PLANNERS ADVISORY COMMITTEE AGENDA MAY 31, 2016 1:30 P.M. 310 Court Street 1 st Floor Conference Room Clearwater, FL 33756 Forward Pinellas serves as the planning council and metropolitan planning organization for Pinellas County 1. MINUTES OF REGULAR PAC MEETING OF MAY 2, 2016 2. REVIEW OF PPC AGENDA FOR JUNE 8, 2016 Subthreshold Countywide Plan Map Amendments A. Case CW 16-17 City of St. Petersburg Regular Countywide Plan Map Amendments None B. CPA Actions May 2016 (Information) 3. OLD BUSINESS 4. OTHER PAC BUSINESS/PAC DISCUSSION AND UPCOMING AGENDA A. Pinellas SPOTlight Emphasis Areas Update (Information) B. PAC Extra! (1) Population Projection Methods (Discussion) (2) Sustainability and Resiliency (Presentation and Discussion) (3) Short-term Rentals Follow-up (Discussion) 5. ADJOURNMENT Public participation is solicited without regard to race, color, national origin, age, sex, religion, disability, or family status. Persons who require special accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act or persons who require translation services (free of charge) should contact the Office of Human Rights, 400 South Fort Harrison Avenue, Suite 300, Clearwater, Florida 33756; [(727) 464-4062 (V/TDD)] at least seven days prior to the meeting.
PAC AGENDA SUMMARY AGENDA ACTION SHEET DATE: MAY 02, 2016 ITEM ACTION TAKEN VOTE I. MINUTES OF REGULAR PAC MEETING OF APRIL 04, 2016 Motion: Dean Neal Second: Fred Metcalf 12-0 II. REVIEW OF PPC AGENDA FOR MAY 11, 2016 MEETING A. Subthreshold Countywide Plan Map Amendments 1. Case CW 16-14 Pinellas County Motion: Dean Neal Second: Marie Dauphinais 12-0 2. Case CW 16-15 City of Safety Harbor Motion: Lauren Matzke Second: Dean Neal 12-0 B. Regular Countywide Plan Map Amendments 1.Case CW 16-16 City of Safety Harbor Motion: Dean Neal Second: Mark Ely 12-0 C. CPA Actions April 2016 None Information Only III. OLD BUSINESS IV. OTHER PAC BUSINESS/PAC DISCUSSION AND UPCOMING AGENDA A. SPOTlight Emphasis Areas Update B. Complete Streets Program None A. Mike Crawford briefed the PAC on the results of the April 11, 2016 U.S. 19 Listening Sessions that were held and reminded of the dates and times for the upcoming Beach Access and Gateway/Mid-County Sessions. B. Chelsea Favero provided an overview of the Complete Streets Program. She defined available funding, timelines, the criteria for qualifying for the funding and addressed any questions. Mike Crawford called for future topics to be suggested for PAC Extra! Mike Crawford discussed the transitioning of the Pinellas Planning Council to Forward Pinellas. V. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 2:00 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, PAC Chairman Date H:\USERS\PAC, PPC, & CPA\01 PAC\Minutes\Minutes 2016\05 Summary Agenda Action Sheet May 2016.docx
2A. Subthreshold Countywide Plan Map Amendment CW 16-17 City of St. Petersburg Planners Advisory Committee May 31, 2016 SUMMARY/BACKGROUND: From: Residential Medium (RM) To: Multimodal Corridor (MMC) Area: 2.1 acres m.o.l. Location: 2500 34th Street North This proposed amendment is submitted by the City of St. Petersburg and seeks to reclassify an area totaling 2.1 acres from RM (allowing 15 residential dwelling units per acre) to MMC (primarily providing for a mixed use environment in transportation corridors). This amendment qualifies as a Type A subthreshold amendment, because it is less than ten acres in size and meets the balancing criteria. The subject amendment area is currently used as automobile storage, and is a portion of a larger 8 acre parcel used for automobile sales. The current use as automobile storage is nonconforming and this amendment will allow the use to become conforming. ATTACHMENT(S): Attachment 1 Maps REQUESTED ACTION: The Planners Advisory Committee is required to make a recommendation to the Pinellas Planning Council to approve or deny the amendment. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends to the Pinellas Planning Council that they approve the requested amendment. H:\USERS\Countywide Plan Map\Amendments\2016\06 June\CW16-17\Case CW16-17 StPete.docx
Attachment 1 Maps
