Short-Term Rental Ordinance Community Meetings August 9th & 16th
This is a press release from the County Administrative Office:
The County of Humboldt reminds the community that an ordinance is being prepared to allow the use of short-term rentals (STRs) in unincorporated Humboldt County.
The purpose of the draft STR Ordinance is to allow some residences in unincorporated Humboldt County to be used for STRs while protecting the character of the neighborhoods where they are located and to preserve residential units for people and families who live and work in Humboldt County.
The County of Humboldt’s Planning & Building Department has revised the draft ordinance based on community feedback received at the first STR ordinance public meeting. The proposed revisions include administrative permit and business license requirements only for most projects, a cap on STRs in the greater Humboldt Bay area where housing is more scarce, and deference to existing operations. To learn more and review the revised draft ordinance, please visit the county’s Short-Term Rental Ordinance web page.
To receive public feedback on the revised draft STR ordinance, the Planning & Building Department will host two community meetings.
Community Meetings
A Southern Humboldt community meeting will take place on Wednesday, Aug. 9 from 5 to 7 p.m. at the Redwood Playhouse, located at 286 Sprowl Creek Rd. in Garberville, CA. This meeting will be hosted in partnership with the Southern Humboldt Chamber of Commerce and the Southern Humboldt Business & Visitor’s Bureau.
A community meeting for Humboldt Bay area residents will be held on Wednesday, Aug. 16 from 6 to 8 p.m. at the Humboldt County Agricultural Center, located at 5630 South Broadway St. in Eureka, CA.
The draft ordinance proposes a permitting process for rental of residential dwelling units for a period of 30 days or fewer, including homes listed on Airbnb and Vrbo. Those who operate these types of STR units in unincorporated Humboldt County and all interested members of the public are encouraged to attend. Attendees will have the opportunity to learn about the revisions made to the draft ordinance and ask questions and share concerns, ideas, and input.
The County of Humboldt is committed to providing equal access to all county programs, services and activities through the provision of accommodations for individuals with qualified disabilities as required under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). With 72 hours prior notice, a request for reasonable accommodation for this meeting can be made by calling (707) 268-3722.
For more information, please call (707) 268-3722, email [email protected], or visit the Planning & Building Department office located at 3015 H St. in Eureka.
Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules
Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/
If you rent out your House by the Night, the first thing the County will do is Tax You…
Air B&B is a significant source of homeless problems, while the wealthy invest in more properties daily…
Air B&B should be limited, now, to a maximum of 10% of the total.
“Short-term”, is merely another word for “High Profit”…
Make it “30 day minimum”…
Nonsense, addiction and burdensome regulations (like banning airbnbs) is the most significant source of the housing problem.
We’re not going to ‘Ban’ our way out of this problem, and assuming 1 less airbnb = 1 more LT rental is just wrong, they’re completely different margins.
The owner should have to live there. Air b and b is a nuisance, it’s noisy, it wrecks the neighborhood, and you don’t know who’s there. They don’t check social security numbers or do background checks, they don’t take license plate numbers. And there is nobody at the “front desk” like a normal hotel/motel you can complain to.
Putting a hotel in a residential neighborhood that’s not zoned for that is ridiculous, but if they must do it, then make it owner occupied only. The owner must live there with their “guests.” See how they like it with a bunch of strangers around.
We’ve had complete opposite experiences. Airbnb’s have background checks and a customer rating system, the bad tenants do not get accepted to rent again and the hosts has always been a text away. Airbnbs have been crucial for family/ client visits as the hotels around here are few and rarely clean.
We need to meet the demand for both ST and LT rentals, banning ST and just hoping it translate to more LT housing isnt a good strategy and is likely to exacerbate the problem.
They do not take social security numbers nor license plate numbers like a normal rental. They create dangerous situations for neighborhoods because you don’t know who your neighbors are. Without the owner living there with their guests there’s nobody to complain to about the noise. Air b and b does nothing about the complaints. They are a nuisance.
