Latest in a series of posts on Airbnb and short-term lodging
We always go to the primary sources, right?
Here is the short-term lodging proposal for addition to the zoning ordinances that was presented by Ms. Heller, City Planning Director, at the December 12 Planning Commission meeting.
Short-Term Lodging amendment to the City Zoning Ordinance
Here also is the related housing ordinance 1741 currently in place governing short-term lodging.
Article 1741: Short Term Lodging Facilities
And here Ms. Heller goes over the highlights of the proposed zoning amendment for the Planning Commissioners.
- Short-term lodging is the term we use for services like Airbnb and others.
- We currently have a housing ordinance that addresses short-term lodging, been in place for 18 months or two years.
- We do require that anyone operating short-term lodging be licensed.
- We’re taking the opportunity now to carry some of those same provisions over into the zoning ordinance.
- We have a definition for a short-term lodging facility and also for hotels so that the two are compatible.
- We define where short-term lodging will be permitted.
- If someone is renting out two bedrooms, we would require a third off-street parking space.
- We are not allowing in this ordinance a rental of more than two bedrooms.
- We would only be permitting in an owner occupied unit.
- For a unit not occupied by the owner, we would not allow short-term lodging at all.
- No more than two rooms can be offered for rent.
- No exterior alterations.
- If the unit is owner-occupied and you can meet these parameters, short-term lodging would be permitted.
- We would not consider short-term lodging for any unoccupied or landlord-type scenario.
Sound reasonable? Whatta you see?
to be continued . . .
2 thoughts on “Here’s the proposed zoning amendment on short-term lodging”
I believe this ordinance as proposed would hinder visitation to our beautiful city during our festive events. I for one use Homeaway or AirBnB to visit out national parks in the western portion of our country. My wife and I usually travel with another couple with smaller children requiring at minimum 3 bedrooms. Under the proposed ordinance someone who travel as I do couldn’t rent a short term residence. An example I rented 5 different residences when I visited the national parks in Utah and my longest stay was 2 days at any one place. The two bedroom rule is detrimental in my opinion. I suggest the authority having jurisdiction should investigate the average stays that people require when visiting vacation venues.
I find it very interesting that this ordinance would require short term rentals to provide parking, but it is my understanding there are no parking requirements for apartment building developers. Does this make sense to anyone?