Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019 STR MaterialsFrom: Bill Goodman Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 10:34 PM To: Eric Levine; Pam Bleiwas; Pat Leary; Rich DePaolo; Rod Howe; TeeAnn Hunter Cc: Paulette Rosa Subject: FW: local Airbnb regulation From: Maralyn Edid [mailto:mse421@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2019 9:20 PM To: Bill Goodman Subject: local Airbnb regulation Bill, see below for actions recently taken in Washington DC to regulate Airbnb. it is worth emphasizing to all deciders in the Town of Ithaca that other communities are wrestling with this issue and making choices that preserve neighborhoods and housing options for residents. would you kindly distribute to all Town Board members. thank you. respectfully, Maralyn Edid 22 Renwick Heights Rd. In case you missed it, the new D.C. short-term rental ordinance, that was unanimously passed by the D.C. City Council last year to implement major short-term rental protections to safeguard housing and neighborhoods, moves forward after the mayor decided this week to let the ordinance become law. The bill will protect permanent D.C. housing by preventing outside commercial investors from buying up properties across the city and converting them into short-term rentals like Airbnbs. It's Time, D.C., a coalition of local community groups, civic organizations, labor leaders and residents, are launching an ad today thanking the city council for passing this ordinance to protect the city's affordable housing stock and permanent residents. Kelly Sweeney McShane, president and CEO of Community of Hope in D.C., voiced her support of the recently passed bill, saying, "Protecting affordable housing options in D.C. is vital to our efforts in ending homelessness and helping low-income families find a stable, affordable home. We praise the city council for pushing this important issue forward to not only safeguard housing for the families we serve in D.C., but also relieve the pressure short-term rentals cause on the cost of housing citywide." D.C. is the latest in a string of major U.S. cities to pass short-term rental regulation, joining Los Angeles, Boston, San Francisco and New York City, all of which passed similar bills in 2018.. "Chairman Mendelson and Councilman McDuffie should be commended for putting forward a common-sense ordinance that protects true home -sharing, while cracking down on commercial investors buying up residential homes to rent on Airbnb," said Graylin Presbury, President of the D.C. Federation of Civic Associations said about the ordinance. "Our group applauds the entire city council for passing this ordinance unanimously to protect our neighborhoods and housing options." We want to thank the city councilmembers, vocal community leaders and residents in. D.C. who worked tirelessly to pass this vital legislation that will protect housing options for permanent city residents and safeguard our neighborhoods. TOWN OF ITHACA LOCAL LAW NO. OF THE YEAR 2019 A LOCAL LAW ADDING SHORT-TERM RENTAL PROVISIONS TO CHAPTER 270, ZONING, OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE Be it enacted by the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca as follows: Section 1. Chapter 270 (Zoning), Article III (Terminology) of the Town of Ithaca Code, Section 270-5, titled "Definitions," is amended by adding the following definitions: SHORT-TERM RENTAL USE -- The rental of a dwelling unit, or portion thereof, for a term of less than 30 consecutive days. HOSTED SHORT-TERM RENTAL USE -- A short-term rental use where the owner is present in the rented unit, or in another dwelling unit on the same or an adjacent tax parcel, throughout the short-term renter's stay. UNHOSTED SHORT-TERM RENTAL USE -- A short-term rental use where the owner is not present in the rented unit, or in another dwelling unit on the same or an adjacent tax parcel, throughout the short-term renter's stay. Section 2. Chapter 270 (Zoning), Article VIII (Low Density Residential Zones) of the Town of Ithaca Code, Section 270-56, titled "Permitted accessory buildings and uses," is amended by adding a subsection N reading as follows: "N. Short-term rental uses, subject to the limitations on short-term rental uses set forth in § 270-219.7." [Repeat for all other zones where this use is allowed —which zones in addition to MDR and HDR? Mobile Home Park, Neighborhood Commercial, Community Commercial, and Lakefront Commercial Zones?] Section . Chapter 270 (Zoning), Article XXVI (Special Regulations) of the Town of Ithaca Code, is amended by adding Section 270-219.7, titled "Short-term rental uses" and reading as follows: "§ 270-219.7 Short-term rental uses. A. Except as prohibited by the New York Multiple Dwelling Law, a short-term rental use is permitted, subject to this section's provisions, in a principal dwelling unit or an accessory dwelling unit in all zoning districts that allow a short-term rental use as a permitted accessory use. [TBD how to treat residential cooperative and condominium developments in this law. Some municipalities specifically prohibit short-term rentals in coops and condos to prevent people from buying them for the purpose of renting them out on a short-term basis, even if the association allows it.] B. Short-term rental uses may occur only in a dwelling unit that is the principal residence of at least one of the property owners, in another dwelling unit on the same tax parcel, or in a dwelling unit on an adjacent tax parcel that is owned by the same owner(s). No other owner(s), collectively or individually, shall own a larger percentage of the tax parcel(s) than the owner-occupant(s), who must reside in the principal residence for a minimum of 185 days per year. ["Principal residence" provisions adapted from accessory dwelling unit owner -occupancy provision. Is 185 days what you want here?] C. Hosted short-term rental uses. There is no limit on the number of days per year that a dwelling unit may be used for a hosted short-term rental use. Occupancy of the dwelling unit during a hosted short-term rental use . [List different occupancy requirements than apply to one- and two-family dwellings? Think about occupancy for rentals where the host remains in the unit, and for rentals where the host is in a different unit. Because the host = one family, allow more than one boarder where the owner stays in the same unit as the renters? Include a cap on the total number of boarders that correlates to the number of rented bedrooms?] D. Unhosted short-term rental uses. (1) In the Agricultural, Conservation, Lakefront Residential, and Planned Development zones, there is no limit on the number of days per year that a dwelling unit may be used for an unhosted short-term rental use. Occupancy of the dwelling unit during an unhosted short-term rental use requirements for the reasons stated in C above.] [List occupancy (2) The following requirements apply to unhosted short-term rental uses in the Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, High Density Residential, Mobile Home Park, Neighborhood Commercial, Community Commercial, and Lakefront Commercial Zones: [The zones in yellow highlight allow residential uses —do you want them here or in (1) above?] (a) Operating permit required. (i) Each dwelling unit used for an unhosted short term rental use shall require a valid operating permit issued pursuant to Town of Ithaca Code Chapter 125 (Building Construction and Fire Prevention), § 125-8. Each such dwelling unit must have its own operating permit, even if more than one such dwelling unit is on the same tax parcel. Before the expiration or renewal of the operating permit, it shall be the responsibility of the owner of such unit to schedule an inspection with the Town of Ithaca Code Enforcement Department in order to obtain a new or renewed permit. 2 (ii) Owners of dwelling units used or to be used for unhosted short-term rental uses on or after , 2020 must apply for and obtain operating permits prior to offering or renting such units for unhosted short-term rental uses. After an operating permit is obtained, it must be maintained throughout the period that such unit is offered or rented for an unhosted short-term rental use. (iii) When applying for an operating permit, the owner shall provide the Code Enforcement Department with proof of any written rental agreements that existed as of the effective date of this section. Where such an agreement exists, an operating permit shall not be required for the specific rental covered by the existing rental agreement, provided that the rental concludes within six months of this section's effective date. [Is this how you want to handle existing agreements?] (iv) The Code Enforcement Department shall issue an operating permit upon verification by inspection that the items listed in Subsection B(I) through (13) below meet the requirements of the applicable New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code and the items listed in Subsection B(14) and (15) below meet the requirements of the Town of Ithaca Code: (1) 911 address number properly posted (with each unit posted); (2) Exterior structure in good repair; (3) Entrances, access areas, parking spaces and similar areas in good repair; (4) Receptacles for proper storage of garbage; (5) Compliant pools and decks (if present); (6) Working smoke and carbon monoxide detectors; (7) Interior structure in good repair; (8) Fire separation (where required); (9) Electrical, plumbing and heating in good repair; (10) Appliances in good repair (if supplied by landlord); (11) Proper light and ventilation; (12) Proper room sizes; (13) Proper egress doors or windows; (14) Compliant off-street parking, per § 270-227 and this section; (15) Exterior property areas do not violate Town of Ithaca Code Chapter 205 (Property Maintenance). (v) A Code Enforcement Officer shall seek a search warrant from a court of competent jurisdiction whenever the owner, managing agent or occupant fails to allow inspections of any premises believed to be subject to this section and where there is a reasonable cause to believe that there is a violation of this chapter, Town of Ithaca Code Chapter 205 (Property Maintenance), or the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code. (vi)Failure of an owner of any unit that is required to have an operating permit to apply for an operating permit in a timely manner, to obtain an operating permit after inspection, or to maintain a valid operating permit after it is granted throughout the period that such unit is offered or rented for an unhosted short-term rental use, shall be deemed a violation of this section. (vii) Over -occupancy. Verified over -occupancy shall constitute a violation of the operating permit. (b) Additional unhosted short-term rental use requirements. (i) Unless allowed a greater number of days below, no unit shall be rented for an unhosted short-term rental use for more than 29 days in any calendar year. If an owner offers more than one unit for unhosted short-term rental use on a parcel and/or adjacent parcel, the total number of days in any calendar year that all units on the parcel(s) may be rented for unhosted short-term rental uses shall not in the aggregate exceed 29. This limitation of 29 days shall not apply to any written rental agreement that existed as of the effective date of this section, provided that the rental concludes within six months of this section's effective date. For the purposes of this section , each of the following shall count as one day: (1) a rental of 24 hours (2) a rental of less than 24 hours that includes an overnight stay (3) a rental of less than 24 hours that does not include an overnight stay (ii) The owner of any unit rented for an unhosted short-term rental use shall provide enough driveway parking spaces on the parcel containing such unit so that all vehicles belonging to the short-term renters are parked on -site. Such vehicles may not park on the street. (iii) No unit shall be subject to more than one unhosted short-term rental agreement at any one time, and if the owner offers more than one unit on a parcel and/or adjacent parcel, only one unit may be rented for an unhosted short-term rental use at any one time. (iv) No unit rented for an unhosted short-term rental use shall be rented for the accommodation of more individuals than two times the number of legal bedrooms in such unit. 0 (v) All units rented for unhosted short-term rental uses shall have prominently posted in all bedrooms in such unit a notice in a form approved by the Code Enforcement Department containing safety and legal compliance information including, but not limited to, the following: location of the nearest exit in case of a fire; limitations contained in the Town's laws regarding unhosted short- term rental uses and noise; and cell phone numbers of the owner and any manager, if there is one. (vi)An owner of a unit that satisfies at least one of the following criteria may rent such unit for unhosted short-term rental uses for up to 90 days in the aggregate in any calendar year: [Where an owner offers more than one unit on a parcel and/or adjacent parcel, do the 90 days apply to each unit that meet the criteria, or is the 90 days cumulative for all units that meet the criteria?] (1) A unit that is (a) located in a Low Density Residential or Medium Density Residential Zone on a parcel that is larger than three acres, and (b) located more than forty feet from the side property lines. (2) A unit that is located in a Low Density Residential or Medium Density Residential Zone on a parcel that is not adjacent to any parcels that contain a dwelling. (3) A unit that is located on a parcel adjacent to the Owner's principal residence parcel. [If the rationale for this criteria is that owners who are next door will hear/deal with problems, that will not occur unless the law requires the owner to be present in their residence during the rental periods. But that would be a hosted use, and this section F applies only to unhosted uses. In addition, there is a separate question: what is the rationale for allowing 90 unhosted days on the neighboring parcel but not on the principal residence parcel?] (vii) Collection of rental information. (1) Every time an owner rents [does this mean before or after the rental stay occurs?] a unit for an unhosted short-term rental use, she or he shall either notify the Code Enforcement