Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-02-15 PC Regular Meeting MinutesMINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY - FEBRUARY 15, 2011 ********************************************************** 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Limont called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Members Present: Connor Limont, Chair Nancy De Luna Van Tanner Roger Dash Sonia Campbell Members Absent: None Staff Present: Bob Hargreaves, City Attorney Jill Tremblay, Assistant City Attorney Lauri Aylaian, Director of Community Development Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Tony Becker, Administrative Secretary III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Limont led the pledge of allegiance. IV. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION Ms. Aylaian informed the Planning Commission that at the last City Council meeting, there were no actions taken that related to Land Use. The City Council appointed Dr. Roger Dash to the Planning Commission. V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS NONE MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION February 15, 2011 VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Request for approval of the February 1, 2011 meeting minutes. Action: Commissioner De Luna moved and Commissioner Tanner seconded the approval of the February 1, 2011 meeting minutes. Motion carried 3-0-0-2. (Commissioners Campbell and Dash ABSTAINING). VII. CONSENT CALENDAR NONE Vill. PUBLIC HEARINGS Chair Limont stated that anyone who challenges any hearing matter in court may be limited to raising only those issues he, she or someone else raised at the public hearing described herein, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. A. Case No. ZOA 10-68, City of Palm Desert, Applicant. Recommendation to City Council for approval of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment requiring a Conditional Use Permit for Short -Term Vacation Rentals in Non -Gated Residential Neighborhoods or Communities, and a modification to the Conditional Use Permit chapter establishing a minor Conditional Use Permit (CUP) review. Principal Planner Tony Bagato orally presented his staff report and PowerPoint presentation to the Planning Commission. This matter was brought before the Planning Commission in April, 2010. At the direction of the City Council, staff was instructed to form a sub -committee and strike a compromise that would better regulate short-term rentals. Mr. Bagato reported that from 1973-2000, the City of Palm Desert Municipal Code was silent regarding short-term rentals, neither prohibiting nor allowing them. Since 2000, a CUP was required to operate a short-term rental, and compliance was monitored on a complaint -driven basis. In January 2010, the Planning Commission directed staff to conduct a study of gated vs. non -gated communities to show where the short-term rentals were in fact operating. Staff discovered that no zone is solely gated or non -gated, as both can be found in nearly every zone. The sub -committee consisted of staff members, planning commissioners, city council members and citizens who were both for and 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION Februar against short-term rentals. The sub -committee found that the cities of Mammoth um and Palm Springs have actively dealt with this issue and those cities regulate short-term rentals under strict control using a business license. However, it would not give as much control as using a CUP along with a business license. After talking with the Police Department, Code compliance and other departments; the use of a CUP with a Business License would give the most control over land use issues and noise. Conditional Use Permits are already in use across all zones for such things as churches, day -schools and other such uses. They provide land use control with regulations and can be revoked for violations leading to fines or jail time for repeat violators. Staff proposed the following conditions to the short-term rentals: having a minimum of 3 days/2 nights' stay; maximum of 2 people per bedroom for overnight guests and additional guests of up to 2 more people for day time; a home will still need to look like a home and not like a hotel with signage and all on -site parking must be provided for use. A contact person with an available 24 hour phone number must be provided to the City and the neighbors in case of noise complaints. A minor CUP would have a one-time deposit of $1500 for this permit, rather than the $2915 for a normal CUP. The reasoning for this is that these cases take less staff work to process and a homeowner would be more likely to afford the smaller fee, whereas the full CUP fee might discourage a homeowner from registering with the City and getting a legal permit. The amount of TOT paid to the city last year was nearly $234,000. Of the number of short-term rentals, 1,212 were in gated communities and nearly 151 were located in non -gated communities. These numbers are approximate based on business license and internet research. Certain assumptions were made about where listings were located based on the verbiage in the advertisement. Over the past ten years, there have been only seven problems with short-term rentals that resulted in violations. Mr. Bagato entertained questions from the Planning Commission. Commissioner Tanner didn't have any questions. He stated that he was part of the sub -committee that reviewed the conditions. Commissioner De Luna began by commending staff on their outstanding work on this difficult task. Her question was about the CUP fee and would that $1,500 fee be an annual fee or a one-time fee? Mr. Bagato indicated that it is a one- time fee. She then asked if the CUP would run with the land and if someone sold their home, would that CUP stay with the house? Mr. Bagato stated that yes, a CUP runs with the property and in the case of someone selling their house, the City could require the seller to notify the City of a change in ownership. Commissioner De Luna commented about letters of opposition that 3 the Commissioners received stating that some of the reasons that were listed in these letters didn't add up to her and while she considered them carefully, she didn't feel it was the City's responsibility to certify that citizens with second homes be successful at renting their