Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTillou Susan - In FavorFrom: Orange Ci ty STRs <ora ng ecitys tr@gmai l.com> S ent: Sunday, Augus t 16, 2020 8:03 PM To : PC publiccomment S u b ject: UPDATED Public C omment Item #3.2 Attac h men t s: Re: Outline of Draft STR Ordinance.eml Please see slightly edited text to comply with the 3 min time limit. Thanks! ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Orange City STR s <orangecitystr@gmail.com> Date: Sun, Aug 16, 2020 at 4:59 PM Subject: Public Comment Item #3.2 To: <PCpubliccomment@cityoforange.org> Chair Simpso n and Members of t he Cit y of Oran ge P lanning Commission, My name is Susan T illou and I’ve been an Oran ge resident my ent ire life, at t ending P eralt a Junior High, Villa P ark High, and undergrad at t he Universit y o f California. My family are original o wners of our No rt h Orange home sin ce t he development was built in 1976 . In t he p ast 8-9 mont hs, I’ve worked closely wit h approximat ely 20 Orange Cit y ST R homeowners t o st ay engaged on t his init iat ive. T rue t o t h e American way, we are all peo p le leveraging innovat ion, an ent repreneurial spirit and our biggest personal asset s t o drive side businesses. We are not corporat ions or invest ors from out side o f Orange. We are resident s who love t he cit y, our homes, and our neighborhoods. In some cases, we are t rying t o hold on t o our family home, h elp pay a mort gage, hoping t o make addit ional income. All of us enjoy sharing our homes (and cit y) wit h visit ing couples, friends and families. We also feel st rongly against ‘bad act ors’ and join t he cit y in a desire t o defend our own homes and n eighborhoods. We’ve been act ive at Cit y Council Meet ings since Jan 2020 and t h e Cit y St aff has allowed us t o feed comment s int o t he draft ing p rocess. We are commit t ed t o collaborat e and creat e a cit y ordinance t hat serves bot h sides and provides a model for ot her cit ies around t he st at e and count ry. We most recent ly reviewed and p rovided det ailed co mment s on t he draft o rdinance under discussion t his even in g. Pl e as e s e e a ttach e d e m ai l for you r re fe re n ce . Highlight s of our recommendat io ns include: S e c 5.94.060 Move from 30 min t o 60 min propert y man ager response t ime and remove t he need t o be ‘physically’ present Mak e signat ure (elect ronic OK) for Rules & Rest rict ions wit h primary rent al guest sufficient . W e are not comfort able requiring minors aged 14-17 year old t o sign. Include st reet park in g direct ly in front of ST R propert y S e c 5.94.070 Remo ve Sect ion B.1.d. as it 's t oo open -en ded Aut omat e and begin T OT collect ion t h rough ST R plat forms. (Not e: Airbnb curren t ly collect s an d remit s T OT from more t han 20 count ies and 50 cit ies wit hin t he St at e o f California, even man y where ST R o rdin ances are not yet in place.) S e c 5.94.080 We recommend t h e cit y reach out direct ly t o key ST R plat forms (Airbnb, VRBO) t o review and p rovide feedback I and t he group remain ready t o assist as t he P lan n in g Commission rev iews t his ordinan ce. T hank for you t ime and considerat ion Susan T illou From: Orange Ci ty STRs <ora ng ecitys tr@gmai l.com> S ent: Thurs day, Aug us t 6, 2020 12:54 AM To : Aaron Schulze Cc: Mary Binning ; Anna Pehous hek; Chip Monaco; mark@markamurphy.com; councilinfo S u b ject: Re: O utline of Draft STR Ordinance Hi Aaron. Happy August! Thanks for your patience as the Orange STR homeowners reviewed the draft. We have also reached out to Airbnb as Section 5.94.080 has requirements that directly relate to them and similar platforms, however we have not yet had a response. Firstly, we would like to thank the Orange C ity C ouncil members and staff for: 1. Your time and effort 2. Accepting Airbnb’s $1 million liability insurance 3. Including whole/shared home allowance, ADUs and other permitted dwellings 4. Grandfathering the existing STR businesses Overall, the proposed STR ordinance you shared by email looks reasonable. The Orange STR homeowner group would urge the C ouncil to: 1. Align with other city ordinances and remove response time as an infraction, change response time to 60 min by phone, 120 min in-person with ‘reasonable consideration' (e.g. no response time limitation for non-urgent neighbor questions during quiet hours); also add property manager ‘or designee’ to ensure maximum response flexibility 2. Remove 5.94.070.B.1.d as it’s too open-ended. Amendments can be made later. 