2B. CPA Actions May 2016 Planners Advisory Committee May 31, 2016 SUMMARY/BACKGROUND: This information is presented in order to better and more systematically apprise the Pinellas Planning Council (PPC) of final action by the Board of County Commissioners/Countywide Planning Authority (CPA) on matters that have been previously considered by the Council. At its May 10, 2016 meeting, the CPA took the following actions: PUBLIC HEARINGS Subthreshold Plan Map Amendment: Case CW 16-11, a City of St. Petersburg case located at 2331 9 th Avenue North. The Board approved the amendment from Public/Semi-Public to Multimodal Corridor (vote 6-0). Case CW 16-13, a City of St. Petersburg case located immediately south of 3651 71 st Street North. The Board approved the amendment from Public/Semi-Public to Residential Low Medium (vote 6-0). Regular Plan Map Amendment: Case CW 16-9, a Pinellas County case located at 2159, 2167 & 2175 McMullen Booth Road. The Board approved the amendment from Residential Low Medium to Public/Semi-Public (vote 6-0). Case CW 16-10, a Pinellas County case located on the north side of Keystone Road, 100 feet east of Ranch Road. The Board approved the amendment from Residential Very Low to Public/Semi-Public (vote 6-0). Case CW 16-12, a City of St. Petersburg case located on the south side of 77 th Avenue, 140 feet east of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Street North. The Board approved the amendment from Residential Medium to Office (vote 6-0). FIRST PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO THE COUNTYWIDE RULES REGARDING TARGET EMPLOYMENT CENTERS, TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS AND TEMPORARY LODGING INTENSITY STANDARDS The Board conducted the first of two public hearings scheduled by the CPA regarding proposed amendments to the Countywide Rules regarding Target Employment Centers, Transferable Development Rights and Temporary Lodging Intensity Standards.
REGULAR AGENDA None At its May 24, 2016 meeting, the CPA took the following actions: PUBLIC HEARINGS SECOND PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO THE COUNTYWIDE RULES REGARDING TARGET EMPLOYMENT CENTERS, TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS AND TEMPORARY LODGING INTENSITY STANDARDS The Board conducted the second of two public hearings and approved the amendments (vote 6-0). ATTACHMENT(S): None REQUESTED ACTION: None, information item only
4B. PAC Extra! Population Projections Sustainability and Local Actions Short-Term Rentals Planners Advisory Committee May 31, 2016 SUMMARY/BACKGROUND: PAC Extra! is a forum for sharing among local government and other land use and transportation planners in Pinellas County. The topics are brought to this forum by individual PAC members, by Forward Pinellas staff, or other professionals and staff who have an interest in offering or gaining additional information. We will send information in advance so that the members can familiarize themselves with the topic, including links to interesting and thought provoking articles. PAC members, and others involved in our process, are asked to provide input, ask questions, formulate direction (if needed), and be willing to bring local experiences or strategies to the discussion. This month s PAC Extra! topics include: 1. Population Projection Methods. This topic was requested by the City of St. Pete staff in conjunction with the required Evaluation and Appraisal Reports included in Florida Statutes. Pinellas County has also asked for updated population projections for various planning and redevelopment activities. https://www.bebr.ufl.edu/ 2. Sustainability and Local Actions. This was brought up by Forward Pinellas staff and will include a presentation by Chris Moore of the Pinellas County staff. He will talk about different initiatives the County has participated in with regard to sustainability/resiliency/sea level rise. This will include time discussing the upcoming vulnerability assessment the County will undertake with RESTORE Act grant funding to assess the vulnerability of critical infrastructure to sea level rise. Here are a couple of links to get you started on topics that are related to sustainability: a. On reducing carbon footprint of transportation: http://www.citylab.com/cityfixer/2016/05/sustainable-trucks-buses-fuel-efficiencyin-transportation/471621/ b. Department of Energy working with local governments: http://energy.gov/public-services/state-local-government c. On renewable energy: http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/05/20/3780189/portugal-renewable-energyrecord/ d. On local government and infrastructure: First, Venice is sinking and the city has actually devised a wall to stop the tide water from flooding the city. H:\USERS\PAC, PPC, & CPA\01 PAC\Agendas\2016\May 31 PAC Extra.docx
