Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Short Term Rentals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Owners and residents urge targeted enforcement, not bans, in Teller County short-term rental debate
Summary
Three residents urged the Board of County Commissioners to avoid blanket bans on short-term rentals, calling for targeted enforcement, permitting with conditions, and subdivision-level zoning options. Speakers emphasized most guests are families, complaint rates are low, and land-use implications deserve study.
Jonathan McIntosh, a second‑home owner who said he has stayed in Teller County properties for 25 years, told the board that most short‑term rental (STR) guests are “families…coming here for the hiking, fishing, wildlife, solitude, and the views,” and argued complaint data show problems are concentrated in a small number of properties. “Short term renters are not a bunch of wild party animals who are descending upon Teller County,” McIntosh said, urging the board to adopt targeted enforcement, permits with conditions, and a complaint hotline rather than sweeping restrictions.
Mark Ostra, a Divide resident and STR operator, described his own experience operating an STR with more than 865 guests and said he could recall only one serious noise incident that was resolved quickly. “I’ve had 0 calls to 911 where police, fire, or ambulance have had to come,” Ostra said, adding that STRs can produce local economic benefits and that his ability to operate an STR supports his volunteer EMT and firefighting work.
Greg Liverman raised a separate concern about land use, arguing the county should treat some STR activity as commercial and consider rezoning or a new zone (for example, an R‑SDR) if the community decides to permit rentals in residential subdivisions. Liverman said the board should address whether it wants residential neighborhoods to permit income‑producing rentals and proposed options including subdivision‑level rezoning and limits on concentration of STRs.
The board listened without taking immediate action; commissioners and staff indicated the matter requires further study of land‑use implications, complaint‑tracking mechanisms, and possible permitting conditions.
