[00:00:01] >> LET ME GO AHEAD AND START THE MEETING. [I. Call to Order.] GOOD EVENING. THIS IS THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE DECATUR PLANNING COMMISSION FOR MAY 14TH. MY NAME IS RACHEL COCKBURN. I WILL BE CHAIRING THE COMMISSION THIS EVENING. THIS IS A SEVEN MEMBER COMMISSION OF DECATUR RESIDENTS APPOINTED BY THE CITY COMMISSION. THIS COMMISSION HEARS APPLICATIONS FOR LAND USE AND ZONING CHANGES, CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS AND LAND SUBDIVISIONS. IT ALSO REVIEWS AND RECOMMEND CHANGES TO THE CITY ZONING REGULATIONS AND FUTURE LAND USE PLANS. I WOULD LIKE TO ACQUAINT YOU WITH THE PROCEDURES THIS COMMISSION FOLLOWS IN THE CONDUCT OF ITS MEETINGS. WE'LL HEAR APPLICATIONS TONIGHT IN THE ORDER THEY ARE LISTED ON THE PRINTED AGENDA. APPLICANTS ARE GIVEN TIME TO PRESENT THEIR CASE WHEN THE APPLICATION IS CALLED. SUPPORTING AND OPPOSING PARTIES ARE ALSO GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT THEIR REMARKS TO THE COMMISSION. PLEASE BE SURE TO STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE BEGINNING YOUR REMARKS. SINCE THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE APPLICANT TO CONVINCE THE COMMISSION TO VOTE IN THEIR FAVOR, APPLICANTS ARE ALSO ALLOWED TO PRESENT REBUTTAL TO ANY OPPOSITION AGAINST THEM. OPPOSING PARTIES ARE NOT GRANTED AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL. WHILE WE DO NOT FORMALLY LIMIT THE TIME FOR MULTIPLE PARTIES TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OUR OPPOSITION TO AN APPLICATION, WE DO ASK SPEAKERS TO REFRAIN FROM SPENDING TIME REPEATING ARGUMENTS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN PRESENTED. INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS ARE ALSO ASKED TO BE AS CONCISE AS THEY CAN WHEN MAKING THEIR REMARKS. ONCE ALL INTERESTED PARTIES HAVE BEEN HEARD, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE APPLICATION. ALL REMARKS SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO THE COMMISSION, AND WE ASK YOU TO REFRAIN FROM ENGAGING ANYONE ELSE DIRECTLY. THE PLANNING COMMISSION RENDERS EXCUSE ME, THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAKES RECOMMENDATIONS ON MOST APPLICATIONS TO THE CITY COMMISSION, AND THE CITY COMMISSION HAS FINAL DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY ON THOSE CASES. WE ARE SUPPORTED THIS EVENING BY OUR PLANNING AND ZONING TEAM CASEY KURZ. AT THIS TIME, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK MY FELLOW PLANNING COMMISSIONERS TO INTRODUCE THEMSELVES, STARTING WITH THE VICE CHAIR TO MY LEFT. >> HELLO, I'M GREG CHILE. >> JOE GRACA. >> MARK BAMBRO. >> JASON FRENDER. >> JOHN MCFARLAND. [NOISE] >> THE SECOND ITEM ON THE BUSINESS IS ON THE AGENDA IS UNFINISHED BUSINESS. [II.a. Approval of Minutes from April 9, 2024 regularly scheduled meeting. ] APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM THE APRIL 9TH REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING. EVERYBODY HAD A CHANCE TO READ AND REVIEW THE MINUTES. ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS CHANGES? YOU HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE WE HAVE A SECOND AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSITIONS OR ABSTENTIONS? ANY COMMENTS? MINUTES ARE APPROVED. FOR NEW BENETS WE HAVE [III.a. The Community & Economic Development Department is requesting text amendments to Article 6 of the Unified Development Ordinance to clarify the utility services and meters between main buildings and accessory buildings/ dwellings.] THREE REQUESTED TEXT AMENDMENTS TO THE UDO FROM THE COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. I BELIEVE WE CAN HEAR PRESENTATION ON ALL THREE OF THOSE AT THE SAME TIME. BUT THEN WE WILL OR. >> I WOULD TAKE THEM INDIVIDUALLY THERE REALLY DIFFERENT SECTIONS. >> WE'LL START FIRST WITH THE REQUESTING TEXT AMENDMENTS TO ARTICLE 6 OF THE UDO TO CLARIFY THE UTILITY SERVICES AND METERS BETWEEN MAIN BUILDINGS AND ACCESSORY BUILDINGS AND DWELLINGS. >> HAPPY TUESDAY. THE FIRST ITEM YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU IS A TEXT AMENDMENT, AND IT IS REALLY JUST AS SIMPLE AS MISS COPER HAS STATED, THIS IS TO REALLY CLARIFY HOW THE UTILITY SERVICES AND METERS BETWEEN MAIN BUILDINGS AND ACCESSORY BUILDINGS AND DWELLINGS ARE CONNECTED AND IDENTIFIED. WHEN YOU SEE IT, YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU, IT'S YOUR FIRST ONE, I PUT THEM ALL TOGETHER. IT'S REALLY JUST CLARIFYING THE DIFFERENT SECTIONS REITERATING THAT ACCESSORY BUILDINGS THAT ARE NOT IDENTIFIED AS AN ACCESSORY DWELLING MUST SHARE UTILITY SERVICE. THEN FURTHER ON, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE ACCESSORY DWELLINGS THAT AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT MAY OR MAY NOT SHARE UTILITY SERVICES AND METERS WITH THE MAIN BUILDING. WE ALSO UPDATED THE DEFINITION THERE FOR YOU BECAUSE IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS ALREADY EXPLAINED IN THE TEXT OF THE CODE. ANY QUESTIONS? [00:05:01] >> I HAVE ONE QUESTION AND IT REALLY IS I WAS JUST CURIOUS. I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE ORDINANCE BECAUSE THAT'S QUICKER TO REFERENCE. ITEM 1C SAYS, ACCESSORY BUILDINGS MAY HAVE A HALF BATH OR A KITCHEN? