Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Short Term Rentals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planner says zoning—not the ordinance—creates hosting requirement for short‑term rentals; resident challenges staff wording
Summary
City planner Jessica Hankins told the Dunsmuir City Council that a hosting requirement cited in the staff report appears in zoning‑district definitions, not the short‑term rental ordinance itself. A resident said the staff framing was misleading and urged policy debate based on accurate code language.
Jessica Hankins, the city planner, told the Dunsmuir City Council she was seeking direction on whether changes are needed to the city's short‑term rental (STR) ordinance and whether public outreach is warranted.
Hankins said STRs are stays of 30 days or fewer and that they now "represent about 7.2% of the housing stock in the city," generating roughly $210,000 a year in registration and transient occupancy taxes. She asked the council whether it wanted changes to the ordinance or clarification on how the city intends the law to be implemented.
A resident identified as Dina, who said she owns a home on 5711 Sacramento Avenue, challenged a line in the staff report that the city manager had characterized the ordinance as permitting only hosted rentals in residential zones. Dina said that was incorrect and pointed to the ordinance's local‑contact requirement. "So what the ordinance actually says is, quote, local contact person means an individual who is personally available by telephone on a 24 hour basis and who maintains the ability to be on‑site within 45 minutes and who has access and authority to assume management of the short term rental, unquote," she said, arguing the code does not require the owner to live on site.
Hankins responded that the commenter was correct that that language is not in the STR ordinance text; instead, "where it is found is in these different zoning districts," she said, explaining that the zoning definitions list STRs as an accessory use that requires an established residential use first. She told the council this creates a discrepancy between the ordinance and the zoning code and recommended staff bring code updates to align the documents with council intent.
The planner said she would review each zoning section and return with updated code and ordinance language; she also offered to take any parking‑related changes to the planning commission for review before returning to council.