Department of the dates of the rental agreement, by electronic methods established by such Department, or maintain a logbook signed by each renter in a prominent location in such unit so that a Code Enforcement Officer may verify the number of days for which the unit has been rented for a short-term rental use. [Instead of the either/or requirement, require electronic notification once it is established, and until then, require the logbook? Other provisions to consider: 5 Village of Cayuga Heights requires "A copy of the visitor's log must be provided to the Village's Code Enforcement Officer within 10 business days following written request, and a copy of the previous year's log must be submitted with any registration permit renewal application."] (2) The owner shall provide the Code Enforcement Department with her or his cell phone number, and also the cell phone number of a manager or other responsible person who lives within 30 miles of the unit in case the owner is not available to address a complaint from a neighbor or the rental guest. The Code Enforcement Department may provide these numbers to the residents of all dwelling units on parcels adjacent to the unit premises." [Other provisions to consider: Mountain View, CA adopted short-term rental provisions in 12/18 that require: "Local contact person. For short-term rentals, hosts shall provide the city, all short-term renters and all occupants of adjacent properties, the name and contact information of a local individual who shall be available twenty-four (24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week, during the term of the unhosted stay. The owner or designated local contact person shall: 1. Respond on -site within sixty (60) minutes to complaints regarding a condition or operation of the short-term rental or the conduct of the short-term renters; and 2. Take remedial action to resolve any and all complaints."] Section . In the event that any portion of this law is declared invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the validity of the remaining portions shall not be affected by such declaration of invalidity. Section . This local law shall take effect on January 1, 2020. 0 TOWN OF ITHACA LOCAL LAW NO. OF THE YEAR 2019 (Formatted: Left ------------------------------------ Style Definition: Balloon Text: Font: (Default) Segoe Ul, 9 pt A LOCAL LAW ADDING C41APTER PF.,RMITS FGR (','ERTA,PUNIKO--PED SHORT......TERM RENTAL U P R Q..) I S.L.I. Q..N S., TOTHEOWN OF. ffMA(,'A,. (-"70DECHAPTER 270 ZONING. OF f..'I I E T.'.O...W N 0 F, Formatted: Right: 0" .... ................................................................................ ......................................... ...... ....... ..... . . . .. . .... . ... . ....... ........... ..... ...... ..... ------------------------------------------------- IT11ACA C0 E --------------- ...................................... .................... .......... Formatted: All caps Be it enacted by the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca as follows: 41. " 11 Section 1. 4' o ( h pja.210 (Z.on.J fl.g) U 1 ofthe Town of Ithaca ....... ... - . . . ..... . .. ............................ Code Sectjon 27(1-5 6t[ed Dcfin�.tk ).D is hefeby amended by adding (.'hatAef� --------- -- t44ed )fRMffli4ltn PiMH14�➢ fOf i:Jfijiv4e4 the..followhig defini6ons� ............ .................................. - - -------------------------- SHORT TERM TERM RENTAL, .-The u dt Lxmjion thereoL Formatted: Font: Bold, All caps ........................................................................................... .................... ............................. f 8 ............ 1m . D fora term of1css tfian 30 consec.utiv.c', ddy.'.� .............................................................................................................................................................. ........... ..... ...... Formatted: Font: Bold, All caps HOSTED S110IRT.-4.'EIRM RENTA.I..., USE ---. Asfiort-tenm rental use, Where the ow nor is Formatted: All caps ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ an the rented Ludt, or hi,,motfier elfin unit one sarn(� o an a a X proj,a ....................................................................dw........................ ............ g . .............................................th..................................... . ...... r dj throti,gjmout th ;hort-lerrn remer's.sta .............................................................................................. ...... ....... y UINMOSTED S11011T.-TEI11M RENTA.I..., USE ---. A short-tcrin t-cntal usc, Wfif.m., thc, owneu- ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... iS not hi the rentcd Ludt, m hi anothen- dwe.flifIg unit on the satnc, or an tdj.,accnt.jax, ........ ................ .... ....................................................................................... ......... .................................................................................................. ......... ninv.cj Ummighotit th.cl s.J.1 o td rrn ne n.l.e. r s sl..�.ty... Secfion 2, Lha2t.�.1-2. 71� (Z211in, 'I", Vill (LL�Y jL..Jd.enUal Zones) ofthe . .. ... .... .......... L.) Ait.J..� .... ...................... ......... ........................... ........................... I own of lthaca C de, Sec6on 270-56, 6t�ed "Perinit e a c s (�y i Ld gs,,md uses," as ...................................................................................... . 0 t d c (,,, s) I I n ain n e by acidifIg ci.., ubsecfion � reading as follows: f., d d , c .................................... ......... ................................................................. "N. t Short--tcmn cnt1d.l. u s c, s su.1-ct to thli e, m4afions on sfimt-te�-M rent"alesse't t ........................................................................... .................... .. ... .............. .......... .... c ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................us........................................ .Ihn... r .......... .......... .2 7 0..-.-.2 9 jEelwat 4mtm sail other zones where this use is allowed� which zones in addition to MIM ......... . .. . ................ . ................... . ................. and 11DR3 Mq)b..i e flome Park,...N'.jg.h.hom-hood Com er i I C)mrnum! ............................... . ....................... ......... . ................................................................................ 1 ........... I . ......... ! .......................................... d an nnna ma ............... . a n d .......... I .. ..... . . . . a k e f r o n t .......... C o F n. i n t.. m c i a I Z !..�21 e s ? ... ......................................................... 11,11, ....... ..... ............... 111c,...27 (Z� �]j n g Secfion . .(.'ha 2 Z�jc,..Xx.vl of, . ................... .................. ............. ............. .............. . ..................... ................................................................. ltfi,aca Code, nsamead.(.,.d b a di g,.c.,.c.jon 270-.2j.9...7,..jtk,.d "Sf-ort--tenn rental uses"and ..................... i ....... .. ..... .......... n .................................................................................................................................................................. rc,jadhi � "as 1'ollows� L .......................................................... 116 270 219.7 Short-term rental uses. A., h,x.d c 1nt asp .o........l....i... b......i...e dwy ....t...h......e ....p ........(..,.'.,..w............Ym.....M..........u......l.. tf12 .l.........D........w.........c......fl.......i....n.....g zLw,a. hors -ten....n.........t.....c......n.....t....a......l.......u......s....e...i.s c'I i l unit m an acccss( pen 4ted. suicct to this section' 00R.I.S., U1 Cl f . .... P .... ...... W f �2� ....................................................................................... . )f-y .. .......... ...... . .......... h ....................................................................................... .... nc,� [Formatted: Font Arial, 12 pt (Formatted: Left J dwT�wa )!rn�;t:inrt llill ad rcannny..dnstri t:.: that aHow a short-tr ri n nentA� Vr:F. as a pennnnttc'd ......... ........ ......... ....... ........ ....... ... ,ny r. IharvwMatreataesutan0 arvrvaasaWa and a aaannanrInacc t"rn� deveh maernt.s in tthis law. Some o mre aaagni uiry abate s st!a;a utua aatllj' pma"arv!uib t shot te:m n rentals in anarvary as aana0 a arvna0arvs tary as a ve;n,t; rve;ab apa �a a�axa �mariw �aat„ tha na na flue alaar�aarvse a��° am!JRg!!1 nn 221_2n as shffl't term baasus a�an at the association allows it:�.;1. R 1.1ort tarunn...ne nt al i.ls n:naay....a�a coon cane➢y nn a a,we ➢firm> unnt th t is tha pni n6Lp,A resid nae of ..... ........ ....... i.... r a t me cai tha....la.uarprve rty.._sa vnann,..fn ancnthen a9wC 11 urvnnt: ctnu the'same, c t a7S p na ➢ s r...fnn, a.niwr 1➢rnug;...nnrt canu.an aa9p ta.ent t ax p. arcc ➢ thaa n arw'hE"a9 �Dy 4ha:.....� utlrua Cr.���nQ u (�)......a�4� trtheu ..... vne r( ), a aal r a tnve➢y can rnnrfnvir' wa➢.f:Vx �h alllaa�wvn a ➢ �r,�nti>r n prvarcant arc enf the t ax:...L ancc ➢(s). .... than t'ha canunc.n s car.ip ant ).,..who nn}ist nr anhe nn thf., pnrna npall nr idcnue icanas nninnrnunn of i li`r a9 aver tra ryean . I�"Ilya una:ulu at me ;udcuaa e,'� l mw ueu aae0aaaAed trr�oin aaa a a ssor�y atan e pin t„ . ....� ........ 1j...2at arvwn...r. aroa a nrrla ana y arvm w asuarvn Is 185 days wham oaa waluro6 hK a C. 1), tJnhaas rcd sfiort-ta rnn n.^ it,,, ll wveers. (f..) 1n Ili AL� CL llw a1, t airn e nv a6of.i, l ake arof.it 1ic.sid nt:r a➢,..ind 1"laa.nnur d 1� cwcdo )mcnt zonaa,. tficre i, naa ➢rnnit on thr nurv,mb r of aC av IN, yr an that a dwell .......... L unnt;..n� av .............. ar r d i'ari iun,fio stc d short tc:n�n,._r nt al ris. 0 c. , p anu of:.the cCwrc ➢lnrrrb Lrni.t cCuurnnn,ax...aaan, annhca t°ri short-term rn rental uasa .......... ..... ............ ....... ......... _ �i asD:...a�aaaaarv,t;:k aagg.ireaents for the reasons stated uatrvWa:� (a)....Operating permit required. (i)....._i taah dwc ➢fifig wnt uused for nn is f.lhaastr d wheat tan n nc ntall...ur..e shall require a valid operating permit issued pursuant to Town of Ithaca Code Chapter 125 (Building Construction and Fire Prevention), §125 1i Each si.ic.fa...al ga➢.l.v.ang>...oa. dt;, enlist heave its cr nn aaprve n �rarnr panxp.nt, c ve.au....pi n a�ra._th n cane .....�uua h hW ➢➢r11 1111V, ns on the, 'ame,..ta�i.....rn.aa.u..a aa.,. Before the expiration or renewal of the operating permit, it shall be the responsibility of the owner of such y unf t to schedule an inspection with the Town of Ithaca Code Enforcement Department in order to obtain a new or renewed permit. (rn)....f Dwnar �z._ot dwalfrngunitn� ur se d crn...to far u;cd tarn n.unthca tars short tannnn ne nt:,al USCIS crau._ean Qitan.... tiD2ti1 n:nau �t aLp 6can nand cart arms asp c rat- ......... 11.9 pr mmit.s...pnncan tar..sailc nng._o ne ntnng^ �1ia h meets I'M Lnnlacaztari 4hcant, t:en.rn rc nt l ary sr 4 Atta n rQn.o c n atnng..pc nnnnt is obtained ainned itmwu t Ire nianntanne atl....t:.hnoruugljo ,t the trariod that siwfi aunt: is aritr red or re ntcd for pan lrnho tcd short-tanrn rental ...... ........ ...... ....... ........ ...... ........ ............... U ,e. (rug). M.fc.n.npp➢ying_$ean anu o (, n'.trn�;...pe nrnnt:,.thr owner ha➢1 provid the.Code ... i nntaarceme not 1.7epirtrnc rat; aaarth pnararf arf an.y wn rattan rc rat ll nti>nr e rnFnt th ,t [Formatted: Font: Arial, 12 pt c.xisted...a4 o the._d tlb c6ve date of tfill v F.q'.6ofl WhQ vV V:�tili allll V�;llP.ePtllt'.n�,, xic,sts, arvU a�p� u �ttaaugti p�.umit sh ul➢ not fit uc.r'�a if d l6 t�llt pe.a rlrc pe.n4 u➢ cewe.u" r9 ...... ......... ...... ......... ............... y thc. ex➢ steng� C111 11 l�, u:nt.pmvidc.d that the, rynt aconcludes w4hif.1 six ....... ........ ............. oIlo ffO s„_of €hu s ec b 000 ;_n tR a day ,,,,d €c l,s tluas flow virv.g 1n arvnt tary handle 2.1bttnl„ atl;ra a°na.a;n,t,s:rvJ (.v.).The Code Enforcement Department shall issue an operating permit upon verification by inspection that the items listed in Subsection B(1) through (13) below meet the requirements of the applicable New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code and the items listed in Subsection B(14) and (15) below meet the requirements of the Town of Ithaca Code: (1) 911 address number properly posted (with each unit posted); (2) Exterior structure in good repair; (3) Entrances, access areas, parking spaces and similar areas in good repair; (4) Receptacles for proper storage of garbage; (5) Compliant pools and decks (if present); (6) Working smoke and carbon monoxide detectors; (7) Interior structure in good repair; (8) Fire separation (where required); (9) Electrical, plumbing and heating in good repair; (10) Appliances in good repair (if supplied by landlord); (11) Proper light and ventilation; (12) Proper room sizes; (13) Proper egress doors or windows; (14) Compliant off-street parking, per 2 70 ��.7...a f. S-e:...i::�.n:7.;v._sc".�:l:lll:lP:l�: (15) Exterior property areas do not violate Town of Ithaca Code Chapter 205 (1"rslp� rvty P�Ilprv.Ut� au...n�..^) (v.) A Code Enforcement Officer shall seek a search warrant from a court of competent jurisdiction whenever the owner, managing agent or occupant fails to allow inspections of any premises believed to be subject to this sc,c on and where there is a reasonable cause to believe that there is a violation of this chapter, Town of Ithaca Code Chapter 205 (Property Maintenance), or the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code. (.vi).Failure of an owner of any unit that is required to have an operating permit to apply for an operating permit in a timely manner, to obtain an operating permit after inspection, or to maintain a valid operating permit after it is granted throughout the period that such uf.iit k rvffi.,r d oa u.ent d lc�l;..a n unho zted short-term rental use, shall be deemed a violation of this we a teof.i.. (Formatted: Left J ( Formatted Font color Auto [Formatted: Font: Ari11 a11 l, 12 p11 t (v%(..._Over-occupancy. Verified over -occupancy shall constitute a violation of the operating permit. (da) &,h. Li ttcana I i.i.nho tad shaaa t grin t o autn➢ ur a YCI L n a meets., (...�.....a Unlessess allowed agneater number o days below, no an.11�: shall rented .f...o......r..a......k..... atnduaa ted sfim.t;.