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> IF THEY HAVE BOTH, THOUGH? >> IF THEY ARE BOTH, THEN THEY ARE CONSIDERED AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT. THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT WE CONSIDER AN ACCESSORY BUILDING AND AN ACCESSORY DWELLING. >> THAT WAS MINE. [NOISE] >> WHAT IS THE CHANGE FOR THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT? NEEDING TO BE SEPARATELY METERED EXACTLY? IS THAT A CHANGE? >> YES THAT'S CLARIFYING THAT IT COULD ACTUALLY HAVE A SEPARATE METER. >> BUT DOESN'T. >> IT DOESN'T HAVE TO. >> DID DID IT PREVIOUSLY IMPLY THAT IT HAD TO? [OVERLAPPING] BECAUSE I WANTED TO NOT HAVE TO. >> IT WASN'T REALLY CLEAR. IT WAS REALLY JUST A POLICY THAT IT NEEDED TO BE. BUT WHEN YOU ACTUALLY LOOK AT HOW THE SERVICES ARE RENDERED, SOMETIMES THE MAIN HOUSE CAN'T SUPPORT IT AND UPGRADES. THERE WERE DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WE LOOKED AT MORE ON A BUILDING CODE AND SAFETY SIDE. BUT THEY CAN STILL BE ATTACHED TO THE SAME METER, IF THAT'S THE PLEASURE. >> IT ALLOWS FOR THAT? >> UNDER 6.83 NUMBER 6, FLOOR AREA, COULD YOU JUST EXPLAIN THE RATIONALE THERE? >> FOR ADDING THE SQUARE FEET OF FLOOR AREA? >> YEAH, IT LOOKS LIKE BEFORE YOU SAID YOU COULDN'T HAVE ANYTHING LESS THAN 300 SQUARE FEET PERIOD. NOW YOU'RE SAYING, CURIOUS? >> IT WAS REALLY JUST TO SAY CONSISTENT TO ADD A FLOOR AREA BECAUSE IT WAS JUST THE WORDS THAT WERE MISSING. IN THE BEGINNING OF THAT, IN NO CASE CAN ADU BE MORE THAN 800 SQUARE FEET OF FLOOR AREA OR LESS THAN 300 SQUARE FEET OF FLOOR AREA. IT'S JUST MAKING THE TERMS EXACTLY THE SAME. THEN THE OTHER CHANGE WOULD BE THERE IS THAT OUR BUILDING CODE WILL ACTUALLY SET THE OCCUPANCY LOAD SO THEN IT WOULD JUST HAVE TWO BEDROOMS WOULD BE THE MAXIMUM. >> WITH THE FLOOR AREA, I SEE THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT IS LIMITED TO NO MORE THAN 800 SQUARE FEET OF FLOOR AREA. EARLIER IN THIS ORDINANCE, ACCESSORY BUILDING SHALL NOT EXCEED 1,000 SQUARE FEET OF FLOOR AREA, INCLUSIVE OF AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT. >> CORRECT. >> IT'S THE DISTINCTION THAT THE MOTHER IN LAW SUITE ON TOP OF A GARAGE. THE LIVING AREA PLUS THE GARAGE STORAGE AREA CAN EXCEED 1,000. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> WHEN YOU'RE CALCULATING IT, ARE YOU CALCULATING THE WHOLE STRUCTURE OR JUST THE LIVING AREA, I GUESS. >> THE WHOLE STRUCTURE. YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER NOT ALL ARE TOGETHER SO IT'S REALLY ANY ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ACROSS. >> I GUESS WHAT ELSE [OVERLAPPING] TO 300 SQUARE FEET. IF YOU HAD A ONE CAR GARAGE, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT WAS 10 BY 20 AND IT WAS 200 SQUARE FEET. WOULD YOU CONSIDER THAT 200 PLUS THE GARAGE OR IS IT JUST 200 SQUARE FEET? >> YOU'RE SAYING THE ADU COULD BE 800 AND THE GARAGE COULD BE 200 AND THAT WOULD MEET THE CODE REQUIREMENT, IS THAT? >> I'M WONDERING MAYBE JUST FROM THE BEGINNING, IF YOU HAVE A GARAGE AND AN ACCESSORY DRAWING IT AND YOU CALCULATE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE. IS IT THE GARAGE PLUS THE ADU? >> YES. TO GET TO THE WHOLE. YES. >> IS THAT ONLY IF THEY'RE IN THE SAME BUILDING OR DO THEY GET SEPARATE? >> IT'D BE ON THAT LOT COMPLETELY. THEY COULD BE SEPARATE, THEY COULD BE TOGETHER. >> IF IT'S SEPARATE, YOU REALLY WANT TO MAKE SURE NOBODY HAS SMALLER THAN 300 SQUARE FEET I GUESS. THAT'S THE INTENTION? I DON'T KNOW. I WAS JUST CURIOUS. A CERTAIN REASON WHY IF YOU WANT TO DO A SMALLER IF YOU WANTED TO DO 200 SQUARE FEET. >> IF YOU WANT TO DO AN ADU THAT'S SMALLER? IT'S JUST SAYING YOU CAN'T GO OVER THE 800. >> BUT YOU CAN'T GO LESS THAN 300, I GUESS BECAUSE YOU'RE COMING FORWARD. >> THAT IS CORRECT. I I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY HISTORY ON WHY THE 300 IS THE MINIMUM, [OVERLAPPING] IT'S IN THE CODE FROM 2012, I THINK WHEN IT WENT IN? >> THERE MAY NOT BE ENOUGH SPACE TO INCLUDE ALL OF THE THINGS NECESSARY TO MAKE IT A DWELLING UNIT OR A LIVING SPACE. >> A DWELLING UNIT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO HAVE A BATHROOM. >> THAT'S CORRECT. IT WOULD HAVE TO MEET THE BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS SO IT WOULD HAVE TO BE HEATED, WATER ELECTRICITY AND THIS WOULDN'T BE WHY IT'S IN THE CODE, BUT I KNOW WHEN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS WERE PUT INTO THE CODE, THERE WAS A LOT OF PUBLIC CONCERN OVER TINY LITTLE SPACES LIKE YOU SEE IN SOME OTHER LARGER CITIES. [00:10:01] THERE WAS FOR WHATEVER REASON, A LOT OF OPPOSITION TO THAT. BUT THAT WAS AFTER THE 300 WAS ALREADY IN THE CODE. >> JUST GOOD, HISTORY OF BOTH SIDES OF IT. THANK YOU. >> ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM CASEY? >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CHANGE TO THE ORDINANCE AS SUBMITTED. >> DO WE HAVE TO ASK FOR PUBLIC HEARING? [OVERLAPPING] >> YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ASK FOR A PUBLIC HEARING. >> YEAH, WE DO. [OVERLAPPING] >> YOU'LL HAVE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC COMMENT OFFICIALLY. I DON'T THINK ANYONE HERE WILL. >> ACTUALLY, IT HAS. >> WE HAVE SOMEONE COME IN, YES. >> DO WE HAVE ANYBODY TO SPEAK? I FORGET WHICH ONE TO DO FIRST TODAY. WE'LL DO SUPPORT OF THE ORDINANCE. >> JUST CHILLING, THAT'S FINE. >> ANYONE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? >> ANYBODY ON THE CALL, CASEY? >> NO. >> NO? >> I CAN'T SEE ANY. >> [INAUDIBLE]. >> ARE THERE ANY INTERNAL DISCUSSIONS ANY MEMBERS WOULD LIKE TO HAVE? >> NOW I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE CHANGES TO THE ORDINANCE FOR ACCESSORY USES AS SUBMITTED. >> I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. >> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? >> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION. >> WELL, HOW IS IT HANDLED WHEN YOU HAVE AN EXISTING CONDITION THAT MAY BE OUTSIDE OF THOSE RULES? IS THAT SIMPLY A GRANDFATHER CONDITION? >> GRANDFATHER, YEAH. IF THEY MAKE ANY CHANGES, THEY'D HAVE TO COMPLY, TYPICALLY, IS HOW IT WORKS. >> YEAH. IT DEPENDS WHAT THE ISSUE WOULD BE. IF THEY'RE CREATING SOMETHING NEW, THEN IT WOULD HAVE TO COMPLY AND MIGHT ULTIMATELY NEED A VARIANCE OR SOME OTHER PROCESS. IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S ALREADY IN PLACE, THEN YES. >> IF THEY HAD A 200 SQUARE-FOOT ADU, IT CAN CONTINUE TO FUNCTION BUT THEN IF THEY DO A PULL-UP PERMIT TO MAKE A SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE, THEN THEY'D HAVE TO MAKE IT 300 SQUARE-FEET UNLESS THEY GOT [OVERLAPPING] A VARIANT FOR THE ZONING BOARD. >> ANY OTHER FURTHER? DO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE ON A SECOND? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? >> AYE. >> [OVERLAPPING] AYE. >> AYE. ANY OPPOSITION? ANY ABSTENTION? MOTION PASSES. NEXT ON THE AGENDA, [III.b. The Community & Economic Development Department is requesting text amendments to Article 6, 7, and 12 of the Unified Development Ordinance to define the use of shortterm rentals and provide associated regulation and permitting standards.] ALSO FROM THE COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, IS REQUESTING TEXT AMENDMENTS TO ARTICLE 6, 7, AND 12 OF THE UDO TO DEFINE THE USE OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS AND PROVIDE ASSOCIATED REGULATION. >> THAT IS CORRECT, SO NOW WE ARE COMING BACK WITH THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL ORDINANCE. AT A QUICK GLANCE, I'LL JUST GO OVER EVERYTHING. ALL OF THE TEXT IS ESSENTIALLY NEW. WE DID ADD THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL IN THE ALLOWED USE TABLE, AND THAT WILL BE A LIMITED USE WITHIN ALL OF THE ZONING DISTRICTS, SO YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE. THEN WE CREATED THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL STANDARDS, WHICH WILL FALL UNDER SECTION 6.3.7 AND BECOME B3. THEN WE CONTINUE TO DEFINE THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL REQUIREMENTS. THERE'S A LOT OF SECTIONS TO GO OVER, BUT I'LL PULL SOME HIGHLIGHTS OUT, AND I'M SURE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, YOU CAN JUST LET ME KNOW. BASICALLY REQUIRING THAT THERE'S A PRIMARY OWNER IN RESIDENCE OR NOT, THAT THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES HAVE TO BE A PERMANENT DWELLING IS WHAT IT'S TRYING TO SAY. YOU CAN'T HAVE RVS OR TRAILERS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. HAVING THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL, HAVE A MAXIMUM OF FOUR GUEST ROOMS. HAVING A MAXIMUM OVERNIGHT OCCUPANCY FOR TWO PERSONS PER GUEST ROOM, PLUS TWO ADDITIONAL PERSONS, SO THAT'D BE A TOTAL OF 10 PEOPLE. IT ALSO THEN FURTHER DEFINES GUESTS AND VISITORS THAT CAN BE ON THE PROPERTY. CONTINUING ON, THAT ONCE AGAIN, ONLY TRUE SINGLE DWELLINGS CAN BE USED AND ONLY ONE ON A PROPERTY. WE DID DEFINE THE PARKING REGULATIONS. [00:15:02] IT IS ALSO TIED BACK TO THE NOISE ORDINANCE. REQUIRING THAT RECYCLING AND GARBAGE BINS BE STORED WITHIN CERTAIN SCREENED AREAS. THE ONE OTHER THING THAT'S GOING TO BE A REQUIREMENT IS THAT EVERY SHORT TERM RENTAL MUST HAVE A LOCAL CERTIFIED PROPERTY MANAGER. THAT IS GOING TO BE SOMEONE WHO IS AVAILABLE 24 HOURS A DAY, SEVEN DAYS A WEEK, AND ALSO CAN BE ON THE PROPERTY IF NEEDED FOR ANY TYPE OF ISSUE OR INSTANCE IN LESS THAN AN HOUR. WE WILL ALSO HAVE A PERMITTING PROCESS BY WHICH THEY WOULD HAVE TO SUBMIT THEIR PAPERWORK THROUGH. WE ALSO SPELL OUT THE ONLINE ADVERTISEMENTS. THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE IN THE UNIT, SO PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THESE REQUIREMENTS WHEN IT COMES TO GUESTS, NOISE ORDINANCES, THINGS OF THAT NATURE. WE WILL ALSO HAVE ANNUAL INSPECTIONS, SO THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF THE BUILDING AND THE FIRE CODES ARE MET FOR THAT PROPERTY THE ENTIRE TIME IT'S BEING USED THAT WAY. WE WILL ACTUALLY HAVE THEM COMPLY WITH THE OCCUPATIONAL TAX AS WELL, SO IF THEY DO NEED A BUSINESS LICENSE HERE, THEN THEY CAN OBTAIN THAT. WE WILL ALSO COLLECT HOTEL AND MOTEL TAX. THIS IS ACTUALLY SOMETHING THE CITY IS ALREADY DOING BECAUSE THE STATE LEGISLATURE CHANGED THAT JUST A COUPLE OF YEARS BACK. [NOISE] THEN ONCE AGAIN IN THE END, THERE IS PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES THAT IF IT'S NEEDED TO REVOKE ANY TYPE OF LICENSING, THAT IT WOULD GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS. THE NEXT SECTION IS UPDATING THOSE PARKING REQUIREMENTS, SO THAT'S IN 7.1. THAT IS ONE PER GUEST ROOM. THEN THE LAST SECTION THAT'S DEFINED IS OUR DEFINITION SECTION WHERE WE ACTUALLY CREATE THE TRUE DEFINITIONS FOR THE LOCAL CERTIFIED PROPERTY MANAGER, THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL, AND THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL OWNER. >> I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. >> SURE. >> DO YOU MIND GIVING JUST A QUICK OVERVIEW OF HOW THESE NEW DEFINITIONS WERE DERIVED, HOW YOU ALL WENT ABOUT THE PROCESS. ALSO HOW THIS