Planning Commission Meeting   6/8/2021

All righty, good evening, and welcome to the regular meeting of the Seed Bill Planning Commission for June.

I think we're ready to begin our deliberations, and I believe Mr. Balmer from UVA is on.

Hey there.

I got a little background noise.

I don't have much for this time.

I did want to mention there was a Board of Visitors meeting on Friday where they announced a major gift for a new democracy institute, the Karsh Family Democracy Institute, and that's just kind of notable for us because

That'll lead to probably to another building at the Ivy Emmett Corridor to kind of complement what's already under planning there, the Data Science Institute and the Hotel and Conference Center.

So that's big news and great news for us.

Oh, great.

That is big news, great news.

Ms.

I've just got a quick report.

So I attended the MPO tech meeting on May 18th, where we made a recommendation for our unified planning work program.

So what the policy board ended up wanting to do is a study of climate change and how to react to it with our transportation planning.

So that should be interesting for the next year.

There's also discussion of potential smart scale projects for the 2022 round.

where basically the ones under consideration are Avon Street, Fifth Street, a couple around hydraulic, that is the District Avenue roundabout and the Hillsdale Avenue extension and then the Rivanna River bike head crossing over on the east side of town.

So we will have to down select to probably four projects and it's possible that some of those projects like Avon Street might need to be broken down into two or even more

in order to get to fundable size.

So the city's position was that we should prioritize the ones in the south side of town as those are dangerous corridors.

We saw a lot of fatalities on 5th Street.

We've done a lot of work up at hydraulic lately.

And of course, we got funded for that last year.

So in addition to that, we got a presentation from UVA Research Center working on analyzing data on bicycle crashes across Virginia.

A really interesting presentation.

I recommend they give it to other groups, including the policy board, and I hope they do.

You can check out a live tweet that I did of it on my Twitter page.

Super interesting data.

That's what I got.

Ms.

A couple of interesting meetings to talk about.

The Housing Advisory Committee met on 519, can't remember what month that was, and discussed tax policy.

Good stuff.

It was initiated by Jason Vandiver, the city treasurer.

We have been doing tax credits for new construction on historic homes at a tax abatement program.

and we've been doing it like I think 20 years.

Very few people take it up, but those few really get the money out of it.

And we're talking about generally high income people and very high dollar homes.

So sort of like an affordable home to a mansion, which was not the intent of the program.

The intent of the program was to save historic homes that would otherwise be lost entirely.

So he brought it to us basically saying, okay,

And there are exceptions.

But in terms of dollar value, I've received a helpful correction from a fellow commissioner.

But in terms of dollar value, most of it goes to a small number of very wealthy people.

And we got actually wonderful data on that I can share.

Really impressive.

So the conversation was, okay, well, what do we do with this?

How do we

Rejigger this to really serve the public and use our dollars most effectively.

And there was some consensus that we definitely do want to focus on preservation as well as affordability, affordable home ownership, affordable rentals, and really help to deliver the goals of this draft comprehensive plan, which was exciting.

Speaking of the comprehensive plan, Seville Plans Together Steering Committee met on 5-19 the same day.

Oh, what a day it was.

Oh, what a day.

We talked about many, many things.

Actually, a lot of this material, again, was familiar to us.

I think most notable, a lot of discussion about medium intensity residential.

The neighborhood leaders group representative had a lot of constructive feedback about that concerns that she had heard, which I think you've probably heard as well.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair Mitchell.

I have a couple of committee meetings to report on.

The Board of Architectural Review met May 18th.

I was not able to attend because of a conflict, but the notes from that meeting indicate that the consent agenda had two certificate of appropriatenesses.

that were approved.

And during the regular agenda, there was only one COA application.

This is for a new apartment building three stories with underground parking that is at 601 Preston Place, which is behind the Preston Court Apartments.

After discussion by the board, the applicant deferred the application.

And so I expect we'll be seeing that again.

The tree commission met just last week, June 1.

We had a really interesting presentation by a state forestry official who told us about a proposal to the

Parks and Rec, City Parks and Rec to do a biological control release and study experiment at Ragon Mountain Nature Area.

This is an experiment that will test the ability of selected parasites to control the emerald ash borer.

It's going to be a five-year study and will be completely funded by the USDA.

And this is a study that's actually been ongoing since 2007 and is now has been started in over 29 states already.

The Tree Commission did endorse the study and it now goes to, or it is in Parks and Rec for approval, I believe.

The Nature Conservancy has given a $20,000 grant for a partnership of local nonprofits to plant trees in a low-canopy city neighborhood.

The Tree Commission is supporting the effort and will participate.

And a plan is now being developed to select the neighborhood, find additional sponsors, and implement the planning.

that is going to happen.

It's a wonderful public-private partnership example.

Finally, an RFP is being written now to perform a study of the mall trees.

And we discussed the importance of how this study needs to dovetail with the planned cultural landscape report that is also going to be advertised soon by the city for the same mall, downtown mall.

And very briefly, Parks and Recs.

They've been very, very busy.

And the focus has just been on getting things open again.

And the opening is based on what the CDC advises and what state and local officials allow us to do.

The good news is we're allowed to open a lot of things.

The bad news is we don't have the people to help us open them.

So there is a

There's a paucity of folks to help us manage things.

And so the gating factor to doing a lot of the things that we need to do relates to our ability to get people on board.

So we've got lots of openings.

If you're interested, go to the Fox and Web website and we'd love to have you.

I want to cut things short on my end because I want to toss the ball to the NDS folks to talk a little bit about where we are on the comprehensive plan process

We have all gotten multiple hundreds of emails regarding this, and there's lots of confusion relating to the process.

And they're going to tend to lend a little clarity to that.

Good evening commissioners.

It's good to see you again.

Yeah, there has been a lot of feedback.

We can't complain that we are not getting any feedback on the comprehensive plan because everybody's well aware that we're getting a lot of feedback from the community.

At this point, we have a draft.

of the chapters within the comprehensive plan and also a draft future land use plan.

And those have been made public to solicit public comments.

And that we are getting the commissioners, the city council, the website, centralized location for feedback and staff.

So we're getting a lot of comments from the public.

In terms of the process going forward, the comment period has been extended from May 31st to June 13th.

And we are still receiving comments.

And then probably after June 13th, people will continue to probably send those comments.

And at this time, the consultant is working with staff

to summarize the comment by categories and those will be reviewed by the Planning Commission on June 29th.

I will say that on the same June 29th, the Planning Commission work session will include a discussion of the comments and staff and the consultant will also hear back from the

Planning Commission in terms of your own comments and then where we go at that point.

I'm sure the Planning Commission and the public would like to know after June 29th, then what?

That June 29th, we enable staff and the consultant to prepare informed timeline on how the final draft document

makes its way to the Planning Commission and the City Council for joint public hearing and subsequently to the City Council for final consideration.

So there will be a lot of discussion at the June 29th meeting.

And after that, the next steps in terms of final review process, the Planning Commission action and the consideration by the City Council will be the timing.

and that timeline will be communicated to the planning commission accordingly.

May I ask you a question?

The meeting on June 29th, that focuses only on the future land use path.

Yeah, we can still discuss

the draft chapters.

But at this point, it looks like everything is centered on the draft future land use map.

There seems to be a little confusion and maybe you can help us and help the public.

The future land use map, it's like a vision of the future land use, how the development scenario will pan out in the future.

The zoning is actually a Lego document.

It essentially dictates how development occurs and under what conditions.

So it's the zoning ordinance

that will actually detail what we do and how we are going to do it.

So actual endorsement of the vision

And so a lot of the feedback we've gotten is,

Do we have the infrastructure in place to support the increased density that we may be considering?

Yeah, we will touch base with the public works and other infrastructure related department.

However, I think the public needs to know.

The comprehensive plan has about seven chapters.

