Sandpoint planning commissioners recommend tightened short‑term rental rules while warning of pending state rollback
Loading...
Summary
The Planning & Zoning Commission on Dec. 16 recommended City Council adopt amendments to Sandpoint City Code Title 3, Chapter 12 that add a neighborhood‑integrity definition, a High Occupancy STR permit, and revised parking standards; commissioners and residents debated the city’s 35‑unit cap and enforcement limits under Idaho law.
SANDPOINT, Idaho — The Sandpoint Planning and Zoning Commission voted Dec. 16 to recommend that City Council adopt an amended short‑term rental ordinance that staff described as tailored to protect neighborhoods while remaining defensible under Idaho law.
Community Planning and Development Director Jason Welker told commissioners the revised Title 3, Chapter 12 adds a definition of “neighborhood integrity” tied to impacts such as noise, parking and congestion; creates a High Occupancy Short Term Rental (HSTR) permit for units advertising 11 or more guests with notice and hearing requirements similar to a conditional‑use permit; and adjusts parking requirements to one off‑street space for five or fewer guests and two spaces for six or more, with larger events reviewed in the HSTR process. Welker said the changes were prompted by the Idaho Supreme Court decision in the Lava Hot Springs case and recent legal challenges elsewhere that show overly restrictive caps can be treated as prohibitions.
“We are absolutely not deregulating STRs,” Welker said. “What we have, if amended tonight, is the strongest STR ordinance in the state of Idaho, but it’s one that’s defensible under state law.” He warned, however, that a draft legislative change under discussion in Boise could remove local permitting authority and limit cities to only life‑safety rules and text listed in statute, forcing a future rewrite.
Public comment at the hearing skewed toward keeping strict local limits: Terry Pardini, a long‑time resident, said he supported the additional restrictions and opposed removing the city’s 35 non‑owner‑occupied cap, arguing it is necessary to “protect the integrity of existing neighborhoods.” Rebecca Holland and Pat Green also urged careful limits and noted concerns about outside investors and housing pressure.
Commissioners pressed staff on how the new “neighborhood integrity” definition would be applied and how enforcement would work. Staff said enforcement is currently complaint driven and relies on community resource officers and an outside subscription service that maps listings; revocation language was clarified to indicate that any one of the principal revocation criteria can trigger a hearing. Staff acknowledged resources are limited for proactive enforcement and that many complaints route through the police department.
A motion to recommend adoption of the ordinance as presented passed on a roll‑call vote recorded in the meeting transcript; the clerk recorded affirmative votes from the commissioners on the record, and the chair announced the motion carried.
Next steps: The commission forwarded its recommendation to City Council, which will consider the ordinance and any additional edits. Staff cautioned council that changes at the state level could require a further rewrite of local rules.