Hotels dont take social security # either. You’re just amplifying the most significant anomalies as if they’re norms.
Hotels are in areas zoned for hotels/motels. Nobody buys or rents in an area where somebody is going to put a hotel on the property line.
There’s a reason they don’t put a motel 6 a commercial enterprise in the middle of a residential area, it’s not zoned for that.
Hotels can 86/kick somebody out for noise because there is somebody at the front desk.
And if somebody announced they were putting a motel/hotel in the middle of a residential neighborhood, the neighbors would not allow it because it’s against the zoning for that area.
Would you want a motel 6 on your property line with strangers coming and going?
The zoning/ordiance is the reason airbnb exist, there’s obviously a much higher demand for travel to our area beyond what hotels are able to provide. Would much rather our family vistors be immersed within arcata rather than forced to stay in Ginutoli.
Renting a home as is, is extremely different then building a motel in your back yard
What about the people that own or have a long term rental, who picked that neighborhood because it’s nice and quiet and has charm and they want their children to play outside, but instead you want to destroy the neighborhood by putting people there that belong in a hotel on Giuntoli.
Renting a home short term is exactly like putting a hotel right on the property line. The only difference is that a hotel would never be allowed in somebody’s backyard.
Air b and b’s are profiting by making a nuisance out of themselves to their neighbors. Air b and b brings nothing positive along with it, with the exception of the money it brings their “hosts.” And that’s at the neighbor’s expense.
Many cities ban air b and b altogether and it’s because they are a nuisance. Trinidad has a moratorium on air b and b as well and it’s for a very good reason.
Firstly, build a hotel if that’s what you want. Hotels are for tourists, apartments and houses are those for those that are there for a long term.
My town was quaint, beautiful area with culture, until the air b and b showed up, now some can’t even afford to live here anymore. It’s not ok. A lot of the charm and character is gone.
It’s not safe for high schoolers, or even college students to walk around a bunch of hotels that are supposed to be and have historically been long term residences.
And you never answered my
question, would you want to live near a motel 6? Would you let your children play outside, in your own backyard with a bunch of different nightly “guests” learing in?
What if… your next door neighbor rented to a bunch of college students all year!
You know their names, you know who they are, but with different nightly guests, they are gone before you know who it is, and then a different nightly guest dues the same thing, or something similar.
College students/long term tenants have a vested interest in the neighborhood, they join neighborhood watches. No short term tenant is going to join a neighborhood watch.
Also Airbnb can host sex offenders; whereas a long term tenant would have to register that.
again, you’re stuck on anomalies, your examples rely on the airbnb guests being terrible.. which is rarely the case.
The house rented to the college students is likely to be much worse, should we ban that too?
“Hotels are for tourists, apartments and houses are those for those that are there for a long term”
No thanks, hall monitor, I’d like to exist in a more flexible society that doesn’t force tourist to stay in the worst town in northern Humboldt
I did answer your question, comparing a motel with 100x more space/rooms isn’t a reasonable comparison to a single family house that remains a single family house.
It’s a 100% reasonable comparison to compare a motel 6 to an air b and b. Both have transient tenants that you don’t know. You’re replacing neighbors with somebody’s commercial enterprise.
Airbnb’s are more prone to break-in’s & theft and because of the transient nature of guests, a neighborhood of short term guests has no real interest in helping you or keeping you safe. You could end with a convicted felon, a registered sex offender, a thief, or a scam artist living next door and you wouldn’t even know it.
Sex offenders have to register where they live, and you can look it up on the town map to know where they are.
There is a reason why hotels have security cameras and 24-hour staffed front desk.
Your air b and b is making money by destroying neighborhoods.
If air b and b is so great why is there a moratorium on it in Trinidad, a cap on it in arcata, and why is it banned in at least 10 cities in California alone?