http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/jun/16/inside-venice-bid-hold-back-tidesea-level-rise The unofficial leader in controlling the sea, and flooding, the Dutch outline some key strategies for the Netherlands to combat SLR. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8362147.stm 3. Short-Term Rentals. This is a follow up to previous discussions and has been added by Forward Pinellas staff. We ask that local governments let the group know what is happening at the local level, from activities you are aware of, to local ways that these are being addressed. Here are a couple of links to get you started on topics that are related to short-term rentals: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/florida-keys/article78566832.html Lastly, Miami is expected to experience serious SLR impacts, is working on a formal plan to combat the problem. http://www.npr.org/2016/05/10/476071206/as-waters-rise-miami-beach-buildshigher-streets-and-political-willpower http://politics.heraldtribune.com/2014/04/30/vacation-rental-owners-fend-localregulation/ See Attachment 1 - pdf from Florida League of Cities and Attachment 2 from the City of St. Petersburg ATTACHMENT(S): Attachment 1 - Florida League of Cities Legislative Issue Briefs Attachment 2 - Transient Accommodation Uses in the City of St. Petersburg REQUESTED ACTION: Information for discussion, but we ask PAC to provide input, ask questions, formulate direction (if needed), and be willing to bring local experiences or strategies to the discussion.
Attachment 1 r^ LEGISLATIVE.*.- w. <1 ISSUE BRIEFS E Vacation Rentals The Florida League ofcides SUPPORTS legislation that repeals the state preemption of the regulation of vacation rental properdes in order to allow local governments to regulate such properties toprotect the health and welfare of residents, visitors and businesses. Background: In 2011, the Florida legislature prohibited dries from regulating short-term vacation rentals. A shortterm vacation rental is defined as a property that is rented more than three rimes a year for less than 30 days at a time. The legislation passed in 2011 included a provision that "grandfathered" any ordinance regulating vacation rentals prior to June 1, 2011. Since that time a number of dries, both "grandfathered" cities and those who did not have an ordinance in place, have experienced problems with these properties. The effect of the 2011 bill is that two separate classes of cities were created respective to vacation rentals, those with home rule authority and those without. In 2014, the legislature passed SB 356 which loosened the preemption on vacation rentals. The bill allowecuocal governments to adopt ordinances specific to vacation rentals so that they could address some of the noise, parking, trash, and life-safety issues created by the proliferation of vacation rentals in residential neighborhoods. Unfortunately, SB 356 left in place existing statutory language stating that dries cannot "prohibit" vacation rentals, or regulate the duration or frequency of the rental. Those dries fortunate enough to have an ordinance in place prior to the 2011 preemption are still allowed to regulate vacation rentals, but the questions remains whether these ordinances wiu remain valid if amended. Some city attorneys believe that these ordinances are "frozen" and any future amendments would cause a loss of the "grandfather." The problem with this is twofold. First, with the rise of popular rental websites Uke Vacation ^ntal by On^ner (VRBO) and AirBnB making it easier to advertise and rent^these properties, the number of vacation rentals in Florida has exponenriauy increased in the last four years. Second, as a result of this enormous growth in the vacation rental market, the scope of the problem has changed and ordinances adopted before 2011 may no longer be effective. It is important to note that many of our larger cities (with a larger professional staf^ fell into the grandfathered category. They have retained the ability to regulate these properties through zoning and may have duration and frequencyrequirements. Some may sritlwant to amend to adjust to a changingproblem. They are reluctant to do so out of fear of losing their exisdng ordinance and with ittheuhome rule authority. Recognizing that the ordinances on the books are no longer effective, cides want the ability to come up xvith solutions that work for their respective community, but because of the potential loss of the "grandfather," they are unable to do so. It is important to note that any potential amendments to existing ordinances would be vetted through numerous public hearings that allow neighboring homeowners, vacation rental owners, vacation rental managers, and local businesses the abuity to weigh in on proposed legislation.
