Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Short Term Rentals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission recommends approval of Desmond short-term rental with safety conditions
Summary
The Custer County planning commission voted to recommend approval of the Desmond short-term rental, adding two conditions: include a 'no outdoor flame' rule in the house rules and mark the property boundary with the applicant's distinctive "Disney tree." The recommendation will go to the county commissioners for final action.
The Custer County planning commission voted to recommend that the county commissioners approve the Desmond short-term rental application, adding conditions to the applicant’s house rules and property boundary marking.
The applicant told the commission they have lived in the valley five years and want to make the lower-level of their home available on a short-term basis to friends, church members and visitors looking in the area. The applicant said the stays would be short (under 30 days) and that they will be on-site during rentals to self-manage the property. "We have the extra space, we would just have that available to folks that maybe uh needed to take a look at the area," the applicant said.
Commission discussion focused on guest access, fire safety and clear boundaries. Commissioners and staff confirmed that the county’s STR resolution prohibits outdoor open flames unless a specific gas appliance is allowed; during the hearing staff and a commissioner advised the applicant to add a "no outdoor flame" provision to the house rules. The applicant also proposed using a landmark tree on the ridge—the colloquially named "Disney tree"—to mark the property boundary; the commission accepted that as a suitable marker for the resolution's boundary-marking requirement.
A committee member moved "that we recommend that the commissioners approve the Desmond STR with the following conditions: adding no outdoor flame to the house rules and adding the Disney tree as the appropriate property bounding." The motion was seconded and carried unanimously.
Commissioners who spoke after the vote cited the property's isolation, the applicant's willingness to accept the suggested conditions, and the fact the applicant will be present during rentals as reasons the application met the commission's criteria. One commissioner noted concerns about road access and said the applicant's plan to direct guests to the safer route addressed that concern.
The commission's recommendation is advisory; the final decision rests with the Board of County Commissioners. The planning commission did not record individual roll-call vote tallies in the transcript; the minutes indicate the motion "carried unanimously."