Air b and b’s take away housing from people that want to buy or rent a house for their family.
The bottom line is that an absentee host that owns 26 houses might lose an investment but he/she won’t lose their life if a bunch of strangers start a fire, but the people owning or renting next door would. It’s the fire danger that’s the main problem. The second problem being creating a condition fir crime. That host MUST live on SITE. PERIOD.
You’re saying that you would feel comfortable with your children playing in the backyard or front yard with strangers, different people every night across the street, next door, down the block? Really?
Nonsense indeed:
I tried it, in Lower Redway, years ago, couldn’t find a renter who had verifiable paycheck income, references or no dogs…
Air B&B produced some strange responses, including a guy who wanted to rent it for “the whole summer”… Right… Too weird for me…
Homelessness is caused by addicts and alcoholics, who would rather spend their income on their drug of choice than on accommodations, but there are a large number of unoccupied homes held through inheritances and simple purchase-to-hold and then “borrow the equity” schemes, homes owned by foreign investors in money-laundering schemes, and houses just sitting there as weekend homes but never visited… There’s eight of them within 200 yards of my house, and only three which are occupied year round, out of the 11…
San Francisco has a reported 40,000 unoccupied houses.
Air B&B sites have ruined Tahoe and Hawaii neatly, and parties and other problems leave owners with large repairs and no recourse.
Go shopping for a house, I dare you, and the ones that were used for nightly rentals are beat to shit, and priced to sell…
I always require my renters to provide 2 years of W-2 income records, tax forms and credit check. References are also helpful, but Nurses and Teachers, LEO’s and Truck Drivers all make decent renters, while young guys and farmworkers, not so much…
Hahaha, nice try..
Word salad.
Eat your vegetables, Lynn
My neighbor kicked out a nice family who had lived there a long time to do air b and b. Now it’s all weird strangers around, and I don’t know what happened to that family. Air b and b should be limited to 10% at most and owner occupied only.
10% is way too much. 10% keeps the housing prices beyond what local labor can easily afford. 3% is better.
3% would be preferred.
“Air B&B is a significant source of homeless problems”
Interesting theory??
Won’t more AirBNB units facilitate converting more local motels to housing for students and homeless?
Seems like the left just can’t learn the law of unintended consequences:
Bard:
“The law of unintended consequences is a principle in social science that states that when an intervention, policy, or program is enacted, it will have both intended and unintended consequences. The unintended consequences can be positive or negative, and they can be more significant than the intended consequences.
The law of unintended consequences was first articulated by the French economist Frédéric Bastiat in the 1840s.”
Fragilista: (medical, economic, social planning) is one who makes you engage in policies and actions, all artificial, in which the benefits are small and visible, and the side effects potentially severe and invisible.
Or at least it’s politically unacceptable to mention the negative side effects.
Did your mommy and daddy buy you a house?
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/aug/5/cities-are-sinking-under-weight-of-their-own-stupi/?utm_source=newsshowcase&utm_medium=gnews&utm_campaign=CDAQu4i5mYXI3v_NARi0rbXN4cy1yJcBKioIACIQXBEbMEZz5y5Gid_4CzfDmioUCAoiEFwRGzBGc-cuRonf-As3w5o&utm_content=rundown
Link is behind a pay wall.
Here is a link to an excellent study from Stanford:
https://siepr.stanford.edu/publications/policy-brief/homelessness-california-causes-and-policy-considerations
First there was no fire wall on either PoM’S link or yours so it’s unclear what you meant. Then your link was not to a “study”, not even a meta study ‐ it was a policy paper. And while it pointed out that California has many multiples as many “unhoused” as New York City, and makes points of needing involuntary commitments for drug use and mental health, along with “Improve accountability by enforcing the law on petty crimes, which are used by some homeless persons to sustain drug use habits” and spending much more for shelters, drug courts and services, it left silent the unfortunate reality that California climate, especially the coastal climate and superficially compassionate socialist government, is what makes California a mecca for all sorts of people including the insane, drug addicted and unemployment youth. We can not spend our way ahead of the curve as spending accelerates the curve. As a Montana politician once said in a news article said “we have so few homeless because one winter would kill them.” This creates a nasty cycle of attracting the nation’s and immigrant disaffected AND raising the cost of housing by competition. It is not likely, without there being a strong deterrent in other aspects, or a very strong economy to provide almost universal employment generating plenty of taxes, that California can spend enough on “creative solutions” to get ahead of the curve that these proposed solutions attract.
