Click Here to Open as PDF    Back to Index

Please Note: This is a long document which may be viewed better by opening the PDF version.

The Gallatin Gateway Community Planning Group thanks everyone who helped make the event a success, and everyone who took the time to participate.  For future announcements, visit www.Gatewaycommunityplan.com.  Please stay involved!

BACKGROUND

This report describes the Downtown Gallatin Gateway Community Planning Meeting held on August 15, 2007 and provides a summary of results.  It also discusses the steps the residents of the Gallatin Gateway Community and Gallatin County should take to continue its planning process.

            The Gallatin Gateway Community Planning Group (Planning Group) has been meeting bi-monthly since February 2007.  The Planning Group had its inception in a series of meetings hosted by a potential developer in December of 2006 and January of 2007, at which a group of citizens volunteered to serve on a committee addressing planning and growth issues in the Gallatin Gateway area in response to several recent changes.  Briefly, those issues are as follows:  the potential development of a high-density residential and commercial neighborhood on the 60 acres between the Buffalo Station and the Exxon Station; the construction of a new billboard at the intersection of Gooch Hill Road and Highway 191, increasing traffic issues on Highway 191 through Gateway, the opening of a gravel pit on Gateway South Road, and the potential expansion of a second existing gravel pit west of the original town site of Gallatin Gateway and the river. 

            To date, the Planning Group, in cooperation with the Gallatin County Planning Department, has held two separate efforts to engage public opinion on growth issues in the area:  the first was a survey mailed to 647 landowners in the Gallatin Gateway area; the second was a public kickoff meeting held on May 18, 2007, with 69 residents in attendance.

            Both of those efforts have resulted in significant participation.  As the results were tallied, however, members of the Planning Group realized that most of the participation was from the outlying Gateway area.  To address this, the Planning Group held a second community planning meeting on August 15 targeted at the residents of the downtown Gallatin Gateway area to directly ask them about their needs and concerns.  This report summarizes that meeting.

PROCESS

            The Downtown Gallatin Gateway Community Planning Meeting was held on August 15, 2007, from 7:00 – 9:00 PM.  A total of 40 residents attended (Appendix B lists all participants).  Immediately after entering, all participants were asked to address 25 issues listed on the wall of the meeting room.  Each participant was given five dots and asked to vote, one dot per issue, on the top five issues with which they were concerned.  Results from the dot voting are as follows (the number indicates the number of votes received):

Top Five Issues/Concerns:

Traffic/Public Safety  19

Groundwater  18

Wastewater Treatment  18

Open Space  16

Signage/Billboards  13

Other issues/concerns:

Water Quality 11

Housing Density  11

Property Rights Protection 10

Commercial Development  10

Schools  9

Lighting/Night Sky  9

Rural vs. Urban Community  8

Fire Protection  7

Emergency Services  7

Industrial Development  6

Noise Pollution  6

Wildlife Habitat  6

Agricultural Operations  6

Law Enforcement  5

Wildfire Mitigation  2

Weed Control  2

River Resources 1

Air Quality 1

Recreational Opportunity  1

Public Transportation  0

After the entry exercise, participants sat at 5 different tables, with approximately 8 people per table.  Dick Shockley, co-chair of the Planning Group, welcomed everyone to the event.  After explaining the brief history of the planning process and the reason for the meeting, Dick asked each group to respond to two questions: 

1)      What do you want Gallatin Gateway to be in the future?

2)      What should this planning process focus on? 

The process for both questions was the same:  participants first responded to the question individually by writing their responses.  After approximately 5 minutes of working individually, participants shared all responses with their table.  A facilitator from the Planning Group was present at each table to help sort answers into categories and to help discussion.  After approximately 10 minutes of discussion among table members, each table shared their results with the larger group.     

            After both questions were answered, the group moved on to the second discussion activity of the evening.  Each individual was asked to respond to a series of goal statements and strategies to reach those goals, presented as a matrix.  Responses are presented in Appendix A. 

Note:  The workshop produced a significant number of responses to the questions asked.  To save space, these responses have not been reproduced here; to see the complete report, see the Planning Group’s webpage at www.gatewaycommunityplan.com.

