Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Vacation Rental Licensing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City staff outline vacation-rental licensing proposal; council debates cap and enforcement
Summary
Staff presented a draft vacation‑rental license ordinance defining short‑term rentals (30 days or less), proposing an initial cap (staff recommended 85) and licensing/enforcement measures including a $500 license fee, fire/life safety inspection (staff fee $300 or third‑party option) and $1,000-per-day fines for noncompliance; councilors discussed options including a lower interim cap and asked staff to notify owners ahead of a Nov. 18 public hearing.
City staff presented a revised draft ordinance to regulate vacation rentals in Astoria, defining "vacation rental" as any structure or portion rented for 30 days or less (excluding owner‑occupied homestay lodging and staffed lodging). Tiffany Taylor, interim community development director, summarized purpose, proposed standards, enforcement procedures and the implementation timeline: staff intends to bring the ordinance forward for a public hearing on Nov. 18, a first reading that night, and a second reading on Dec. 2; if adopted, the ordinance would take effect Jan. 2, 2025, and operators would have three months to apply for licenses before enforcement begins.
Staff reported a refined inventory that reduced the previously cited count (about 106) to 83 units that meet the new definition (some properties were reclassified as homestay lodging, inns or owner‑occupied). Based on that review and recent approvals, staff recommended a cap of 85 licenses (leaving two slots for growth) but noted that if a large multifamily property declines to use short‑term rental rights, the available supply would change. Tiffany Taylor said staff would maintain a wait list if the cap is reached and that licenses are not transferable even though land use status can be.
Councilors asked detailed questions about enforcement, penalties and consequences for nonconforming uses. The draft would require a fire/life‑safety inspection by a third‑party vendor or the city's building official; staff estimated a $300 charge if done by city staff and said third‑party costs vary (often cheaper). The license fee shown in the draft is $500; combined with an inspection the initial cost to an operator could be around $800. Staff and council clarified enforcement: operators would have three months after ordinance effective date to apply; failure to apply would expose operators to fines (the code enforcement specialist recommended $1,000 per day in the draft and staff corrected inconsistent language to reflect that figure). If a license is revoked, reapplication rules include waiting periods (six months for some reapplications, a year for full revocation in draft language).
Councilors debated the cap. Councilor Davis suggested an interim cap of 50 to avoid immediately allocating capacity to properties that might not intend to operate as short‑term rentals, while others favored staff's 85 as a starting point with the option to adjust after the application period and public hearing. Several councilors asked staff to notify property owners who may be impacted and to provide a full lodging inventory spreadsheet ahead of the Nov. 18 hearing.
No formal vote on the ordinance was held; staff will return for public hearing and formal action at upcoming meetings.