Cities without vacation rental ordinances in place prior to June 1,2011 have had their zoning authority stripped and are now seeing vacation rentals completely taking over residendal neighborhoods. Longtime residents are moving out as a result and the residential character of traditional neighborhoods is slowly being stripped away. The impacts of problematic vacation rentals on neighboring residents are felt in a number of ways: The Hotel Next Door - Commercial Activity in Residential Neiphbnrhnnds Houses that sleep 26 people are now present in -what was once a traditional neighborhood. Because of the inability to regulate the duration of a renter's stay, these houses could experience weekly, daily or even hourly turnover. Obviously, the constant turnover of renters creates a number of issues for cides and neighboring property owners. Prior to the preemption, local governments were_able to regulate this activity through zoning. Vacation rentals have become increasingly popular in the last five years and because a city cannot "prohibit" these properties, they are powerless to exclude vacation rentals from residendal neighborhoods. As a result, investors, many of whom are located out-of-state or even in a different country, have purchased or built singlefamily homes with the sole intent of turning them into vacation rentals. Loss ofzonin? Authority Cities use zoning as a tool to prepare for future growth in their cities and also use it to control where commercial and residential properties are located. Hotels have different infrastructure needs than single-family residential properdes. As residential neighborhoods are developed, the infrastructure installed is designed for the future use of the properties. Many neighborhoods have infrastructure in place with capacity for up to eight people per house. Now there are houses in these very same neighborhoods that sleep 26 people placing a significant strain on existing infrastructure. Commercial properties Uke bars, hotels and restaurants typically need more parking than a single-family property as well as have different operating hours and experience greater noise levels. The current law removes important land use and zoning tools that -will impact how a city plans for future growth and levels of service. Noise Complaints Many neighboring residents complain of the noise generated by the vacationing renters next door. When people go on vacation, often their behavior changes - they may stay awake until later, consume a few more adult beverages throughout the day, or participate in recreational activities until later such as swimming at midnight while listening to music. Residents complain of the noise generated as a result. Many of these complaints are generated by the neighboring houses, but it's important to note that many of our primarily-residenrial communides may not be located on a beach. Instead, they may be located on a canal that leads to the ocean or even a lake. Sound travels over water - and residents located more than a hundred yards away may be the ones that are calung and complaining to the police and their local elected officials. Some dries have noise ordinances, but these have proved problematic to enforce. One such example is Lighthouse Point -Lighthouse Point's ordinance requires sustained noise over a certain decibel threshold for 10 minutes. Many times after the police arrive at a residence, the noise dies down. These renters may leave the next day with new ones replacing them. The new renters are often unaware of the noise ordinance or past complaints and may cause the same problems. The out-of-state property owner may not even be aware of the problems created by their renters and with the constant turnover, the problem ends as one renter leaves and begins again as new renters Contact: Casey Cook, Sr. Legislative Advocate - 850.222.9684 - ccook(a).flcides.com
arrive. This causes a significant drain on law enforcement resources. When law enforcement officers are caued to respond to noise complaints, one less officer is on the street either preventing crimes or solving crimes. Parking Many vacation rentals are located in single-family neighborhoods for families. The parking available in the driveway was built for two or three cars. When you now have a renovated house that sleeps 26, there -wiq. be more than three cars needed to get these renters to the property. As a result, many of these cars are parked on the street. Cars parked on the street make it tough for emergency vehicles to respond to emergencies and cause increased response times to emergencies in these neighborhoods. Cittes have begun to adopt ordinances creating parking standards for vacation rental properties. Unfortunately, these ordinances only solve the parking issue and not any of the other