-.te ran.._�-ctp�,ta�.l.... i.i.s�c� for more than 29 days in any calendar year. If an owfiet ea6lers more than one t:antV I'm tt�nfio ated �shmt-t.et na Y ,, , l t:ar�e on a ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... parcel a,ndh)a - ra4as a^tu4;...p;a,p.v(d, the total number of days in any calendar year that all n.untts. on tfic. parcel(s), may be rented char v.ni o t d sfio u tenn. rental nt,a.l, ar sa g�...shall not in the aggregate exceed 29. This limitation of 29 days shall not apply to any wn::fid".u:u...rental agreement that existed as of the effective date of this se.c4.taan, paQvtda d (hart tha ua.nt al a a�na,llV0 a wu4.han saga tno f. of tfik as dtoWs a ffe lava data For Vhe....puur o a y..of this section rah sa.f Vhc. ....... ......... ........ ......... daaldaaw f.igb ,da alll...c. t,. n.d.....a:s._t.npn.a._t9.a�:.Y..:.. 4.1:...p....a9:..:nan:ll.tad1,...4>1:...2.4:...>n::u.ca.any s (2p a aa.nt al aa6 le,z4 than 24 heauns.._that inchides an.o a tnJzh.t `tciy (3) as rental of lc.ss than 24 hay ns that does neat anc➢ 0e ,,m ovcrntnht ,'t;av (rv,(....The owner of any linrt u-cnta d $eau an arnduosta d tiorV tarn rented are shall provide enough driveway parking spaces on the f), r:n.F"➢ containing such :Ln nfl. so that aH vehicles belonging to tha...stio t tarunn..renters aaa pnrtca d ern yiltc "�1icil va ht da �1.. ay not park on the street,., (.h:.i.) No :ua,nfl. shall be subject to more than one unfiost:ed ............................................... heart tc,nnn..rental agreement at any one time, and if tfic, ow;.c...u......ep_�. ,,rs more than one.u..n.j. t on a p n a a d and/orad ac a rat parcel, only one wJt..mayberented16a-aniinhaaatc.ad bort-tennuafitaadar-c..atany one time. (rv:.). No avnfl:..ta nt d.:f:.o aar u. yn,fioa t d stiort t nnn tc ntl a➢.:uVse shall be rented for the accommodation of more individuals than tvvaa times .................... the number of legalbedrooms 1n such I n7 t. .................... (v:,p All lirart; to rite d...f:aaa tin➢aa ;t d duatn;t t tan r.cua t ad 1ite.>. shall have prominently posted in all bedrooms in such u.im.t a nn.otwe in a form approved by the Code Enforcement Department containing zaa.fes. end da gaad. c arnnlnlf.aa,.1n..c, information including, but not limited to, the following: location of the nearest exit in case of a fire; limitations contained in the Town's l aw, ya°g.°,_aaadu.E.nd...:uu:n.11.fun.t.°.a.tl`. 5f._:`....h.(n.n::ti._tl6: n n:. t a nt al 1lyea und.naaasc,, .;a.nd cell phone numbers of the owner and any manager, if there is one. (Formatted: Left J [Formatted: Font: Ari11 a11 l, 12 p11 t (Formatted: Left ------------------------------------ a owner of wdt that satisfies at le.ast one of the following criteria may rent such iniit 16u- Lvnhosted short --term n,,ntal u.�scs for L�p_L(L90 days in th.f., t 1 ......................................................................................... ... ..................................................... ...... ......... . >rcgcuV.d.. n anv calendar year: J��erv. 2j2 owner offers niore than one unit on a ............ .......................................................................................................................................................................................... . .......... InIm, r—c—c.. —dothe .22 !hin iuI2.ply !,.�j each unit that nicet ... ....................................................................................................... than _criter4a !.rvL i.s t....h...... .......0..J....... 11Y .s........cur n.......u......l....a......t...i.....v.......e........f....o.......r.........a......l...l....u.......n.......i....t....s........that ........i...n........e.....e.....t...t.h......e..... Eriteria?[ .......................................... (1) A unit that is (a) located in a Low Density Rr.,.,.sJdentk11 or Medium Density Residential Zone on a parcel that is larger than tfifcc, a......crCI.s, and (b) located ................................. more than fi)�.tv fcet from the side property JAn(,.,,s. .................... I ......................... .................... (2) A unit that is located in a Low Density R.c.....s....i.d......c.....n.t.i..a.l ...or Medium Density Residential Zone on a parcel that is not adjacent to any parcels that contain a d c, I' (3) A unit that is located on a parcel adjacent to the Owner's prinq.ipal E"Lidence am L . . ........................................................................................................................... LIV Wi )L) n4occurlinimsthelaw toll lara ant ........... �,!2..LEL 1! �� .................................................................................................... M .................................................................................... i.E ILK it residence Formatted: Font: Bold, Highlight ............... ............... -,""I'll" ............... Collection of rental information. an before or after tile rental Every time an owner rents t I i i s 122 e ....................................................................................................................................................... 1!1ufl. .....foran inch hort-tnn..........................wc, she ..................o........ or he shall either notify the Code Enforcement Department of the dates of the rental agreement, by electronic methods established by such Department, or maintain a logbook signed by each renter in a prominent location in such i.i n it so that a Code Enforcement Officer may verify the number of days for which the i.init has been rented 16u- a ............ I ................... .......................... I'l () Y t n- t t" r f l t fl i.isc,. nstead of the either/or re±I.gjELmentrvqliiE ............. electronic notification once itJs established.,.and lintil..then the ........................................................................................................ ........ ........................................................... ..................... .......................... .................... ......... ................................... Formatted: Highlight [. rovisions to consider: . ........... . . . ................ . . . .......... . ... . ......... — Lj!!At IX Buff" t avian !!..c if.211.s lm.J.1-1 s. �A emp:L_of visitor's lol! Inust b� wovided to ... .. . ......... ... -- ------------- . ....................... that the VillagCs Code Enforcement Officer within I (i business..111tys followin ritten ................................................ within . .................... . .......... ..... .............................. mcm, a In ELgist ation i 2i!!�!it reng a it 11!i a,.i E ............................ ........ ................. ..... a I . ....... 11 l The owner shall provide the Code Enforcement Department with her or his cell phone number, and also the cell phone number of a manager or other responsible person who lives within 30 miles of the i.in it in case the owner is not available to address a complaint from a neighbor or the rental guest. The Code Enforcement Department may provide these numbers to the residents of all dwelling units on parcels adjacent to the u..u.I.J.t prernises,..". [Formatted: Font: A I r I i 11 a 11 1 "I'll 1 ­ 2 I'll, p 11 t oust ain Vaew d. Dada) Act] short terin..r ntarvll .111:ajyis arvlros in 12/1 that r� apaa�iii a°.. "L,arocaal contarv.c rverson. For short-term, rentals', Iiiis shaall u)KL ad 6be cltL_all sh�rva 6 tv ni renters and all ocf aa�y� icent aro as r1Jvs the name sand cont. act information of a local indh7idaaaal who shall he available t ont. farvalm l� Ny„l�oarims Uma:m° daa� �aW7en 171 datwrs ll)vr week. l lair ana� tlua..�a a aaa ary °„6ha nua l rvsta d striy l ha..miwnea or da su,l;urobata d local contact lmea aria% shaall. ............................. fa ]Nta;saond anaa-sate; within lusty (fll� aaaaauartta toibuaalalan aal„aaraana� as ......... qbr 2p rr°aat.ion of that, short-term rental or the aondarc of that, short tofln r ntems aana� 2.lake renedi ll action to aasollveauay s .. ¢ Section . In the event that any portion of this law is declared invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the validity of the remaining portions shall not be affected by such declaration of invalidity. Section . This local law shall take effect (Formatted: Left J [Formatted: Font: Ari11 a11 l, 12 p11 t TOWN OF ITHACA LOCAL LAW NO. OF THE YEAR 2019 A LOCAL LAW ADDING A CHAPTER TITLED "OPERATING PERMITS FOR CERTAIN UNHOSTED SHORT TERM RENTAL UNITS" TO THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE Be it enacted by the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca as follows: Section 1. The Town of Ithaca Code is hereby amended by adding Chapter , titled "Operating Permits for Certain Unhosted Short Term Rental Units," reading as follows: "Chapter Operating Permits for Certain Short Term Rental Units -1. Applicability. This chapter applies to all Unhosted Short Term Rental (USTR) Units except: A. Those located in Agricultural, Conservation and Lakefront residential zones. B. Those located in residential cooperative or condominium developments. C. Those located in multiple dwelling buildings where they are prohibited by law. § -2. Operating permit required. A. Throughout the term of rental occupancy, all Unhosted Short Term Rental Units (except those listed in § -1 above) shall require a valid operating permit issued pursuant to Town of Ithaca Code Chapter 125 (Building Construction and Fire Prevention), § 125-_ Before the expiration or renewal of the operating permit, it shall be the responsibility of the owner of such Unit to schedule an inspection with the Town of Ithaca Code Enforcement Department in order to obtain a new or renewed permit. B. The Code Enforcement Department shall issue an operating permit upon verification by inspection that no violations of the following standards exist: [Insert list here. ] C. A Code Enforcement Officer shall seek a search warrant from a court of competent jurisdiction whenever the owner, managing agent or occupant fails to allow inspections of any premises believed to be subject to this chapter and where there is a reasonable cause to believe that there is a violation of this chapter, Town of Ithaca Code Chapter 205 (Property Maintenance), or the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code. 11/27/17 D. Owners of USTR units that are rented as of the effective date of this Chapter must apply for operating permits for the rental units by . When applying for the operating permit, the owner shall provide the Code Enforcement Department with proof of any rental agreements that existed as of the effective date of this Chapter. E. Failure of an owner of any USTR unit that is required to have an operating permit to apply for an operating permit in a timely manner, to obtain an operating permit after inspection, or to maintain a valid operating permit after it is granted throughout the period of rental occupancy, shall be deemed a violation of this chapter. If a violation persists beyond the time frame specified in the notice of violation, the property must not be rented until it is brought into compliance. F. Over -occupancy. Verified over -occupancy shall constitute a violation of the operating permit. § -3. Unhosted Short Term Rental Unit Regulations. A. No USTR Unit shall be rented as such for more than 29 days in any calendar year. If there is more than one USTR Unit on a parcel, the total number of days in any calendar year that all Units on a parcel may be rented shall not in the aggregate exceed 29. This limitation of 29 days shall not apply to any rental agreement that existed as of the effective date of this Chapter. B. The owner of any USTR Unit shall provide enough driveway parking spaces on the premises containing such Unit so that no vehicles belonging to renters of such Unit shall park on the street C. No USTR Unit shall be subject to more than one rental agreement at any one time, and if there is more than one USTR Unit on a parcel, only one may be rented at any one time. D. No USTR Unit shall be rented for the accommodation of more individuals than Two times the number of legal bedrooms in such Unit. E. All USTR Units shall have prominently posted in all bedrooms in such Unit a Notice in a form approved by the Code Enforcement Department containing useful information including, but not limited to, the following: location of the nearest exit in case of a fire; limitations contained in the Town's USTR and Noise Ordinances; cell phone numbers of the owner and any manager, if there is one. § 4. Penalties for offenses. A. Any person, association, firm, corporation or other entity found by a court to have violated any provision of this chapter or to have assisted in the violation of any provision of this chapter shall be guilty of a violation, punishable: 11/27/17 2 (1) By a fine of $500, and revocation of the operating permit for one year, for conviction of a first offense. (2) By a fine of $1,000, and revocation of the operating permit for two years, for conviction of the second of two offenses, both of which were committed within a period of three years. B. Each week's continued violation shall constitute a separate additional violation. § -5. Collection of rental information. A. Every time an owner rents an USTR Unit, she or he shall either notify the Code Enforcement Department of the dates of the rental agreement, by electronic methods established by such Department, or maintain a logbook signed by each renter in a prominent location in such Unit so that a Code Enforcement Officer may verify the number of nights for which the Unit has been rented. B. The owner shall provide the Code Enforcement Department with her or his cell phone number, and also the cell phone number of a manager or other responsible person who lives within 30 miles of the USTR Unit in case the owner is not available to address a complaint from a neighbor or the rental guest. The Code Enforcement Department may provide these numbers to the residents of all dwelling units on parcels adjacent to the USTR Unit premises. § -6. Definitions. A. Short Term Rental Unit. A dwelling unit (whether a principal dwelling unit or an accessory dwelling unit) that is located on the same tax parcel which contains the owner's primary residence, and which is rented for any period less than Thirty days. The owner must be a natural person. B. Unhosted Short Term Rental (USTR) Unit. A Short Term Rental Unit (as defined above) that is rented for any night when the owner is not present in his or her primary residence or on the same tax parcel as the USTR Unit. There may be more than one USTR Unit per tax parcel, but each must receive a separate operating permit Section 2. In the event that any portion of this law is declared invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the validity of the remaining portions shall not be affected by such declaration of invalidity. Section 3. This local law shall take effect immediately upon its filing with the New York Secretary of State. 