SUMMARY

The responses to the both the small group questions exercise and the goals matrix reveal broad support for the larger goals presented for downtown Gallatin Gateway, with some differences in perception of how to attain those goals.  Many of the responses request more information, suggest amendments, and provide cautions.  Results from the meeting provide policy direction and point to a next step in the Gallatin Gateway planning process.  Overall, the following themes emerged: 

Sewer and Water.  One of the most discussed issues of the night was the possibility of forming a water and sewer district.  While several participants cautioned that central water and sewer could potentially lead to greater density than was desired by the community, everyone agreed that the community should investigate this issue further.   

Compatibility between existing residential and new commercial.  Many responses dealt with the compatibility (or incompatibility) of residential and commercial use.  Generally, most participants felt that the downtown Gallatin Gateway area should primarily be residential, with appropriate, small-scale commercial allowed only if it was compatible with existing uses in the area.  Many residents spoke of their concerns about the expansion of the gravel pit west of town.  Other residents expressed concern that increased commercial use would lead to greater traffic and safety problems. 

Rural Character.  Much of the discussion centered on the rural character of the area.  Many residents expressed a desire to preserve open space in the Gateway area by directing moderate growth into the downtown core and the area around the existing Exxon Station rather than spread along the highway or throughout rural Gateway.  Other residents voiced a desire to control the proliferation of signs and billboards in the area.  Many residents expressed a general concern that increased development would erode the things they currently value about downtown Gallatin Gateway.
 

Next Steps 

The Planning Group will begin following up on the workshop by distributing this summary to everyone who participated.  The Planning Group will then consider the results of the workshop and begin consolidating responses into policy statements.  Those policies will state larger goals and objectives of the Gallatin Gateway community and begin to identify implementation actions for the community and the County to take. 

It is important for residents of the Gallatin Gateway community to understand that implementation of a community plan will require two actions:   

1)      Investments.  One of the most important issues identified by participants was formation of a water and sewer district.  Exploring this possibility will require a significant investment in both the time and the energy of Gallatin Gateway residents. 

2)      Regulations.  Many residents discussed concerns such as high-density development, inappropriate commercial development, increased industrial uses in the area, and signs/billboards.  Addressing these concerns will require serious discussion of zoning regulations.   

Staying Involved

The Planning Group meets every first and third Wednesday of the month from 7:00 pm to 9:00 pm at the Gallatin Gateway Community Center.  Over the next several months, the Planning Group will continue to host community-wide meetings to address issues and concerns expressed by the community and to discuss implementation strategies.  The next meeting will be held October 17 to discuss conclusions and recommendations for the Community Plan. 

You can monitor the group’s activities at www.Gatewaycommunityplan.com.  The Planning Group is committed to ensuring all landowners are involved and actively steering the community planning process.  For questions, contact co-chairs Dick Shockley at 763-4605 or Christie Francis at 763-4691.

 APENDIX A:  RESULTS OF THE GOALS MATRIX EXERCISE

OTHER RESPONSES TO THE GOALS MATRIX:

Downtown Gallatin Gateway should continue to be…

…the center of the surrounding Gallatin Gateway area.

• Not necessarily
• Keep services (school and fire)
• Yes, with proper controls
• Also at gas station

…a rural alternative to Bozeman, Belgrade, and Four Corners.

• Do not understand the question – “rural alternative”?
• Good idea but it ain’t gonna happen.
• Services – viable commercial core at smaller scale
• I don’t understand what this means.  Isn’t that what it will be regardless?
• Maintain small with open space
• Rural is wrong – small ????, well-planned town
• Not clear on meaning

…a mix of residential and commercial development.

• Very little commercial, very little development.
• More residential, small commercial
• “small town” commercial
• emphasis should be on “small scale”
• No large housing projects
• Small, limited commercial meeting needs of community (small scale)
• 95% residential, small commercial
• commercial small businesses – retail and professional
• only if small commercial development in town proper
• small commercial
• of light commercial
• a grocery store of the quality of Town and Country foods
• but public controlled

…a community center with small-scale commercial development providing restaurants or basic services for visitors.

• More commercial development creates traffic and parking problems.
• A residential community center.
• On Highway 191 yes, in town no!
• Consider exploitation of tourism.
• Just close, not inside
• Where?
• Small, locally-owned shops
• Caution!  Residents first, not chain, not big sky drive-thrus
• Similar in scale to current town; local businesses
• No gas station, already have two restaurants
• Just outside, not inside

Should the downtown Gallatin Gateway community…

…investigate and collect more information on the possibility of forming a public water and sewer district?