And some of the chapters deal with community facilities and infrastructure like transportation,

community facility and what have you.

And if there are the problem in terms of infrastructure support, the public works department and other appropriate city departments that are vested with the authority of providing infrastructure support for development, they will point that out.

That's the reason why.

You have various elements within this comprehensive plan.

You have the land use, you have the demographic information, then you have the infrastructure aspect that will say, hey, wait a minute, I don't think we have enough infrastructure to support this development.

before I toss the ball to Missy.

So I just want to be clear.

So when you say there's going to be a timeline laid out on June 29th or after June 29th to get to the final draft, that doesn't mean that there's one more iteration.

You're talking about in terms of engagement with the Planning Commission?

Yeah.

Yeah, well, the engagement with the Planning Commission is ongoing.

Because at the end of the day, the Planning Commission is the, I don't know how to put it, is the lead entity in terms of comprehensive planning, land use decisions, transportation, and what have you.

So the engagement with the Planning Commission doesn't end

on 29th.

When it's necessary, we touch base with the Planning Commission during the meetings, or if we find it absolutely necessary, then we can schedule a meeting just to brief you.

But June 29th meeting,

Okay, great.

Yeah, I think that is something we have to discuss, you know, with the consultant.

because they have their own timeline, they are just tense.

I think after June 29th, we have to discuss that.

Already we've started engagement in terms of that particular timeline with them already, because right now we are meeting with them every week, staff and the consultant, we have check-ins every week.

So we've started a preliminary discussion in terms of

And you may have mentioned this, and if I missed it, forgive me.

But the next objective is to complete and get a nod on the future land use map.

And then we segue into the balance of the documents.

We haven't decided that yet, you know, because when we meet on June 29th, and after the discussion, we will provide some kind of an idea what needs to get done before we get to the Planning Commission.

And once we get a hold of that, then we'll be able to provide an educated

Just to reiterate, just for the public, this is a vision document.

The Future Land Use Act is a vision document.

We are ways away from rezoning.

R1 is not

based on this vision document isn't going away.

So again, vision document versus an ordinance.

An ordinance is where things become real and become concrete.

OK, thank you.

Anyone else?

I have a quick staffing question.

Good question.

Actually, I went over to the city manager's office today.

Ask that question.

The city manager wasn't there, so I spoke with Brenda Kelly.

We talked about that.

So there is a discussion right now in terms of when

You know, this will be advertised.

There are some issues that are currently being considered related to that, you know, so once that is taken care of, it will be advertised.

Anyone else?

Ms.

Sure, I'm not going to reiterate things that Alex noted, except that I may do one or two that may be in different wording, which might, you know, just

spark somebody's interest in a different way.

We've definitely appreciated all of the comments that we've been receiving from the community.

A lot of interest, a lot of passion from the community in very different ways.

We have been working with the consultants to, they are right now getting that categorized and getting it organized in such a way that the commission is going to be able to look at that and be able to circulate through and figure out areas that need additional discussion as we move forward.

There was a lot of confusion based on the comments about a number of things.

And it'll take us all a while probably to communicate that because some of these concepts, unless you do this every day, are not something that you would know about.

Or you would see a map, anytime somebody sees a map, they think it's happening right away.

And so that's one of the things with the future news map that can be kind of complicated because it's a visioning document that helps as you're getting into the things that become code and become the area and the things that you want to become as a community into the future.

But once you start seeing colors on paper and colors on top of things that you like and places that you go,

It can be a little bit disjointing in a way.

But like both Hosea has said and Alex has said that the future land use map is a visioning tool.

It's not legally binding like the zoning ordinance is.

And the zoning ordinance is the step that comes after the land use map.

So we as part of this project, we have professional consultants on board to assist us with recommendations on things that might

work for our community to implement the goals that our community wants to bring forward.

The commission has been working on this for an awful long time and there's been a lot of community members involved as well.

This effort started in 2016-2017 timeframe and one of the major principles that started from this was that the Charlottesville community is growing.

And with that growth, the Planning Commission did not want that just to happen without there being a way to be involved in how that growth occurs and where that growth comes.

So the commission really came at this from something is going to happen to our community.

We know that we're seeing growth.

And we want to consciously make decisions about how that happens and not allow something to happen to us.

So I think that's one thing that we don't want to get lost in the discussion here.

I know a number of folks who commented have provided feedback on some of the population projections that are out there.

And they show some numbers.

We see a lot of applications that come through the community.

We see a lot of increased infrastructure and industry

that are moving forward to our community.

We also see a number of people who are having to leave our community because they can't find a place to be in our community.

So there are a lot of different factors that come into play with that.

And so, the main thing we want folks to be able to recognize here is we know that this is coming and we want to be able to look at this from, we want,

The community to have a voice in how that comes to our community.

A lot of interest in the comprehensive plan.

We've had a lot of comments.

Some of the bigger things that the future land use map presented at this point in time shows is, you know, an increase in the number of units in general residential areas.

and introduces a medium density residential category.

It provides for some neighborhood nodes.

And these are things that are different.

And people in our community have different feelings and different thoughts about how these things that are not the same may or may not affect them.

And the commission very much recognizes

that this is a factor for all in the community.

And one of those things is the telephone game that we all remember from back in the day where you hear a message and it goes around to different people and by the time it gets down the line, the message kind of changes.

And, you know, we were seeing a little bit of this with the discussion and so we want to do the best we can to help

get people as clear as possible on what's going on with this process and we know we have some work to do on that.

Just want to encourage the public that we've got this opportunity on June 29th.

Well, first of all, the public comment period is still open and we are taking any and all comments.

Comments are coming in in all different ways.

They're coming in by email.

They're coming in by phone calls.

They're coming in by the Planning Commission listserv on our website.

And all of those that come in are getting routed to the commissioners as well as to the consultants on the project.

The volume is incredibly high.

And so at this point, we don't have the capacity to do individual answers at this point.

So I do want to let you know that we are seeing that and we are getting those combined.

And there will be the opportunity to see that your comment is part of the discussion.

So I do apologize that we're not providing comments on the spot.

But the volume, thank you for being so involved, is very high.

And so we can't do it individually, but we're hopeful that once we get them combined we'll be able to help with that.

I do want to note that we have the work session on June 29th.

Everyone is welcome to view that opportunity.

It's going to be at 530.

We'll have it on Zoom.

We'll have the links available for folks.

In advance of that, a week in advance of that meeting, we'll have all the materials that are available.

So folks will have the opportunity to review those and folks may have some comments concerning that too.

I'm going to stop there just because I've talked quite a bit and allow for whether, Chair, we want to have more questions from the commission or we're bumping up on six o'clock.

Either way, we can

Then this is important.

So let's just take another couple of minutes as we do.

The problem is we're going to lose Reed and we need Reed to get into the other discussion.

Thank you, Chair.

I want to repeat and emphasize something that Ms.

Creasy pointed out.

This process of creating a new comprehensive plan started over five years ago.

And for over four years, the Planning Commission has been

Pleading, begging for public comment to come in to help with this process.

And that has taken the form of over 30 some meetings, presentations, workshops throughout the community.

And so it has been, and it was the Planning Commission's

It was their objective from the very beginning that they wanted to hear from the public.

They wanted to hear what people had to say about the comprehensive plan and about what's going to happen to our city as a result of the continuing growth.

All right, very briefly, anyone else?

Because we really do need to get Reid on board, up and out, okay.

Right, then let's do the consent agenda and then we'll move on, then I'll have a conversation with Missy and Joe about how we're gonna do this.

So the consent agenda contains the minutes from February 9th.

Is there a motion to approve?

I so move.

Is there a second?

Second.

We have a move and a second, motion and a second, all in favor?

Any objections?

Any abstentions?

Minutes are approved.

Ms.