11/27/17 Short Term Rental Committee Group Meeting April 3, 2019 Present: Bill Goodman, Supervisor/Chair; Board Members Tee -Ann Hunter, Rich DePaolo and Pat Leary Recorder/Support — Paulette Rosa, Town Clerk Resident Representatives: Mia Slotnick, Brent Katzman, Alexis Schmidts, Mike Macananny, Ryan Mitchell, Laure Strook, Carolyn Greenwald, Kenny Simpson, Common terms/abbreviations used: ABB — Air B&B STR — Short Term Rental; rental of less than 30 consecutive days USTR — Unhosted short-term rental; owner is not present when rental occurs HSTR — Hosted short-term rental; owner is present when rental occurs 1. Welcome Mr. Goodman welcomed everyone and outlined how he envisioned the meeting going by saying he would like to go around the table and ask everyone to introduce themselves and where they are from as well as what your issue is. Mr. Goodman thought the rental day limit seems to be a big issue and we have different comments from different folks so we will cover that; the question of overlay districts we have started to discuss and then if there are other particular issues he would make note of those and the group can discuss them. Mr. Goodman added that towards the end, because this is an unusual format for a committee meeting, he will see if there are folks in the audience who want to add anything that might not have been covered. Mr. DePaolo noted for the record that this particular committee meeting is being recorded so everyone was aware of that since usually they are not recorded. Mr. Goodman stated that given the size of the group, he would be the facilitator and try and keep the meeting on track and he asked that people do not just jump in but raise their hand to be recognized to speak. With that said, he wanted to try and have some back -and -forth dialogue and questions which is a different format for committee meetings and hence why this type of meeting was called. 2. Introductions Bill Goodman, Town Supervisor — Interest in helping the Town come up with some regulations that might be serving as a model for other municipalities because there are a lot of municipalities contacting him to see what we do with this issue. STR Special Committee Meeting April 3, 2019 Pg. 1 Tee -Ann Hunter, Town Board Member — Interested in the balancing act in crafting this legislation and she thanked people for coming and speaking and she hoped that we can find an equitable and satisfactory resolution to the problems that surround STR. Mia Slotnick, Renwick Heights resident — Interested in regulations to minimize the detrimental effects of STR in residential neighborhoods that her area has already experienced. Brent Katzman, Host in the Town since 2015, both HSTR and USTR — Agrees with Mia and Tee -Ann in that their sincerest hope is that we can reach a place tonight that helps everyone understand that we are empathetic as can be to the concerns of hosting and the behavior of guests and the appropriate measures to address that. Alexis Schmidts, USTR Host — Feels her situation points out one of the more helpful ways in which people can do STR to promote the Town and she is here to share her story. Mike Macananny, Renwick Heights resident — Seconds what Mia had to say. Ryan Mitchell, Ithaca Board of Realtors — Interested in making sure we are advocating for homeowners' rights today and taking existing homeowners into consideration. Bruce Bates, Director of Code Enforcement — Interested in making this law something that can be enforces and kept track of. Paulette Rosa, Town Clerk — Administrative support for the committee Laure Strook, Forest Home area — Goals similar to Renwick Heights. She said that they are in a residential area which is very desirable with a lot of rentals that are not STR and those that have been used as STR did not work out well at all and they are hoping to find a way to retain a sense of community which is already hard with long-term rentals. Carolyn Greenwald, USTR since 2007 — She said that she has been doing this for a really long time, even before Air B&B and she is in favor of legislation that is narrowly tailored to address real concerns that people have while hoping at the same time that we don't throw the baby out with the bathwater and make sure we are addressing concerns but also keeping the benefits as much as we can for the town residents and homeowners. Kenny Simpson, Renwick Heights — Interested in seeing some sort of sharing that if people are to rent in high density areas, that something comes back to benefit those that have to live with that when most of those people are absent or subjecting the area to it. He thought that regulations that are more progressive like the regulations in Massachusetts where there are consequences for renting over a certain amount of days where you pay taxes and those taxes come back to the community that is affected. Rich DePaolo, Town Board — Primary interests are preventing the ubiquity of STRs as a way of keeping housing affordable. He also believes that people have a right to maximize their income to the extent that they are doing it as a supplemental endeavor and when it gets to the point STR Special Committee Meeting April 3, 2019 Pg. 2 where people are doing it as a full time business, he thinks we should consider regulating it as a full time business so that means potentially leveling the playing field between full time STRs and hospitality businesses that are subject to much more stringent regulations. He would like to level the playing field, he would like people to supplement their mortgages and taxes, and he would like to keep housing stock from being gobbled up and carved up in tiny little increments for STR. Pat Leary, Town Board — Feels the same way as the other committee members, especially preserving the rental housing stock for longer term residents and rentals and not squeezing that out for tourists. 3. Identification of Issues Mr. Goodman briefly summarized the current draft legislation adding that the Committee is only looking at the Low Density, Medium Density and High Density residential zones in the Town; they would not apply in the Town's Ag, Conservation, or Lakefront zones. The draft has a 29-day limit for USTR and he reminded the group that we are not talking about HSTR at this point yet and to focus on the USTR. The draft has various items in there to try and address some of the complaints we have received in the past such as parking requirements and provision of contact information in case there is a problem. Mr. Goodman added that last spring there was a lot of interest in the draft and we received a lot of comments and emails with questions and concerns and the committee has talked about a lot of those, we have not been able to come up with any resolution to them and he is hoping that is what the group can work on tonight. Mr. Goodman again asked to go around the table for any specific issue we should be discussing tonight? Tee -Ann — Length of time is an issue and the overlay districts and she would like to talk about the enforcement and having certain tenant behaviors being a trigger for enforcement action. Mia — Overall, number of days and enforcement and an overlay and revenue coming back to the Town to offset taxes paid by everyone. Brent — Said that he thought Carolyn had sent a memo out with the regulations they are supportive of but what he hasn't seen discussed during the course of this committee's existence include the acknowledgment we have that there is very little data that helps us understand the magnitude or presence of USTRs in the Town and what those benefits and/or negative impacts are. We are operating on very well meaning and well spoken concerns that have been expressed, but we don't really know the extent of the problem and we are big believers in that legislation should be scaled to address the problem, not scaled to anticipate a problem that may not exist. He would like to talk a bit about the scale of the legislation. STR Special Committee Meeting April 3, 2019 Pg. 3 Brent said the other piece that has been missing from the process is any understanding of the benefits to the community and to the hosts that do this. That may begin to create an image of the host community that is quite different that what he thinks is trying to be prevented which is this idea of people buying up properties and holding them off the market and doing this exclusively. He said none of us know how much that exists or if it exists, but we do know that for the lions' share of hosts, that is not the case and we want to make sure that those hosts can continue to move forward, so we would like to talk a bit about that. Alexa — Thanked the committee and gave an overview of her story. She bought a house with someone and it didn't work out and subsequently would have lost the property if she was not able to move out, rent somewhere smaller, and do USTR. She maintains the property very well and is onsite quite often for her gardens and studio. She is concerned about the primary residence requirement. Mike — Said his issues center around disruptions and enforcement. He is particularly interested in what Kenny had to say about taxes benefiting the larger community. Those folks that are not benefitting from these activities directly as hosts are affected by these activities so therefore it seems there should be some, don't want to say compensations, but in a global sense, a reduction in their own taxes for everybody, because those folks that do come in are using those services. He is also interested in the idea of an overlay district because, number 1, we have many areas in the town that are unique, and one size does not fit all for these laws and everybody has a sense of that. So that is a potential method to limiting the impact of certain areas that may be more sensitive than others. Mike said, with that, if we return to the premises and the founding principals behind the current zoning code, "medium density residential zones purpose 270-65 Purpose — The purpose of the medium density residential zone is to create areas that are almost exclusively residential in nature where there is minimal intrusion of commercial, farming or other activities that could be detrimental to residential development and occupancy." Which basically implies families. When you have mini -hotels, you are taking housing stock, you are reducing the level of familiarity of the neighbors with neighbors and you really are creating a business enterprise in an area where it was not originally set up to be. He said he realizes things change, but we have to have some sort of sensible legislation and he thought it was a good start. Ryan — Said that in addition to the issues Brent raised, he wants to understand how the enforcement process is going to work. Is there something on the back end that the Town plans to monitor or some sort of system? How are you going to know that people are doing this? Renting their homes out? How do you notify the property owners that you are planning to do this? The recent registry for apartments... no one knew that... they didn't know they had to do that. He was curious because that is an issue in and of itself so how are you going to monitor STR and stay on top of that? Bruce — Just listening. Paulette — Just listening. STR Special Committee Meeting April 3, 2019 Pg. 4 Laure — Used and example; Judd Falls Rd next to her street, has about 70% long-term rental properties and if these owners figure out that they could make more money renting short term... she likes to have a relationship with next door neighbors and usually people are there for a year or more but if we get people coming every weekend, even if they are nice, it is difficult to build a community out of this. She is an Air B&B user outside of Ithaca so she has been in places where she has benefited from them and mostly in big cities that were rented long term during the year and then STR in the summer because the house was vacant and they asked their guests, us, to tiptoe and we did and it seemed to be working well. Maybe that is something to consider. In residential areas you don't want to have different people every weekend, it is really disruptive, even if people are really being nice and parking there cars where they should and being respectful. Carolyn — She would like to focus on the relationship between the number of nights and enforcement because to her, we have talked so much about the number of nights... the hosts think 29 is far to restrictive and the people who are living near them think it is far to lenient and she thought that that highlights that focusing on the number of nights is not where we should be focusing our attention. If someone has a giant party next to your house 29 days, which is pretty much every weekend, you are going to be extremely unhappy. That tells me it is not about the number of nights, its about making sure we have enforcement of the noise and parking problems and if we did, that would be 98% of the problem. She would love to see legislation that starts with getting the 98% of the problem nailed and then, if we see that that is not effective, then come back and address more of the issues or come at it from another direction. She thought that the relationship between the number of nights and enforcement is key. Kenny — He thought that the number of nights and overlays are important, and he echoed Bill's point that people are now looking to Ithaca, but we should also look to municipalities that have experienced this for a decade longer than we have. Most of those municipalities have reversed their initial course and become much more protective of the residents rather than promoting the practice. One way they have done that, for example, in Massachusetts, there is an 8% tax and the Town of the locality get it. He said that Air B&B is taking your money and why should it go