Gallatin County planning has posted the final text of a proposed zoning amendment, to be heard June 13th. This was submitted by Wendy Dickson (not BCPOA).
You should read the full text and narrative for details, but briefly the effect is to:
- Define rentals and add them to the permitted uses in the AE and RF subdistricts (most of Bridger Canyon)
- Require a written approval from planning
- Create some standards limiting number of units, providing contact information, and documenting rules
- Make Accessory Dwelling Units rentable short or long term
File, accessed 5/8/2024, 4pm:
Direct link to the file at Gallatin County Planning Department, if you prefer:
Twitter
Facebook
Canyon email list
RSS
Email
NO short term rentals. Short term rentals in the Bridger Canyon Zoning District will be damaging environmentally, for property values, and for the community at large (especially road safety for people and animals). BCPOA and the community needs to say NO for any short term rentals, and make it clear to the County Commissioners that the current zoning has successfully preserved this landscape for all, resident and non- resident alike, for 50 plus years with its GUIDED and LIMITED uses. The essentially private-public- stewardship through zoning with single-dwellings on 40 acres, or adjusted in PUD’s, with expanded accessory dwellings for family, facilitate land use practices which implement the zoning goals to preserve and sustain long term health of land for agriculture, for wildlife habitat, migration and safety with LIMITED DEVELOPMENT and use. This region is an active and critical wildlife corridor for all species except possibly, grizzly bears, and since we saw one several years ago on I90 not far from Bear Canyon, they may be here too. Other letters already sent to BCPOA state known negative impacts of short term rental situations in rural areas. News articles are out there describing the damaging impacts to wildlife/rtural regions that open up to short to rentals. The reason we still have an active wildlife corridor and healthy wildlife populations is BECAUSE of limited use, confined to single owner dwelling on specified sized acreage.
We bought land here knowing the zoning. We’ve assumed the limitations and responsibilities of the zoning for the larger goals which recognize the critical importance of preserving agricultural lands for wildlife and wildlife corridor preservation. The zoning has worked. It can only continue to work if it is honored, and not radically changed to open up to commercial land use through short term rentals. Our zoning has achieved what thousands of regions wish they had – past wisdom to PLAN through CONSTRAINT. Now other regions have degraded ecosystems in which wildlife populations are struggling or are gone. THIS is why I say in practice, we are a Private-Public contract which has worked for the larger good. Short Term rentals ARE NEGATIVELY impactful on landscape situations such as this one. FIFTY years of success shows the BC Zoning is still working for the public good, and for the community, which has a right to its road safety and neighborhood quality as well.
I have lived in Bridger Canyon since 1990. From that time until a few years ago I rented my house as a short term or long term rental. I have never had a complaint from anyone in the Canyon regarding this. I am happy to get whatever permits are required and make sure the renters are vetted. I may not rent it anymore, but I do want to have the option. It is NOT Air B&B, I always use a local property manager.
Many rentals in the past have been folks building their house in the Canyon. I have had some vacationers as well. I no longer rent to skiers as they don’t take care of the house.
I believe the new regulations are reasonable and fair, and allow people who need income a chance to have tenants in their ADU’s and thus get rent. This was the way it was done for the majority of years, before the County decided to disallow it. I hope we can get back to being reasonable and neighborly regarding this,
There are important distinctions to understand in this discussion. Renting for more than 30 days at a time, “long-term” renting has always been allowed and has an important role in the make up of community residents. It is not now or has ever been changed or threatened. At issue is “short-term” (STR) renting, less than 30 days and 99% conducted through the online platforms of Airbnb and VRBO. “Short-term” renting has never been allowed in the zoning, even though a small number of places have flown under the radar and operated as STRs for years. What happened is that two years ago neighbors in the Canyon formally complained to the County about multiple STRs operating near them after problems with STR guests. The ONLY way that the County investigates zoning issues is if a public complaint is filed. Up until two years ago, no public complaint had been filed against any of the existing STRs. The County is not disallowing STRs, it is simply (and FINALLY) doing its job of enforcing the zoning rules. This is also an issue because of the rapid proliferation of STRs, owned by non-residents, being offered year-round as pure tourism accommodations. This removes them from the pool of available housing for local residents. The proposed amendment would allow ALL of Mary’s nearest neighbors to be purchased and operated as year-round tourist accommodations.
If you live in Bridger Canyon, be aware that this amendment is a BAD IDEA and it is being put forth solely to protect the business interests of a very few people, mostly out-of-state and out-of-canyon investors who want to turn the Canyon into a “neighborhood” of Airbnbs. If this passes, your neighbor’s house can become a year-round tourism accommodation, forever. Most of those tourists will be nice people but you will bear the brunt of the ones who are careless and irresponsible. And you won’t have a neighbor, just a series of strangers with no connection to the community other than enjoying the beauty that zoning has protected for 50 years. The promoters of this amendment clutch “property rights being stolen” like a string of pearls. NONSENSE. They claim that STRs are needed so people can afford to stay in their homes. This is a NONSENSICAL argument that fails the test of logic. Remember that Airbnb was designed to help Owner/Residents make additional money and meet people by renting rooms or their entire home when they were away PART-TIME. This amendment invites investor groups, “vacation home” owners, realtors and property managers to pop the champagne and promote the sale of residences in Bridger Canyon as year-round, lucrative investments. Make your voice heard to the Commission NOW! email to Commission@gallatin.mt.gov and say REJECT the June Zoning Text Amendment. And be sure to include if you are a Bridger Canyon owner/resident. The City of Bozeman rejected these investor-owned STRs and the Canyon should too.