• Not for development, but for current residents.
• Public health, rural
• Absolutely, but with limited capacity to discourage over-growth

…explore opportunities to help the school expand?

• Use what they have more effectively.
• Developers need to address this
• If needed.
• As needed.
• If needed
• If that’s what’s needed.  The area will grow regardless.
• High school to keep kids in community
• Expand while staying in present locale

…explore opportunities to provide paved streets, sidewalks, and street lighting?

• No lighting like South 19^th Street.
• No to all three
• That will come with development
• Perhaps lighting, but not necessarily paved streets and sidewalks
• Prefer trails
• No street lighting
• Safe sidewalks for Mill street out to South Gateway – YES
• Sidewalks  - yes
• No street lights, but sidewalks and landscaping
• Perhaps not lighting
• Mill street only
• Maybe – this is a lower priority for me
• Too much too soon (we don’t need bike paths when the roads are safe)
• NO NO NO NO
• Just sidewalks – no street lighting, no paved streets, public controlled

…designate areas for future growth in the downtown Gateway vicinity?

• Limit future growth
• Through zoning process
• Where?
• I.e., be in charge of where growth happens
• And eliminate junk heaps through zoning without being overly restrictive
• Very limited growth
• Keep it small and adjacent to existing town
• Plan ahead

…identify specific areas for park space dedication?

• There are already 2 community parks in town which are not being kept up very well, why add more?  Take care of what we have.
• Attach to school.
• Where?
• By/along the river
• In surrounding, existing open space
• Consider existing spaces, underutilized and hardly cared for
• The gravel pit as a water park
• Associate with the community center

New development in the downtown Gallatin Gateway area should…

…extend the existing street pattern and connect with the center of town where feasible.

• Limit development
• Utilize current structure
• With industrial traffic
• Where feasible

…provide sidewalks and paved streets within its borders?

• Gravel roads keep traffic slower.
• Community benefit rather than commercial/owner benefit.  Employ ancient European model that the privilege of commerce is gained by big business benefiting the community by providing and supporting the services to the residents.
• Without major impact to what is already there.
• Prefer trails
• Paved streets means faster traffic
• With landscaping/beautification/clean
• Pedestrian paths
• Or a bike path/foot route.  This could take the place of lining the streets with sidewalks
• Sidewalk/path along Mill street but not paving inner Salesville
• ?Maintenance?
• rural paths, not paved

…take place in, or adjacent to, a core consisting of downtown Gateway and the existing Exxon station rather than in a continuous strip along Highway 191.

·         Prefer development on 191

·         Preserve open space

·         Definitely

·         Down to post office

…continue the pattern of streets and alleys similar to the original townsite.

• Without changing existing Gateway drastically.
• Needs updating
• Lots are too small
• Where feasible

What other strategies do you suggest?

• Limit future residential, as well as commercial development, to keep small-scale rural community.  Do not allow Gateway to become another Four Corners.
• All of the above keep the same issues of traffic and parking associated with commercial development.
• User-friendly community
• Grocery store on highway
• REAL traffic control
• No industrial business, especially gravel pits!
• Zoning and TDR’s should be tools to generally develop Gallatin Gateway to an attractive residential/commercial town that is surrounded by agricultural land and open space.  Gotta be market based.
• Pursue water and sewer.
• Pursue zoning
• If people have complaints, tell them to pony up and pay for a solution
• Water and sewer
• Reduce speed on 191
• Stoplight on Mill and 191
• Connect the non-motorized path along Highway 191 that goes through the tunnel with a similar path in town that extends to the river
• Alternate commercial trucking route that bypasses Mill Street and Salesville plat area
• Do not allow extension of gravel pit until there is a better plan.  The impact on quality of life through river access, evening/morning walks, bicycling, etc. is HUGE.  Commercial rights do not exceed citizen rights.  We don’t want a memorial walkway.
• Maintain significant open space around town proper
• Maintain/develop corridor along river with no development
• Maintain large rural gap between other communities – not be continuous with Bozeman, Belgrade, 4 Corners
• No new buildings taller than the school
• Bring in speakers who have been through the process , this stage of growing pains and successes.  Let them share their experience, and maybe we can learn from them.
• Zoning (citizen based), not County dictated or developer’s vision
• Need a park
• Water and sewer
• Paved roads
• No gravel trucks
• Connect Gateway to the river and mountains with continuation of pedestrian/bicycle trail (this would work both ways, it would better connect people in the outlying area with Gateway).
• A town for the people, run and decided about by the people of Gateway!!

