Council accepts parts of planning board's advisory opinion on UDO short-term rental rules; will hold April hearing

The City Council considered the Planning Board's advisory opinion on proposed UDO text amendments for short-term rentals Wednesday and moved to accept some recommendations while deferring others pending further study.

Council members discussed each planning-board recommendation in detail. The council accepted the planning-board revision clarifying that short-term rentals must be clearly incidental and secondary to the dwelling's primary, non-transient residential use. The council also accepted proposed parking standards tied to guest-room counts or to the number of existing improved on-site spaces (whichever is greater), and it accepted a recommendation relating to accessory-use language.

However, the council rejected two planning-board recommendations pending additional analysis: (1) a recommendation that would have fixed a specific numeric cap (150 days) in the UDO itself; staff and the attorney advised that placing a fixed day-count in the zoning ordinance could create unintended vested-rights consequences; the council instead directed that the UDO should reference licensing language in Chapter 136 so that the licensing ordinance (subject to administrative adjustments) provides the operational day limits; and (2) a recommendation that would have limited short-term rentals to buildings with three or fewer residential units without first confirming how many existing properties would be affected. Council members asked staff to provide inventory data on multi-unit buildings and the practical impacts of the proposal before adopting a restriction that could affect nonconforming or long-standing housing stock.

During the discussion the council also agreed to incorporate Planning Board recommendations v3 and v10, to reject v5 and v9 pending additional staff work, and to schedule a public hearing on proposed Local Law Number 4 (UDO short-term rentals) on April 1 at 7 p.m. Commissioner Moran announced a recusal/abstention on the subsequent vote (recorded on the meeting minutes as an abstention).

Why it matters: The UDO changes and the separate licensing chapter in the city code together define how short-term rentals may operate, how many days a unit may be rented, parking requirements, and which building types are eligible. Council members expressed concern about creating unintended grandfathering or vested-rights effects by embedding a numeric limit in the zoning ordinance rather than in the licensing chapter, and requested staff to compile data on how many properties would be affected by building-type restrictions.

Next steps: Staff will provide proposed language that cross-references Chapter 136 licensing rules, prepare inventory data on potentially affected units, and publish the Local Law 4 text before the April 1 hearing. The council will consider public comment at that hearing and take final action afterwards.