issues created by commercial activity in a residendal community. Revenue Issues There are approximately 16,000 licensed vacation rentals in Florida, but a quick search ofvrbo reveals tens of thousands more that are advertised. As stated earlier, a property rented more than three dmes a year for less than 30 days at a time meets the vacation rental definition and should be licensed by the state. The Department of Business and Professional Regulation (DBPR) is tasked with investigating unlicensed vacation rentals, but they lack the resources needed to investigate these complaints. Unlicensed vacation rentals could be costing the state of Florida millions each year from licensing revenue. Licensed vacation rentals are also required to charge a sales tax to renters and then remit this back to the state. Many licensed vacation rentals are not doing this and unlicensed vacation rentals most Ukely are not as well. Again, DBPR and DOR have limited resources and cannot adequately investigate complaints from local governments. The loss of sales tax revenue from these properdes is likely costing the state millions in sales tax revenue. Some counties impose a tourist development tax (TDT) and vacation rental owners in these counties are required to collect and remit this money to the Department of Revenue (DOR). DOR also has limited resources and does not have the manpower to track down vacation rentals that are not paying the TDT despite numerous requests from cides around the state. Last year, the legislature began the conversation on vacation rentals and the League of Cities supported both HB 307 and SB 356. These bills were a step in the right direction, but only pardauy restored home rule to Florida's cides. Cities are still prevented from regulating the duration and frequency of the rentals and local zoning does not apply to these properties. Current Status: The House Local Government Affairs Subcommittee held a workshop on vacation rentals and a number of city officials from around the state, the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, and the Vacation Rental Managers Association provided comment to the committee. HB 735 (Moraids) and SB 1344 allow grandfathered dries to amend their vacation rental ordinance without losing their grandfather status. The bills also allow cides to set a tninimum stay requirement of up to seven days for vacation rental properties. Revised: 4/27/2015 Contact: Casey Cook, Sr. Legislative Advocate - 850.222.9684 - ccook(%fldties.com
Attachment 2 Transient Accommodation Uses in the City of St. Petersburg The internet has increasingly influenced, shaped and responded to every aspect of modern life, including the market place. The relationship between commerce and the internet has been both profitable and turbulent, causing market disruption in the entertainment (e.g., Napster vs record labels) and retail industries (e.g., Amazon vs brick and mortar retailers), to name a few. The term peer-to-peer first appeared in 1999 with the file sharing platform Napster, which allowed users to access media files such as books, music, movies, and games using a peer-to-peer software program that searched for other connected computers on a network to locate desired content. The term peer-to-peer evolved to the more encompassing term sharing economy in the mid-2000s. The term refers to business models that enable providers and consumers to share resources and services using innovative software and technology platforms. The sharing economy includes a variety of services, one of the most common being home sharing. Home sharing is recognized as an organized agreement between two parties, in which one party rents out all or part of his or her home to another party on a temporary, one-time basis. The length of a stay can vary greatly from nightly to weekly. Popular websites for home sharing services include Airbnb, established in 2008, HomeAway and FlipKey, both established in 2006 and VRBO (Vacation Rental By Owner) established in 1995. As a land use, home sharing is often referred to as a short-term rental. Short-term rentals differ from other lodging uses by providing complete, independent living facilities, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation. Although bed and breakfasts often are similar in appearance and location to many short-term rentals, they are distinguishable by the presence of the owner/operator onsite. Boarding houses differ from short-term rentals by having multiple rooms or units for rent and common kitchen and dining facilities that are shared by the occupants. Boarding houses also tend to be less transient than short-term rentals. Similarly, hotels and motels are distinguishable from short-term rentals by having separate entrances and an onsite management office. In