Council continues debate on short‑term rental rules as neighbors press for distance limits and stronger enforcement

City council members and residents held an extended discussion about a draft short‑term rental ordinance that would create a permit regime, annual inspections, occupancy and parking limits, and distance requirements between rentals and neighboring homes.

Why it matters: Council members said the city is trying to balance property‑owner rights and neighborhood character. Residents in high‑density areas — especially lakefront neighborhoods with older, closely spaced cottages — told council that specific numeric distance limits and hard revocation criteria are necessary to prevent clustering and recurring nuisance problems.

Key points in the draft discussed at the meeting - Separation rules under consideration: the draft discussed a required minimum of 25 feet between a permitted STR premise and an adjoining residential premise and a 300‑foot separation between permitted STRs. Council members and residents debated whether those distances were appropriate and how they would be measured (foundation to foundation, gutters, decks). - Permit and renewal: the proposal being discussed would require an annual permit, application materials, proof of annual inspection by the New Franklin Fire Department, and disclosure of the listing site(s) used to advertise the unit (if any). A permit is revocable; participants asked for explicit revocation criteria tied to calls for service and repeated violations. - Occupancy and parking: the draft ties maximum overnight occupancy to the number of bedrooms (discussion referenced a common approach of two persons per bedroom plus one extra in a common area). Parking limits in the draft would cap the number of motor vehicles to the number that can be accommodated on the lot (garage + driveway) plus two in the driveway in specific configurations; councilors discussed enforcement challenges when vehicles spill onto neighborhood streets. - Shared‑wall and shared‑driveway rules: for units that share walls or driveways with neighboring owners (duplexes, triplexes), the draft calls for written neighbor notification and, in some cases discussed during the meeting, notarized neighbor consent before issuing a permit. - Fees and enforcement costs: staff and councilors raised concerns that proposed permit/inspection fees in the draft may be too low to cover the city’s administrative cost. One outside example mentioned to council used a roughly $400 fee that staff said would not cover the full cost of multi‑department inspections and enforcement in some jurisdictions. - Unadvertised rentals / informal rentals: speakers noted that STR activity need not appear on commercial platforms (Airbnb/VRBO) to fall under the ordinance; the draft would regulate any rental activity that meets the STR definition regardless of listing method.

Public comments and enforcement concerns - Several residents urged strict numeric separation standards to protect densely built lake neighborhoods, described many older houses that sit much closer together than modern code allows, and said that clustering of STRs would change neighborhood character. - Commenters emphasized enforcement, asking for clear, objective revocation triggers (for example, thresholds of police calls for service), faster complaint response and financial consequences for repeat violations. Residents also noted that signage and neighborhood notifications alone were inadequate without strong penalties or revocation processes.

Next steps and status - Council members and staff said they will continue editing draft language, including definitions (for example, what constitutes a bedroom), distance measurements and fee levels. Staff asked for additional input from council and said they will bring revised language back for further review.

Discussion versus decision - Discussion only: the meeting provided a substantial public hearing and policy discussion; there was no final vote on ordinance adoption. - Direction/assignment: staff were asked to revisit fee calculations, distance wording and revocation criteria and produce revised draft language. - Formal action: none at this meeting.

Clarifying details from the draft and meeting - Distance thresholds under discussion: 25 feet (between STR and adjoining residence) and 300 feet (between STRs); measurement method (foundation‑to‑foundation or other) remained unresolved. - Occupancy: draft discussed two people per bedroom plus one extra occupant in a common area as an occupancy cap methodology. - Permit inspections: proposal includes annual inspection by the New Franklin Fire Department; details of the inspection scope were requested by council. - Enforcement: the draft contemplates fines and the potential for permit revocation; permit renewal on an annual basis was discussed.

Quotes: No direct quotes are attributed in this article because the meeting included many individual speakers and the draft language remains under revision; summaries above are drawn from staff briefings, council discussion and public comments recorded in the meeting transcript.

Contact: Staff indicated they will circulate revised language to the council and the public before the next committee meeting.