to a billion - dollar corporation versus our locality. If the money is going to go and the people are going to do this, it should come locally rather than to a billion -dollar corporation and that is what is happening in other cities. He said that in Japan and Berlin and Amsterdam you have to survey your neighbors and if they don't agree to it, you can't rent. Many other municipalities that have this, the residents that are there and the impact on them and the resident housing has become the focus so he would say from the get go... we can talk about nights, we can talk about overlays to protect areas, but he thinks people that want to get in the game should be willing to pony up and actually pay for some of the services they are using and to subsidize others who are subjected to the process. STR Special Committee Meeting April 3, 2019 Pg. 5 Rich — Said he thought it is fair to say that the people who own the houses are paying taxes so they are paying for those services anyway, so I don't know if the use is (someone spoke over him) Rich went on to say that he would back the lens way out and asked all of the guests there, how many people would like to see more regulation than what currently exists? One person raised their hand) He said the reason he asked that is because he thinks we are here by and large based on the experience of relatively few people who live in a rental -intensive neighborhood where this issue has become problematic. He said he doesn't think this is a town -wide issue and he does feel as if we do have to strike a balance. He is not necessarily in favor of overlay zones because he thinks it is a classic NIMBY approach; just take care of our needs and you can go solve everyone else's problems on your own. So if we are going to do this in a cooperative way, it is helpful to have everybody involved, because we are going to have to solve this issue town -wide. Rich said the point he is making is that even though he has been involved in crafting this draft legislation and involved in regulating accessory dwelling units and so forth, he doesn't see a crisis at hand. He sees that the approach that we have taken is relatively balanced given the competing interests so he wants us to keep in mind that we are not trying to solve a catastrophe. We have to keep that in mind and some of the muted approaches that people are saying should be considered. Pat — Said that she thought that limiting the number of days is key because no matter how many safeguards are put into place to preserve the neighborhood quality and restrict disruption, the key issue for her is preserving the housing stock for low-income rentals and permanent residents. She thought there was a break even point for anyone and the Economic Policy Institute analysis did cite several studies about this and she thought it was commonsense that if a person who owns a home can make more money from renting an unlimited number of short-term nights than having a graduate student rent their house for a year, that's what they are going to do. That is common economic sense so we have to find the break even point where we are not giving people an incentive to choose the STR over the more traditional year -long rentals. That is her main concern, because in Ithaca, housing prices are astronomical and she doesn't want to increase the cost of housing by having this unrestricted. Carolyn asked to address the point about money going out of town to Air B&B; she said it is the exact opposite because Tompkins County hosts paid $300K last year at the 3% tax, which means the Tompkins County hosts brought in $1 OM and that money went right here to the people in this town. Kenny responded that if you surveyed those guests, they would have come and stayed in a traditional hotel if STR weren't available so the root money would have still been here. Carolyn responded that some people wouldn't and her only point was that the money isn't flying out of the town to a big company. Bill said he would like to put the economic issue to the side since the number of days seems to be the overriding issue. STR Special Committee Meeting April 3, 2019 Pg. 6 Kenny asked if the Village of Cayuga Heights should be exempted on the draft and there seemed to be some confusion but the Village has their own Codes and Zoning Department under municipal law and the Town of Ithaca has no say in that even though in other ways the Village is considered part of the Town. Bill turned to the number of days and the number came from many discussions about how many weekends there are with graduations, homecomings, parent weekends and festivals and the Committee came up with the 29 day limit. The Village has their own zoning and implemented 14 days and the Committee heard from people in Renwick Heights who want the same limit dur to their proximity and we have heard from a lot of hosts that 29 days is to short. Carolyn brought up tonight that we shouldn't focus on the number of days but the activities that are causing the problems as opposed to focusing on days. Bill wanted to focus on the different views or less or more or focus on something else and see what we can figure out. Rich asked if it would be helpful to know approximately how many days a year hosts are renting their properties and some hosts answered; 200-200-145-220 .... Tee -Ann said we are hearing numbers from people but this doesn't apply to an accessory dwelling units if you are there or Lakefront zones.... Carolyn who runs one on the lake gave her seat to someone else.... Tee -Ann asked if the principal residence language was still in the draft and if so then the limiting factor in this legislation would require whoever is renting a STR would have to have the whole house used and that is very limited. She understood that the only USTR that would be allowed would be in or of your primary residence. Alexis said she herself rents an apartment elsewhere, but her rental is surrounded by forest and a graveyard and this would be limiting her when no one is affected. Kenny said that is an important consideration because that almost puts her in the same as an Agricultural Zone and the characteristics of a neighborhood make a big difference. Anthony joined the table and said he lives in the NE and has both USTR and STR and the USTR is adjacent to his primary residence. Separate lot. He said he had been renting long term for years and the last three years he had increasing trouble getting new tenants in and said other landlords are likewise afflicted. He said most of us are sympathetic to the idea of preserving long-term stock and ABB is not "free" it is hard work, and that is the reason, from an economic standpoint... there isn't a bunch of people trying to get in to this. There is a limit on people's time and resources that balances their desire to do this. He said in his case, it is right next door so the law would directly affect his ability to do this. He said he did sign a long-term lease with someone that starts in July and the way the law is written now, he would be unable to cover his mortgage if he wasn't able to do STR for the lag time of more than 29 days. STR Special Committee Meeting April 3, 2019 Pg. 7 Anthony said they think the specific is not important but the neighborhood integrity is and figuring out ways to get enforcement and compliance is. Anthony added that he didn't think there was an opportunity for a variance or hearings for the example Alexis gave of her situation and although he is sympathetic to Kenny's comments about funds returning to the Town, as Carolyn said, we have been paying room taxes now. Anthony felt that a variance process needs to be discussed and some kind of arbitration if there is a conflict. Mike said that Bill has asked for comments on the draft and it seems enforcement has come up several times and it seems there is a requirement for operating permits and basically self - reporting and he thought that was a step in the right direction. He realizes that people don't want restrictions and forms but he thought there was no way around that if people want to be able to regulate and enforce. Brent commented on Mike's comment saying that as shown in Carolyn's memo, we are very much in agreement that these properties should be registered and there should be some reporting mechanism. He elaborated on Anthony's comment saying he thought the issue of the number of nights — there are so many stories and each property is so unique — he said he was in a MDR with 10 acres, on Rte. 79 so all the noise is the traffic, not the noise at his house. Brent said his plan for himself is that at some point he is going to be at a point where he would like to be snow bird and have his property used and paid attention to in the winter so by having the flexibility to say that 3 months out of the year I can do STR is very attractive. He would have a friend or colleague oversee it but he would like to keep his property but not necessarily live in it for 12 months. Brent said his story is no different than academic rentals and sabbaticals or 9 months where there are three months left and 29 days is less than 1 month so 120 days is starting to go toward the right direction, but to him, days is less relevant than how a property is used, how it is managed and the responsibility of the hosts managing. Anthony responded that one of the things we can agree on is that even the hosts think that regulations are in the best interest of preserving our opportunities and the integrity of the community and the challenge lies with the civil servants on how to enforce this and looking at models that are out there. He said in the last 3 years he has had more noise issues with his long- term tenants than his short-term tenants from the same spaces. Anthony said this "trust" economy is built on feedback; he has a user profile and his guests have a user profile so there are filtering mechanisms that help to ensure the integrity of the process and he hoped that we could be creative in the enforcement arena so we are bringing to bear technological advancements that will enable peaceful coexistence of these dueling interests. Rich asked what those technological advancements would be or what does that look like and Anthony said in the case of ABB he knew they have partnered with a number of cities to make STR Special Committee Meeting April 3, 2019 Pg. 8 some information and feedback available. He has no way of vetting an incoming long-term tenant but he can see a long history of a short-term tenant and can see that they will be a good tenant for his neighborhood. He said that all of the damage he has had to his properties have been from long-term tenants. Pat responded that there is a lot of variation from the people we have heard from throughout this process and she thinks the idea of a variance is good for those cases that just don't fit neatly. She said we need some broad standards and number of days is an important part of that, but the flexibility argument is persuasive because you can't get a three month rental, for sure, but we have to come up with good cutoff points where we are not just opening it up to all year long. Pat was also spoke about the overlay districts saying that you can't go just by the zoning of a particular area because you do lose some of the problems that certain areas have had so she wasn't against and overlay zone for areas where it has already shown to be pretty problematic as far as the density of STRs. Tee -Ann said in some of our discussions we have talked about limiting the number of permits townwide or per neighborhood and she didn't know if there were legal reasons that we cannot do that and maybe that is something we want to include in our discussions so we do not have neighborhoods that are experiencing a high level of this. Mike addressed what Brent said about flexibility and so forth and an appeals process saying why couldn't we have something in the law that if someone wants to rent more than 14 days they have to get their neighbors within 500 feet to agree and use that letter as support in an appeal. He was trying to facilitate a way to support that argument. Mike went on to say that a good starting point, and for a lot of reasons we have discussed and presented to you folks before, why not adopt the one that the Village of Cayuga Heights did with the shorter level and then if folks need more, let them address their neighbors and see if it is ok because we are all in this together. Why not turn this in to something that is more cooperational? Anthony said that Carolyn mentioned out memo and we are really in favor of permits and he thought that would really help address the issue of investors moving in by limiting the number of permits. He liked the idea of some tiered days, he needs three months, and he liked the idea of this appeals process. He thought he spoke for all in saying they are all in favor of registration and limiting the number of permits so we don't have industrial investors coming in and destroying our neighborhoods. Rich said he would do the old sandwich trick; he loves the idea of flexibility in terms of potential variance/waiver opportunities potentially related to proximity of other neighbors. If you have 10 acres and the only thing you are hearing are cows and the highway, maybe that's a little bit different. He said he was not jumping on the overlay district because he thinks then everybody, every little circle, cul-de-sac is going to say we are neighborhood and we want an overlay and it's going to become a legislative and regulatory nightmare. He also is not in favor of limiting the number of permits because he thinks that you would get into a situation where there would have to be some kind of revolving opportunity to acquire a permit and then if you are an ABB STR Special Committee Meeting April 3, 2019 Pg. 9 operator, how do you know if the permit you have this year is going to be available next year? You couldn't be guaranteed a permit because other people have to be given and opportunity to participate in whatever lottery system comes along. He thought that anybody who has a property and can prove qualifies to be a STR should be able to have one provided that they follow whatever rules apply to everyone. He said that limiting the number of permits becomes problematic and hard to administer and a revolving headache that isn't necessary at this point. Kenny said he thought the permit idea was very important but if you can't