Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Short Term Rentals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council adopts short‑term rental code changes after divided debate over Two Rivers residency requirement
Summary
After a lengthy public hearing and debate, the council adopted Ordinance 2026‑06 amending Chapter 6 on short‑term rental business licenses. The changes replace the STR-area map with zone-based caps, allow year‑round applications and renewals, and include a contested recommendation to remove the MC-zone residency requirement, which divided council votes.
The council held a public hearing and subsequently approved Ordinance 2026‑06, which amends Chapter 6 of the Salida Municipal Code addressing short‑term rental (STR) business licenses. City planning staff summarized three primary amendments: replacing the STR-area map with numeric caps by zoning district; removing a residency requirement in the MC (Mixed Center) zone (a change that directly affects Two Rivers Commons); and allowing STR applications and renewals year‑round rather than in a May–June window.
Staff corrected earlier data errors before presenting updated caps by zone and explained that planning commission recommended adopting zone-specific caps and also suggested removing the residency requirement in the MC zone. The staff presentation showed existing counts and new cap limits by zone and explained procedural changes intended to improve licensing efficiency.
Public comment included testimony from the Two Rivers Commons developer and residents who said lifting the residency requirement supports the neighborhood’s design as a ‘secondary downtown’ and could create foot traffic that benefits ground-floor businesses. Opposing views in council discussion focused on protecting long‑term housing supply and asking for a deeper reduction in overall caps. One council member said, “I can’t vote yes for something that removes the residency requirement,” citing concerns about local housing stock.
After deliberation, Council Member Papenfort moved to approve Ordinance 2026‑06. The ordinance passed on a divided roll-call vote. The transcript records several council members urging further analysis of caps and asking staff to report back if council wants different cap levels in a subsequent action.
Actions at a glance: - Ordinance 2026‑06 (Chapter 6 amendments) — motion passed by majority; recorded roll‑call vote split along lines of residency concern. - Council directed staff and planning commission follow‑up on cap methodology and historical basis for prior percentages.
Next steps: Staff will provide further analysis on caps and historical rationale if council requests a more aggressive reduction; the ordinance as adopted will change licensing procedures and cap calculation method as described in the amendment.
