Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Gallatin County adopts 4 Corners zoning changes that limit some short‑term rentals to owner‑occupied properties
Summary
The commission adopted amendments to the 4 Corners zoning regulations that define short‑term rentals, add appeal procedures, and require owner‑occupancy and a signed acknowledgement for short‑term rentals in certain rural subdistricts; staff and commissioners said the rewrite provides regulatory clarity.
The Gallatin County Commission voted to adopt a text amendment to the 4 Corners zoning regulations that adds a definition and standards for short‑term rentals and updates appeal procedures to align with state statute. The adopted language requires a signed acknowledgement that a property is the owner’s primary residence (defined as residing there at least 183 days per calendar year) for short‑term rentals in specified rural subdistricts and requires property owners to be physically present on site during guest stays (either in the same dwelling or another legally established dwelling on the same lot) as part of the standard.
Christopher Scott, county planning, said staff renoticed the revised amendments following commissioner direction and provided sample motions and findings. The amendment also makes short‑term rentals in certain subdistricts a conditional use that requires a public hearing and allows the commission or board of adjustment to place additional conditions on approval.
Public comment at the hearing included residents who helped draft the original 4 Corners regulations and property owners’ representatives seeking assurance that preexisting rentals would be recognized as nonconforming uses. Deb Wahlberg, a member of the original community group, told commissioners she supported the conditional‑use approach and owner‑occupancy requirement as a reasonable compromise. Tom Henish, speaking for specific landowners, asked that preexisting short‑term rentals be recognized as grandfathered if applicable.
Commissioners said the months‑long public process and multiple rounds of comment improved the proposal and that clarifying the regulations reduces the risk of litigation over ambiguous text. One commissioner summarized that the revised code "provides clarity in the regulations and specificity" and framed the change as a governance improvement rather than a policy endorsement of short‑term rentals.
The commission moved, seconded and adopted Resolution 2025‑106. The motion carried by voice vote; the transcript records ayes but does not provide a numerical roll‑call tally in the provided excerpt.
What happens next: properties in the affected subdistricts that seek to operate a short‑term rental under the new language must demonstrate owner‑occupancy, submit the signed acknowledgement and — where required — secure a conditional‑use permit that will be heard publicly. Owners claiming a preexisting nonconforming use must follow the county’s established administrative nonconforming determination process.
