The primary concerns expressed by the Commission relating to the appropriate
designations for a Tier 2 STR (conditional or permitted) focused on the number of
days the dwelling could be rented as well as the characteristics of how the dwelling
unit (i.e. owner occupied or investor owned) was used. These issues were
discussed at length. It was concluded that a Tier 2 STR could not be used for more
than 120 days a calendar year for rental - anything more would cause it to become a
Tier 3 STR and result in it no longer being considered being used for “residential”
purposes.
The Commission also clarified that a property owner would still be entitled to only
one STR per entity regardless of what Tier it fell into and whether it was being used
as a “primary” or “secondary” dwelling. It was reiterated that Tier 1 would permit
an STR as an accessory use to the primary residential use of the property for no
more than 30 days per year, Tier 2 would be allowed to be used between 30-120
days per year and that it would be “permitted” if it were the operator’s primary
residence and “conditional” if it was their secondary residence, and that a Tier 3
would not be allowed within any residential zoning districts given its commercial
characteristics; however, would be conditional in M-OF to mirror the allowance of a
Bed & Breakfast and permitted in the M-N, M-C, and M-DT give the underlying
commercial nature of those districts and the potential that existing dwelling units
were located in those zones.
A motion was made by Commissioner Loe and seconded by Commissioner
Geuea-Jones to allow a Tier 2 STR in the R-1, R-2, and R-MF districts as conditional or
permitted (C/P) and be further permitted (P) in the M-OF, M-N, M-C, and M-DT
districts as shown in the Permitted Use Table that was being displayed during the
work session. The motion was passed unanimously. It was further noted that the
definitions to differentiate between “primary” and “secondary” residence would
be discussed further and that the Commission and staff would also discuss
use-specific standards for the Tiers that would further clarify the differences
between them.
During the work session, Mr. Zenner also provided an overview of how the
proposed regulations would be prepared and presented during the required public
hearing. He noted that prior to taking this topic to the public hearing it was staff’s
intent to flush out the details and outline the ordinance content, then secure a
meeting with Council to gain their support and feedback, make revisions based on
Council feedback, and then finally proceed to a public hearing.
Commissioners asked if the ordinance would be shared with other “allied”
departments to ensure that the proposed standards were not unenforceable or
problematic. Mr. Zenner stated that this was the staff’s intent as something more
significant was prepared and the framework for the regulations was better defined.
He noted that the internal feedback loop would occur before meeting with Council
and depending on the internal comments additional Commission work session
discussion may be needed.
Having arrived the end of the work session, Chairman Loe suspended further
discussion on the topic. Mr. Zenner noted that conversation would continue at the
April 7 work session which would be used to continue to flush out use-specific
standards and confirm the Tier 3 district and use (permitted or conditional)