WAS ADVERTISED BECAUSE I KNOW, AGAIN, WHEN THE ADU WAS BEING PUT INTO THE UDO THERE WAS A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS JUST BEING USED FOR RENTAL AND THOSE TYPES OF CONCERNS BY RESIDENTS. >> SURE. CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY AND THE STATE ADVERTISING, THIS HAS BEEN PLACED WITHIN THE LOCAL NEWSPAPER. THEN IT WILL HAVE THESE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS, ONE HERE WITH YOU ALL AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND THEN IT WILL MOVE FORWARD TO THE CITY COMMISSION ONCE AGAIN FOR THAT HEARING PROCESS. >> NOT SUBJECT TO THE NOTICE, IT PRINTS ALL THE SIGNS ALL OVER THE CITY. >> BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING TO POST. WHEN IT'S OF THE CODE AND NOT OF A PROPERTY, THERE'S NOT NECESSARILY A SIGN THAT GETS POSTED. IF A PROPERTY IS BEING REZONED, THEN A SIGN WOULD GO ON THAT PROPERTY. BUT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE APPLICABLE FOR ALL. >> THE BOARD BECAUSE IT WAS A ZONING CHANGE. >> GOT IT. >> DUPLEX, FOR EXAMPLE, A GLOBAL. >> I'M SORRY. WHAT WAS THAT? >> DUPLEX TRIPLEXES SIGNS AND THERE WAS A BUNCH OF NOTICE, HOW WAS THAT? >> THEY CHANGED THE DEFINITION OF THE ZONING. >> THE ZONING DEFINITION I THINK WAS CHANGED. >> HELLO, GOOD EVENING. I'M ANGELA THREADGILL. I AM THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. THE REASON WHY WE DO NOT FALL UNDER THAT REQUIREMENT FOR THE INCREASED NOTIFICATION IS BECAUSE THIS DOES NOT HAVE AN IMPACT ON DENSITY. THAT'S WHAT IT BOILS DOWN TO. THE 2022 MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING ORDINANCE, CHANGE THE SINGLE FAMILY ONLY ZONING TO ALSO ALLOW DUPLEXES TRIPLEXES AND QUADPLEXES BECAUSE OF THAT CHANGE IN DENSITY, THAT'S WHY THE NEW NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES THAT THE STATE LEGISLATION PUT IN PLACE. THAT'S WHY WE HAD TO FOLLOW THOSE. THIS DOES NOT FALL UNDER THAT DEFINITION. THEN I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT THIS TRULY IS A COMPANION PIECE TO THE MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING ORDINANCE. WHEN WE WERE GOING THROUGH THOSE PUBLIC CONVERSATIONS [00:20:01] ABOUT THAT ORDINANCE IN 2021 AND 2022, AND IT CONTINUED INTO THE PUBLIC HEARINGS AS WELL. WE HEARD A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT HOW THESE NEW UNITS COULD POTENTIALLY BE USED AS SHORT-TERM RENTALS AND THAT WE REALLY SHOULD HAVE STANDARDS PUT IN PLACE. THAT'S ALSO ONE OF THE REASONS WHY THERE'S THIS 18 MONTH PHASE IN PERIOD FOR THE MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING TO LIMIT THE NUMBER OF PERMITS THAT ARE ISSUED FOR MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING. FOR US TO IMPLEMENT ITEMS SUCH AS THIS, AND SO THE CITY COMMISSION HAS EXPECTED US TO BRING FORTH THIS DRAFT ORDINANCE TO YOU ALL AS WELL TO THEM FOR THE FINAL ACTION. BUT AS CASEY HAS MENTIONED IN HER MEMORANDUM, WE DID SOLICIT COMMUNITY INPUT. WE RECEIVED BOTH POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE ASPECTS OF SHORT TERM RENTALS, AND SO WE DID HAVE AN ARTICLE IN THE DECATUR FOCUS IN 2022 AS WELL. AGAIN, SOLICITING THAT SORT OF FEEDBACK. THANK YOU. >> I THINK THE OTHER QUESTION WAS ABOUT DEFINITIONS? >> YES. JUST THAT PROCESS YOU WENT THROUGH TO I AS WORK WITH THE LAWYER AND THEN. >> ABSOLUTELY. THE DEFINITIONS ARE REALLY TAILORED TO THE CITY HERE. OF COURSE, I LOOKED AT OTHER CITIES, NOT ONLY JUST IN THE METRO, BUT OUTSIDE OF THE STATE. WE WENT THROUGH REALLY WHAT WE WERE DEFINING AS OUR CODE, NOT NECESSARILY WHAT ANYONE ELSE WAS. THEN OF COURSE, THE LEGAL TEAM REVIEWED IT. WE MADE SOME CORRECTIONS, AND THIS IS WHERE WE LANDED. >> I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. ONE QUESTION AND JUST BROAD KIND OF QUESTION. WITH THE ORDINANCES AS CURRENTLY WRITTEN IN THE ZONING, WITHOUT THIS, COULD A WALK UP FLAT OR A DUPLEX OR A TRIPLEX BE COMPLETELY SHORT TERM RENTAL? THIS LIMITS IT TO ONE UNIT WITHIN IT? >> YOU'RE IN AN ODD SITUATION RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THE CODE DOESN'T ADDRESS IT. YOU COULD SAY IT'S NOT ALLOWED, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, IT'S HAPPENING. >> YOU COULD SAY IT'S NOT PREVENTABLE. >> RIGHT, AND WE ARE COLLECTING THE HOTEL MOTEL TAX. THOSE WERE SOME CHANGES THAT HAPPENED AT THE STATE. THIS IS REALLY SOLIDIFYING HOW IT CAN BE DONE AND REGULATED IN THE FUTURE. I THINK YOU ALL CAN BOUNCE ON WHATEVER WEBSITE YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH AND SEE THEM. WE KNOW THEY'RE THERE, BUT AT THIS TIME, WE DON'T REALLY HAVE A MASTER LIST, BECAUSE YOU'RE JUST GOING TO GO ONLINE AND TYPE IN YOUR DATES AND THINGS WILL COME UP. BUT THIS IS REALLY THE PROCESS TO BRING IT ALL TOGETHER TO ACTUALLY MAKE IT CONFORM AND A WAY WE CAN TRACK IT. THEN A SEPARATE COMPONENT OF THIS, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT REALLY A CODE IS WORKING FOR THAT PERMITTING PROCESS. WE CAN ACTUALLY KNOW WHO HAS THEM, WE CAN ACTUALLY TRACK, WE CAN TRACK THE INSPECTIONS AND MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY IS DOING EVERYTHING TO THE CODE. >> IN YOUR OPINION, THIS IS PUTTING RESTRICTIONS ON THE ABILITY TO HAVE SHORT TERM. >> IT'S REALLY MAKING IT CLEAR THAT YOU COULD HAVE THEM. IF THAT MAKES SENSE. WE COULD SAY THE MOST RESTRICTIVE AND SAY NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE THEM. WE COULD GO CITE EVERYONE, BUT OF COURSE, WE WON'T FIND