APPENDIX B:  SMALL GROUP RESPONSES TO THE GROUP QUESTIONS: 

Question #1:  What do you want Downtown Gallatin Gateway to be in the future?

Note: All responses have been sorted according to category and are recorded as they were written.  The responses generally fell into eight categories:

Sewer/Water

Planning, Zoning, and General Growth Issues

Traffic/Pedestrian Safety and Road Issues

The School

Billboards and Signs

Gravel Pits

Community Pride

Small Town/Rural Feel/Community

Sewer/water

• Central water/septic
• Fix water/sewer issues
• Water and sewer
• Water and sewer

• Clean, safe drinking water
• Wastewater
• Adequate sewage treatment
• Water/sewer district before Bozeman gerrymanders

• Water and sewer

• Water safety

• Sewer/water
• Sewer/water
• Small town with sewer and water addressed

• Central septic

• Protect river quality

• There is a definite need for central sewer
• Central water/sewer
• Central sewer

• Central sewer
• Wastewater treatment
• Protect river quality

Planning and Zoning

Planning Issues

• Don’t want:  rapid growth that chokes out the agriculture, outgrows the streets, and overwhelms emergency services

• Enforced property rights (usage)

• Smart growth, not like 4 Corners

• No development along river corridor
• Only small commercial uses, similar to current

• Open to growing needs
• Maintain and strengthen downtown as center of community for the area
• Extend a small residential grid with entry-level homes
• Mix of commercial/residential
• Want:  low-density residential with destination commercial (artists studios, walkable shops, etc) and covenants
• City park
• Trail system
• Reasonable fire and emergency medical services
• I would like to see Gateway keep its community core (school, community center, fire dept), but grow organically, with business and homes (small, local businesses, growth patterns similar to present)
• City park

Zoning Issues

• Not a lot of regulations

• Zoning to provide enforceable community-approved rules

• Zoning
• Zoning:  yes

• Architectural review of development

• Building height limitations
• No more commercial development, but emphasis on residential
• Keep Gateway residential
• Limit housing density
• No large-scale commercial
• Limit light pollution
• Keep future development small-scale, consistent with current buildings, etc…

• No apartments/townhouses

• Housing and small retail businesses
• Less development, no large housing development

General Downtown Gateway Growth Issues

• Want:  room for small business that hires from community that has wages equivalent to Bozeman and will not grow to Walmart
• No houses which take up most of the lot or block the view

• Viable commercial core

• Main street presence
• Small businesses

• Want:  affordable place to live
• More community functions

• Keep small village feeling
• Grocery store
• Grocery store
• Recycle
• A few local businesses in downtown core (grocery, daycare, family restaurant)
• Grocery store
• Restaurants/cafes
• Locally-owned grocery/café
• Businesses, shops
• Small office/business, retail
• Local ownership (no chain stores, restaurants)
• Safer river conditions or public park area for teenagers, children, and adults
• Vibrant small town (like it was…)
• Grocery store
• Recycling

• Re: downtown – a nice grocery store, quiet streets with no ATV’s
• Want:  more law enforcement – frequent patrols by Sheriff – keep it quiet and friendly, like now
• I’d like to see Gateway have a park, more grocery choices (a grocery store?)
• I want a small to medium independent grocery store
• No big power transfer or transformer stations

• Don’t want streetlights, big signs, busy retailers
• Local ownership (no chain store/restaurant, etc)
• Similar style to old buildings

• Continue progress

• Leave things as they are; all’s okay

Traffic/Pedestrian Safety and Road Issues

• Safer 191 intersection
• Road improvements –sidewalks (kids) and drainage
• Gateway connected to the Gallatin River and National Forest (Little Bear) with pedestrian/bike paths
• Sidewalks or continue path through town
• Continuation of path from the tunnel under Highway 191 all the way through town to the first bridge, with NO motorized use
• Limit traffic – keep area safe for children (and adults)
• Safer 191 intersection
• Highway 191 is the elephant next:  fix traffic/safety issues; no more blight in the form of huge billboards, junkyards, buffalo stations, etc.