brief, short-term rentals take on the appearance of a residential use, but are a transient accommodation use. Short-term rentals have become increasingly popular as an alternative to staying in hotels or motels largely due to competitive pricing, but also due to factors like the desire of travelers to obtain an authentic lodging experience and excess housing capacity, which varies from a second home to a garage apartment to an extra bedroom. For properties within the City of St. Petersburg, short-term rentals are only allowed up to three times within any consecutive 365-day period, unless the property is within a zoning district that allows the hotel or motel use or a special overlay approval has been obtained. Page 1 of 4 Updated 5/24/2016
Do the City s Land Development Regulations ( LDRs ) accommodate a short-term rental use, such as those commonly associated with internet reservation websites, including AirBnB, FlipKey, HomeAway and VRBO? The LDRs allow a property to be offered for an occupancy of up to three times in any consecutive 365-day period without it being considered a transient accommodation use. The City does not have a specific short-term rental use. The LDRs refer to transient accommodation uses which is an umbrella term that includes the hotel use and motel use as defined in the Use Matrix. The term transient accommodation uses is not listed as a line item in the Use Matrix, but is used in the definitions of hotel and motel in the Use Matrix. What is the Resort Facilities Overlay (RFO)? The Resort Facilities Overlay or RFO is an overlay listed as a land use plan category under the special designation section in the City s Comprehensive Plan as follows: Policy LU3.1(E)(5): Resort Facilities Overlay (RFO) - Overlaying the future land use designations for areas suitable for the combination of residential and transient accommodation uses. Transient accommodation and residential uses shall be as defined in the Zoning Ordinance. Transient accommodations shall be allowed within areas designated RFO not to exceed the maximum density in the underlying future land use plan category and zoning district. When located within an RFO area, individual transient accommodation units shall comply with the definition of dwelling unit as found in the Zoning Ordinance. Uses which are nonconforming or grandfathered uses shall not be eligible for the RFO designation. If approved, a property owner that applies for this special overlay can use their property for transient accommodations. The application process is the same as the City s regular Future Land Use Map amendment process and summary points are outlined below. Application approval requires four to five public hearings, two to three of which are at the City level and two of which are at the County level Application process can take about five to six months from time of application submittal Applications are accepted on a quarterly basis (the last business day of March, June, September and December each year) Application fee is $2,400 Application is available here Application is handled through the City s Urban Planning Division Office (Municipal Services Center, 8 th Floor) Page 2 of 4 Updated 5/24/2016
Does City Administration have any current plans to adopt a short-term rental use in the LDRs that does not require utilization of the RFO? No. The City Attorney s Office has stated concerns involving state preemption of local regulations if the City were to adopt a short-term rental use in the LDRs. The City s current transient accommodation use regulations are grandfathered. Section 509.032(7), F.S. states, in part: A local law, ordinance, or regulation may not prohibit vacation rentals or regulate the duration or frequency of rental of vacation rentals. This paragraph does not apply to any local law, ordinance, or regulation adopted on or before June 1, 2011. Additionally, the Budget, Finance and Taxation Committee (which consists of four City Council members) discussed the issues of short-term rentals and tax collection at its July 16, 2015 meeting. At that meeting, no committee member expressed a desire to change current City regulations regarding transient accommodations. What transient accommodation uses are listed and defined in the LDRs? Transient accommodation uses are defined in LDR Section 16.90.020.3 Definitions as follows: Transient accommodation uses means a building containing one or more transient accommodation units, one or more of which is occupied by one or more persons, or offered or advertised as being available for such occupancy, when the right of occupancy is for a term less than monthly, such right of occupancy being available more than three times in any consecutive 365-day period. The determination that a property is being used as a transient accommodation