EVERYONE IN ONE SWOOP. THIS IS REALLY BRINGING ALL OF THE CODES TOGETHER TO SAY THAT YES, WE KNOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THEM, WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH HAVING THEM, AND THESE ARE THE REGULATIONS AND THE PROCESSES BY WHICH IF YOU WANT TO HAVE ONE, YOU WOULD HAVE TO COMPLY WITH. >> IN GENERAL, THE IDEA OF A SHORT TERM RENTAL DOES NOT SUPPORT MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING BECAUSE THE PROPERTY OWNER WHO HAS SHORT-TERM RENTAL CAN MAKE MORE MONEY RENTING IT SHORT TERM THAN RENTING TO A LONG-TERM TO AN INHABITANT WHO'S GOING TO BE THERE ALL YEAR LONG, MULTIPLE YEARS. >> THIS IS JUST DESIGNED FOR LESS THAN 30 DAYS. >> BUT I MEAN, I GUESS WHAT I'M GETTING AT IS IF WE WANT TO PROMOTE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING, IF CURRENTLY, THE CITY COULD SAY, SHORT-TERM RENTALS ARE NOT PERMITTED IN. >> THEY ABSOLUTELY COULD. >> THEN THIS WEAKENS INITIATIVE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING BY ALLOWING A SHORT-TERM RENTAL. I'M JUST TRYING TO [INAUDIBLE]. >> YOU HAVE DIFFERENT PROPERTY. YOU MAY HAVE HOMEOWNERS WHERE THEY DON'T LIVE HERE 12 MONTHS OUT OF THE YEAR. THIS IS A WAY TO BRING SOME AFFORDABILITY TO THEIR COSTS AS WELL. YOU DO HAVE VISITORS WHO COME INTO THE AREA AND YOU WANT TO SHOW THEM YOUR AREA. YOU WANT TO SHOW THEM THE BEST THAT IT IS AND CAN BE. [00:25:04] IT ALL TIES TOGETHER. I GUESS IT DEPENDS WHICH SIDE OF THE PENDULUM YOU'RE ON. >> YOU GOT SOME MORE QUESTIONS? >> YES. >> COMMISSION ASK QUESTION. >> MY QUESTION IS JUST THE LIMITING THE TWO PERSONS PER SLEEPING ROOM OR GUEST ROOM. JUST, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST IMAGINING WHATEVER KID TWO PARENTS AND A SMALL KID, THAT TECHNICALLY WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED, WHICH SEEMS LIKE THOSE ARE VERY MUCH THE PEOPLE THAT OFTEN LOOK FOR AIRBNB, KIND OF THING. IS THERE A WHAT'S THE RATIONALE FOR THAT? >> THE RATIONALE REALLY IS TO MAKE SURE THAT, I GUESS WE CAN SAY A FAMILY ATMOSPHERE BUT SO WE DON'T HAVE PEOPLE JUST RENTING THEM TO HAVE PARTIES AND HOST THINGS LIKE THIS WHERE YOU HAVE WAY TOO MANY PEOPLE INSIDE OF A UNIT AND THEN IT STARTS TO DISRUPT THE NEIGHBORS OR THE PARKING OR ALL OF THAT. IT'S REALLY JUST A WAY TO KIND OF. >> PARTY HOUSE. >> I HAVE TWO QUICK QUESTIONS. CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE GRANDFATHER SITUATION? HOW DOES THIS GET ENFORCED RETROACTIVELY IF SOMEBODY IS A KIND BUILDING AND LET'S SAY THERE'S TWO OR THREE PEOPLE DOING IT NOW, HOW DOES THAT WORK? >> WE WILL HAVE TO ACTUALLY FIND ALL OF THEM AND THEY'LL HAVE TO COME IN FOR PERMITTING. >> THAT WAS MY SECOND QUESTION. CAN YOU GET A PERMIT IS IT JUST APPLICATION AT THE WINDOW THROUGH THE PERMIT OFFICE? >> YES, ACTUALLY, WE'LL HAVE. IF IT'S THE PLEASURE TO MOVE FORWARD AND ADOPT THIS, THEN WE WILL ACTUALLY BRING ON A OUTSIDE COMPANY SO YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO SUBMIT ONLINE JUST AS YOU DO NOW. THEY WOULD ALSO BE TRACKING THESE MONTHLY. A NEW ONES COME ONLINE THAT MAYBE WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT, THEY COULD SEND US THOSE ADDRESSES. ONCE AGAIN, WE COULD CONTACT THAT OWNER OR SEND A LETTER OR AT LEAST KNOW WHERE IT'S HAPPENING TO BRING THEM INTO COMPLIANCE. >> IT'S PURELY ADMINISTRATIVE THE APPLICATION PERMIT PROCESS. IF YOU COMPLY, THEN YOU GET IT BASICALLY. IT'S NOT LIKE YOU HAVE TO COME TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND GET IT. >> YOU DO NOT HAVE TO COME TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. IT WOULD ALL BE ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT. SO BETWEEN ZONING, BUILDING AND FIRE MARSHAL. >> BUT IF THEY HAPPEN TO BE THREE ACTIVE MARKETING INVESTORS HAVE BOUGHT FURNITURE AND THEY'RE MARKETING, AIRBNBS AND THE CONDOMINIUM BUILDING, MOSTLY PEOPLE JUST HAVE TO DUKE IT OUT, HOW DOES THAT WORK? >> USUALLY, WHEN YOU DEAL WITH NONCONFORMITY, IF THAT COMES UP, WE WOULD REALLY HAVE TO LOOK AT HOW WAS IT THERE, THAT WOULD BE MORE OF AN INDIVIDUALIZED LOCATION. WE DIDN'T WRITE ANYTHING IN THE CODE THAT AUTOMATICALLY GRANDFATHERS THEM BECAUSE ONCE AGAIN, THEY'RE REALLY NOT PERMITTED. OUR GOAL IS NOW THAT WE HAVE THEM, FIND OUT WHERE THEY ARE, MAKE SURE THAT WE BRING THEM UP TO THE CODE. >> ONE MORE QUESTION. IF YOU HAVE A PROFESSIONALLY MANAGED APARTMENT BUILDING LIKE AMY MONERO, WHATEVER. WHAT'S THE POLICY FOR THAT? THEY PRESUMABLY COULD HAVE ONE AS WELL, THE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY. >> THEY COULD HAVE ONE, YES. >> THANK YOU. >> HOW DO WE DEFINE HOUSEHOLD SPEAKERS WHEN THE SECTIONS DEALING WITH NOISE? WHAT DOES IT REFER TO AND IS THAT SPECIFIC ENOUGH TO COVER EVERYTHING LEGALLY? >> YES. THE ATTORNEY DID REVIEW IT. WE COULD SIT HERE AND LIST SIZES AND ALL OF THAT, BUT THE REAL INTENT IS THAT YOU'RE NOT RENTING IT TO HOST A PARTY. YOU'RE NOT HAVING A LARGE BAND COME IN, YOU'RE NOT PUTTING UP A STAGE IN THE BACK. EVERYTHING WOULD BE NO DIFFERENT THAN IF YOU AND I WERE USING OUR BACKYARDS, AND OUR PROPERTIES, AND OUR PORCHES. IF YOU CAN THINK OF WHAT YOU WOULD NORMALLY BUY. >> I'M IMAGINING THAT A LAWYER FOR SOMEONE CITED MIGHT BE ABLE TO DRIVE. >> AND THAT'S ALSO WHY IT TIES BACK TO THE NOISE ORDINANCE. >> HOW DOES THAT WORK FOR SOMETHING LIKE PORCHFEST WHERE, SAY YOU HAVE AN AIRBNB FOR SOMEBODY WHO WANTS TO HOST IT IN ORDER TO HOST A FEW BANDS OR WHATEVER FOR