Creasy, Mr. Rice, what I'd like to do, because we need to read input, is move matters to be presented by the public, not only on the agenda, to after the agenda item, which relates to short-term rentals.

Ms.

I believe so.

We may have some

So why don't we, does this, why don't I toss the ball to Ms.

Russell?

And then she will toss the ball to Reid.

And then before we begin delivery, we'll give the public a chance to chat with us about short term rentals.

Ms.

Sure, thank you.

Thanks to everyone.

I know this has been the discussion around short term rentals and homestay has been recently, well, fairly recently discussed in the past few years.

And obviously, I'm new to the commission.

So broadly, I want to frame the question, or the topic is sort of

are our short-term and slash homestay regulations serving our community as best they can.

I'll start with a couple of data points.

And this is a study that's specific to Airbnb, but just understand that if I'm, when we're talking about Airbnb, you know, I'm talking about short-term rentals and homestay broadly.

So evidence, this is a report from the Economic Policy Institute

Evidence suggests that the presence of Airbnb raises local housing costs.

Property owners do not benefit from Airbnb capacity to lower the transaction costs of operating short term rentals, but the beneficiaries are disproportionately white and high wealth households.

The shift from traditional hotels to Airbnb lodging leads to less reliable tax payments to cities and city residents likely suffer when Airbnb or Airbnb operators circumvent zoning laws that ban lodging businesses from residential neighborhoods or violate our policies around short-term rentals in residential neighborhoods.

So in that, the first problem I'm presenting to address is, do our short-term rentals and homestay regulations go far enough?

Whom do they benefit?

And at what cost to our neighborhoods and affordable housing picture?

And then if they do, and they are, we can discuss whether the intent is acceptable.

Can they be enforced adequately given, you know, our city staff resources to, again, serve our community?

Second kind of topic of conversation is data from Forbes, and it talks about the Airbnb effect, and that is essentially a remarkably similar

is, to some, the Airbnb effect is similar to gentrification in that it slowly increases the value of an area to the detriment of the indigenous or, you know, local residents, many of whom are pushed out due to financial constraints.

So my question around that data point is in the future, will, you know, looking ahead towards additional possible increases in density, ADUs, will

Will that proposed soft density result in more rentable housing stock, which I believe is the intent behind that recommendation?

Or will it result in more short-term rentals used in more of an Airbnb type capacity?

How would we prevent this from happening?

I don't think that's what we would want.

So my anticipated outcome resulting from this discussion is not to

introduce a new zoning or home state regulation per se, but I want to know if our current home stay and short-term rental policies are sound, that staff are able to enforce them.

OK.

Everyone hear me OK?

Because my computer sometimes is wonky.

We're good?

Yep.

All right.

So thank you, first of all, for changing up the meeting so I can get out of here at 7.

That being said, my colleague, Craig Fabio, is on the call and is also knowledgeable about the subject.

He also has time divers.

who works on the taxation side of this use.

I was going to go ahead and just kind of summarize the staff report.

I'm just basically providing facts.

I'm trying to keep my opinions separate from the content of the meeting.

So I'll just go ahead.

And then if you have any questions, let me know.

So I'm glad we can revisit this.

It's been five years or so, and I think it's a good time to come back and see what problems or successes might exist from the homestay ordinance.

Just real quickly, for any people in the public,

The Virginia Code defines a short-term rental as providing space intended for occupancy or lodging purposes for a period of fewer than 30 consecutive days in exchange for a charge for that occupancy.

So we are here because this Planning Commission wanted us to review the ordinance, which City Council

We enacted a resolution to the Planning Commission in 2015 to study it, and we rolled out an ordinance.

It was adopted September 8, 2015, which took a long time.

There's a lot of collaboration with business owners and people who had already been doing short-term rental in the city, so it was a very detailed process.

So right now, the city authorizes short-term rental

in two ways through the homestay program, which really is only for residential zones where a homeowner resides in the property.

Those are the only people who apply for homestays or homestay permits.

Right now I've gotten say about 125 that I've signed off on, which is more than last year and years prior.

And then also a hotel or other districts that allow hotel as a buy-rate use can also have short-term rentals.

So apartment buildings can offer short-term rentals as long as it's a buy-rate use for a hotel.

So prior to this ordinance, there was the ability to have short-term rentals

Primarily, we did have a homestay where we allowed people to rent up to three guest rooms in their house.

But they had to be on premises when those rooms were let out.

And that was in the single family, two family zoning districts.

And then we also had a bed and breakfast, which allowed eight guest rooms, and then in,

which allowed up to 15 guest rooms.

And those were more in the higher density residential units, I'm sorry, residential zoning districts through the special use process.

And those two, bed and breakfast and inn, are still in our zoning code.

But traditionally going way back, I mean, we've allowed boarding houses for many years.

I mean, that was a major use and there are still a couple of boarding houses in the city.

So let's see here, I'm sorry.

So when staff initially looked at the homestay regulations, we discussed different things.

For instance, whether or not we should have a lottery to cap the certain number of homestays, but we figured that would

have holes in it, and that was not pursued as an option.

Also, it was assumed that at some point there would be a saturation point.

And once there was 100, let's say, you know, there would be no more need for homestays.

And so they would kind of self-regulate, but I am not seeing that.

I am not seeing any sort of top of that bubble.

I mean, the bubble just keeps getting bigger and bigger and bigger.

And it's amazing to me how many

More home stays there are than I would ever imagine.

So when we did create the ordinance, though, we focused on three main things, safety, impact, and enforcement.

So safety, we have something in our ordinance that says that you have to have a fire

detector and a carbon monoxide detector.

And it also states that staff can come into the property at least one time each year to inspect these.

I do not go in and inspect those uses, but that clause is in the ordinance.

Impact.

You know, how is it going to affect the neighborhood and

And who can apply for these?

For instance, the code says you have to be a property owner and reside in the home for at least 180 days of each calendar year, which is not half a year.

And it's weird why that's in there.

Maybe it'd be at least 183 days of each calendar year.

But certainly lots of things can impact a property and also a neighborhood.

It allows up to six adults with any number of children to occupy a home as a short-term rental.

The number of people doesn't really affect an impact on the neighborhood.

It's the number of cars, the amount of noise they produce, and the amount of trash and impact.

That's really what you see.

So, for instance, are those six individuals arriving in separate vehicles?

Is there enough parking on the street?

Is it already overcrowded?

Is there parking on the property?

Will the guests stay out late at night?

Is there a hot tub on the property?

Is it a dense neighborhood or is there a lot of open space?

So there's just a lot of different factors.

And as we know in the city, there's a lot of different environments.

So the program impacts some neighborhoods a little more

intensely than other neighborhoods.

And then finally, enforcement.

In the beginning, I got about maybe two or three complaints a year, and now I'm getting many more complaints, and it really is about impact, noise, and vehicles, but also from other homestay operators who are doing, running their homestay legally,

you know, abiding by the law and looking across town and saying, no fair.

Why is that person, you know, not abiding by the law?

So we're getting a lot more complaints.

We do have something written in the code that if we get more than three substantiated complaints that we can revoke a permit and for the remainder of that year and the subsequent year.

But if

If someone hasn't gotten a homestay permit and is operating illegally because they don't reside in the property, then that doesn't come into play and we enforce the ordinances that through the notice of violation process.

As far as the getting a permit, it's a annual permit, the $100 fee.

I have heard some rumbles that that is expensive and my opinion is that

It's just, I mean, they're operating a business in their home and so they should have to pay a fee and really a hundred dollars versus the amount that they make is very minimal.

And this is an annual permit.

And so it is a little, you know, as a staff of two people, it takes a while to send out

All the permits and kind of babysit and make sure everyone's getting their permit.

So really, each year, not everyone gets a permit, even though they're operating their homestay in compliance.

So you've got three tiers.

You've got the people who are getting the permit and they're following all the rules.