3. Provide STR indemnification for max occupancy and criminal activity. That is, Orange STR homeowners can assign fine(s) to occupants for these infringements. 4. Review requirement of minors to sign House Rules or any other binding consent document. C an we simply require primary renter to sign House Rules with electronic consent being OK (esp with C OVID concerns)? 5. C larify parking requirements to include street parking in front of STR property 6. Make quiet hours 10pm – 7am 7. Allow for automated, direct C ity TOT collection from Airbnb and other platforms. (We requested this of Airbnb in the Spring and can ask if this is now available.) 8. Add ‘with probable cause’ to authority granted for inspection as the group have serious concerns about government overreach vis-a-vis the 4th Amendment 9. Wait for Airbnb’s response to Section 5.94.080. The Orange STR group is especially concerned about transferability of liability if platform(s) don’t comply. We also had questions for the C ouncil: 1. The 300 permit cap seems arbitrary and could result in a sub-par rental getting a permit and precluding a sterling rental. Would a higher cap provide more TOT, sales tax revenue and greater local business opportunities, including for STRs? 2. Per Section 5.94.010 (Definitions), Section 5.94.040 (Application for Permit) and Section V (Section 17.04.038 Muni C ode ‘Definition S’ amendment), hotels, motels and B&Bs are exempt from the STR definition. Why? Don't they have <30 day rentals, need to obtain a business license, permit and pay TOT taxes as well? 3. Section 5.94.020 (Purpose) - why is 'public drug use' listed? If drugs are used away from the home, why does this relate to Orange STR homeowner liability? 4. C an we know what the TOT tax rate will be? And business license fees? C an this be disclosed before approving the resolution? 5. Most importantly, given the STR homeowner group’s concern over transferable liability in Section 5.94.080 and the short timeframe we were provided to review the draft ordinance, can we appeal to postpone until we have feedback from Airbnb and maybe other platforms (VRBO, etc)? Alternatively, or maybe in tandem, we’d like to consider an indemnification in case of STR Platforms’ inability (or unwillingness) to comply. I’ll plan to join next Tuesday and encourage the others to do the same in case there is an STR discussion. However, we would appreciate confirmation of date of a public (even if online) discussion, especially in relation to question 5 above. Thanks again for all of your help Aaron. Susan On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 2:15 PM Aaron Schulze <aschulze@cityoforange.org> wrote: Hi Susan, My fami l y and I are doi ng we l l and I hope that you are too. You have gre at ti mi ng as we have j ust de ci de d to take the draf t short te rm re ntal ordi nance to Pl anni ng Commi ssi on on Monday , A ugust 17th . We had hope d that w e coul d take thi s i te m to a me e ti ng that al l ow s i n-pe rson publ i c comme nts how e v e r, si nce that i s not happe ni ng anyti me soon w e re al i ze d that the re w as no ne e d to w ai t any l onge r. I have attache d a copy of the draf t ordi nance for your re vi e w . A l though w e cannot have i n-pe rson comme nts, we hope that y our group w i l l provi de comme nts on the draf t ordi nance so that the Pl anni ng Commi ssi on can tak e y our pe rspe cti v e i nto account w he n consi de ri ng i t. The P l anni ng Commi ssi on w i l l make a re comme ndati on to the Ci ty Counci l and the Ci ty Counci l (most l i ke l y on Se pte mbe r 8th ) w i l l make the f i nal de ci si on on any modi f i cati ons to the ordi nance and ul ti mate l y whe the r to adopt i t. Pl e ase l e t me know i f you have any que sti ons about the draft ordi nance . Thanks, Aaro n Schulz e Senio r Adm inistrative Analyst C ity o f O range (7 1 4 ) 7 4 4 -2 2 0 2 w w w .cityo fo range.o rg From: Orange Ci ty STRs <orange ci ty str@gmai l .com> Se nt: Saturday, Jul y 25, 2020 11:37 A M To: A aron Schul ze <aschul ze @ci tyof orange .org> Cc: Mary Bi nni ng <mbi nni ng@ci tyof orange .org>; A nna Pe houshe k <ape houshe k @ci tyof orange .org>; Chi p Monaco <Counci l manMonaco@gmai l .com>; mark @markamurphy.com; counci l i nf o <counci l i nfo@ci tyof orange .org> Subje ct: Re : Outl i ne of Draf t STR Ordi nance Hi Aaron. Hope this finds you and your family safe and well. Can you please provide any update on progress with the Planning