03-14-2016 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 14, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 13. #15-3759 CITY OF ORONO TEXT AMENDMENT: SHORT-TERM (VACATION) RENTALS ORDINANCE (continued) Knutson, stated if rentals are allowed for two or three days at a time, it can become a motel, which does not help his property value. Knutson stated the City should require at least 30 days of rental and that he is asking for it to be changed from two or three days to 30 days. Levang stated at the listening session she wanted to hear from adjacent neighbors, which did not happen, and that the City Council does need to hear from both sides. Loftus noted the City of Greenwood has criteria that require all rentals to be a minimum of 30 days. Barnhart stated Greenwood in essence prohibits short-term rentals that are less than 30 days. Barnhart noted Orono cannot do anything to prohibit renting for long-term, and that the purpose of the ordinance is to balance the goals of the property owner to use their property in a manner that does not negatively impact the neighbors. Barnhart stated this is similar to the discussion a number of cities had regarding home occupations and bed and breakfast places. The Planning Commission felt the City has enough regulations and should not add to them. Barnhart noted under the draft ordinance the City would be relying on people to call in and complain. Knutson noted the ordinance reads that it is intended to prevent nightly, rapid turnover of rental properties. Barnhart stated earlier in the process there were two parallel ordinances. One prohibited short-term rentals and the other regulated them. Barnhart stated the concern with this type of rental is the rapid turnover, and that idea, even with a longer-term rental, is that the situation will not be too offensive. Barnhart stated with a rental of only two or three days, a person tends not to be as careful about whether they are being offensive, and that in his view this ordinance provides some responsiveness. Walsh asked if there is any case law that says property rights are being taken away if rentals less than 30 days are not allowed. Mattick stated he is not aware of any case law specific to that example. Mattick stated the general issue of rental is being litigated more and more around the context of a city's ability to inspect the home and whether cities can regulate it at all. Mattick stated the issue that was described here with five people living in the home is that it looks a lot like a family that could own the home. Mattick stated the offensive issues have nothing to do with it being used as residential but rather what the renters are doing while they are staying there. Mattick noted the same type of conduct could come from someone who owns the home. Generally the courts are saying from a zoning perspective, the property is zoned residential, and that there is a difference between owning the home and renting it. Walsh asked if he could obtain more information on litigation regarding this matter. Walsh indicated he would like to have that information so the City is not passing an ordinance blindly without knowing how it can be enforced. Page 29 of 37