You're getting other people who, for whatever reason, aren't renewing their permits, but they're still going to comply.

And then the third category, which is

In my opinion, the smallest category, because I've done a lot of research and I get a lot of complaints, is the people who either rent to more than eight adults or they don't reside in the property.

And the people I'm really most concerned about are the people that are breaking the law and they don't reside there.

And those are the people that I'm going after.

So finally, I just want to let you know that just

what other localities are doing.

Our ordinance just five years ago, I guess six years ago, was like one of the first in the state.

So a lot of other localities in Virginia were kind of just on autopilot watching what other people wanted to do because they didn't wanna take drastic steps too quickly.

So Blacksburg just rolled out an ordinance that kind of mirrors ours, but it's more restrictive.

which says that a property owner can rent rooms for a maximum of 90 days each year and they can rent out the entire property for just 30 days of each year.

On the other side, the city of Alexandria doesn't have any limitation.

There's no limitation at all except that you have to register with the Department of Finance.

So there's no permit whatsoever.

But that's just kind of, I mean, Blacksburg is similar to like Charlottesville because of the universities and the impact from the student population.

Alexandria is a lot more urban, so I can see how those are different.

So if you have more questions, please let me know.

And even though I'm going to jump off at seven, I'm going to watch the tape and feel free to email me if you have any questions.

So there you go.

Oh, I'm so sorry.

But before we jump in, we've been getting some comments from those who are watching, wondering if we're going to have a Matters from the Public opportunity later in the meeting.

Right.

One quick question.

Your report does not recommend a lot of amendments to the ordinance.

The 183-day piece is the only thing that leaps out at me.

What would you like to see amended?

Well, so the enforcement of the ordinance isn't really, I think the code is pretty sound.

It's manpower, to be honest.

There's two of us and not to put upper management because upper management has changed so many times, but we've been asking for a zoning administrator for over 12 years.

I'm sorry, a zoning inspector for over 12 years and it just for whatever reason can't find its way into the budget so

With the staff time that we have and all our other duties and responsibilities, we have to prioritize our time.

And so we really focus more on complaints that we get, and we're not proactively going out and enforcing these things.

This ordinance has turned out to be, with all the other ordinances that we've gone through, I mean, this by far takes up

Way more time than I would ever imagine.

You would think that you would create this tool where everyone has this opportunity to make money off their property.

And in turn, instead, there's a lot of people that just see this as an investment.

That's what they want to do.

I didn't predict that way back when because that just wasn't the business model six years ago.

But really, the emphasis on making this only

permitted for owner-occupied properties is because the planning commissioners prior to you didn't want Charlottesville to turn into the outer banks where it just turns into a bunch of rental units and it drives out a bunch of people.

So there are some, I mean, most of the people are doing it responsibly.

I mean, by far.

The same people apply every single year, and when I type in their email, it pops up because I've corresponded with them.

And that's most of the people.

I can't put a number on it because I'm sure there's some I don't know about, but it's very small, comparatively, at least the ones that I can get complaints about.

I mean, it's really not so much the owner not being owner-occupied.

It's the renting out to more than six people.

Ms.

Well, I just wanna point out that Todd Divers has his hand raised.

You're muted Todd.

Thanks Reed.

Hey everybody.

Hey.

Thanks for including me on this.

I mean, I've got some ideas to read.

I don't think you can in good conscience make the ordinance any more restrictive than it is without giving Reed some help.

I mean, that would just be negligent in my opinion.

And I mean, I'll be honest with you.

We've got about 250 of these things in our tax system.

Reid's got about 125 in the homestay system.

So I mean, he's not hearing about a lot of them, because they're not misbehaving, but that doesn't mean that they're doing what they're supposed to do.

I think I'm just gonna touch on one other thing and I'll let you guys get back to it.

But I think the annual $100 fee is onerous.

I think that is the only home occupation permit that requires a fee every single year.

Every other home occupation permit is a one time thing.

I think it's a disincentive for compliance.

I think it ties Reid and Craig up, you know, chasing people for $100 when they, you know, could be going out doing something else.

He's not gonna tell you that because, you know, he's a nice guy.

But, you know, yeah, I think if you did anything, I would get rid of that, you know, I wouldn't make people pay that 100 bucks every single year.

And I'd get them some help.

And Ms.

Russell, do you want to open it up to public comment?

Absolutely.

All right.

So what we're going to do is open it up for public comment.

In this section, we're only talking about the short-term rentals.

We will open it up for general stuff after we wrap up the discussion on short-term rentals.

Thank you, Chair Mitchell.

At this time, if you'd like to address the Planning Commission on short-term rentals, click your raise hand icon, or if you're joining us by phone, press star nine.

We will call on you in the order of hands raised and you will have three minutes for comment.

And our first commenter is Miranda Watson.

Miranda, you're on with the Planning Commission.

Hello.

So I wanted to be here today because I have a small business where I manage short term rentals in town for homeowners when they're away.

So I just kind of wanted to share my perspective on that, and kind of mean from my perspective, the very positive

impact that I've seen this have for local homeowners.

So I mean on a more serious level, I mean we know this is a difficult town for a lot of people to afford to live in and so protecting

you know, people's ability to kind of utilize their homes in this way when they're away.

I mean, I've seen people be able to separate from their spouses because, you know, or be able to afford to do that.

I've seen people be able to stay in their homes when they wouldn't have been able to otherwise to like pay for graduate school.

And then, you know, on the lighter side, pay for like a family vacation and that kind of stuff.

So, you know, as far as,

My perspective is concerned where it's being done well.

It's being managed where, you know, I'm, this is what I'm doing now.

I'm available 24-7 to kind of deal with anything that could arise.

I can kind of advise people on being able to follow

the rules and the protocols that have sort of been laid out for the city.

I've just seen it be a hugely beneficial thing for a lot of people in town.

And from my angle, you know, I'm also able to employ a number of cleaners.

You know, local individuals helped do that.

I went to the IRC and kind of trained like refugee women who had come in as like, this is a well-paid job that I can sort of train them.

They could bring their kids.

They don't have to speak a lot of English.

And also just kind of steer all of the guests that are coming to town to, you know, my favorite local restaurants and shops and, you know, I'm trying to kind of take

what's coming in, which is already coming in, which is people with money to spend in Charlottesville and kind of figure out how I can sort of distribute that amongst the community as best I can and to the homeowners themselves, as opposed to it going to kind of a hotel.

So, you know, just from my perspective, it's been an awesome thing.

And I mean, for me, of course, personally,

You know, I quit my other job and this is what I do now.

So, you know, it's benefited me as well.

So, and I saw kind of just in the comments, like the ability to protect the whole house rental, I think is important, which is the part where the owner doesn't have to be there because that's sort of the main, that's the main interest point for people who are coming to Charlottesville.

Thank you.

And next we have Laura Santiago.

Laura, you're on with the Planning Commission.

Welcome.

Hi, I want to thank you guys for your time.

I know working for public service is often a thankless job.

And I appreciate all you guys with that complete sincerity.

I just wanted I was wondering, Miss Russell, if you could throw up those two resources you mentioned your chat.

This is a subject I've been following for many years since we lived briefly in a country where the majority of their travel is short-term rentals, not the hotel industry, which is a major lobbying factor in this.

And when I got back, I just started following this obsessively.

And my understanding was the research that you cited was mostly done in cities where investors were buying up big apartment complexes.

And I really look forward to reading that and seeing if that has changed or my understanding is incorrect.

Furthermore, it sounds like, I mean,

Reid has a really, really good grasp on this.

Happy to, as a short-term rental owner, very happy to pay a significant down payment one-time fee, use that for the city to enforce the regulations.

It's written very solidly compared to other places in this country, as you guys said earlier, already.

So what we just need to do is focus on, I don't see the speaker now, she actually spoke over half an hour ago, but she mentioned the two different types of rentals.