Commission and if/how Orange STR homeowners can be of assistance? Thanks and best regards Susan Tillou On Thu, Mar 26, 2020, 7:32 AM Aaron Schulze <aschulze@cityoforange.org> wrote: Hi Susan, Thanks so much for the update. We were working on getting the ordinance to Planning Commission for its April 6th meeting, but with the Covid-19 virus we are holding off for at least a few weeks. O nce we have a better idea on the timing then I will update you. Thanks so much for your patience. Sincerely, Aaron Schul z e Seni or Admi ni s t ra t i ve Ana l ys t Ci t y of Ora nge (714) 744-2202 www.ci t yoforange .org From: O range City STRs Se nt: Wednesday, March 18, 2020 6:56 PM To: Aaron Schulze Cc: Mary Binning; Anna Pehoushek; Chip Monaco; mark@markamurphy.com; councilinfo Subje ct: Re: Outline of Draft STR Ordinance Hi Aaron. Hope this email finds you safe and healthy in this unprecedented time for all. Wanted to keep you pos ted on the Orange City STR homeowners (virtual) meeting held this past Monday, Mar 16. As promised, we are providing more feedback on the specific points in your outline so you have input before sending draft ordinanc e to the Planning commission. (Is the April 6 still your target date given other health and public safety priorities the City is currently facing?) Below is the group’s aggregated feedback with some additional questions for you and the City Manager. We're also c opying the City Council to ensure visibility on detail we are discussing to the outline Counc ilmember Monaco shared at the Feb 11 meeting. -- Occupa ncy – Yes, that means that a 3BR house would have a max of 8 people Thank s for the clarification. The group questioned why Orange would be more stric t than Anaheim which has a 3 + 2 per BR formula. W e raise this as oftentimes families with children (especially for Disneyland visits) bring – or we provide – cribs or pack & plays in a living or bed room, and this raises the number of ‘people’ (of any age) in a house. Is the City Manager OK with 3 + 2 per BR? Ma x # Pe rmits – This was specific ally requested by the City Council at the meeting which is why we are including it in the proposed ordinance. Our overall preference is for no max on # of permits, but at minimum, our request would be for 150 to be the Max # of New Permits (above and beyond the current STRs that are grandfathered). Spa cing Re quireme nt – This was als o direction from the City Council. Staff would recommend that existing STRs be grandfathered in so that the spacing requirement would only apply to properties going forward. Linked to Max # of New Permits, again our preference is for no spacing requirement, but we are OK with 300ft if impos ed only on new STR licenses and current STRs are grandfathered in. Prope rty Ma na ger Re sponse Time – The Council directed us to include a requirement for a property manager that is located in town and could respond quickly. Our interpretation of that is that it would not take someone based in Orange more than 20 minutes to respond to a property loc ated in the City. This item was the source of big debate. Our STR homeowner group is fully aligned with the City in wanting homeowners to take first responsibility for mediating any issues before the city is called, in the case of non-life and death emergenc ies. However, 20 mins on-site was unequivocally rejected. Not least that it is more stringent than Anaheim which has the most restrictive response time we can see (45 mins), but to be in-person stringent than Anaheim which has the most restrictive response time we can see (45 mins), but to be in-person within 20 mins is not even possible when crossing from one side of Orange to another during rush hour – and what if the property owner/manager is in a work meeting or a movie and doesn’t see the message immediately? Do the police guarantee response to calls within 20 mins? Our strong recommendation would be for the property owner/manager to respond (whether that be messaging/c alling the home guests or going in person) within an hour. Again, our goal is to have the property owners mediate any non-emergency issues to avoid a draw on city resources. Our only as k is that we be practical about what really is feas ible. Good Ne ighbor Policy - Is the City OK with having emergency c ontact information posted and other guidance and hous e rules to be ‘made available at the property ?’ Rationale: many of us have info books for guests where we share recommended restaurants , places to shop, visit, etc and the house rules are made available here and in an online resource. Guests agree to rules when they sign and book, so the res ource is an additional reference. Posting emergency numbers in an acces sible place makes sense. Fine s – W e are still figuring this out and I can get bac k to you with more info in a few weeks. Can you provide any more detail on fines that have been discussed? For ‘3 Strikes , You’re Out,’ what are the strik es? W ill be a differentiation between minor and major infractions? 2 Night Minimum Sta y – As with many of these provis ions, enforcement would be mostly complaint based and so we would only look to enforce it when there is a problem property. Understood. Our group dis cus sed this in detail. W e understand the 1 night allowance can be used by gues ts for parties, which we all seek to avoid. We came up with what we thought was a creative solution: Is the City open to a 1 night minimum for owner- occupied and 2 night minimum for whole house rentals ? Busine ss Lice nse /TOT – By making STRs a legal business, they would then be required to get a business license and pay trans ient occupancy tax (since they are renting for periods of fewer than 30 days). The revenue generated from thes e taxes would be us ed to offset the costs of administering the STR program as well as Code Enforcement and Police costs of res ponding to problem properties. It is hard for us to justify to our res idents diverting funding from police/fire/parks /libraries to manage STRs, so having a dedic ated funding source for this program just makes sense to us. We agree that a standard business license makes s ense given the TOT will more than cover above administrative, code enforcement and any police costs . We only wis h to clarify that TOT will be grandfathered for current bookings, that is cases where guests have pre-booked or pre-payed for a s tay before the code is in effect. Can you please let us know if this is OK? La nd Use Ma trix – Yes, this would add STRs as an approved use in all zones that allow residential including R-1. Thank you for c onfirming. Reve nue Estima te – W e are still working on estimating revenue from this program as well as what we think it will c ost the city in staff time and other resources. I can get you an update on that is a few weeks as well. Sounds good. Pleas e k eep us posted. -- Together with the 20+ other Orange STR homeowners, we are very happy to further ideate on above points by email before you share a draft with the Planning Commission. Aaron, one quick ques tion for you regarding our in-person meeting next week: Given State guidance that we not gather in groups – and given I just returned from Europe last Thursday and am self-quarantining - would you like to convert our meeting to ‘virtual F2F’ or maybe by phone? Thank s again for your help and for allowing Orange STR small business/homeowners to input guidanc e for the code with you and the City. Sus an O n Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 8:56 AM Aaron Schulze <aschulze@cityoforange.org> wrote: Hi Susan, Thanks so much for your feedback and questions and keeping us up to date with your group. We do not have any further information at this time other than that we are in the process of drafting the ordinance with a goal of getting it to Planning Commission for consideration at their meeting on April 6th . Here are my responses to your questions regarding the ordinance outline: Occupancy – Yes, that means that a 3BR house would have a max of 8 people M ax # Pe rmits – This was specifically requested by the City Council at the meeting which is why we are including it in the proposed ordinance. Spacing Re quire me nt – This was also direction from the City Council. Staff would recommend that existing STRs be grandfathered in so that the spacing requirement would only apply to properties going forward. Prope rty M anage r Re s pons e Time – The C ouncil directed us to include a requirement for a property manager that is located in town and could respond quickly. Our interpretation of that is that it would not take someone based in Orange more than 20 minutes to respond to a property located in the C ity. Fine s – We are still figuring this out and I can get back to you with more info in a few weeks. 