PORCHFEST. >> THAT WOULD GO UNDER THAT SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT, I'M ASSUMING COUNSEL APPROVES THOSE. THAT WOULD BE ENCOMPASSED THROUGH. IF IT ENDS UP BEING ON THEIR PORCH THEY WOULD NOT BE TREATED ANY DIFFERENTLY THAN TO SAY IF IT WAS ON YOUR PORCH BECAUSE THAT IS A ACTUAL SPONSORED EVENT WHERE IT'S DESIGNED TO BE THAT WAY. >> IN THE ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM, THAT SECTION T. IT SAYS, "TTHE SHORT TERM RENTAL PERMIT MAY BE REVOKED OR SUSPENDED BY A CITY COMMISSION FOR GOOD CAUSE AFTER A HEARING." [00:30:01] WHO CONDUCTS THE HEARING? WHAT'S THE FORUM FOR HOLDING THIS? >> THAT WOULD BE CITY COMMISSION. >> CITY COMMISSION? >> THE AIRBNB OWNER WOULD HAVE TO BE NOTIFIED THAT THERE ARE PROBLEMS AND THEN THEY WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO ADVISE THEM, THE REASONS WHY, ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT THEY MAY HAVE, THINGS OF THAT NATURE. >> THEN THE VIOLATIONS THAT MAY LEAD UP TO THEIR PERMIT BEING REVOKED, IT SAYS MULTIPLE VIOLATIONS OF FEDERAL, STATE, CITY CODES, ORDINANCES, AND RULES AS DEFINED IN THIS SECTION. WHAT EXACTLY LEADS UP TO MULTIPLE VIOLATIONS? IS THAT A CUMULATIVE THING? IS IT OVER A SPECIFIED PERIOD OF TIME? AGAIN, I'M TRYING TO SPOT WHERE IT MAY BE TOO VAGUE WHERE SOMEONE COULD LAWYER UP AND [INAUDIBLE] >> ONCE AGAIN, IT WOULD BE NO DIFFERENT. OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT DOES THESE THINGS NORMALLY ALREADY. THINGS LIKE ALCOHOL LICENSING AND OTHER THINGS HAVE THE SAME TYPE OF PROCESSES. EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT SPECIFICALLY SPELLED OUT, THE SAME TYPE OF INFRACTIONS THAT ARE HAPPENING, SOMETHING THAT YOU COULD THINK OF GOING ON IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IT WOULD BE FOR THE INTERNAL STAFF TO ACTUALLY DOCUMENT, MAKE SURE THAT IT'S WELL DOCUMENTED, UNDERSTOOD, HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM, NOT WAITING UNTIL, LET'S SAY, THE FIFTH TIME. BUT THIS IS THE REASON YOU HAD TO COME OUT HERE, THESE ARE STILL THE RULES. >> THE PERSON WHO'S MANAGING THAT ON YOUR STAFF IS THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, IS THAT RIGHT? >> YES, AND I THINK CODE ENFORCEMENT WILL STILL BE DOING A LITTLE BIT. LIKE I SAID, NOT EVERY PERSON IS GOING TO KNOW TO PICK UP THE PHONE AND CALL THE ZONING ADMINISTRATORS, SO WE DO KNOW THAT THEY WILL PROBABLY END UP CALLING THE POLICE DEPARTMENT FIRST, ESPECIALLY IF IT'S AFTER HOURS AND THEN WE WOULD MAKE SURE THE MECHANISMS IN PLACE WHERE EITHER THEY CAN HANDLE IT, OR THEY COULD REACH OUT TO ONE OF US. BUT EVERYONE WOULD HAVE THAT INFORMATION BY WHICH TO CONTACT IF IT'S THAT SEVERE. NOW, IF IT'S JUST A MEDICAL EMERGENCY, THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS ON THE PROPERTY. BUT IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT CONTINUALLY HAPPENS. >> WE GOT A COUPLE MORE. GO AHEAD. >> JASON WAS WAITING. >> I'M SORRY, JASON, GO AHEAD. >> CAN YOU DEFINE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A GUEST ROOM AND A SLEEPING ROOM AND HOW THAT RELATES TO THE [INAUDIBLE] "SHORT TERM RENTALS MAY HAVE A MAXIMUM OF FOUR GUEST ROOMS OR SLEEPING ROOMS. ALL GUEST ROOMS AND SLEEPING ROOMS MUST MEET THE BUILDING." I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IS BETWEEN THEM. >> WE WERE MAKING SURE THAT THEY WERE ALL CAPTURED. SOMEONE MAY HAVE A PULL OUT COUCH OR SOMETHING. MAYBE BY THE BUILDING CODE IT'S NOT A BEDROOM PER SE, BUT IT WOULD BE THE ABILITY FOR SOMEONE TO SLEEP THERE. >> IT'S ESSENTIALLY EVERY BEDROOM THAT'S WITHIN THE HOUSE, SO EVEN IF IT'S A SINGLE RENTAL WITH FOUR BEDROOMS? >> CORRECT. >> THEN UNDER THE PARKING MINIMUM [INAUDIBLE] REQUIRING ABOUT FOUR OFF STREET PARKING SPACES. >> CORRECT. >> WHICH SEEMS A TAD EXCESSIVE WHEN WE ONLY REQUIRE HOTELS TO HAVE 0.75 PER GUEST ROOM AND DUPLEX. IT SEEMS IT WOULD MAKE A LITTLE BIT MORE SENSE FOR IT TO BE ONE PER PUBLISHED RENTAL. BUT I WAS HOPING YOU COULD ELABORATE A LITTLE BIT ON THAT. >> SURE. THAT'S ONE THING THAT WE WENT BACK AND FORTH ABOUT. USUALLY IN A HOTEL AND IN A CAR, IF YOU HAVE EIGHT PEOPLE COMING TO A HOUSE, THEY'RE PROBABLY DRIVING INDIVIDUALLY. IT GOES BACK TO HOW THEY'RE DESIGNED AND WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE WAS REALLY NO IMPACT TO THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS, TO CARS HAVING TO PARK IN PLACES THAT AREN'T DESIGNED FOR IT. THINGS LIKE THAT, KNOWING THAT WHEN YOU DO RENT A HOUSE IT'S USUALLY NOT ONE FAMILY FOR FOUR BEDROOMS. YOU HAVE PEOPLE COMING FROM DIFFERENT PLACES, AND RUNNING CARS. >> I GOT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. THE DEFINITION ON THE LOCAL, CERTIFIED PROPERTY MANAGER. WHEN I SEE CERTIFIED THE ROOT OF THAT IS CERTIFICATE. THERE'S A CERTIFICATE THAT THAT PROPERTY MANAGER WOULD HAVE SAYING THAT THEY ARE QUALIFIED TO BE A PROPERTY MANAGER. THE DEFINITION GOES ON TO SAY THAT THEY MAY BE A PROFESSIONAL PROPERTY MANAGER OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS OR OTHER DESIGNATED PERSON. WHAT'S THE CERTIFICATE? [00:35:01] >> WE WILL NOT BE ISSUING THEM A CERTIFICATE. THAT'S A WORD TO MAKE SURE. BUT WE DO WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE'S BOUNDARIES ON IT. I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHO IT COULD BE, BUT SOMEONE WHO HAS THAT INDUSTRY KNOWLEDGE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT RAISES TO SOME OF THESE