An investor who's buying a property they have never lived in, do not plan to live in, and takes from longer-term rentals.

Versus, you know, the retired couple who's renting their basement.

Or the teachers, as the first short-term rental owners I knew in Charlottesville were teachers who would rent their house when they would go away for the summer.

Obviously a group that needs affordable housing.

So I think you guys are already on there.

Just enforce what we got.

Make the short-term rental owners pay to enforce it.

We're happy to.

You guys are providing us the service.

So thanks for all you do.

Happy if you guys want to reach out in the future.

My name is Laura Santiago again.

And next up we have Peter Crossum.

Peter, you're on with the Planning Commission.

Welcome, Peter.

And Peter, you're on.

You're not muted, but we can't hear you.

Can you hear me now?

Yeah, yes.

There he is.

All right.

Again, I would like to reiterate what the last speaker just said, and thank you all for what you're doing.

I was fully aware of the homestay ordinance in Charlottesville more than five years ago before I purchased my house here and intentionally purchased a duplex with the intent of

of operating the home state to supplement my income.

Not so much for my income now, I'm still working, but I'm approaching retirement age.

And when I do retire, part of my retirement plan is the income that I can earn off of this property.

That being said, the $100 annual fee, I don't consider it a punitive or a disincentive

It's just a part of doing business in the city and I'm fine with it.

I was fine with signing the waiver to have the property inspected.

I did a significant renovation in the space that I use as my short stay space so that it would be compliant with fire code.

It's very, very,

This business is a hospitality business.

And like it or not, Charlottesville is a big hospitality town.

We do a lot of business here.

I'd say I've been in operation for over three years.

Last year, it was a very big exception to the norm.

But in the other years, this year, too, I'm doing about roughly 20% of my business involves wedding-related stuff.

I'm very close to the university.

Football season is big for me.

If I were unable to continue doing business, I would convert the place into an apartment that would be rented to university students.

It's not going to have a big impact on affordable housing because of the neighborhood that I'm in.

I'm a block from a fire station, a block in either direction from a gas station, a block from half a dozen restaurants.

It's a very good location for this operation.

I can understand people being upset about having something in their residential neighborhood, but my neighborhood is very mixed use.

And I would

like if you're going to make modifications to zoning regarding short stay that you consider the mixture of use in a neighborhood residential versus commercial slash presidential.

I would also like to point out that about two years ago

We've got about five seconds.

A delegate piece who's from the eastern part of the state submitted to the state legislature an ordinance that was largely based on the city of Charlottesville's home state ordinance for consideration of state law so that it would be universal across all of Virginia.

That didn't go anywhere in the legislature, but

Your ordinance is so well structured that it was at least considered for introduction for statewide law.

Thank you very much, Peter.

Next up, we have Shawn Lyons.

Shawn, you're on with the commission.

Good afternoon.

I really appreciate this conversation about this important issue.

I am a Charlottesville STR owner operator and I have been so for approximately three years.

I would like as an STR owner to be respectful of my neighbors.

I do not want to inconvenience them with my guests.

I do not want them to have less of a quality of life because I'm operating my short-term rental.

What I have seen in my neighborhood over the last few years is the introduction of new STRs.

STRs which are not in compliance.

They exceed the maximum number of guests.

They occasionally cause disturbances to our neighbors.

So in listening to Mr. Brodhead mention,

that he is aware of owners who are not compliant.

I'm glad that he acknowledges that.

I think it is very important that the owner operator be in the residence, be there to monitor, be there to respond to the concerns of neighbors in the area.

That is not always the case.

As you may be aware, there are many devices that allow owners to monitor the activity of their guests, the noise level, surveillance cameras.

I'm adjacent to one that has all of those features, but there's still a blindness that comes with owners who aren't there.

Just think of it.

You're awakened at two o'clock in the morning.

How do you contact the owner?

Some of the owners are unknown.

They don't provide any information on how you make them aware of concerns.

They're not obligated to.

In going back to the fact that the ordinance requires the owner operator to be in residence, I hope in the future that this can actually be enforced in a consistent and fair manner, and I believe that that

will increase the quality of the experience and minimize the disruption that non-owner operators experience while living adjacent to these short-term rentals.

I thank you for your time and consideration.

Next up, we have Scott Wiley.

Scott, you're on with the Planning Commission.

Hi, can you hear me now?

Yes.

Okay, great.

I would add I actually talked and was sort of instrumental and, or I should say involved in, in the original regulations.

So a couple of points that I made then I'll just briefly make now.

Number one over that period, I mean, we, my family has contributed several thousand dollars in taxes to Charlottesville based on the 8% we pay in income.

I do think that the main problem is people who buy places and rent them out when they're not there all the time.

So the people like me who live here and occasionally go away for a weekend, and I mentioned this before, so I'm a nurse and there are 10 nurses in my unit.

I'm the only one who can afford to live in Charlottesville.

Everybody else lives in Clavana, Nelson, Green,

Buckingham and so forth and drives into work because they can't afford to live in Charlottesville.

So this property we have, we have two bedrooms that are rent out and it helps us to be able to afford to live in Charlottesville.

I hope that you will not throw the good out with the bad.

I think that there are

The fact that there are people who aren't following regulations doesn't mean that those of us who are and contribute to the tax base and are responsible, hopefully that won't get thrown out with the people who buy up several properties and do affect property values.

And as far as that goes in my neighborhood in Rose Hill, the thing that affects affordability is the fact that there are houses getting torn down and $450,000 houses being put up next door.

And then the last thing is I just would reiterate what other people have said.

We're pretty close to Preston Avenue with all of the developments along there in terms of restaurants and pubs and so forth.

And people who stay here can walk to those and they contribute to the tax base.

So those are the people that like it or not, taxes and income are what drive a lot of ability to do things in the city.

So I will yield the rest of my time.

And next up, we have Craig Griffin.

Craig, you're on with the Planning Commission.

Hello.

I moved to Charlottesville in 1991, actually.

I've seen a lot of change over the years.

I've been a short-term stay host now for about four or five years in our current location.

And I can echo a lot of the things that you've been hearing this evening is that

that folks who are coming to stay in Charlottesville are coming because of the experience that the Charlottesville people provide.

And so we spend a lot of our time and our interactions with our clients

recommending restaurants like Marie Bette, like Angelique's in the Dairy Market, which is fantastic fried chicken if you've ever been there.

We tell people to explore the neighborhood, to go to Cardinal, to go to the neighborhood shops and that kind of thing.

And that actually has a significant economic impact that folks who are coming here

I really do want to learn about what Charlottesville is all about and by providing those opportunities to stay close in to those things that are uniquely Charlottesville I think is really important.

If you require that an owner stays in the house with the guests, that breaks down that whole paradigm.

And the reason for that is not because they can go wild.

It's just that they want to unpack and be able to settle in and do their thing and have their conversations and that kind of thing.

There's nothing wrong with having rules around size of groups or about making sure that

We're following the rules and paying the fees and that kind of thing.

But it's really important that folks can settle into a home, unpack their things, and not have an odd roommate in the whole equation.

The last thing I would say is that it's also really valuable to understand that when people come to Charlottesville, they're coming here for an event of some kind.

They're coming to

go on vacation, they're coming for graduation, they're coming for any variety of events, a wedding, that kind of thing.

And it's really important that they have a place where they can gather and be together during that time.

If anybody else would like to comment on short-term rentals, click the raise hand icon or press star nine if you're joining us by phone.

We will have a chance later in the meeting for general comment.

I will close the comment session for this part of the meeting.

Ms.

I think it would be good to hear what others on the commission think.

I mean, I have some commentary and I want to be clear, like I think that we actually do have

Good regulations.

I don't think I have any comments to add.