enforce permits then limiting the days is the way to reduce the impact on the area. The threshold for determining whether it is a hobby and way to earn a little extra money is the 14 day Federal tax filing threshold. You are then a business. There is the hobby rentals that are 14 days or less which is what Cayuga Heights has legislated for then there's the businesses which gets back to Mike's point about changing the characteristics of a medium density neighborhood to an area that now includes what are essentially for -profit rental businesses which was not the intention of the zone when it was made. Kenny said he thinks that permits equate to lower days if there's no permits and go from there. Bill wanted to get in and said he is trying to keep an open mind and not insert himself too much because technically he is not a Committee member, but he wanted to ask a question that everyone doesn't have to answer now but he would like them to think about it; the flexibility variances sound good to him because he understands cases like Brent's and Alexis' because you don't have a lot of neighbors around to disturb so there won't be noise and parking issues, so the idea of having some kind of variance or flexibility does make sense but his question is if we don't have a limit of days, then how are we going to handle the situations that have happened in Forest Home or Renwick Heights in the past where we do have problems because we are going to get some hosts that are not paying attention or addressing issues. Some that are gone on sabbatical and intend to come back but are not addressing issues. Bill said his thought with a time limit had always been that this would stop cases like that so how would we handle that type of situation? Bill also said we do have provisions, he believes, in our current Zoning Law, that if someone wants to do a B&B they have to come in for a Special Permit so maybe we do something similar and over a certain number of days, even though under NYS Law you may not be considered a B&B, we are going to say you are going to be subject to the same sort of procedures and you have to come to the Planning Board for a Special Permit and then they can have a public hearing and neighbors can come in.... Paulette is biting her lip ... (it's really hard to get a Special Permit) Ryan commented on the idea of permits, suggesting that you a certain amount of complaints would cause the permit to rescind. Three strikes you're out type of thing. Anthony said he appreciates Rich's comment and wanted to clarify that he was not suggesting limiting the number of hosts but the number of dwellings that a host can run with the idea being STR Special Committee Meeting April 3, 2019 Pg. 10 that someone from out of town couldn't get four places ... buying up four houses in Renwick Heights changes the character so he said what he really should have said was limiting the number of properties that an individual owner can own. Rich responded that that is already embedded in the legislation because is has to be your primary dwelling... Anthony said he isn't in favor of that because in his case, it's right next door, it's not his primary residence although they legally share a driveway. It's a real example of how if the homeowner had a permit, and there is a follow up of enforcement... Anthony said we haven't talked about enforcement but one night of sleeplessness for Kenny is one night too many, so if it's 14 days or 1 day, unless we can come up with some meaningful enforcement, we are still going to have the same problem. It is always the holidays that people are going to rent. He talked about decibel meters and there are ways of making sure that noise and parking are enforced and we need to talk about that. Brent said he appreciates Ryan's comment and one of the things that is talked about in the memo is this notion that if you issue a permit you have responsibility to manage your property responsibly. By giving your neighbors your phone number and there are issues and they continue, there is no reason why hosts shouldn't be penalized up to revocation of the permit. There is nothing wrong with having that conversation. He said to him, if you have an out of town host or someone who goes away for the winter, then you make it incumbent upon them that there be somebody identified locally that keeps an eye on the property and takes that seriously. He didn't think the property owner necessarily has to be the person to respond if you have a responsible party available that responds and is accessible. Brent said instead of the number of nights, to him, it is irrelevant. You sign a lease with somebody for 9 months and they turn out to be a bad actor, you are stuck with them for 9 months. The number of nights question is moot, to him it is about responsible hosting and having mechanisms where neighbors who have concerns can have them addressed immediately and effectively. Mia said she has been making notes and ran through them; definitely enforcement is a big concern and shouldn't rely on the neighbors because it has been really bad as far as relationships go; the 3% tax — she doesn't see where any of that has come back to residents of the Town to offset their taxes because it is her understanding is that that goes to Tompkins County to promote tourism so that is different and not what they are talking about; Cayuga Heights put a lot of time and thought into it and it seems 14 for USTR and 24 for HSTR is working really well for them so she thought that seems like it would be a good starting point because as Mike said, we can always add later but it is hard to take away; Anthony's point about guests being vetted by ABB — we have heard that from some of the hosts in our neighborhood but we have still had big problems with those people so that isn't foolproof; if an area isn't amenable to some of these restrictions that are already suggested in the code like parking since in our neighborhood it is a real issue ... what are we supposed to do? STR Special Committee Meeting April 3, 2019 Pg. 11 Knock on the door and ask if that is the renters' car and they can say no it's someone visiting etc.; if the neighborhood topography isn't amenable to this, that should be a strong indication for an overlay, the one size fits all doesn't work in this; as for variances, as Rich said, if we do one for one neighborhood then everyone will want one and the same thing may happen with a variance process you're saying the number of nights doesn't matter as long as you have responsible guests but it's not just the noise and the parking and parties, it is that our sense of community really suffers when you have different people staying and you have no idea who the people are staying every weekend next to you or across from you; people playing in the streets or walking big dogs through your yard, it really suffers; as Mike said, this is not what the Comprehensive Plan intends for medium zoned residential neighborhoods. It is very clear in that Plan that they did not intend for STR to be operating alongside residences. Mike wanted to say that this has been invaluable and he thought the town has a good start on the law and he thinks the enforcement is key and an appeal process should be in there to make it easy for someone with 10 acres to ask for a variance. He thought the town should start off slow like Cayuga Heights did and then if it works out you expand the number but let the appeal process turn on that. Bill then said there is 20 minutes left and we have talked a lot about the limit and enforcement, and he wanted to talk about the overlay question a bit. He asked if there are folks at the table who would like to speak to that. Kenny said there is already overlays and exceptions established to this rule — Lakefront, Agriculture, Cayuga Heights... you have already zoned and Cayuga Heights has an overlay that keeps them out and so if you look at the Town maps, all the areas are designated so it's not like you are going door-to-door to overmark some of these... Forest Home, Renwick Heights- they all have clear designations and all the history of how they were formed is there, the borders are there, on the maps. So creating an overlay is not a door-to-door process, it's a character of a neighborhood. You may so these are really tight in there, we might want to limit it and make it more like Cayuga Heights, this is wide open, give them more doors. He thought that was a better approach. People began talking over each other and there was a lot of confusion on the Village of Cayuga Heights which would need to be explained at another time. Anthony said he likes Mia's point about topography and maybe identifying specific characteristics of a community that might imply an overlay is appropriate. He thought that was a sound, reasonable approach that the community could bind to. He said when it comes to his neighborhood, his neighbors do not interact, we are spread apart, so there are characteristics to neighborhoods based on how they are geographically located and how the houses are situated which can really impact the community feeling. (Hanshaw) We have the walk so people come walking by but we don't have block parties and so for him, if we could come up with meaningful STR Special Committee Meeting April 3, 2019 Pg. 12 rationale for identifying.... and the list could grow ... as well as the idea of a variance which seems like a reasonable compromise. Someone asked about the Lakefront and if that was an overlay and Bill responded that Lakefront Residential is it's own zone. An overlay is something that might be different within its own zone, for example, all medium density residential within the Town is treated the same and all Lakefront Residential is treated the same with their own chapter in the Code and regulations but an overlay would be within a certain zone and you would treat that little area differently within the zone. Brent said related to overlays/zones, this is new and he wanted to hear from the Committee because the latest draft suggests that residential co-ops and condos will also be exempt as well as multiple dwelling units and he didn't know what that meant. Bill responded that that was added because of discussions from the Rental Registry Law that was adopted and how that would relate to co-ops and condos and we are having to change that law so I put it in here so we address it at the beginning and not have to change it. Bruce explained that most of the co-ops such as EcoVillage, have their own regulating authority within their group so if they have a problem with one particular tenant, the group is going to control and address that where an individual person with a singular residence, that control mechanism isn't there; if the owner doesn't take control there is no one to go to where with co- ops there is an outside control of a Board or some other mechanism. Bill added that multiple dwelling units are addressed by NYS law which has outlawed STRs in those types of dwelling so they are exempt from ours because the State already bans it. The suggestion was made to reference the NYS law to avoid this confusion. Bill asked if there were any more comments on overlays and there were not so he turned to enforcement. We have talked about enforcement with number of days and three strikes you're out and the current draft says if you are convicted of a violation you are fined and possible revocation of your license, but are there any other thoughts on enforcement? Kenny asked how the Town is going to know how many days are being rented. Bill responded that the current draft says it has to be reported to Codes and we are exploring electronic ways to do that or you have to keep a log book, which is how Cayuga Heights is doing it. That is the current draft, but we are open to ideas. Anthony said for example, Paris(?) partners with ABB and limits the number of days that can be booked so there are these reasonable facile opportunities to collaborate with — Kenny brought up the other online platforms — Anthony — sure, but there are start ups that aggregate that information and make it available — somebody — for a LOT of money.... STR Special Committee Meeting April 3, 2019 Pg. 13 Anthony said we are keen to make sure that our communities are maintained in a way that is appropriate and beneficial for all of us. All of the owners that we have met with are in favor of enforceable regulations and we are interested in cooperating with the Town. We already pay hotel taxes and sales taxes so we feel good regulation is going to benefit everyone and grateful for the opportunity to have our voices heard tonight. Brent said he just wanted to make sure before the night wraps up that we do not lose sight of the question of primary residence status. He thinks that is going to be important for hosts like Alexa and Anthony and that is a category that we should continue to discuss because he wasn't sure that is necessary to have effective legislation. Alexa said she thought the limit on how many each person could have might actually help this because even though she doesn't live at her property and she doesn't have neighbors, if she did have neighbors, they would know her. She asked if that is what has happened in Renwick Heights, a person buying multiple. Participant — I will tell you what happened in front of my house — an owner who left Ithaca and lived in Albany and did ABB and because they were not there, they hired somebody who is not a professional in town and actually manages 3 ABB properties for absentee owners, and they posted the house with too many guests possible and it was a perfect profile; a woman who had a very good profile, but it turned out it was her son who rented it and had a fraternity party with beer pong, peeing from the porch and everything. So they had lied and the ABB ad said no party but we had about 30 cars, so it was a nightmare. She said she knows it might not be representative of those here, but when you draft legislation you have to think about protecting against this and what surprised her the most was that these absentee hosts had been approached by an intermediary and we didn't want to call the police because we knew the owners and I called them and sent them a picture and they had no clue. The woman who was managing was not there that weekend and her brother came but they couldn't abate the party. She said she knows it is the horror story, but there are people who are doing