• Safe pedestrian river crossing and access
• Slower downtown traffic, including across bridges
• Safe, uncongested highway access
• Quiet streets

• Sidewalks
• Pedestrian friendly
• Less traffic
• Pave post office road!
• Traffic light at Mill Street and 191

• Pedestrian safe
• Slow traffic down/stop signs
• Reroute truck traffic
• Traffic and speed changed to facilitate nice, quiet neighborhoods and pedestrian traffic
• Pedestrian friendly
• Eliminate industrial traffic
• Stop signs
• Pedestrian friendly!!
• Eliminate industrial traffic

• Paved roads

• Speed limit signs
• No major industrial haul routes through town

• Safe pedestrian access on main road, bridges
• No semi’s and large trucks (cement trucks)
• Sidewalks
• Sidewalks
• Pedestrian friendly
• Pedestrian friendly

• Limit truck traffic in front of school, community center

School

• Larger area for school when it needs to expand (larger playground)
• Improved school with ample playground
• Gateway school – give it all the support it needs, solve the wastewater issue or it won’t be able to expand if necessary

• Viable future plans for school
• Healthy School
• Improved school with ample playground
• Access to good education

Billboards and Signs

• Limit signage
• No billboards, big ugly signs

• Limited billboards
• No billboards
• Less billboards

• No billboards on 191 and Gateway
• Reduce billboard

Gravel Pits

• No gravel pits
• Less gravel trucks
• No gravel trucks or similar industrial vehicles
• A through-way fo trucking gravel or any other commodities

• Fewer gravel trucks (none?)

Community Pride

• Enforced “junk” regulations (vehicles, trash)

• Cleaned up
• Some paint
• Clean!

• Old Gateway motel cleaned up
• Re: downtown – no junkers (cars) or environs

• Cleaner lots

• Weed control

Small Town/Rural Feel/Community

• I want to keep the rural look and feel – no sidewalks, no up-to-date pseudo western look; rather see the money spent on larger issues, those that keep the health and high-quality of living
• Quiet residential community

• Close-knit neighborhood
• Know neighbors
• Depend on neighbors

• Maintain small community – no sprawl!
• The draw of Gateway is the small town feel; don’t want pre-planned, organized look like other towns
• Rural community

• Small population
• Don’t want:  gated community

• Community feeling
• Kid/pedestrian friendly

• Family friendly
• Ideal for me:  remain a quiet and sleepy town; I like hearing the birds
• Friendly/beautiful/clear
• Don’t want to cater to big Sky/Bozeman attitudes

• Booked community center
• Stay agricultural
• Family/community events (parade, festival)

• Do want:  wildlife habitat near town..sandhill cranes, Canada geese, deer, etc.
• Some open spaces
• Open space/agricultural land
• Want: open space, small town living, a place where you don’t have to lock your dogs
• Don’t want: to look like Bozeman

Don’t want:  large commercial businesses that don’t support Gateway residents and businesses

Question #2:  What are the Most Important Issues and Concerns We Should Address In This Planning Process?

Note: All responses have been sorted according to category and are recorded as they were written.  The responses generally fell into ten categories:

Water and Sewer

Planning and Zoning

Traffic and Road Issues

The School

Parks and Trails

River Issues

Billboards

Emergency Services

Open Space Issues

Other

Water and Sewer

• Water/Sewer treatment

• Water issues, sewage (community??)