Yeah, I mean, I guess to that question of enforcement, I've kind of heard this

I don't know if you call it a rumor or idea or whatever from time to time that like the owner occupancy requirement does not apply to LLCs because they aren't people and therefore don't have the ability to reside at a place.

And to that point, I know there are some companies in town that run many Airbnbs

and many people seem to think that they are all full-time Airbnbs where no one resides at that place.

I think I will.

No, I don't think it can be said that that's a hard and fast rule.

As a general rule, an LLC is a type of business entity.

So if you go to find out what state laws apply to how an LLC is set up and

and how they're supposed to be operated, it's in the section of the state code called corporations.

So it's a business type entity.

But that being said, a number of LLCs only have one member and they conduct business activities through that corporation and they get some protection from

liability.

But in terms of how the IRS, you know, regards it, it's an extension of that individual's, you know, income.

So a lot depends in an LLC situation on whether or not there's one member or multiple members.

But I would say that anecdotally, and Reid can weigh in if he's ever noticed this, but

particularly in the area of the university, it seems as if quite a few of the, particularly the single family dwellings that are used for these types of short-term rentals are actually purchased by an LLC.

So I think that in those situations,

There is some intention by whoever owns it, whether it's someone who's graduated from UVA or what have you, to sometimes use that building as a place to stay themselves, but to also use it for sort of a commercial operation when they're not staying there themselves, very much like

Beach rental is a great analogy.

And so it's really difficult.

You don't want to base your regulations specifically necessarily on who owns it.

But as I said earlier, it is a fairly easy place to draw a distinction to say if somebody's living there, it seems more like a home occupation.

And the impacts are likely to be more similar to a home occupation.

versus if someone's not living there, it's more like, or not living there most of the time, it seems more like a business and generally like any other business, if it's managed well, it presents few problems in a mixed use district or a commercial district.

If it's not managed well, it's gonna cause problems wherever it is.

I was just going to say that in the past with LLCs, we actually require sometimes that people provide us with the LLC document showing that they're actually part of the LLC.

So the LLC might be owned by many people, and so they have to show that they are, in fact, on the deed.

and so we can grant them an application that way.

So there are LLCs.

Some of the LLCs that you see snapping up properties are tapping into a long-term rental market where they're not necessarily renting to, they're renting to 30 days or more, but they appear to look like the traditional Airbnb

because it's like this nice renovated space and it looks very boutique and what have you.

What people who are renting Airbnbs want to live in, but they are actually, since the pandemic, where you're having people able to work remotely, they can stretch their dollar.

If they have a New York City or a San Francisco job, they can come to Charlottesville and pay Charlottesville prices and get more bang for their buck.

I am seeing more of a trend of that because I've done I've gotten some complaints about some of these and I've looked into it deeply and they are in fact more than 30-day rentals so there is some of that going on.

Also that going back where Todd said he had about 250 people registered with him, I also want to say that

Some of those are the buy rights.

We had talked about where you have all the other zoning districts that allow for a hotel.

And so all those are buy right and the homestay doesn't apply.

So I don't think that there's a huge 125 applicant difference between what I have for numbers and what he has.

I think it's a lot smaller when you factor in all those other buy right uses.

But I like what all the people had to say.

I have permits for all those people.

Ms.

Watson, for instance, is like a property manager.

And that's something that people have to put on their application is who a property manager is if they, in fact, aren't the people or the person that's going to be on call if there is an issue.

Yeah, so I mean that makes sense to me.

I'm not trying to like vilify LLCs here and I certainly understand that you can have single owner LLCs or multi owner LLCs.

I'm just trying to make sure that there is no exemption

whereby you can have a company owning a house and get out of the owner occupancy rule or permanent residence rule.

In fact, I would say that to me, it might make sense to make that owner occupancy rule more of a permanent occupancy rule.

If you've rented a place for five years that has an extra room, I don't see any particular reason why you renting that out as an Airbnb is different from you owning that house and renting out your spare room as an Airbnb.

Obviously, it is in our ordinance now.

No, so you're absolutely right.

So you can have a single family dwelling in an R1 neighborhood.

And that dwelling could be owned by an LLC.

So what Reid has to figure out if he receives a report about that, is if, if, for example, that LLC is a single owner,

then he should ask that single owner of the LLC, ask for the driver's license or something that shows what their normal place of residence is.

And if that driver's license or voter registration card or whatever document it is has a Florida address, then you know that's... So it's the same process of information gathering as it would be if it weren't owned by an LLC

But as you can imagine, getting all of that information requires the zoning staff to rely on cooperation.

And if they don't have cooperation, then you have to figure out, how do I get the information I need to bring some sort of prosecution of a zoning violation in a courtroom?

Because you still have to have evidence when you go.

They have a difficult job when it comes to these.

And I think they've been doing a really good job.

OK.

And then quickly, because I don't want to hog read, if I have a nonconforming, say, multifamily use in an R1 zone,

I mean, if the homeowner resides there in one of those units, then arguably they could rent out one of the other units.

Ms.

Good afternoon, everyone.

I'm sorry I had a hard time finding my mute button.

I had a few comments and a couple of questions first.

So my first comment and then, Reid, I had a couple of questions for you.

Thank you.

I appreciate that.

But my first comment before I ask any questions is that as a planning commissioner who has been side by side with Mr. LeHindro working on the comprehensive plan update and fighting feels like vigorously for the last five years for affordable housing, I do feel like I was taking the time to address Airbnbs.

It's not a waste of our time, but we could use this time to

That's going to be my first comment.

There are more people who are operating correctly or not causing problems.

To me, us taking a whole segment today to talk about something that's not really helping our community as far as providing more affordable housing seems like we're kind of moving backwards here.

The second thing I would like to know is, because it doesn't seem like much has changed, especially if you say our ordinance is such a great ordinance, I would like to know how many complaints Reid has received.

I would also like to know what area

of the city those complaints are coming from, because I think I have a general idea of where they're coming from.

We talked about this about five years ago, and we were under the impression then that most of the complaints were coming from the university area.

OK.

I can't give you an exact number of complaints, but I can tell you that I get complaints all over the city, in every zoning district.

that gentleman, Mr. Lyons that came on.

He's off a cherry.

I've talked to the, I've cited his neighbors who are doing something illegally.

Not so much in Greenbrier, not, you know, it's very quiet over there.

I don't think a lot of people really do it over there, but it is everywhere.

I can get back with you with a tally of the number of

complaints I've done.

Once I do get it, I go online.

The hardest thing to do is figure out where these illegal uses are.

Because if you use Airbnb or VRBO or what have you, it doesn't tell you what the address is.

So finding the general location.

If I do get a complaint, it's helpful because normally I get an address.

And then I start gathering evidence

I don't really want to say publicly what I do, because it's kind of a secret.

But I can tell you later, I don't want to have people hide how they're operating illegally.

And then I generate a notice of violation.

Give the person 30 days.

If they don't comply, then we've got to go to court.

And most likely coming soon, we're going to be going to court this summer.

So get ready, Lisa.

In one extreme example, I have to say, most people comply.

A lot of people don't know, and they want to get into compliance.

And it's really the extremes that will get to court.

Because our ultimate goal is compliance.

I mean, we're not making lots of money from going to court.

We're just trying to get something back the way it's intended to be used.

In one extreme example, the people could not comply, and they decided to sell their house.

And the neighbors were ecstatic because they dealt with a terrible Airbnb where it was terribly run and it was noisy and it was a quiet cul-de-sac.

And I've got a great letter from the property owner next door.

He's very happy now.

No, I was asking where the locations was, and like I said, my comment more so was we're talking about it takes away from affordability, but have we ever asked ourselves the question as to why so many people in the city of Charlottesville, as some of our constituents even said during the public comment, feel like they need to operate an Airbnb in order to

Be able to afford to stay in the city.

To me, that strikes a bigger iron.

