Short-term Residential Rental Uses. Feedback Summary

Transcription

1 Short-term Residential Rental Uses Feedback Summary CHPD, Planning Division November 29, 2016

2 Short-term residential rental outreach overview Three data points Online feedback form Public meeting Commissions and other groups (not included in this presentation) 2

3 Online feedback - who responded? 379 respondents as of close of form on Nov. 15, 2016 Not an Arlington resident 1% Multiplefamily buildling (lowrise or highrise) 21% Arlington resident 99% Duplex, semidetached or two-family house 4% Townhouse 8% Single-family detached house 67% Rent 18% Own 82% 3

4 Online feedback who responded? 379 respondents as of close of form on Nov. 15, I am an Arlington resident I am interested in hosting an accessory homestay I am a hotel owner/manager in Arlington I am an apartment building owner/manager in Arlington I am a hotel or apartment owner/manager outside of Arlington I live in another jurisdiction and am following this process in Arlington I work in/represent the home sharing industry Other 4

5 Online feedback - general comments Support for allowing accessory homestays Supplemental income Community building Cultural exchange Revenue and tourist generator Opposition to allowing accessory homestays Concerns with impacts (trash, noise, loss of neighbor familiarity) Commercial lodging already available This type of commercial use not appropriate in residential areas/buildings Opposition to regulating accessory homestay Challenges of enforcement Property owners should be able to use their property in any way they choose Use already occurring with minimal impacts 5

6 300 Online feedback: Zoning districts and unit types In what types of residential dwellings and neighborhoods should accessory homestays be allowed? (check all that apply) Single-family detached houses Townhouses Single-family neighborhoods Not appropriate for accessory homestays Duplexes, semidetached Multiple-family (low, mid or two-family or high-rise) within residential neighborhoods Multiple-family (low, mid or high-rise) within mixed-use neighborhoods (eg Rosslyn-Ballston, Jefferson-Davis or Columbia Pike corridors) Concerns about encroachment of commercial lodging and associated impacts into residential areas Multiple-family neighborhoods Should be up to HOA Should not impact surrounding areas Should preclude investors from taking over a building for short term use Allow in all zoning districts Owner-occupancy is most important consideration Property owners should be able to use their property in any way they choose None of the above (accessory hoemstays should not be allowed) 6

7 Online feedback: Proportion of unit In what manner should accessory homestays be allowed (check all that apply)? Partial rentals Allows for monitoring of guest behavior Consistent with other home occupations Entire dwelling rentals Eliminates sofa rental and/or renting multiple rooms Easier to enforce Allows for renting while on vacation Short-term rental of an entire dwelling Short-term rental of a portion of a dwelling Both should be allowed Flexibility is preferred Partial rental may be more appropriate for single-family home than condo unit 7

8 Online feedback: parking How many off-street parking spaces should be required? For what types of dwelling units should parking be required (check all that apply)? One, for some dwelling types 43% None 57% Require parking Parking is already a problem On-street parking should not be allowed for this use Restrict vehicles owned by the host Require parking near Metro where on-street parking is scarce Require parking where RPP program is in effect Do not require parking Successful units will be near transit Utilize on-street parking RPP program manages parking supply Encourage public and shared transit options Single Family Detached Duplex/semidetached/twofamily Townhouse Multiplefamily served by Metro Multiplefamily served by Frequent Bus 8

9 Online feedback: creation of additional parking Other home occupations prohibit, once the home occupation is approved, the creation of any additional parking spaces that did not exist at the time of approval. Should a homeowner be allowed to create an additional off-street parking space (subject to all applicable regulations) after an application is approved? No 44% Yes 56% Any new parking should conform to all requirements Paving of properties is a concern 9

10 Online feedback: owner occupancy and primary residency How many days/year should constitute primary residency? 9 months (275 days) 40% 6 months (185 days) 50% Require owner-occupancy Owner-occupancy assures neighborhood stability Owner should be on premise during rental Require minimum occupancy prior to eligibility Do not require owner-occupancy Many have employment that necessitates being away Long-term renters should be eligible 8 months 5% 7 months 5% Require less than 6 months 6 months is consistent with IRS and State requirements Consider military and diplomatic families 10

