Planning Commission reviews Station Camp infrastructure plans and pushes for completed hospital agreement and updated traffic study

Gallatin City Planning Commission · January 6, 2026

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

An 83‑acre Station Camp infrastructure plan advanced through staff review; commissioners pressed the applicant for a finalized hospital agreement or a clear condition and asked for traffic‑study revisions including turn‑lane and level‑of‑service fixes before returning for approval.

The Planning Commission reviewed an infrastructure‑only final master development plan and preliminary plat for the Station Camp master plan, an approximately 83‑acre phased infrastructure project west of Big Station Camp Creek and north of Highway 386.

Staff flagged minor comments and asked for a clear subdivision name, 9‑1‑1 assigned road names, clarification of the timing for open‑space dedication and additional timing for phasing. Engineering and the commission focused attention on a traffic‑impact study under review; staff said consultant comments had been returned to the applicant and that the study needed revisions to address level‑of‑service and turn‑lane questions.

Kelly (representing the applicant) told commissioners they preferred keeping the proposed greenway/trail on the south side of the boulevard to activate central green space and said they would work with staff on safe‑crossing alternatives (signalized crossing or HAWK system) rather than relocate the trail. The applicant reported an executed letter of intent with the hospital for a right‑of‑way arrangement but said final, fully executed agreements remained under legal review.

Commissioners repeatedly stressed that a fully executed agreement is necessary for constructing the critical road connection the development relies on; several members said they would accept a strong condition tied to execution but asked staff to verify that condition would be sufficient. The applicant agreed to revise the traffic study and to work with staff on signal timing and access geometry. No formal vote was recorded; staff and the applicant said revised materials would be returned to Planning Commission for further review.