CONCERNS AND MAKING SURE THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO CHECK ON THE PROPERTY, NOT NECESSARILY BEING THERE ALL THE TIME, BUT EVEN WHEN GUESTS COME AND GO, HAVE THAT KNOWLEDGE AND HAVE THAT ACCESS ACTUALLY AS WELL. >> YOU JUST DEFINED WHAT YOU MEAN BY CERTIFIED, WHICH IS NOT IN THIS DEFINITION. >> IT REALLY IS GOING TO BE THE PROFESSIONAL PROPERTY MANAGERS, REALTORS, PROPERTY OWNERS, OR OTHER DESIGNATED PEOPLE WHO ARE AT LEAST 21 YEARS OF AGE. >> BUT WHAT YOU JUST SAID IS NOT IN THIS DEFINITION BECAUSE OF THE OR OTHER DESIGNATED PERSONS. I COULD DESIGNATE ANYONE WHO'S OVER 21 AS MY CERTIFIED PROPERTY MANAGER, BUT THEY DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE WHAT YOU DEFINED WHEN I JUST ASKED YOU THAT THEY HAVE KNOWLEDGE ABOUT PROPERTY MANAGEMENT AND HOW TO RUN A PROPERTY. I FEEL THE CITY NEEDS TO DEFINE WHAT CERTIFIED MEANS. I LIKE YOUR DEFINITION, BUT IT'S NOT IN HERE. OR YOU STRIKE OR OTHER DESIGNATED PERSONS. >> SURE. >> BECAUSE THEN YOU HAVE SAID THEY'RE PROFESSIONAL PROPERTY MANAGERS, REALTORS, OR PROPERTY OWNER, THE PERSON WHO OWNS IT. I THINK IT'S EITHER DEFINE WHAT QUALIFICATIONS THE OTHER DESIGNATED PERSON WOULD HAVE TO HAVE, OR STRIKE THAT ALTOGETHER. >> SURE. >> IS THE INTENTION, BY USING A WORD LIKE CERTIFIED, TO SHOW THAT THIS IS THE PERSON ON FILE? >> THAT'S CORRECT. SO THAT WE HAVE ONE ACCOUNTABLE PERSON THAT AT ANY TIME, NO MATTER WHAT THE ISSUE IS. MAYBE IT REALLY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PEOPLE STAYING THERE. MAYBE THERE WAS AN ACCIDENT IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE. BUT WE KNOW MAYBE THEY'RE NOT THERE ALL THE TIME. WE CAN CALL THEM. REALLY MAKING SURE THAT THERE IS A CONTACT THAT HAS THE MOST CURRENT ACCESS AND INFORMATION. WE ALWAYS WRITE IT FOR IF THE WORST HAPPENS, BUT WE ALSO COULD CALL THEM FOR OTHER REASONS TO LET THEM KNOW. >> MAYBE A DIFFERENT WORD, OR REGISTERED, OR LISTED, OR? >> DESIGNATED. >> YES. I LIKE DESIGNATED. [OVERLAPPING] >> [INAUDIBLE] BECAUSE DESIGNATED IS RIGHT THERE. I DESIGNATE JASON TO BE MY PROPERTY MANAGER. >> YOU COULD DO THAT. >> THEN WE SHOULD STRIKE CERTIFIED. >> THE PROPERTY OWNER, THAT COULD BE ME. >> IT COULD BE A NEIGHBOR. >> I WOULD SUPPORT STRIKING CERTIFIED IF WE FEEL ANYBODY COULD BE THIS PERSON. >> IT'S CERTAINLY NOT A FULL TIME JOB. IT SHOULDN'T BE SOMETHING WHERE YOU NEED SOME BACKGROUND CHECK, OR TEST AND CERTIFICATE. >> THEN I WOULD SAY LET'S STRIKE CERTIFIED. >> I THINK MOST LIKELY IT'S GOING TO BE THE PROPERTY OWNERS. >> I AGREE. REGISTERED [INAUDIBLE] YOU'RE GOING FOR. >> BUT THERE'S NO REGISTRATION. >> YOU WANT TO SAY WHO IT IS. >> IT'S ON FINAL ACTUALLY DESIGNATED IS CORRECT. >> YOU DESIGNATED A PERSON AND THAT'S WHO IT IS. >> DESIGNATE. >> BACK TO THE PARTY. >> YOU CAN STRIKE THAT WHOLE. THEY BASICALLY THEY HAVE TO BE OVER 21. THE PROPERTY WE COULD STRIKE CERTIFIED. WE'RE STARTING TO WORDSMITH, WHICH IS GOOD. WE'D SAY LOCAL PROPERTY MANAGER, THE RESPONSIBLE PARTY, 24 HOURS A DAY, SEVEN DAYS A WEEK, ALL TIMES. THEY SHALL BE AT LEAST 21 YEARS OF THE PERSON SHALL BE AT LEAST 21 YEARS OF AGE, AND THE PERSON MUST BE ABLE TO TRAVEL TO THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL WITHIN 1 HOUR BEING CONTACTED. >> I WOULD THINK MAYBE YOU LEAVE IN YOU COULD BE DESIGNATED PROPERTY MANAGERS, MAY BE PROFESSIONAL PROPERTY MANAGERS, REALTORS, AND SO FORTH, JUST TO GIVE AN IDEA OF WHAT? >> WOULD IT, AND THIS IS WHAT YOU INTO THIS IS CODE. WE CAN'T WE CAN'T WELL, TECHNICALLY IN CODE, YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO SUGGEST ANYTHING. IT'S EITHER SHALL OR SHALL NOT. MAY IS ACTUALLY A BAD WORD IN CODE. IT REALLY SUPPOSED TO IF YOU LOOK AT BUILDING CODES, IT'S SHALL OR SHALL NOT. THERE'S NO MAY'S WE COULD PUT A NOTE LIKE, [00:40:03] HEY, WE SUGGEST THIS, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE THIS IS WHAT WE WANT. >> ONE THING THAT SEEMS TO COME TO MIND IS THAT I MEAN, JUST IN THE REAL WORLD, SOMEBODY COULD EASILY BE THE PRIMARY, YOU KNOW, PERSON, THE DESIGNATED PERSON, BUT THEY GO ON VACATION. THEY DESIGNATE SOMEBODY ELSE FOR AN INTERIM PERIOD OF TIME WHILE I MEAN, I ASSUME WE WOULD NOT WANT TO BE ABLE TO PROHIBIT THAT. >> THEY WOULD JUST RE REGISTER ALL THE CONTACT INFORMATION. >> YOU HAVE TO CHANGE IT OVER ON A PERMANENT BASIS. YOU CAN DO IT. I'M JUST SAYING YOU START TO WRITE ALL THESE THINGS DOWN AGAIN. >> BUT THE TRUE INTENT IS THAT WE CAN FIND SOMEONE WHEN NEEDED. WHETHER IT'S THE OWNER OR THAT'S. >> I AGREE. I JUST DON'T KNOW THAT ITS LIKE YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO PUT IT IN FOR A PERIOD OF TIME, THAT THIS IS WHAT IT IS. THEN THEIR RETURN BACK REVERTS BACK TO THE DESIGNATED OWNER OR WHATEVER. I'M JUST I THINK THROUGH ALL THE, YOU HAVE YOUR KID WATCHING FOR A COUPLE OF WEEKS OR WHATEVER. ONE OTHER QUESTION ON THE PARKING THAT SEEM, THEY JUST LET'S SAY SOMEBODY THAT THEY WANT TO RENT A THREE BEDROOM HOUSE THROUGH AIRBNB, BUT THERE'S NOT THREE OFF SITE YOU'RE NOT INTENDING TO RENT IT TO THREE SEPARATE PARTIES. YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO RENT IT TO A FAMILY WITH TWO KIDS OR WHATEVER, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE THREE OFFSITE PARKING BY GUEST ROOM. I MEAN, SHOULD IT BE BY RENTED GUEST ROOM OR SHOULD IT BE I MEAN, ARE YOU GOING TO COUNT UP THE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS AND I'M JUST SAYING YOU'VE ALSO GOT STREETS WHERE