11 Online feedback: Multiple-family building cap What, if any, should the limit be on the number of units within any individual multiple-family building that can be approved for an accessory homestay? No more than 75% of the units 0% No limit 45% No more than 50% of the units 9% No more than 25% of the units 46% Do not require a cap Condominiums have their own ability to limit Artificially limits market in each building Difficult to enforce Require a cap Too many units changes character of building Too many units could impact purchaser financing and insurance Cap to maintain supply for full-time residents Restrict to 0-25% 11

12 Online feedback: Number of lodgers How many lodgers should be allowed? 2 per BR plus 2% 2 per BR maximum of 6 5% It depends 3% Other 3% 2 per BR 26% No limit 14% 2 per BR with a maximum 2% 0 12% 12 1% 6 12% 8 1% 2 9% 4 7% 1 1% 3 2% 5 1% Considerations for number of lodgers Children should not be counted Use definition of family/regulations for maximum occupancy Do not allow party houses Proposed number seems appropriate Dwelling size Unit and building types Fire code requirements No limit should be set Owner should be able to decide 12

13 Online feedback: Accessory dwellings Should an accessory homestay be allowed in accessory dwellings? Yes, in the main dwelling 3% No 25% Yes, both of the above 66% Yes, in the accessory dwelling 6% Allow in accessory dwellings Units are already have required standards, so most appropriate for short-term rental Offer more flexibility than standard lease Either unit appropriate if owner on premises Limit occupancy to 2 or fewer Do not allow in accessory dwellings Use of accessory dwellings for short-term rental is not appropriate 13

14 Online feedback: Family/caregiver suites Should the family/caregiver suite regulations be revised to allow use of a family/caregiver suite for an accessory homestay? No 34% Yes 66% Allow in family/caregiver suites A well-suited space for this use Allow when caregiver is not there Do not allow in family/caregiver suites These suites have a specific purpose and should only be allowed to be used for that purpose This provision should be revised to address other needs for its intended purpose, but should not be revised to fit another purpose 14

15 Online feedback: Food service Should an accessory homestay host be allowed to prepare and/or serve food to lodgers? All meals should be allowed to be served 40% Only breakfast should be allowed to be served 15% No 34% Only packaged snacks should be allowed to be provided (eg prezels, candy, water, etc.) 11% Do not regulate food service Food service should not be addressed Difficulty of enforcement Community building opportunity Food service should not be allowed Food service changes the use to a boarding house, B&B, or hotel Food service subject to additional regulation 15

16 Online feedback: Accessory homestay permit and revocation How long should a permit be valid before it has to be renewed (through submittal of a new application in order to update contact information, etc.)? Two years 58% One year 42% If an accessory homestay permit is revoked, how long do you think the waiting period should be before a homeowner could apply for an accessory homestay again? Application process and renewal Neighborhood comments or complaints should be considered in reissue If revoked, no permit should be reissued Need to define substantiated complaint Two years 48% One year 52% No permit needed Unnecessary burden Should be streamlined 16

17 Public Meeting 34 participants Format presented the same questions as posed in the on-line feedback form Majority of general comments focused on positive attributes of accessory homestays and questions about need to regulate 17

18 Public Meeting Element Zoning districts Area of dwelling unit used Parking Owner-occupancy and primary residence Cap Maximum number of guests Accessory dwellings Family/ caregiver suites Food and beverages Accessory homestay permit Revocation of accessory dwelling permit Summary of Feedback Even distribution of support for all districts; only two dots for no homestays Most in favor of entire dwelling; also support for allowing both Most in favor of no parking requirement; majority in favor of permission to add another space if needed Most in favor of 9-month residency requirement; also support for no owner-occupancy requirement Most in favor of no cap Most in favor of allowing more than 6 lodgers Most in favor of use of accessory dwellings Most in favor of use of family/caregiver suites Most in favor of allowing all meals Even distribution in support of 1 or 2 years Slightly more support for 1-year waiting period 18