Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Short Term Rentals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board upholds revocation for 1024 Eleventh Ave, citing residency evidence and neighborhood testimony
Summary
After staff review and testimony from neighbors, the Board of Zoning Appeals found insufficient evidence that Jarrett Lane's short-term rental property at 1024 Eleventh Avenue North was his primary residence and denied his appeal, upholding revocation.
The Board of Zoning Appeals on June 24, 2025, denied Jarrett Lane’s appeal and upheld the revocation of the owner-occupied short-term rental permit for 1024 Eleventh Avenue North after staff presented public-record evidence and neighbors testified they did not observe Lane living at the property.
Staff summarized records showing multiple addresses associated with Lane, including a long-standing mailing and registration address of 307 Bramblewood Drive. Investigators reviewed deeds, vehicle and voter registration records and other public documents; staff also cited Host Compliance data that showed stays after the revocation took effect. The revocation letter had an effective date in December 2024.
Lane told the board he purchased 1024 Eleventh Avenue North in 2022 and said he uses his condominium at 1350 Rosa L. Parks Boulevard Unit 417 as a secondary residence and home office; he provided utility bills, insurance documents and other items he said support his status. He also said sensitive mail and some registrations had been routed to his mother's address for security reasons.
Neighbors and the Hope Gardens Neighborhood Association testified in opposition to the appeal. Doctor Kevin Griffith, association president, said Lane was a stranger to the neighborhood and that association members voted unanimously to oppose the appeal. Neighbor Ed Lynch said the house was vacant much of the time, that guests regularly came and went and that he had personally observed behavior consistent with a full-time short-term rental.
Board members reviewed the public-record factors used to determine residency and concluded that, on balance, staff's revocation was supported by evidence. One board member noted that a sworn voter-registration statement listing another address was persuasive. The board voted unanimously to deny the appeal and uphold the revocation.
The revocation remains in effect and staff will continue to monitor compliance and provide Lane with information about any administrative or legal remedies available to him.