2 Night M inimum Stay – As with many of these provisions, enforcement would be mostly complaint based and so we would only look to enforce it when there is a problem property. Bus ine s s Lice ns e /TOT – By making STRs a legal business, they would then be required to get a business license and pay transient occupancy tax (since they are renting for periods of fewer than 30 days). The revenue generated from these taxes would be used to offset the costs of administering the STR program as well as Code Enforcement and Police costs of responding to problem properties. It is hard for us to justify to our residents diverting funding from police/fire/parks/libraries to manage STRs, so having a dedicated funding source for this program just makes sense to us. Land Us e M atrix – Yes, this would add STRs as an approved use in all zones that allow residential including R-1. Re ve nue Es timate – We are still working on estimating revenue from this program as well as what we think it will cost the city in staff time and other resources. I can get you an update on that is a few weeks as well. As I mentioned above, we as staff are preparing the ordinance to match the direction that we received from the City Council. If you would like to propose something different, I would suggest that you reach out directly to Council with your proposal. That way they will have time to consider your ideas/proposals before the Council meeting when the ordinance is considered for adoption. Thanks, Aaron Schul z e Se ni or Admi ni s t rat i ve Anal ys t Ci t y of O range (714) 744-2202 www.ci t yoforange.org From: Orange City STRs Se nt: Saturday, February 29, 2020 8:50 PM To: Aaron Schulze Subje ct: Re: O utline of Draft STR O rdinance Hi Aaron. Hope this finds you well. Thank y ou again for allowing us to be a part of the process and for sharing the STR outline with us last week. We’ve had the chance to briefly disc uss with other Orange STR homeowners and have below initial feedback and questions. As mentioned when we spoke by phone last week , there is a larger meeting of Orange STR homeowners being held the evening of Mar 16 and we hope to gather more ideas to share with you after that. We will plan to do s o by email, or at least during our in-person meeting on Mar 27th. In the meantime, c ould you please let us know thoughts on our feedback below - and if by now you have any further drafting done, would you be able to share this with us for additional input as well? Thanks again, Susan — City Manager’s Offic e to work with City Attorney’s Office to prepare a zoning ordinance that will allow STRs with the following res trictions: · O c c upanc y lim it of 2 + 2 per bedroom - c an we c onfirm this m eans 2 adults per hom e + 2 for eac h bedroom available for rent? So, for exam ple, a 3 BR hom e would have 2 x 3BR + 2 = total m ax of 8 people? · Maxim um num ber of 150 perm its c itywide - the group is not c om fortable with c ity-w ide c aps and do not s ee a prec edent in other c ities , w ith the exc eption of Newport Beac h whic h has a c ap of 6k STR perm its . W hat is the objec tive of this as k, and is there another way of addres s ing it? (e.g. oc c upanc y lim it that c ontrols for parties and traffic ). · Spac ing requirem ent of 300 feet between perm itted STRs - this has als o rais ed a flag w ith our group. The prim ary c onc ern is that it is too res tric tive to ‘good ac tors ’ w ho c urrently have STR s nearby and don’t have an is s ue with neighbors . Als o, it’s not c lear to us how the c ity w ill c hos e the ‘winner’ (i.e. whic h hous e gets the perm it and w hic h does not). O ne of the hom eow ners in our group has another STR 2 doors dow n from him . He was there 2 years before they were. Do they both get lic ens es ? Does the longes t running STR have firs t right of refus al? Do both get grandfathered in? Again, it m ay be helpful if w e unders tand the objec tive behind this point s o together we c an explore the bes t way to protec t our hom es and neighborhoods . · Property Manager that m us t be able to res pond within 20 m inutes - By ‘res pond’ is this on- s ite in 20 m ins , or ans wering a c all? O ur c onc ern w ould be needing to be on-s ite for an is s ue w ithin 20 m ins if we are in a w ork m eeting or s tuc k in traffic c om ing bac k form work in LA, es pec ially if it was an is s ue that c ould be m ore effic iently and effec tively addres s ed by phone. O f c ours e, for a real or life-threatening em ergenc y, the default w ould be 911/polic e/fire, but for all els e, w ould a 1 hour ‘res pons e’ (of any s ort) be m ore prac tic al? · Good Neighbor Polic y o All adjac ent and fac ing properties m us t be notified and have c ontac t info - Agree o All gues ts to s ign lis t