this really as a business business and there are intermediaries in town that are doing this who are not even licensed. Alexis said she would be horrified if she were the host and would be willing to pay a fine that could go back to the community because that is horrible. Kenny said that is a point we haven't touched on, the pseudo hosted property where someone who is a relative of the owner stays there intermittently and the owner has it registered as their primary residence even though they live miles away, and it all looks fine on paper but it's not. There are two pseudo hosted in our neighborhood. Bill thanked everyone for participating and went around the other attendees not at the table to say something if they wanted. STR Special Committee Meeting April 3, 2019 Pg. 14 Carolyn said she is in favor of the legislation and registration and fines and permitting but wanted to mention that legally, when you get down to the nitty gritty and think about revoking someone's license, there should be some sort of due process provisions because there might be a situation where there is just neighbor -to -neighbor animosity and she wouldn't want to have a host to not have some mechanism to challenge whatever complaints are being lodged in their direction. Fay Coakley — said she is an ABB host who lives in Renwick Heights. She has talked with a number of the neighbors here and she does know one of the problem properties is not ABB or STR at all but the owner's son who lives there who is having friends over and partying and creating a lot of these problems. To Brent's point, she does not agree with 14 nights, 24 nights, 49 nights because there are a lot of people who live in their property 6 months a year, 9 months a year and are snow birds who go south in the winter of go down to the City to work for half a year. She said she has a handful of clients that live in downtown Ithaca and Cayuga Heights who have those situations where they are able to keep a home in Ithaca and NYC or Florida because of that opportunity to STR. So limiting it to 14, 29 nights, would probably prohibit them from keeping their house in Ithaca so she is a proponent of somewhere between 90-120 nights. She said she has been an ABB host since 2015 and she has always been in that range, year after year. Fay said she would like to pursue more the rules, if there is a noise or parking complaint, who do those complaints go to and not have neighbors have to call but filing a complaint to someone through the town where that property gets fined as many times as it takes and then that property gets fined or loses their permit. Or some kind of mediation where it can be worked out. She said that all of the hosts that she knows are super hosts and very responsible and we protect our property, she thinks, more than the typical homeowner because we are making our living off of this. Norma thanked the Committee for this opportunity and she agrees with the concept of overlays. Jim Lane — said his situation is similar to Anthony in that I purchased the house next door to mine because I wanted to regulate who lived there and the house was in disrepair and we totally remodeled it. He said his reason for doing it was to give his parents a place to stay when they come back from Florida in the summer to see their grandchildren. He said he owns many long- term rentals and he would never buy properties to just do ABB because it would not be lucrative. It is a lot of work, and as an investor, he just wouldn't do it. He said he just doesn't see people doing that and he is also a realtor and doesn't see clients doing that. Jim said it sounds like there are a few bad apples out there that caused this problem and he would like to see us not penalize the masses and ease into this. He said he doesn't have a problem with having a permit and if there are issues you get penalized and maybe lose it but he didn't think it was right to penalize everyone and have to get a variance but instead work the other way around it and address the issues that occur. STR Special Committee Meeting April 3, 2019 Pg. 15 Unknown — She said her parents rent on ABB occasionally and she thought there were between 3-5 neighbors in Eastern Heights and we all take turns helping and greeting the guests etc and it has lead to more interaction between neighbors now more than ever. She said she is a millennial and we are really into not buying houses and into the shared economy. She said the few friends she has in their late 20's who have bought houses have been able to because they have been able to have some supplemental income; some security. She said it's an investment and the way the economy is going and it's the way her generation is going to want things to work and there has to be some kind of appreciation that that is the way things are trending. She said she agrees that there should be a way to opt people out like the bad apples and not be afraid to call the police when someone is peeing off the porch regardless of who it is. She also said as far as taxes, she has no idea how this is going to be administered and who is going to pay for it and it seems to make way more sense to have an opt out rather than a huge overarching thing. Bill thanked everyone for the respectful conversation and the Committee will report to the full Town Board. STR Special Committee Meeting April 3, 2019 Pg. 16 TOWN OF ITHACA LOCAL LAW NO. OF THE YEAR 2019 A LOCAL LAW ADDING SHORT-TERM RENTAL PROVISIONS TO CHAPTER 270, ZONING, OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE Be it enacted by the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca as follows: Section 1. Chapter 270 (Zoning), Article III (Terminology) of the Town of Ithaca Code, Section 270-5, titled "Definitions," is amended by adding the following definitions: SHORT-TERM RENTAL USE -- The rental of a dwelling unit, or portion thereof, for a term of less than 30 consecutive days. HOSTED SHORT-TERM RENTAL USE -- A short-term rental use where the owner lives and sleeps in the rented unit, or in another dwelling unit on the same or an adjacent tax parcel, throughout the short-term renter's stay. UNHOSTED SHORT-TERM RENTAL USE -- A short-term rental use where the owner does not live and sleep in the rented unit, or in another dwelling unit on the same or an adjacent tax parcel, throughout the short-term renter's stay. Section 2. Chapter 270 (Zoning), Article VIII (Low Density Residential Zones) of the Town of Ithaca Code, Section 270-56, titled "Permitted accessory buildings and uses," is amended by adding a subsection N reading as follows: "N. Short-term rental uses, subject to the limitations on short-term rental uses set forth in § 270-219.7." [Repeat for all other zones where this use is allowed— MDR, HDR, Lakefront Residential, Agricultural, Conservation.] Section . Chapter 270 (Zoning), Article XXVI (Special Regulations) of the Town of Ithaca Code, is amended by adding Section 270-219.7, titled "Short-term rental uses" and reading as follows: "§ 270-219.7 Short-term rental uses. A. Applicability. This section applies to all short-term rental uses except: (1) Rentals of dwelling units that are owned by cooperative corporations and subject to proprietary leases under the Cooperative Corporations Law. (2) House sitting arrangements where a house sitter occupies an owner's principal residence while the owner is away, the house sitter provides security, maintenance and/or pet care, and the house sitter pays no money or other financial consideration to the owner in exchange for the occupancy. For the purposes of this § 270-219.7, the ownership and minimum residency requirements in subsection C below must be met for a dwelling unit to be considered an owner's principal residence. B. Except as prohibited by the New York Multiple Dwelling Law, a short-term rental use is permitted, subject to this section's provisions, in a principal dwelling unit or an accessory dwelling unit in all zoning districts that allow a short-term rental use as a permitted accessory use. C. Short-term rental uses may occur only in a dwelling unit that is the principal residence of at least one of the property owners, in another dwelling unit on the same tax parcel, or in a dwelling unit on an adjacent tax parcel that is owned by the same owner(s). No other owner(s), collectively or individually, shall own a larger percentage of the tax parcel(s) than the owner-occupant(s), who must reside in the principal residence for a minimum of 185 days per year. D. Hosted short-term rental uses. There is no limit on the number of days per year that a dwelling unit may be used for a hosted short-term rental use. No unit rented for a hosted short-term rental use shall be rented for the accommodation of more individuals (including hosts) than two times the number of legal bedrooms in such unit. E. Unhosted short-term rental uses. The following requirements apply to unhosted short-term rental uses: [STR Committee will decide whether all requirements for unhosted rental uses will also apply to hosted rental uses, with the only difference being the number of days allowed for short-term rental uses.] (1) Operating permit required. (a) Each dwelling unit used for an unhosted short term rental use shall require a valid operating permit issued pursuant to Town of Ithaca Code Chapter 125 (Building Construction and Fire Prevention), § 125-8. Each such dwelling unit must have its own operating permit, even if more than one such dwelling unit is on the same tax parcel. Before the expiration or renewal of the operating permit, it shall be the responsibility of the owner of such unit to schedule an inspection with the Town of Ithaca Code Enforcement Department in order to obtain a new or renewed permit. (b) Owners of dwelling units used or to be used for unhosted short-term rental uses after July 15, 2020, must apply for and obtain operating permits prior to offering or renting such units after July 15, 2020 for unhosted short-term rental uses. After an operating permit is obtained, it must be maintained 2 throughout the period that such unit is offered or rented for an unhosted short- term rental use. (c) The Code Enforcement Department shall issue an operating permit upon verification by inspection that the items listed in Subsection (1) through (13) below meet the requirements of the applicable New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code and the items listed in Subsection (14) and (15) below meet the requirements of the Town of Ithaca Code: (1) 911 address number properly posted (with each unit posted); (2) Exterior structure in good repair; (3) Entrances, access areas, parking spaces and similar areas in good repair; (4) Receptacles for proper storage of garbage; (5) Compliant pools and decks (if present); (6) Working smoke and carbon monoxide detectors; (7) Interior structure in good repair; (8) Fire separation (where required); (9) Electrical, plumbing and heating in good repair; (10) Appliances in good repair (if supplied by landlord); (11) Proper light and ventilation; (12) Proper room sizes; (13) Proper egress doors or windows; (14) Compliant off-street parking, per § 270-227 and this section; (15) Exterior property areas do not violate Town of Ithaca Code Chapter 205 (Property Maintenance). (d) A Code Enforcement Officer shall seek a search warrant from a court of competent jurisdiction whenever the owner, managing agent or occupant fails to allow inspections of any premises believed to be subject to this section and where there is a reasonable cause to believe that there is a violation of this chapter, Town of Ithaca Code Chapter 205 (Property Maintenance), or the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code. (e) Failure of an owner of any unit that is required to have an operating permit to apply for an operating permit in a timely manner, to obtain an operating permit after inspection, or to maintain a valid operating permit after it is granted throughout the period that such unit is offered or rented for an unhosted short-term rental use, shall be deemed a violation of this section. (f) Over -occupancy. Verified over -occupancy shall constitute a violation of the operating permit. (2) Additional unhosted short-term rental use requirements. (a) Unless allowed a greater number of days below, no unit shall be rented for an unhosted short-term rental use for more than 29 days in any calendar year. If an owner offers more than one unit for unhosted short-term rental use on a parcel and/or adjacent parcel, the total number of days in any calendar year that all units on the parcel(s) may be rented for unhosted short-term rental uses shall not in the aggregate exceed 29. This limitation of 29 days shall not apply to any written rental agreement that existed as of the effective date of this section, provided that the rental concludes within six months of this section's effective date. For the purposes of this section , each of the following shall count as one day: (1) a rental of 24 hours (2) a rental of less than 24 hours that includes an overnight stay (3) a rental of less than 24 hours that does not include an overnight stay (b) The owner of any unit rented for an unhosted short-term rental use shall provide enough driveway parking spaces on the parcel containing such unit so that all vehicles belonging to the short-term renters are parked on -site. Such vehicles may not park on the street. (c) No unit shall be subject to more than one unhosted short-term rental agreement at any one time, and if the owner offers more than one unit on a parcel and/or adjacent parcel, only one unit may be rented for an unhosted short-term rental use at any one time. (d) No unit rented for an unhosted short-term rental use shall be rented for the accommodation of more individuals than two times the number of legal bedrooms in such unit. (e) All units rented for unhosted short-term rental uses shall have prominently posted in all bedrooms in such unit a notice in a form approved by the Code Enforcement Department containing safety and legal compliance information including, but not limited to, the following: location of the nearest exit in case of a fire; limitations contained in the Town's laws regarding unhosted short- term rental uses and noise; and cell phone numbers of the owner and any manager, if there is one. (f) An owner of a unit that satisfies at least one of the following criteria may rent such unit for unhosted short-term