Thursday, June 17, 2010

“Vacation rental ordinance stalls” plus 1 more

“Vacation rental ordinance stalls” plus 1 more

Vacation rental ordinance stalls

Posted: 16 Jun 2010 11:04 PM PDT

Vacation home rental owners vented their displeasure over proposed new county regulations last week, saying the latest version of a vacation rental ordinance is overkill that will put some people out of business.

As written, the ordinance "is like trying to kill a fly with a baseball bat," said Sea Ranch resident and vacation home property manager Barry Weiss at a Sonoma County Planning Commission hearing last week.

The proposed county ordinance won't affect approximately 350 vacation rentals at Sea Ranch and along the Sonoma Coast but it would require permits and impose restrictions on approximate 650 known vacation rentals in the county's unincorporated area.

Responding to complaints about noise, parking, garbage, trespassing, crime and other disruptive activities occurring on vacation rental properties, county supervisors appointed an ad hoc committee last year to work with property owners, vacation rental managers, lodging industry representatives and others to find common ground for permitting vacation rentals that are now basically unregulated by county zoning laws.

But the latest draft drew flack from vacation rental industry representatives who said it was much more stringent than earlier versions.

The new draft goes "above and beyond" what had been agreed upon in previous workshops, said Thera Buttaro of Bodega Bay & Beyond vacation rentals.

Russian River and Heladsburg area rental property owners and managers agreed.

"It was changed a lot from what was a workable plan." said Guerneville Realtor Herman Hernandez.

"We thought we had a pretty good compromise," said Healdsburg resident Marc Matson, of Healdsburg Vacation Homes. "All of a sudden it changed."

Limits on how many guests (two per bedroom) could stay in a house served by a septic system were a concern to Monte Rio vacation rental owners.

A requirement that pets could not be left unattended in vacation homes was also among the concerns that persuaded planning commissioners to send the ordinance back to the Permit and Resource Management Department staff for rework.

A Sonoma County Board of Supervisors public hearing scheduled for July 13 has been postponed. Instead the Planning Commission will take another look at the ordinance on Aug. 5.

"They just need to kind of refine it," said Hernandez.

In Healdsburg vacation rentals in certain agriculturally-zoned areas would not be allowed under the proposed ordinance because those uses are not consistent with the Sonoma County General Plan, said county planner Jane Riley in a staff report to the commission last week.

That prompted those vacation rental owners to seek legal help. Tina Wallis, a land use attorney with the Clement, Fitzpatrick & Kenworthy firm in Santa Rosa said she represents clients who own wine country vacation rentals on land zoned LIA (land intensive agriculture) where some existing vacation rentals may not be allowed.

In those cases, "There's a potential takings issue," Wallis told the commission.

Many vacation home rental advocates cited the potential economic impact if the new ordinance puts people out of the vacation rental business which now generates more than $2 million in annual county transient occupancy tax (TOT) revenues, about 25 percent of the total county TOT, which is a 9 percent tax added to the nightly rate guests pay at hotels, inns and vacation rental houses.

Vacation home rentals generate more than $20 million in annual revenue in Sonoma County, and vacation home renters spend an estimated $60 million annually on food, drink and shopping, said Ken Fischang, chief of the Sonoma County Tourism Bureau.

County Supervisors began looking at the burgeoning vacation home rental industry more than a year ago owing to increasing complaints about noise, traffic, parking, parties and other compatibility issues when houses in residential neighborhoods become commercial vacation rentals.

Most of the vacation homes are in the 5th Supervisorial District but the majority of complaints have come from the Sonoma Valley where wine country mansions have become venues for large outdoor gatherings.

Most of the serious complaints — less than two dozen — have been generated by large houses where wedding parties, reunions and corporate retreats take place, said Sonoma County planner Riley.

Under the new policy all vacation homeowners will be expected to get an over-the-counter zoning permit that spells out standards such as how many people are allowed to stay in a vacation house, limits on the number of guests, parking requirements and noise limits such as quiet hours from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. and a requirement that the vacation home rental industry set up a complaint system with someone on call to respond

Most vacation rentals are managed by professional property management services whose rental agreements typically include provisions against large parties or events, said Riley.

But there are also a large number of vacation rentals by owners that are advertised on websites but do not pay transient occupancy tax, according to county officials.

The Sonoma County Lodging Association and county staff estimated there are approximately 200 county vacation rental properties that do not pay TOT, according to a report last year.

Property owners and managers who do pay the tax say the by-owner rentals that don t pay the TOT have an unfair business advantage that the new ordinance needs to address.

Last week's continuation means Sonoma County probably won't see a vacation rental ordinance in place for this summer season.


Five Filters featured article: Headshot - Propaganda, State Religion and the Attack On the Gaza Peace Flotilla. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction.

Vacation rental to close in October

Posted: 16 Jun 2010 11:51 PM PDT

The city of Napa and the owners of a vacation rental in Browns Valley have reached an agreement that avoids a lawsuit, City Attorney Michael Barrett said Tuesday.

The city will allow Dan and Cindy Phillips to continue to operate their five-bedroom vacation rental at 3081 Arden Way in Browns Valley until the end of October.

The City Council voted earlier this year not to license the Phillips operation after neighbors organized in opposition. Neighbors complained about noise and traffic.

The Phillipses had asked for a reasonable amount of time to wind down their business or they would sue the city.

The owners of another Browns Valley vacation rental, Deborah and Robert Dornaus, have sued the city for the right to keep operating at 1133 Larkin Way, a block from the Phillips rental.

The council voted earlier this year to allow a limited number of vacation rentals in residential neighborhood after several years in which rentals were not regulated.

Five Filters featured article: Headshot - Propaganda, State Religion and the Attack On the Gaza Peace Flotilla. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction.
Posted by at

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)