Why do people feel like the only way to be able to live in the city of Charlottesville is that you have to operate an Airbnb to have an additional income?

The other thing I guess I have a hard time with is that we're sitting here debating apples and oranges when we have and it's we've discussed this so many times that is like I feel like I want to throw up we have neighborhoods that are somewhat affordable

and then you have these developers who come in and if the regular home rates are roughly about $200,000 to $250,000 for a home and then you let the developers come in and build these $400 to $500 starting price developments or new homes,

To me, that seems like a more issue of pricing affordable housing out versus Airbnb where people are making money to be able to afford to stay in Charlottesville.

So that was my big comment.

I just wanted to know how many complaints we have and what we're doing to enforce that.

And then also, from what I know of Airbnb, I do know that when you

Make it so that that home has to be owner occupied at all times in order to have guests you do really take away from that Airbnb experience that people are looking for, hence as to why they're not going to a hotel in the first place.

If we have someone graduating from the University of Virginia, they don't necessarily want to stay at a hotel because they want to stay somewhere where the family can gather and have dinner space together.

So I do think that's something that we should look into.

Mr. Solliot I have questions, and maybe comments will evolve from them.

The number six, it sounds like a magical number.

I couldn't figure out why.

The old planning commission decided that.

There was no notes.

No, I think it depends on the house, right?

Every neighborhood, the impact is going to be felt differently.

Like I said, you know, a lot of the complaints we get is that a bachelorette party with, you know, eight different cars just showed up because they all, they drove from different locations.

But others, you know, where they all come together or, you know, maybe it's a couple families.

It really depends, right?

And so a small house can't really accommodate eight people, but a larger house might be able to.

And then you should know as well that under the building code, depending on the height of a particular dwelling and how many bedrooms it has,

I can't remember, like Reid, I can't remember specifically how we got to six in the zoning ordinance, but in the building code, there could be a different number based on the characteristics of a particular structure.

And then also in considering

sort of what is the presumed reasonable occupancy of a particular residential structure, it's generally presumed that two people per bedroom is a reasonable rate of occupancy.

So if you look at a lot of single family dwellings, there are very few that are gonna have more than three bedrooms.

So six seemed like

Applying sort of that two person per bedroom rule, six seems like the upper limit that most houses other than some really big Victorian structure or something itself might have, but a lot of those larger structures might then fall under the building code requirements.

The residential homestay versus commercial or mixed use, does the six number apply differently?

The homestay with the six unrelated only applies where a homestay permit is required.

So once you get to the commercial or mixed use, it's a hotel and it's not regulated by me.

Thank you.

Two uses sort of jumped to me.

Residential, which is more sort of like a hotel, like this is a place that I want to stay, maybe cook a meal, maybe have a couple of people over, versus an event.

This is, you know, I'm going to have a party with a lot of people and they're going to bring their cars.

All right, no, I mean, I'm sure there is, and there's probably a precedent somewhere, but that was not really, we more thought about, is someone gonna try to have events at large events?

People have asked, can I have weddings?

And I can't allow that, but it's hard to regulate how people use their house.

For instance, someone who resides at a house,

As their permanent residents, how can I prevent them from having a dinner party every single weekend where they have all these guests and are a big backyard barbecue?

There's no way to regulate that.

So I think it would be really, really, really hard to do.

Parking, I hear a lot about parking just all the time.

Can we regulate parking?

I'm sure it would be hard to enforce.

It would be hard, it would be kind of on the owner.

I think some owners really try to restrict how many vehicles their guests bring.

If you look on some of the Airbnb websites, it says it, like, you know, maybe, you know, only can bring two cars or what have you.

But unless it's a restricted parking zone where there's zone parking, it's hard to prevent.

You know, anyone can park on a street.

It's a public street.

And it would be really hard to enforce.

That would be calling on the neighborhood to come and help me enforce it by providing me with pictures and license plates and that kind of stuff.

And I think it'd be hard to investigate because by the time I get that information, the cars are gone and the Airbnb stays over.

Although you could, again, in your zoning ordinance, you establish minimum on-site parking requirements for different uses.

If you called out this type of use in the mixed-use districts as something that warranted its own set of parking standards, you could probably do it that way.

I think, and Reid can correct me if I'm wrong, I think there's already components of parking regulations that go with

a home occupation.

So you're not supposed to use a lot of the spaces on the street for regular parking for people.

So if you can figure out what would make an impact, yes, you could do it.

I hate to cut out short, but I do have to be there at 7.15.

So Craig Fabio is on the call and he is able to, best as he can, answer questions.

Or if you have more questions, certainly email me and I will get back to you as quick as possible.

Thank you very much.

And I hope the rest of the discussion goes well.

Thanks.

No, sir.

Thank you.

That's all I've got.

So as I recall, one of the main concern that Ms.

Russell had and why we're having this conversation tonight is the impact that, is the STR, short-term rental business, having a negative impact on affordable housing?

This is Craig.

I will speak slightly to that.

It was pointed out by one of the respondents that this provided them affordability.

And this is something that we hear from folks is the ability to do this is the only means they have to stay in Charlottesville.

So there is that piece of it.

I think it's very difficult to state that there's an absolute impact on affordable housing when our current market is something that anyone outside or those of us here might call obscene, insane.

I don't know where the top is.

I don't know what the answer to affordable is.

You know, it's middle-income folks that have been able to get a foothold.

A good amount of them are using this as a means to maintain their homes.

So there is at least some affordability there.

But any actual evidence we've received that this program or short-term rentals are illegal are not.

Yeah, and I'm wondering what information we need to be able to make that assessment.

And if that's even possible with the number of illegal STR rentals going on.

So I don't know that this has helped the conversation, the concerns of why we're discussing it.

So just two thoughts.

One, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

It looks like it ain't broke.

The other thought is that there are two things that might be broken.

And that is moving to 183 days, maybe something we want to think about down the road.

And the other thing that Mr. Divers mentioned is that

chasing down a hundred bucks every year.

Maybe almost more work than Craig and Reid need to do.

100 bucks, 100 bucks initiation fee may be the way to go.

So those are the only two things that I've heard that are broken on this.

Otherwise, interesting discussion, but I wouldn't mess with it.

The only thing I'd mess with is getting Reid some more help.

But

I didn't ask for this discussion, but I did raise the issue because of the anecdote that I see on my street, which does have a number of duplexes providing affordable housing, or at least some sort of subsidized housing because I think there's members of IRC.

Anyway, I'll make the link to the affordable housing plan and why this, I think, raises an issue we should discuss.

We have approved an affordable housing plan that includes protections for lower income or marginalized

communities, supporting tenants rights, implementing and increasing subsidy programs, tax relief, rental assistance, right?

That's all in our affordable housing program.

These programs require more staff.

And what I'm hearing from staff is they need help to implement the policies that are great, that are

You know, state precedent.

But we have to support our staff and make sure they are run.

I just want to add, thank you for bringing that up.

Additional staff up.

I'm the one that submits the budget.

And I intend to request for that position again.

In the past, we have requested that and it hasn't been funded.

And last year due to COVID, all new positions where proposals were suspended, unless it's critical.

If I could chime in, I've got a couple maybe action items or ways to kind of further look at the issue.

And I'll say, like, I used to be pretty skeptical of the idea that short-term rentals had a significant impact on the supply of overall rentals.

But I think the last year has given us a very significant natural experiment to kind of see the impact that they have, right?

And one thing I've noticed from, you know, constantly browsing Craigslist and Zillow

is that there have been a lot of fully furnished apartments on the market for long-term rental lately.

I think more than I had seen in the past, but of course that's entirely actable.

So one thing we could look at, and maybe this is engaging the CCI team that produced that report is take a look at the list of permanent locations that we had

pre-COVID, see how many of them were put on the market as long-term rentals post-COVID.

And maybe that will tell us how many entire homes are being rented out kind of long-term that are not on the market because of short-term rentals.

