Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Family Transfer topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves family transfer exemption allowing Wallace family to create one 1‑acre parcel
Summary
Gallatin County commissioners approved a family transfer exemption for Winfield and Martha Wallace to create a one‑acre parcel for their daughter, Emily Wallace, in the East Gallatin zoning district.
The Gallatin County Commission on April 15 approved a family transfer exemption allowing Winfield and Martha Wallace to divide part of their approximately 6‑acre parcel at 515280 East Gallatin Road to create one 1‑acre lot for their daughter, Emily Wallace, for the purpose of building a home.
Brad Stein, senior planner with the City of Belgrade, presented the staff report and recommended that the request comply with subdivision ordinance provisions applicable to family transfers, citing Section 13(g) of the subdivision code review criteria. Stein noted the tract was created by deed book 48, page 140 (June 1912) and that the property is zoned Agricultural Rural Residential in the East Gallatin Zoning District.
During the public hearing, county attorney staff member Leanne Certain administered a sworn testimony sequence. Owner Winfield Wallace testified the family purchased the property in October 1996, currently keeps one horse and lives on the property, and that the proposed one new parcel is to be transferred to his daughter, Emily Wallace, who intends to build and reside in the house within two years. Wallace testified neither the recipient nor the remainder parcel is intended for sale, that Emily does not own other Gallatin County property, and that there was no current intent to further develop or sell the property.
After receiving staff findings and applicant testimony, a commissioner moved to adopt the staff report findings and approve the family transfer exemption requested by Winfield and Martha Wallace. A second followed and the motion carried by voice vote. Commissioners stated the application met the code criteria and that no rebuttable presumptions to deny the exemption were apparent from the record.
The commission did not attach conditions beyond the standard findings and did not specify additional permits or approvals required for the eventual building of a residence; building permits and applicable inspections remain subject to normal county and city procedures.