use is made without regard to the form of ownership of the property or unit, or whether the occupant has a direct or an indirect ownership interest in the property or unit; and without regard to whether the right of occupancy arises from a rental agreement, other agreement, or the payment of consideration. The term "transient accommodation uses" includes but is not limited to hotels, motels, recreational vehicle parks, tourist lodging facilities, resort condominiums, resort dwellings, vacation resorts, and dwelling units occupied or available for occupancy on an interval ownership or "time share" basis, when any of the above are made available for occupancy more than three times in any consecutive 365-day period and the right of occupancy is for a term less than monthly. The term "transient accommodation uses" does not include any of the following uses if such use otherwise complies with the applicable requirements of the City and is licensed by the State of Florida, if such licensing is required by law: bed and breakfast homes, community residential homes, nursing homes, rehabilitation facilities for persons with drug, alcohol, or physical impairments, respite care facilities for persons with terminal illnesses and their families, short-term/emergency housing or long term housing where allowed by this chapter, and child foster homes. The term "transient accommodation uses" does not include a guest house dwelling, when one or both of the sleeping rooms are located as a permitted accessory use within and incidental to the primary residential structure and the primary residential structure is owned by a natural person and occupied by the owner. A use which is otherwise a residential use is not considered a "transient accommodations use" solely because it is occupied by members of the owner's family, a housekeeper or caretaker, or guests who reside on the premises without paying rent or other consideration for such occupancy. Page 3 of 4 Updated 5/24/2016
The term "transient accommodation uses" does not prohibit the owner of a residential dwelling unit from occupying the dwelling unit as infrequently as the owner may desire. Hotels are defined In LDR Section 16.10.020.1 Use Matrix as follows: o Establishments providing transient accommodation units available for the accommodation of persons more than three times in any consecutive 365-day period, each for a term less than monthly, in which meals may or may not be provided, and in which principal access to all transient accommodation units is through an inside lobby or office supervised by a person in charge at all hours. The term includes, but is not limited to, transient accommodation units, without regard to whether such units are available on a rental basis or by other forms of agreement or property ownership. Hotels may include internal restaurant and accessory commercial uses for guests, fitness facilities, swimming pools, or shuttle services between hotels, airports, or other destination points. Motels are defined In LDR Section 16.10.020.1 Use Matrix as follows: o Establishments providing transient accommodation units are available for the accommodation of persons more than three times in any consecutive 365-day period, each for a term less than monthly, in which a majority of the units have direct entrances from the outside, and in which parking spaces are oriented to the units in such a manner as to facilitate direct access from such units to the automobiles of the occupants. The term includes, but is not limited to, transient accommodation units, without regard to whether such units are available on a rental basis or by other forms of agreement or property ownership. Why aren t bed and breakfasts considered a transient accommodation use? Bed and breakfasts have generally been viewed as fitting in with the character of more traditional neighborhoods in the City and are allowed in the NT-1, NT-2 and NT-3 zoning districts if approved through the Special Exception review process. The bed and breakfast use also has a list of use specific criteria that must be followed and are contained in LDR Section 16.50.040. One of the requirements is that an owner or manager must reside on the premises. Additionally, the Pinellas Planning Council s (PPC) Countywide Rules, which the City must comply with, includes the bed and breakfast use in the definition of Residential Equivalent Use as such: A residential like accommodation other than a dwelling unit, including bed and breakfast, group home, congregate care, nursing home and comparable assisted living facilities. Where can I learn more about the research the City has done on short-term rentals? Please contact the Urban Planning & Historic Preservation Division at 727-892-5255 or catherine.lee@stpete.org Page 4 of 4 Updated 5/24/2016