Gallatin commission approves 5-unit townhome conditional use permit with screening, retention and no-blasting conditions

The Gallatin City Planning Commission on an unrecorded voice vote approved a conditional use permit for a five-unit attached townhome development, adding requirements for "ample screening," city-required stormwater retention and a prohibition on blasting.

Charlie Pieria, a staff planner, told the commission that the applicant seeks approval for a multifamily use on four lots totaling 1.15 acres and that staff recommended approval of Resolution 2025008 with eight staff conditions; the project will return for site-plan review where stormwater, buffer yards and other technical requirements will be addressed.

Neighbors urged the commission to deny the permit or attach strict conditions. "This project is simply too large for a lot that is barely able to accommodate it," said Kent Graves, who said he represented six homeowners surrounding the site and asked the commission to require an eight-foot solid wood privacy fence on the east, west and south sides. Long-time resident Rick Manon raised detailed stormwater and geologic concerns, describing an overflowing storm drain that reaches Highway 31 during heavy rains and warning that blasting or rock removal could damage foundations and utilities.

Applicant representative Andy Leath of Greenlit Design acknowledged existing drainage on adjacent properties and said the design "will do all it can to mitigate the stormwater," adding, "we're obligated to take care of what we cause an increase" in runoff. Leath said the proposed access location is largely dictated by state/highway access rules and that his client prefers to avoid blasting; he told commissioners his team is willing to accept a no-blasting condition.

Vice Chair Schreiner moved to approve the conditional use permit with the added contingencies requiring ample screening, compliance with city stormwater retention requirements and no blasting, and to incorporate the staff-recommended conditions; a motion to second was recorded and the commission voted aye to carry the motion.

Commissioners and the applicant discussed screening options during the hearing, including vegetative screens such as Thuja Green Giants (arborvitae) and the option of a fence; the applicant said he would work with staff to identify code-compliant screening appropriate to adjacent properties. Staff also noted the CUP grants the zoning right to pursue a site plan but does not authorize immediate construction; technical items such as buffer yards, setbacks and retention infrastructure will be resolved at the planning commission site-plan review.

The commission’s approval sets the conditions the developer must meet when submitting a site plan. If the site plan meets city technical requirements, the project will proceed to the planning commission and could later require council action per the city’s review flow.

Resolution 2025008 was approved with the stated contingencies and the eight staff conditions cited in the staff report.