• Water and sewer

• Sewer and water district – School, Stacy’s, Gateway Inn

• Central Water and Sewer

• Septic/central water
• Sewer system
• Water/sewer district
• Central water and sewer
• Water and sewer central but not obligatory; learn how to make it affordable
• Water and sewer issues

• Water/Sewer
• Water/sewer

• Water/sewer district

• Water/sewer district

• Water and sewer system for Gateway and the school if feasible

• Sewer system limited to Salesville plat plus 25%

• Water:  please pursue means for conserving and preserving clean water quality.  This may involve sewer/water service to the community
• Pursue water/sewer district

• Sewers are a double-edged sword:  my fear is it would encourage more development, so I would want to see sewers along with zoning parameters

Planning and Zoning

• Zoning
• Reasonably-parametered zoning
• Require river setbacks
• Eliminate gravel pits and/or regulate travel rates
• Maintain development in town proper; no sprawl
• Limit commercial development size

• In order to control unwanted development, mining, billboards, strip clubs, we need zoning (unfortunately)
• No zoning

• Don’t be too restrictive or controlling with any zoning

• Potential commercial needs most control

• Limit commercial:  where?  How much?
• Zoning
• Residential limits
• Citizen-based zoning

• Gravel pit limits
• Zoning:  how can we implement our choices?  If through zoning, please pursue
• Existing Gateway – if new standards are implemented, will what exists be “grandfathered” or must changes be made to meet standards?  Who will pay for changes if they must be paid?
• Zoning for:  residential, light commercial, no heavy industrial
• Neighborhood plan/control space; commercial lots
• Eliminate gravel pit, concrete plants, asphalt plants

• Not 4 Corners

• Controlled Development

• Controlled development
• Some lighting on the streets of Gateway (not overpowering,  but not dark)

• An agreed community decision for the people of Gateway and not big money corporations

• Small commercial businesses to be supportive of community, i.e., bookshop, coffee shop, art enclave

Traffic and Road Issues

• Weight limit on Mill Street
• Restrict speed on 191 (Gooch Hill and Cottonwood)
• Traffic light at Mill and 191
• Safe traffic
• Stop light at Mill and 191

• Little or no commercial development on Mill Street between 191 and second bridge (traffic issue)
• Traffic control – speed and volume
• Slow down traffic
• Eliminate industrial traffic
• Road safety

• Light at Highway

• Water and sewer
• Traffic safety and control (includes pedestrial)
• Traffic control

• Traffic

• Alternate trucking route that bypasses any downtown Gateway streets
• Mandatory 45 mph from Cottonwood Creek to buffalo station
• Fix drainage or rebuild road on Mill Street

The School

• School doesn’t have enough room
• School expansion; if possible, stay where it is
• Kids

Parks and Trails

• Pedestrian/bicycle paths extend to other side of second bridge
• Encourage, possibly support public spaces – small park area or support for community center projects
• Bike paths (research available grants)
• Park/open space for community
• Community park

• Pedestrian walkway between 191 and Gateway South road

• Get money to help buy gravel pit and convert to water park for community and county

River Issues

 

• River quality
• River safety/quality

Billboards

• No more billboards on highway 191 within 5 miles north and south of Mill street
• Limitation of # and size of billboards

Emergency Services

• Emergency services  (fire, law, floodplain) to accommodate growth
• Emergency services, i.e., police

Open Space Issues

• Not to push out our slowly depleting wildlife habitat
• Open space in rural surround with access from town (paths, trails)

• Retain open space

Other

• Don’t make Gateway like where you came from
• As the need arises, they are usually filled.  Most wants are already here, just not to the extent that some people expect; no city to provide

• I hope we are not a covert impact study

• No singling out properties that bother you because of how they look
• The main issues facing Gateway can and should be addressed without telling the property owners what they can’t do, like what color their house is or how many cars in driveway

• Something to keep kids in Gateway instead of going to Bozeman

APPENDIX C:  PARTICIPANTS

1)      Pete Stein

2)      David Steinmuller

3)      Michael Lebwohl

4)      Janine Roberts

5)      Charlie White

6)      Rick Hargrove

7)      Ruth Hargrove

8)      Terry Threlked

9)      Ric Blevins

10)  Francis Vargo

11)  Gary Kachadurian

12)  Margaret Kachadurian

13)  Earl Wortman

14)  Bradley Flategraff

15)  Toni Donnelly

16)  Brian Persha

17)  Tim Roark

18)  Katy Nygard

19)  Frank Silva

20)  Brook Savage

21)  Kris Ellingsen

22)  Nikki Robbins

23)  Stephanie Sandston

24)  Kim Parsch

25)  Amy Davis

26)  Alex Fox

27)  Lauren Coleman

28)  Steve Janes

29)  Gina Taylor

30)