It’s like the fallacy of providing a guaranteed minimum income to the poor. It only works when it’s recipients are few enough to not be noticed. If it’s widespread, prices adjust to the fact that there is more money around to be had, then the minimum poor fall back into not having enough again while the rich skim off the cream to become richer. This is how social policies actually increase social problems.
Die yuppie scum
*downvote*
B and b’s should only be allowed if the owner lives on that property,
no ADU’s (accessory dwelling units) should be used as b and b’s, and no air b and b’s should’ve allowed on the property line.
AUSTIN (KXAN) — A federal judge ruled Tuesday in a lawsuit against the City of Austin for its short-term rental (STR) ordinance prohibiting people from operating an STR without living at the property, which a Houston couple said unfairly prevented them from listing their Austin home, according to court documents.
“Gunfire, ‘chaos’ and unruly teens at a house party in North Dallas have neighbors saying ‘No’ to short term rentals.
“I thought I was in a war zone. I moved to this community, this neighborhood to be in a calm safe neighborhood to raise my kids, I did not come here to be two doors down from a hotel where anything goes,” said Sonya Hebert who lives on the same street.”
From nbc5 Dallas Fortworth.
And in California it’s banned in at least 10 cities, and regulated in several more.
“Federal appeals court upholds Santa Monica’s ban on short-term vacation rentals.
A federal appeals court on Thursday unanimously upheld a Santa Monica ordinance banning most short-term vacation rentals.
A three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit of Appeals rejected a potential class-action lawsuit against the city, which passed the law in 2015 on the grounds that visitors who rent through Airbnb Inc. or other companies “sometimes disrupt the quietude and residential character of the neighborhoods.”
Of course Humboldt government wants to throw wrenches into the Frey. They screw up and muddy anything they touch with their greedy hands. The property owner owns the property why shouldn’t they be allowed to rent it how they see fit
If they are not rented out for an night they should be made available for sheltering the unhoused that night. The owner’s are not out any thing be cause they would be vacant any way.
Strate rate – I suggest you read about the damages some homeless people have caused to hotels & motels, during the Pandemic.
Right… you must be kidding.. like a bunch of drug addicts are never going to burn the house down, have a big party withoutvregard to the neighbors, damage the fixtures, steal any thing not nailed down and refuse leave without a month’s long law suits.
We unknowingly rented a house that had an apartment air-bnb attached from out of town owners. We were told it was rented out two times a month. It ended up actually being two separate airbnbs that had new patrons every other night. It was nuts so many parties we ended up having guests light back yard on fire. Had to watch some poor kids while a DV incident occurred upstairs with their parents. Had a hoarder stay for two weeks who put rotten food all over the deck and yard. It was miserable and I was so upset that I had been lied to before I signed the lease. The owners were super apologetic though they hadn’t expected the pandemic to be so lucrative a time to have an airbnb.
Lets make Humboldt family friendly again. Less incentives for property investors we should be investing in long term Affordable house ownership for local families
My other neighbor across the street who had a baby was kicked out of that place so somebody that owns 26 houses in that town could do an air b and b. Humboldt should be family friendly, not ousting a woman and her baby so somebody could make a profit. Margins, that’s not all it’s about.
?
Draft looks good. Not a bad idea to go to the meeting and say so.. or at least write an email to the board again if you can’t make it. Lets keep our locals!