properties out. Commissioner De Luna isn't convinced that the $234,000 in TOT would completely be lost by approval or denial of this ordinance. She stated that she is concerned with preserving the neighborhoods for those citizens who live here full time. Mr. Bagato stated that the sub -committee and City staff have been tasked with finding a compromise not only for those who live here full time and want the tranquility but also for those who live here and want to rent out their house. The conditions set forth are the conglomeration of ideas and suggestions from those individuals who worked on this project to strictly regulate these homes, but still allow them to make money and have their business. These suggestions take into account that 99% of the rentals are compliant and only 1 % were problematic. Commissioner De Luna ended by asking who would one call with a complaint. Mr. Bagato said that a complainant could call the City, or the 24 hour phone number that will be provided to the City -per condition, or City Code compliance and a response to that complaint will follow. With the new sets of proposed conditions, the City would have more avenues of enforcement including, but not limited to: fines, revocation of CUPs, and even jail time if there are repeat violations. Commissioner Tanner wanted to point out that there have been a couple of homes that HAVE had their CUP's revoked for repeated violations and are no longer in operation, illustrating that the process, albeit long, does work. Commissioner Dash began by thanking staff for their assistance as this was his first meeting. He asked about staff's level of confidence in the accuracy of the numbers presented here tonight. He clarified by indicating that he meant the numbers of gated vs. non -gated short-term rentals specifically. Mr. Bagato stated that there was some small margin for error, especially when he did his internet search to see where some of the rentals were located. If, on the website a rental was listed in a country club, he assumed that it was a gated community due to the nature of country clubs, but the website might never actually have said "gated". He cross-referenced the locations with business licenses/addresses listed with the City. Commissioner Dash wanted to clarify about enforcement and the level of priority to enforce and didn't feel that it was a top priority since there were very few complaints. Mr. Bagato stated that enforcement in times past was complaint driven. The City of Palm Springs hired new staff to regulate and enforce their rentals. The City of Palm Desert has officially determined that there is not M MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING 11 11 \ February1 enough time nor staff to devote to full-time enforcement such as Palm Springs has. Commissioner Campbell thanked staff and the sub -committee for their efforts and had no questions. Commissioner Limont wanted to get some clarification on a few matters: she asked if we currently had an ordinance on short-term rentals. Mr. Bagato stated that, yes, but it currently only covers the R-1 zone. She then asked about the 151 short-term rentals, not in gated communities and how many had CUP's? Mr. Bagato stated that only five had CUP's. Commissioner Limont asked why the other 146 rentals haven't been approached to come into compliance with the City. Mr. Bagato stated that enforcement has been `complaint driven', so if no complaints were lodged, then the City wouldn't necessarily have contacted these owners. There are many short-term rentals that are operating with business licenses but do not have a CUP and those would be grandfathered in this new ordinance as compliant. Commissioner Limont asked for a rough estimate of how many of the 151 short-term rentals do not have either a CUP or a Business license. Mr. Bagato hazarded a guess of 80. Commissioner Limont continued by asking about the number of people allowed in a house. She wanted to know what people would do for situations like Thanksgiving, where she herself had nearly 20 people in her house, and under this new ordinance, she would have been in violation. She wanted to know how the City enforces this. Mr. Bagato stated that it will still be 'complaint based' and citizens can still call the police and code compliance. The land use control [that the CUP offers] is still the better option since it now specifically indicates what rentals can and cannot do. Commissioner Limont asked if the police are called, could that response be `back -charged' to the homeowner. Mr. Bagato said that it could. And that is part of the new ordinance to noise responses that was recently changed. Commissioner Limont questioned why staff went against Planning Commission directives in the past on this issue and brought the matter before the City Council, despite a 4-1 vote in opposition to an ordinance similar to this. Ms. Aylaian addressed the issue regarding staff recommendations saying that staff reviews the technical data on each application based on the codified zoning ordinance. She noted that there will be times when the City Council or Planning Commission might disagree with staff, but staff would maintain their recommendation all the way to City Council to see the project 'through'. For staff to change their recommendation mid -stream because of a 4-1 or 3-2 vote by the Planning commission diminishes the value and independence of the recommendation. It is not indeed to be disrespectful, nor is it staff's function to recommend against something because of the opinion of an individual or 5 commission.. Staff is tasked with making professional recommendations based on the code. Ms Aylaian invited the members of the Planning Commission to comment on any project that they feel IS NOT in accordance with City Policy or and direct staff to look into the issue and report back, a request to change the code so that it reflects current policy or that a Commissioner may comment to the City Council suggesting a change in the code. Chair Limont declared the public hearing open and asked for anyone who wanted to speak IN FAVOR OF the recommendation. Sarah Pallett of 42669 Brighton Street, Palm Desert, CA, spoke in favor of this ordinance. She stated that her family sometimes lists their home for a short term rental. She served on the sub -committee that crafted these guidelines. Ms. Pallett stated that most people who rent her house