rental uses for up to 90 days in the aggregate (cumulative for all units on the parcel that meet the criteria and on an adjacent parcel) in any calendar year: 0 (1) A unit that is (a) located in a Low Density Residential or Medium Density Residential Zone on a parcel that is larger than three acres, and (b) located more than forty feet from the side property lines. (2) A unit that is located in a Low Density Residential or Medium Density Residential Zone on a parcel that is not adjacent to any parcels that contain a dwelling. (g) Collection of rental information and actions to address complaints. (1) Every time an owner rents a unit for an unhosted short-term rental use, prior to the beginning of the rental stay, the owner shall notify the Code Enforcement Department of the dates of the rental agreement by electronic methods established by such Department. (2) Local contact person. Owners shall provide the Code Enforcement Department, all short-term renters and all occupants of adjacent properties with the name and contact information of a local individual who shall be available twenty-four (24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week, during the term of the unhosted stay. Once this notification is given to the Code Enforcement Department and adjacent property occupants, it does not need to be given to them again until the name and/or contact information changes. The owner or designated local contact person shall: (i) Respond on -site within sixty (60) minutes to complaints regarding a condition or operation of the short-term rental use or the conduct of the renters; and (ii) Take remedial action to resolve any and all complaints." Section . In the event that any portion of this law is declared invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the validity of the remaining portions shall not be affected by such declaration of invalidity. Section . This local law shall take effect on January 1, 2020. To: Short Term Rental Committee and Town of Ithaca Board Members From: Carolyn Greenwald and Brent Katzmann Date: January 23, 2019 Re: Alternatives to proposed USTR draft As we understand it, the primary concerns created by USTR that the Committee wants to address include: 1. neighbor noise and parking complaints, 2. concerns raised by neighbors in the Renwick Heights and Forest Home neighborhoods about strangers coming into their neighborhood, and 3. adverse impact on available affordable housing stock. USTR hosts in the Town of Ithaca recognize these concerns and agree that should be adequately addressed while weighing them against the value of USTR to the Town and its residents. This memorandum is the result of a recent meeting of over 20 local hosts. An USTR plan that makes guests feel welcome and wanted is in character with the reputation of Ithaca as open community welcome to outsiders and visiting families. USTR assists home owners by providing revenue which may be used for maintenance, property taxes and other costs. Tourists spend additional money in the Town of benefit to the entire community. It is our belief that the current legislation is highly restrictive without justification since less restrictive methods have not been tried. The Town has not commissioned a study to determine the negative impacts of USTR legislation. As such, the prudent approach is to begin with the least restrictive legislation that addresses the known problems without unnecessarily burdening the current USTR hosts, including those who have come to rely on their USTR income to maintain the affordability of living in the Town of Ithaca and those with a long track record of operating without adverse impact. As your constituents, Town hosts are quite concerned with the legislation as currently drafted and we respectfully request that before the draft legislation is finalized, the committee agrees to schedule an open committee meeting at which hosts and other interested parties are invited to engage in thoughtful discussion and dialogue with the committee. We believe that a discussion, rather than a brief public comment period immediately prior to Town Board vote, is the best way to promote a democratic exchange of ideas. In the meantime, here are our suggestions about addressing the concerns of USTR in a measured, incremental manner that balances neighbor concerns with host, visitor and community benefits. Issue #1: Adverse Impact on Neighbors — Noise and Parking Less restrictive oations to be included in initial legislation: • Require valid operating permit' • Fines for violations include revocation of the operating permit' • Require communication with neighbors including providing neighbors with cell phone number • Owner must provide enough off-street parking so that no vehicles belonging to renters are parked on the street. Maximum number of occupants per parking space is four • Maximum number of occupants per bedroom is two adults and one child • House rules must include quiet hours and guests must sign an agreement acknowledging such' Significantly more restrictive oations to be considered if initial regulations prove inadeauate: • Limit on number of rental days' • Cap number of permits per neighborhood' Issue #2: Residents object to strangers as guests in their neighborhood • Occupancy is limited by current zoning, e.g., single family homes may only be rented to a single family plus one unrelated person' ' In general, the host community is supportive of this option. This will provide the Town with options for policing the bad actors and will provide funds to support a healthy, well governed USTR system. Z Permit revocation is the best way of punishing the bad actors without ruining the USTR marketplace for everyone else, hosts and visitors alike. ' Communication between neighbors will eliminate a large number of problems outside of governmental intervention. 4 This simple solution is the answer to parking complaints. If a certain neighborhood continues to have parking issues related to USTR post legislation (which is unlikely) then further parking regulations including permits can be enacted. ' Guests who are notified in advance that they will be charged by the host for any fees paid by the host are likely to keep quiet hours. (The hosts are responsible for all fees to the Town but should set up mechanisms to recoup the amount from their guests either through a contract or damage deposit). 6 Although a limit on the number of days will limit the number of days neighbors are exposed to the potential of a party next door, it seems much more prudent to eliminate the likelihood of parties and loud guests all together with the above narrowly tailored solutions. Why allow a neighbor to suffer for 14 or 29 days when the legislation can be designed such that the neighbors never or rarely suffer adverse consequences? ' This option is more difficult to enact but will eliminate the problem of small areas such as a single cul-du-sac having a disproportionally high number of USTR. This option is probably not necessary if permits are limited to one per natural person. s Limiting rentals to a single family in a single family zone means that guests to a USTR are unlikely to pose a threat to neighboring properties. This limitation also limits and/or addresses noise and parking concerns. If houses are rented only to single families, there is little reason to limit the number of days rented. Issue #3: Adverse Impact on Housing Stock Less restrictive options to be included in initial legislation: Limit number of permits per person and only natural persons (no LLCs) may apply for USTR permits9 Residency restriction for permit holderslo Significantly more restrictive options to be considered if initial legislation fails to address the concern: • Limit on number of rental days to 12011 • Cap number of permits" • Require USTR hosts to rent only their primary residence13 • Limit number of rental days to 2914 We see that there are significant additional issues raised by the current legislation that we understand the committee may disagree with, but many of your constituents feel very strongly about: Issue #4: Current USTR draft may not reflect the best interest and wants of the citizenry Proposed actions: • Draft legislation with the least restrictive approach first • Commission a study on the potential impacts of the legislation15 9 Most USTR hosts rent their own home when they leave town. They may be snow birds, they may go on sabbatical, they may rent unhosted leave because USTR brings in income used to offset real estate taxes. Limiting the number of permits per person allows folks to rent their own home unhosted but eliminates the possibility that an outsider will come to town and buy available housing stock to start an USTR business. to Permit holders must reside in Tompkins County. This makes hosts available to immediately address complaints and prevents the purchase of houses solely for STIR. The Tompkins County border makes sense since all proposed new zoning ordinances and regulations are subject to county review. 11 If permits are limited to one per person, there is no reason to limit number of days to discourage investors from buying property. 120 days covers gaps between long term tenants for responsible landlords. 11 This option would require an annual lottery to distribute permits if more permits are wanted that become available in a given year. In such a system, permits should be offered for three-year periods. 11 This option will have an unnecessary and undesirable impact on long term hosts with a history of renting their non -primary residence without issue and upon landlords who are able to find tenants for the academic year which leaves a three-month vacancy. A less impactful option is to limit the number of USTR permits per person and to allow properties registered as long-term rentals to apply for an interim USTR three-month permit. 14 This limitation is unfair and overly broad. If the other safeguards are in place, this short time limit is entirely unnecessarily and will drastically reduce income to USTR hosts and area tourism. is While this involves upfront cost, it is probably less impactful economically than the current USTR draft (and, only one way to find out). Issue #5: Current draft punishes USTR hosts with a proven track record of neighborly behavior Proposed actions: • Edit draft to incorporate less restrictive alternatives suggested above • Grandfather properties that have been in operation for more than three years without neighbor complaints to the Town to continue in the same manner as before16 • Once a violation is documented, the grandfather status is revoked Issue #6: It will be an extraordinary challenge for the Town to enforce limitations on hosts unwilling to comply with regulations Proposed actions: • Limit requirements to those which are easily enforceable by the code officer (ie. the registration requirement and compliance with noise and parking limitations) • Preserve for later legislation requirements near impossible to enforce (ie. the number of nights rented by a USTR) Issue #7: It is a founding principle of our country that governmental intrusion into the homes of its citizenry is undesirable (see e.g., the V Amendment to the U.S. Constitution) Proposed action: • Adopt narrowly tailored regulations targeted to address concerns without government overreach and unnecessary impingement on the rights of home owners. Respectfully submitted, Carolyn Greenwald and Brent Katzmann 11 Production of records of Room Tax can be used to prove length of time as a USTR. From: Bill Goodman Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 10:34 PM To: Eric Levine; Pam Bleiwas; Pat Leary; Rich DePaolo; Rod Howe; TeeAnn Hunter Cc: Paulette Rosa Subject: FW: local Airbnb regulation From: Maralyn Edid [mailto:mse421@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2019 9:20 PM To: Bill Goodman Subject: local Airbnb regulation Bill, see below for actions recently taken in Washington DC to regulate Airbnb. it is worth emphasizing to all deciders in the Town of Ithaca that other communities are wrestling with this issue and making choices that preserve neighborhoods and housing options for residents. would you kindly distribute to all Town Board members. thank you. respectfully, Maralyn Edid 22 Renwick Heights Rd. In case you missed it, the new D.C. short-term rental ordinance, that was unanimously passed by the D.C. City Council last year to implement major short-term rental protections to safeguard housing and neighborhoods, moves forward after the mayor decided this week to let the ordinance become law. The bill will protect permanent D.C. housing by preventing outside commercial investors from buying up properties across the city and converting them into short-term rentals like Airbnbs. It's Time, D.C., a coalition of local community groups, civic organizations, labor leaders and residents, are launching an ad today thanking the city council for passing this ordinance to protect the city's affordable housing stock and permanent residents. Kelly Sweeney McShane, president and CEO of Community of Hope in D.C., voiced her support of the recently passed bill, saying, "Protecting affordable housing options in D.C. is vital to our efforts in ending homelessness and helping low-income families find a stable, affordable home. We praise the city council for pushing this important issue forward to not only safeguard housing for the families we serve in D.C., but also relieve the pressure short-term rentals cause on the cost of housing citywide." D.C. is the latest in a string of major U.S. cities to pass short-term rental regulation, joining Los Angeles, Boston, San Francisco and New York City, all of which passed similar bills in 2018. "Chairman Mendelson and Councilman McDuffie should be commended for putting forward a common-sense ordinance that protects true home -sharing, while cracking down on commercial investors buying up residential homes to rent on Airbnb," said Graylin Presbury, President of the D.C. Federation of Civic Associations said about the ordinance. "Our group applauds the entire city council for passing this ordinance unanimously to protect our neighborhoods and housing options." We want to thank the city councilmembers, vocal community leaders and residents in D.C. who worked tirelessly to pass this vital legislation that will protect housing options for permanent city residents and safeguard our neighborhoods.