By SHANNON HAUGLAND
Sentinel Staff Writer
The Assembly voted 5-0 Tuesday night to adopt an ordinance setting a residency requirement on short-term rentals in residential zones.
The other major change in the ordinance was not allowing conditional use permits to be transferable with the sale of the property.
The ordinance passed on final reading following a number of public comments for and against. Voting in favor were Rebecca Himschoot, Thor Christianson, Dave Miller and co-sponsors Kevin Knox and Kevin Mosher. Crystal Duncan and Mayor Steven Eisenbeisz were absent.
“This is a step forward in protecting long-term housing stock,” Knox said after the vote.
The ordinance is intended to limit the conversion of long-term rental housing into short-term housing in R-1, R-2 and related residential zones. Short-term rentals are allowed uses in a number of zones, but require a conditional use permit in residential zones.
Mosher said he and Knox proposed the changes enacted in the new ordinance after their previous proposal, calling for a moratorium on issuance of short-term conditional use permits, was voted down. This option reflects what he and others heard in a public process including a town hall meeting, other public meetings and hearing from the public. He said he and others made an effort to reach out.
“The residence requirement was what people felt was most important, and we heard from people from both sides,” he said. “This is a tricky issue ... I feel this is a very light-handed, level-headed compromise to alleviate this.”
Mosher said conditional use permits are “exceptions to zoning that’s supposed to be Residential,” and that there are several zones other than Residential that are better suited to commercial enterprises, such as short-term rentals.
Miller said he’s seen communities in other states where high housing costs are pushing people farther and farther out of town to find affordable housing. This is not an option in Sitka, he noted.
“I don’t know if this (the new ordinance) is a great solution to this,” he said. But he’s talked to enough people in the business community who are having trouble finding workers and have nowhere to house the workers if they could be found.
The ordinance will require any proposed short-term rental property also to be the applicant’s primary residence.
“A primary residence is that which is occupied by the applicant as the applicant’s principal place of residence at least 180 days out of the year,” the ordinance states. Primary residence status must be documented by voter registration, vehicle registration or other evidence.
Dwelling units eligible as short-term rentals are single family homes, mobile or manufactured homes or a non-owner occupied unit within a two-family or multifamily unit.
The other major component of the new ordinance states that the permit is void if the property is no longer the applicant’s primary residence.
Some members of the public at the Assembly meeting testified against the residency requirement.
“There’s the 180 days which I think puts a lot of (onus) on the owners of the property,” said Keith Brady, a real estate licensee. “I have several who would love to do short-term rentals but with the 180 they can’t do that.”
He asked the Assembly to reconsider. “We do have a housing crisis, trust me, I hear it. I have a lot of people on my list looking for rentals, looking to buy, but I don’t think this is the right way to go about doing it.”
Teal West said she felt the 180-day requirement would have unintended consequences, such as driving up the price of short-term rentals and creating incentives to convert apartments into STRs.
“I don’t understand why this ordinance is presenting itself as a way to solve a long-term housing crisis or an affordable housing crisis in our community, when we are actually doing the opposite by enforcing a 180-day residency stipulation in the permitting process,” she said.
Anne Pollnow said she is supportive of the language that a short-term rental in a residential area needs to be a primary residence.
“What I’m adamantly opposed to in this ordinance is the 180-day restriction to rent, and to the city telling me I must live in my home for 180 days,” she said. “This is a governmental overreach and may cause a hardship in an effort for me to pay my mortgage. If I find myself having a poor work year, I may need to rent my place, my investment, for 181 days.” Other options for renting would not work for her, and she is concerned that enforcing the ordinance may include putting a lien on people’s property for violations, she said.
Richard Wein also spoke against adopting the ordinance, and said that if it passed current permits should not be grandfathered and those who have a short term rental permit should have to reapply.
A theme of those speaking in favor was that this not an entire solution to the housing shortage in Sitka, but there is a problem that the community needs to work on and this is a start.
“I think that this ordinance does a good job balancing private property rights, zoning regulations, and the city’s responsibility to make policy that supports a livable Sitka for current and future generations,” said Katie Riley, a member of the planning commission, which endorsed the new ordinance.
She said the state Department of Labor report in September said that 3.5 percent of Sitka’s housing units are short-term rentals, the second highest in the state, with effects compounded by Sitka’s development limitations. Responding to comments that Sitka needs better data to support this ordinance, she said, “My question is how bad does a trend have to be before you’re willing to take action?”
Another planning commission member, Wendy Alderson, said the city continues to allow short term rentals in commercial zones, water front zones, and general island zones. “If you want to own more than one short-term rental and have a commercial endeavor I think there’s plenty of room to do so commercially,” she said.
Tory O’Connell Curran said the ordinance is a solution to part of the problem, and the city needs to take action. She said the ordinance still provides a number of options for people to rent out their apartments or homes for income.
“Remember, we’re talking about residential neighborhoods, and I for one think that it’s important to keep the integrity of our residential neighborhoods mostly residential and available for residents to rent or to own,” she said. “So I think this is a small bit of this while giving a homeowner some choice in how they choose to use their property. So I encourage you to support it.”
A few Assembly members in their comments observed that the ordinance can be adjusted as needed if problems arise.
Other items will be covered in Thursday’s Sentinel, including establishing a Sustainability Commission, which is replacing the Climate Action Task Force; and an update on the airport terminal project.