But I'm definitely very sympathetic to the argument that it's also helping people afford their places.

And to that point, I think

As I mentioned earlier, changing the owner occupancy rule to a pure permanent residency rule makes sense.

So it's not to exclude renters who are also having trouble affording their homes from being able to rent out a bedroom or even the whole place for a weekend on home space sites.

And then lastly, it seems like the vast, vast majority of the problem is a result of

people who aren't complying with the rules at all and aren't registered.

And I think what I'm hearing from people in the community is that they're aware of Airbnbs that are not in compliance or are nuisances, but no one really has any idea how to support it or to report it rather.

So first off, if we could say exactly how that's supposed to be reported here now in this meeting, that would be great.

And then secondly, maybe all we need is like,

A web form on the city website that is report an Airbnb violation.

You know, here's a basic rundown of the rules.

Please, here's a text box, tell us what it violated.

And here's a space to upload images.

Fill this in, submit the form instead of saying, well, you need to contact the zoning administrator.

Rory, I had a quick question for you.

I heard you say, and I'm just looking for clarification, that we should change it so that people who are renting currently or long-term tenants have the ability to do so.

Wouldn't that be like re-leasing their lease?

Typically, yeah.

I mean, I think usually it's specified.

I think it depends on your lease, right?

I think typically it's specified in your lease.

Like I know my lease has a whole short-term rental section for that, which I guess implies that people are probably doing it without permission or maybe with, well, I guess it's buy right in this zone, but I mean, yeah, I would have to depend entirely on your lease, but that would be between the renter and their landlord, I guess.

Here's the question or the here's what would draw concern for me because if your tenant is running an Airbnb and you have not approved or okayed that, when they go to look up who owns that property, the tenant's name isn't going to show up.

The landowner or the homeowner is going to be the one who has to deal with the backlash of that.

I feel like if we're going to extend that, because I know that's something that we talked about the last time we looked at this, I definitely think it needs to come from the homeowner.

A tenant is just a tenant.

They can't supersede the homeowner, if that makes sense to you.

Because when they have a violation, they're not coming after the tenant.

They're going to come after the property owner.

Yeah, I mean, I think that makes sense.

I mean, if you're not in compliance, you could be doing it as a renter anyway now.

But I think, yeah, like to have a sign off from the landlord or from the property owner makes sense.

The change, I guess, would then be saying, if the tenant is a permanent resident and is the one running it, they can do it as long as they have a sign off from the landlord.

So Craig here.

From an enforcement standpoint, that would be difficult.

Also from a staff standpoint, the concern, which our attorneys may speak to as well, would be, we would need to have the documents to state that the owner is allowing for this because any enforcement we go after, it goes back to the property owner.

So a bad actor as an operator,

We would have to go after the owner and things happen and owner may not be aware of something even if we have something in writing that says that an owner does.

But on the flip side of that, all of the other home uses are available to a tenant.

You can operate your landscaping business, you can operate your computer home repair, your hair salon as a tenant with a property owner permission.

It does get a little bit different in a residential situation, and I think we'd be concerned about a much greater deal.

Yeah, and I'm trying to add, I believe the county has a concept in their homestay ordinance of a resident manager, where the owner is the one kind of signing off on the whole deal.

But then there's a resident who is not the owner, and presumably a tenant in this case, is the one running the homestay.

So I guess it might be useful to talk to county enforcement staff to talk about how they manage that.

So that is the same situation as the bed and breakfast.

But the owner applies for that.

here, you know, in our non homestay and some of the some of the areas where it is allowable, some of the areas you can just rent as a hotel, some of the areas you are required to have an onsite manager.

A live-in manager.

So some of them have a small room that the manager lives in.

Some of them have, you know, a separate apartment there.

And it's not an area where there's an owner requirement, but there is an on-site person required.

But the on-site person does not apply for that permit.

Right.

Seems like Mr. Divers might have something to say.

I'm just going to reiterate what Craig said that, yeah, this is the only use I'm aware of, home occupation use that a tenant can't engage in.

And I can tell you it happens because I've spoken to many, many landlords

who were not aware of it.

But then I've also spoken to landlords who were perfectly fine with it, you know, and would have blessed it had they known about it.

Yeah, so going back to my, you know, when you pose the question of what's my desired outcome, I said, I'd like to know that our policies are sound, that staff are able to enforce them.

And, you know, I don't think we really went to the, we got to the question of what would more ADUs look like and, you know, increase density, would that exacerbate

people taking advantage or not following the policy.

It sounds like there's some minor tweaks that may be worth considering.

I don't feel very strongly about that.

I feel the most strongly about making sure we're supporting our staff in this and all progressive policies that have good and

Worthy Intent and making sure we can support our staff in implementing them.

I want council to hear that as well.

I think we've got one councilor on, but yep, good.

I did that.

I looked up my lease just now, and it has a clause that I can do a short-term sublet, but I need to give the landlord 25% of the revenue.

Great.

And I know the notes, the notes are gonna, these notes are going to, right, this is going to the consultant as part of the zoning update.

Yep, and they are online, so they're watching, so good.

Right, Mr. Rice, I think we're ready to open it up to the public.

Thank you, Chair Mitchell.

At this time, if you'd like to address the Planning Commission, please click your raise hand icon or if you're joining us by phone, press star nine.

We'll call on you in the order of hands raised and you have three minutes.

And Rebecca Deeds has her hand up.

Rebecca, you're on with the Planning Commission.

Welcome, Rebecca.

Thank you.

I'm here on behalf of the all-volunteer nonprofit Preservation Piedmont.

We thank the Planning Commission for your service, and we deeply appreciate the work you put into the proposed land use map.

All the work put in by city consultants, staff, and commissioners.

Preservation Piedmont, once a progressive and livable city for all residents, housing insurance,

Our organization has been providing input into the comprehensive planning process since 2017.

We've met with several city council members and the consultant team, and we have some feedback to share.

We're concerned the current plan will create greater displacement of historically marginalized communities and vulnerable neighborhoods like 10th and Page,

Fiefel, Starr Hill and Rose Hill due to proximity to the universe, the speculative development and demolition.

So we see clarity from the consultants regarding strategies.

they will use to protect those neighborhoods.

We worry about widespread demolition of smaller, more affordable existing housing in favor of new and larger units to benefit upper income earners resulting in considerable environmental degradation and waste.

We want to see a plan that will incentivize and promote reuse of existing structures.

And the proposed land use map does not reflect

how these changes would interact with architectural design control and conservation districts in the city.

The plan should address the potential effects of upzoning on cultural and environmental resources, such as the reduction in city tree cover due to new development.

Such impacts will contribute to heat islands and also reduce shaded streets and sidewalks that encourage blocking rather than driving.

According to consultants' estimates, the proposed changes will produce only a small number of actual affordable housing units.

At the November 2020 community meeting, the consultants stated that with mandatory inclusionary zoning and the possible broad land use changes, maybe 30 new affordable units and 12 new affordable ADUs per year could be anticipated.

According to the housing plan, 4,000 units are needed.

We would hope that the Consultants Planning Commission and Council look at more details related to the land use map, taking into account city topography, its watersheds, and locations of resources like shopping, office facilities, and schools that could be walkable to new proposed housing.

And we want to remind commissioners that the future land use map is only one of many tools provided to help exacerbate the affordable housing crisis.

The affordable housing plan outlines many other strategies outside of the land use plan.

So that should move ahead while work on the land use map continues.

And if anybody else has addressed the commission at this time, please click your raise hand icon or press star nine.

Right, thank you very much.

And that will then conclude the public comment session.

Ms.

I'd just like to put in a plug.

And do that pretty quickly because Missy, Lyle and I are meeting to talk about that on Thursday.

Is there a motion to adjourn?

Second.

All right, we are adjourned.

Have a good night.