want to stay in a luxurious place with family and pets in a quiet location and many hotels don't necessarily allow pets and some places aren't quiet. Offering her home affords her renters all of these amenities. She stated that neighboring cities offer short-term rentals and the rental group that sends clientele to Palm Desert will just as easily send their patrons to neighboring cities if they feel Palm Desert is no longer welcoming. With that, she stated that she supports the conditions and wants to keep the groups coming to Palm Desert where they stay and spend their money and time in the city. Hal Reynolds, 73308 Tamarisk Street, Palm Desert spoke in favor of this proposal. He said he didn't think there was a problem until he and his family got back to their house and there was a football game going on in the street and over 20 guys swimming in the pool next door. He would like to keep the neighborhood quiet. Another house down the street was rented to a rock band for a few days. His neighbors are from Canada and decided not to rent their house any longer after hearing about the 20 guys swimming in their pool. Mr. Reynolds wanted to impress upon the Commission that he is for this proposal since it will enforce something that he feels should already be enforced. Hearing no other testimony in favor of, Chair Limont asked for any testimony IN OPPOSITION TO the recommendation. Ms. Elena Baumann, of HK Lane Real Estate stated that she opposes a '$1000 tax' [sic] on real estate that would cause a chain reaction to rent prices and real estate prices. She knows that many people come to the desert to spend money and by adding this tax it will drive business away. Hearing no other testimony, Chair Limont declared the public hearing closed and asked for any Commissioner comments. N. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION February1 Commissioner De Luna just wanted to say that it is most important to protect the ftm neighborhoods for those that choose to live here in a family community, not in a business community. Commissioner Dash stated that although he was new, he felt that staff's attempt to address the problem as it was and not just deny it outright was a good way to manage the problem and with these recommendations for enforcement, he could support this. Commissioner Campbell is in favor of staff's recommendation as presented and moved for approval. Commissioner Limont commented that she still had a problem with the 3day / 2 night condition. She commended staff on their research but still didn't think she could support this issue as it was presented. Mr. Bagato stated that the '3/2 day' was a compromise because some felt that one day was too short and one week was too long, since many visitors come out from Orange County or LA to shop but they wouldn't be able to do that for an entire week and take off extra time from work in most cases. Therefore, the `3/2 day' was reached as the best possible compromise for this condition. Commissioner Tanner wanted to commend the sub -committee for how hard they worked on this. He stated that he originally voted against allowing short- w term rentals, but after hearing from home owners, retail and other interested parties he sees that this still can promote secure neighborhoods, but also keep people coming to Palm Desert and staying and spending their time and money here. He mentioned the fee is a one-time fee to cover added staff time for enforcement and is a reasonable request considering that the actual price of a CUP like this was higher at $2915. He has decided to vote in favor of this recommendation. Action: Commissioner Campbell moved and Commissioner Tanner seconded the motion to approve case ZOA 10-68. The motion carried for approval 3-2 (Commissioners Limont and De Luna voting NO). Commissioner Campbell move adopting Planning Commission approval of ZOA 10-68. Motion De Luna voting NO). IX. MISCELLANEOUS IA d and Commissioner Tanner seconded Resolution No. 2545 recommending carried 3-2 (Commissioners Limont and It i \l \ �Illl �► • 1 Action: Appointment of ChairNice Chair and Discussion of Commission Rotation. The Commissioners discussed the various options and possibilities about continuing a rotating system or an elected system to determine the next Chair/Vice Chair. Discussion ensued among the Commissioners, and culminated in a decision to elect the Chair and Vice Chair yearly as necessary. Commissioner Tanner moved and Commissioner Limont seconded approving Commissioner Sonia Campbell as Chair and Commissioner Nancy De Luna as Vice Chair and approving the decision to elect a new Chair/Vice Chair in a year's time. Motion carried 5-0. X. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES Commissioner Campbell stated that they were having their meeting that Wednesday, February 16, 2011. B. LANDSCAPE BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE Commissioner Limont did not speak about her committee as discussion ensued about Planning Commission liaisons to various committees. C. PARKS & RECREATION Commissioner Tanner did not speak about his committee. D. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE Commissioner Dash was appointed to this committee since the former liaison was not re -appointed to the Commission. XI. COMMENTS Commissioner Tanner formally welcomed Roger Dash to the Planning Commission, stating that they worked together on the Parks and Recreation Commission. Chair Limont asked about the latest update about "The Reserve". Ms. Aylaian informed the Commissioners that the City of Indian Wells insisted that the Reserve hire an independent consultant to prepare a new environmental document on the proposal to change out their landscaping. Rl MINUTES ll i \ \ _ �llll �\ -• 1 The study and the public hearings would not be held for another six to eight months. Nothing will be changed out on the Palm Desert side in the interim, until these hearings have taken place. Some plants will be removed from the areas that were over planted, but nothing new will be added without approval via public hearings. XII. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner De Luna moved and Commissioner Campbell seconded the adjournment of the meeting by minute motion. The motion carried 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 7:14 p.m. LAURI AYLAIAN, Secretary VEST: M. CONNOR LIMONT, Chair Palm Desert Planning Commission /tb 9