bedroom units that are in short supply locally and provide walkable amenities and transit connections for North Side residents. Opponents and neighbors pressed commissioners about traffic at the Fifth Street/Front Street intersections, evacuation options across the railroad, stormwater, and the scale of excavation required for the hillside site.

What the plan would include: City Planner Jennifer Severson and City Manager Grant Gager told the commission the applicant proposes a mix of 104 studios, 68 one‑bedroom and 68 two‑bedroom units across nine buildings in three phases (roughly three buildings per phase). The plan includes roughly 12,850 square feet of commercial space in Building 1, intended to serve nearby residents, and a proposal to manage stormwater on site using two retention facilities. The applicant has said build‑out will likely take several years — the developer estimated 5–7 years for full completion, with construction of individual buildings occurring in sequence (the first building estimated at roughly 14 months to occupancy).

Technical reviews and conditions: The applicant submitted a traffic impact study and a stormwater/drainage plan; independent traffic consultant Bob Ablin (Ablin Traffic Services) testified that the project would generate roughly 1,800 new daily vehicle trips and create an increase in delay for one specific movement (east‑to‑west left turns at Fifth and Front in the afternoon peak). Ablin and the applicant’s engineer proposed a peak‑hour left‑turn restriction (with signs and enforcement) at Fifth and Front and other modest intersection improvements; consultants said those measures would restore the affected movement to a level of service similar to existing conditions.

Public safety and water infrastructure were major points of debate. City and project engineers and the fire chief described additional fire hydrants and a requirement for sprinklers in all buildings. City staff also recommended the project’s water main be looped rather than left as a long dead‑end main — looping improves pressure and reliability for fire flows. The applicant objected that requiring the full external loop before any occupancy would add up‑front infrastructure costs that could stall the project; after discussion the commission amended conditions to require the loop to be completed by the time the first certificate of occupancy is issued in phase 2 or within a set calendar deadline after phase 1 (the commission instructed staff to include a financial‑guarantee mechanism; commissioners and the applicant discussed a 36‑month backstop during the hearing).

Commission action and added conditions: Commissioners voted 4–0 on the ordinance’s first reading and instructed staff to return with second‑reading language that includes the commission’s amendments. The commission’s expressed conditions included: - Require the PUD road and waterline loop connecting to the previously approved development to the west prior to occupancy of any building designated as part of Phase 2 (staff to draft enforceable timetable/financial guarantee; commissioners discussed ~36 months as a maximum backstop). - Require traffic mitigations identified in the updated traffic study — notably peak‑hour restricted turning movements (eastbound left‑turn restriction at Fifth & Front) and associated signage and enforcement — prior to issuance of occupancy for initial phase(s). - Require additional fire hydrants and sprinklers in buildings per the fire chief’s direction. - Require the developer to record a covenant prohibiting short‑term (fewer than 30‑day) rentals in units in the development; the applicant stated it does not intend short‑term rentals and agreed to a covenant. - Require the developer to meet with neighborhood representatives to discuss trail and open‑space connections and to coordinate on pedestrian/bicycle connections.

What the developer said: The applicant’s team described the project as a multi‑year, market‑based rental project intended to add workforce and market rental housing not currently available in the city. “We have no interest in doing short‑term rentals,” one developer said during questioning; later the applicant confirmed a willingness to add a no‑STR covenant. The applicant also emphasized that the project does not request an increase in density beyond existing code‑allowed limits; rather the PUD requests flexibility in form and an incentive (height) in exchange for public benefits (open space, commercial, sidewalks, connectivity).

Opposition and concerns raised: Neighbors and public commenters voiced repeated concerns about train crossings and evacuation constraints on the North Side, the adequacy of the Fifth Street crossing over the railroad, construction dust and large earth‑moving volumes, and impacts to local views and wildlife corridors. Several speakers asked the commission to require stronger guarantees for water looping and emergency access. Commissioners and staff acknowledged long‑term community interest in a new grade‑separated north–south crossing but noted such projects require separate planning and funding efforts outside this land‑use decision.

Next steps: Because land‑use code requires more than 15 days between public hearings on subdivisions and rezones, the item will return for a second reading/hearing at the next commission meeting (the commission adopted the first reading and directed staff to prepare second‑reading materials that capture the amended conditions). Staff will prepare final ordinance language and the enforceable phasing/infrastructure conditions and will return them for the commission’s final vote.

Ending note: The PUD marks the first use of Livingston’s PUD ordinance adopted in 2023 as part of implementing the 2021 growth policy’s recommendation for housing variety. Supporters framed the project as a practical way to add smaller‑unit rentals and neighborhood commercial options; opponents warned of traffic, evacuation and ecological impacts and pressed for firmer infrastructure guarantees.