Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Short Term Rentals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Manor council staff propose limited permit system, occupancy and insurance rules for short‑term rentals
Summary
At a May 6 work session the Manor City Council discussed a draft ordinance to allow a capped number of whole‑home short‑term rentals with annual permits, occupancy and parking limits, insurance requirements and inspection/renewal rules; no formal action was taken and the law director recommended review by the planning commission.
Manor City Council members and staff on Tuesday reviewed a draft ordinance that would allow a limited number of whole‑house short‑term rentals in selected residential districts under an annual permit regime, but took no formal action.
City staff presented a proposal that would limit permits by population (one permit per 2,000 residents, rounded to the nearest figure divisible by the number of wards); restrict short‑term rentals to certain single‑family residential districts; require annual permit renewals and inspections; set guest and parking caps tied to bedrooms; and require proof of insurance and three years of guest records.
The draft was presented by Ken Filipiak, who described it as a compilation of “some of the central points that are made in most legislation that we see that regulate short term rentals in other communities,” and said the city is watching several state bills that could limit local authority. Kathy Cantanzaridi, identified by staff as the principal author of the draft section, summarized the main elements: owners who do not live nearby must designate a caretaker within about 30 minutes; the permit would cover whole‑house rentals for stays under 30 days; and applicants must provide contact information, proof of insurance, number of bedrooms and parking spaces, hosting‑platform details and other recordkeeping.
The draft ties guest capacity to bedrooms (two guests per bedroom plus three additional guests), requires a minimum of one paved parking space per bedroom plus one additional space, and bans sleeping in accessory structures, tents or campers. It would require short‑term rental permit holders to maintain records of each guest’s dates, number in party and nightly rate for at least three years and make them available on inspection. On renewals, the draft would require evidence the property was occupied a minimum of 60 days during the previous calendar year to qualify for renewal.
Staff proposed an annual permit cycle with a December 1 renewal start date and a December 31 expiration if renewal is not completed, at which point applicants could be placed on a wait list. The draft contemplates nontransferable permits but left transfer rules open to council direction. On insurance, staff recommended a certificate showing the property is a rental and naming the city as an additional insured or additional named insured so the city has the same rights as a policyholder.
Council members raised enforcement and neighborhood impacts. One councilmember said the city has long‑term rentals owned by entities outside Manor and raised concern about a single LLC owning multiple properties in Ward 4; staff confirmed an instance where one LLC owns 17 properties, 14 of which are in Ward 4. Councilmembers said limits were intended to avoid clustering of short‑term rentals in lower‑priced neighborhoods and to preserve housing stock for residents. Staff noted their intent that annual review and the renewal process provide a mechanism to consider violations and to refuse renewal for properties with repeated nuisance or code issues.
On legal and procedural questions, the law director advised that because the proposal would change which land uses are permitted in particular zoning districts, the safe course would be to refer the draft to the planning commission for recommendation before adoption. Staff also said they could run a community survey if council wanted broader resident input.
No motion or vote occurred at the work session. Council and staff left open several policy choices including which zoning districts to include, whether permits should be transferable, the precise fee structure and the appeals path for permit denials or revocations. Staff said a more formal ordinance would be drafted by the law department if council chooses to proceed.
The council ended the discussion without scheduling a follow‑up vote; next steps identified during the session included possible referral to the planning commission and further work by the law department and staff on enforcement, fee and appeals language.