of rules /res tric tions along with party ordinanc e info, nois e, litter…etc . - Agree and m any platform s , like Airbnb, already have a ‘Hous e R ules ’ s ec tion built into the rental agreem ent. o All rules /res tric tions to be pos ted on property - Agree and we s ugges t ‘be m ade available’ to renters at the property. Many of us have inform ational books (em ergenc y num bers , rec om m ended res taurants and loc al ac tivities , etc ) and already have thes e in the info book. W e prefer this to a fram ed pos ting on the wall, as the latter would detrac t from the ‘hom e feel’ that drives m os t people to go w ith STRs vs hotels . · Three s trikes polic y – three m ajor violations in a 12-m onth period and you los e your perm it - Agree. W e all w ant to c ontrol for bad ac tors . · Strong fines - As s um ing this is linked to 3 s trikes (?), m ay we s ugges t a s c aled approac h. For exam ple, 1s t s trike: $300, 2nd: $400, 3rd: $500 + revoc ation of perm it? · 2 night m inim um s tay requirem ent - This is not a m ajor is s ue for our group either, however we s truggle to s ee how the c ity w ould enforc e it. If parties are already agains t the Hous e Rules , for exam ple, c an we c ons ider this is s ue to be addres s ed through other m eans ? O r is there another objec tive we need to unders tand to agree bes t tac tic ? · R equire bus ines s lic ens e and paym ent of TO T - There is s om e debate within our group on need for both perm its and TOT. W ouldn’t lic ens es alone generate enough revenue to c over an additional enforc em ent offic er? O ur other c onc ern is on how m any and w ho gets perm its . The group’s rec om m endation w ould be to m ake the overall proc es s as s im ple as pos s ible. Sim ply requiring perm its m ay be a good w ay to filter bad ac tors , but c om plic ated bureauc ratic proc es s es beyond this will require extra c ity res ourc es to m anage - and exc ept for the 2 problem hom es , we as O range STR hom eowners feel that we m os tly have good prac tic es already and do not need to be ‘m ic rom anaged’ by c ity governm ent. W e would as k the c ity to rem em ber that the 99% of us that are ‘good ac tors ’ want to protec t our inves tm ents and w e als o feel s trongly about keeping our hom es and neighborhoods s afe. · This ordinanc e will add STRs to the Land Us e Matrix (C hapter 17) but the rem aining provis ions will be added to Chapter 5 of the O MC - O ur ques tion is only to c onfirm this m eans adding a provis ion that inc ludes R 1 (res idential) hous ing to be allowed in the land m atrix and m unic ipal c ode. Can you pleas e c onfirm ? O ne additional ques tion we had related to perm it/TO T ques tion: How much headcount and revenue do the c ity expect to need from to provide adequate management and oversite of STRs? On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 7:49 AM Aaron Schulze <aschulze@cityoforange.org> wrote: Hi Susan, It was great to speak with you over the phone about the STR ordinance that we are working on. Here is an outline of what we are putting together based on direction we received at the last City C ouncil meeting: City Manager’s O ffice to work with City Attorney’s Office to prepare a zoning ordinance that will allow STRs with the following restrictions: · Occupancy limit of 2 + 2 per bedroom · Maximum number of 150 permits citywide · Spacing requirement of 300 feet between permitted STRs · Property Manager that must be able to respond within 20 minutes · Good Neighbor Policy o All adjacent and facing properties must be notified and have contact info o All guests to sign list of rules/restrictions along with party ordinance info, noise, litter…etc. o All rules/restrictions to be posted on property · Three strikes policy – three major violations in a 12-month period and you lose your permit · Strong fines · 2 night minimum stay requirement · Require business license and payment of TOT · This ordinance will add STRs to the Land Use Matrix (C hapter 17) but the remaining provisions will be added to Chapter 5 of the OMC Let me know what your group’s comments and feedback are, as well as any best practices that you have that we might have missed. Thanks, Aa ron Schul z e Seni or Admi ni s t rat i ve Anal ys t Ci t y of Orange (714) 744-2202 www.ci t yofora nge .org E-m ai l correspondence, along with any attachm ents, m ay be subject to the Cal iforni a Public Records Act; and as such m ay be subject to publ ic disclosure unless otherwi se exem pt under the Act.