|
Connect with Jeffco!
  |
|
|
|
Board Denies Request for Short-Term Vacation Rentals Regulation
The Board of County Commissioners voted 2-1 to deny a request for an amendment to the Zoning Resolution that would have allowed the Board of Adjustment to grant permission for short-term vacation rentals in Jefferson County. Commissioners Kathy Hartman and Faye Griffin voted to deny the amendment; Commissioner Kevin McCasky voted in favor.
"For a variety of reasons, partly because of the concerns about neighborhood integrity and primarily because of my concerns related to what I would consider to be unfair competition with our commercial property operators, I am opposed to this resolution," Hartman said before making the motion.
The amendment regarding short-term vacation rentals, defined as rentals of single-family homes for less than 30 consecutive days, was originally part of a request for several changes to the Zoning Resolution. The short-term rental amendment request was brought to the Planning Commission this fall and later separated from other changes for individual consideration, because it was such a highly debated issue at public hearings.
Staff and Planning Commission's recommended proposals had included several provisions, including:
- Rental occupancy would be limited to two people per bedroom.
- The rental home would have valid water and sanitation permits and would need proof of fire protection from a fire district.
- The use would not create traffic problems and owners would provide adequate parking. Staff recommended two off-street parking spaces for each bedroom in the home plus one additional space. The Planning Commission recommended half a parking space per bedroom.
- The property owner could not be a commercial entity and could operate only one short-term rental in Jefferson County.
- Special exceptions to allow short-term rentals from the Board of Adjustment would need to be renewed annually.
The Planning Commission also strongly recommended that the properties be taxed as commercial rather than residential.
Supporters of short-term vacation rentals said the option helps some homeowners who are struggling to pay their mortgages in the current economy. The rentals also generate revenue and provide an affordable option for vacationers.
"(Vacationers) don't want a hotel room where they pay a high fee and are surrounded by other people," Char Price said. "They want a private place in the mountains. Colorado mountain homes are a destination. They do provide an income to all of the private businesses in town."
Opponents said short-term rental owners aren't taxed fairly. Hotels, inns and bed & breakfasts pay the higher commercial property taxes as opposed to residential property taxes. Short-term rentals also do not have to conform to commercial lodging building codes for fire sprinklers and other requirements.
Several hotel and inn owners testified at the hearing that they are losing income as a result of the growing trend for short-term vacation rentals.
Kathy Krysiak, general manager of the Quality Suites Hotel in Evergreen, spoke of the impact on her business and other area businesses. "This includes B&Bs, inns and restaurants, all of whom are already struggling in this economic downturn," Krysiak said. "Our business and other businesses, however, are operating with a license. We comply with all insurance, tax, parking, fire, health and ADA requirements."
For more information regarding short-term rentals, the Zoning Resolution or other Planning & Zoning topics, visit the Planning & Zoning Web site. |
|
Commissioners Approve Subdividing Property as Neighbors Dispute Boundary Line
Commissioners unanimously approved a request from owners adjacent to the Silver Springs Ranch Subdivision to subdivide their property into two lots. Several neighbors testified about a disputed property boundary along the property's western boundary on the final plat.
The owners, Renee Faulkner Mulvaney and Michael Mulvaney, requested to subdivide their property near Pine Junction and the Park County/Jefferson County border, so they could build an additional single-family home there. Both the Planning Commission and staff recommended approval of the request.
Staff learned that several neighbors were disputing the property's western boundary line as they were processing the Mulvaneys' request in December. Neighbors said they were concerned that the final plat would contradict previous land surveys and could create a "domino effect" by shifting everyone's property boundary 50 feet to the west and into Park County. The neighbors based their boundary lines on a 1996 land survey that showed the Mulvaneys' western property line 50 feet east of where the Mulvaneys' professional land surveyor placed it. County staff said the 1996 survey was never registered with the County Clerk & Recorder as required by state law.
"If they move this property line over, it absolutely makes my property unlivable, because half of my house would belong to another person and the rest of it is not large enough to live on," said William E. Ramey, Jr., who lives two properties to the west of the Mulvaneys on the Park County line. "This would have a very bad effect on the whole neighborhood."
Before making their decision, Commissioners heard from several staff members, including Cartographic Supervisor Mike Greer and County Attorney Ellen Wakeman, who said the subdivision boundary on the plat complied with both state and county regulations. However, if neighbors wished to dispute it, they had the right to do so in a court of law.
"We do not decide property lines. Courts do," Commissioner Kathy Hartman said before voting. "My vote says that I believe that the land use that is being requested for this property fits our land-development regulations and is appropriate with this zoning on the property. My vote has nothing to do with where the property line is because that is not within my authority." |
|
 View BCC Meetings Online! | |
|