PARKING IS ON STREET PARKING AS PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD EQUATION, AND IT'S NO DIFFERENT THAN IF THEY LIVE THERE, THEY'D BE PARKING ON STREET. I GUESS I'M JUST WONDERING WHY WE WOULD MAKE IT SO CONSTRICTIVE THAT IT PREVENTS A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO MIGHT HAVE OTHERWISE BEEN ABLE TO DO IT. >> I AGREE. IF YOU HAVE TWO FAMILIES TRAVELING TWO CARS I JUMPED OUT. >> BUT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TWO SLEEPING ROOMS. TWO FAMILIES. >> IT'S A FOUR BEDROOM. >> BEDROOM HOUSE FAMILY TWO CARS. >> THOSE TWO CARS ARE GOING TO BE ALLOCATED FOR ALREADY BY THE BILL. >> WE DON'T WANT TO PICK AND CHOOSE BY THEM HAVING TO TELL US HOW MANY CARS ARE DRIVING EACH TIME IT'S RENTAL DON'T >> IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU WANT TO LOOK AT A LESSER OF A RESTRICTION, JUST AS LONG AS IT CAPTURES THE WHOLE I THINK WOULD BE APPROPRIATE. >> I THINK IT ALREADY SAYS THAT IN, IT WAS LRI 2, AND ONLINE ADVERTISEMENT SHALL INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION, THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF VEHICLES PERMITTED. IF THE LISTING SAYS, HEY, YOU CAN FIT TWO CARS HERE AND SOMEBODY BRINGS THREE CARS AND THEY'RE INVALIDATION OF THE LISTING, THAT'S ALREADY DEALT WITH. I FEEL LIKE REQUIRING THE MINIMUM PARKING ON TOP OF WHAT'S ALREADY REQUIRED FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING EXCESSIVE, ESPECIALLY AT A TIME WHEN WE'RE SAYING THAT WE HAVE EXCESSIVE PARKING AS IT IS. >> SORRY I GO. >> I'M SORRY, IT'S NOT BEING USED AS A TRADITIONAL RESIDENTIAL HOME? RIGHT. BECAUSE IT'S BEING USED AS A SHORT TERM RENTAL, IT HAS A DIFFERENT STANDARD CLASSIFICATION BECAUSE THERE VERY EASILY COULD BE FOUR DIFFERENT ADULTS COMING TO OCCUPY A FOUR BEDROOM HOUSE FOR THE WEEKEND. >> WHICH IS WHY BY LISTING WE SAY, IF YOU SAY ONE SPACE PER LISTING ORDER. THEN WITH THAT, IF THE LISTING SAYS, HEY, THIS LISTING HAS TWO PARKING SPACES IN THE DRIVEWAY, MAXIMUM TWO CARS. >> YOU ALSO HAVE SECTION 1.3, IT SAYS, SORT TERM ONE PARKING SPACE RATIO, ONE PER GUEST ROOM. THAT MEANS IF I READ THAT RIGHT, IT MEANS YOU CAN'T HAVE A THREE YOU CAN'T DO A THREE BEDROOM THAT DOESN'T HAVE THREE OFFSITE PARKING SPACES EVEN IF YOU ONLY WANT TO RENT RENT OF THEM. >> CORRECT. >> I THINK SOME FOUR TIME INJURIES. WE'RE GETTING INTO YOUR DISCUSSION HERE, WHICH I THINK IS FINE AND GREAT. BUT RIGHT NOW, DOES NOT ALLOW SHORT-TERM RENTAL? >> DOESN'T PROHIBIT IT EITHER. >> BUT IT DOES NOT ALLOW. IF THERE IS A SHORT-TERM RENTAL CAUSING PROBLEMS, SURROUNDING HOMEOWNERS CAN GO TO THE CITY, THIS IS NOT SUPPORTED IN THE CODE. I THINK MAKING THIS MORE RESTRICTIVE AT THE BEGINNING IS A SMARTER WAY TO GO THAN MAKING IT LESS RESTRICTIVE. I MEAN, WE'RE ENABLING IT NOW, AND WE'RE PUTTING RULES AROUND IT. NOW, IF WE FIND A COUPLE OF YEARS FROM NOW THAT THESE RULES ARE TOO RESTRICTIVE AND THEN WE COULD POTENTIALLY RELAX THEM. >> BUT I THINK PARKING IS TOO RESTRICTIVE. [00:45:05] >> I LIKE THE ONE PER GUEST ROOM OR SLEEPING ROOM. I THINK WE SHOULD SAY OR SLEEPING ROOM. >> I THINK THE CITY'S TRYING TO AVOID A SITUATION WHERE ON A STREET WHERE MANY OF THE RESIDENTS DO UTILIZE OFFSITE PARKING. IF THE SHORT TERM RENTAL COMES IN AND HAS MULTIPLE GUESTS AND THEY ALL SHOW UP. >> SHOW UP. >> EXACTLY. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO, LIKE, BE LIMITED THERE'S NOTHING IN HERE THAT SAYS THEY HAVE THEY WOULD HAVE TO PARK ON THE FRONTAGE OF THE DWELLING THAT THEY'RE RENTING, THEY COULD PARK IN FRONT OF THE NEXT HOUSE AND SOMEBODY GARAGE. >> THAT ALLOWS OVERNIGHT PARKING. >> THEY COULD PARK IN THE GARAGE DOWN THE SQUARE, SOMEWHERE. >> WE DON'T KNOW I MEAN, IT DEPENDS WHERE. >> I THINK THAT IF YOU HAVE IN THE LISTING THAT THERE IS A MAXIMUM NUMBER OF VEHICLES ALLOWED ON SITE OR ON THE STREET WORK, THEN I THINK THAT THAT'S ADDRESSED ALREADY, AND I DON'T KNOW THAT HAVING A MINIMUM NUMBER OF FARMING SPACES IS PARTICULARLY BENEFICIAL. >> THE ENFORCEMENT OF PARKING IS GOING TO BE REALLY MINIMAL UNLESS SOMEBODY EXPLICITLY CALLS AND COMPLAINS. >> THERE ARE NO HOUSES HERE WITH FIVE TEENAGERS THAT HAVE. SIX SEVEN CARD. >> I DON'T SAY LIFT IS ANY DIFFERENT. THEY HAVE TO GET ALONG WITH THEIR NEIGHBORS. THEY FIGURE THAT OUT. THAT'S HOW US PERMANENT RESIDENTS DEAL WITH IT. BUT THESE ARE NOT PERMANENT RESIDENTS. THESE ARE VISITORS WHO ARE GOING TO COME IN AND WE WANT TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT TO THE NEIGHBORS AND THE CITY'S LOOKING AHEAD AT WHAT ARE THE POSSIBLE NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES. BECAUSE IF YOU'RE RENTING A SHORT TERM AIRBNB IN OAKHURST, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO PARK IN THE CITY DECK OR EVEN THE AGNES SCOTT DECK AND WALK A MILE BACK TO THE DWELLING. YOU GO TO PARK AT THE DWELLING. >> IF IT WERE TO INSTEAD SAY, THE LISTING MUST INCLUDE THE NUMBER OF OFFSITE PARKING SPACES, AND THEN THE PARKING MINIMUM OR PARKING MAXIMUM BE RESTRICTED TO THE RENTERS CAN ONLY UTILIZE OFFSITE PARKING SPACES AND CAN'T UTILIZE STREET PARKING, WOULD THAT SOLVE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, THEN? >> I DON'T SEE IT AS ENFORCEABLE. NOBODY'S GOING TO PAY ATTENTION TO THAT AND FOLLOW IT TO THE LETTER OF THE LAW AND THEN IT COMES DOWN TO THE CITY TO ENFORCE IT OR THE NEIGHBORS TO COMPLAIN. >>BUT THIS SAYS, IF I READ IT, RIGHT, THAT IF YOU DON'T MEET, IF YOU HAVE A THREE BEDROOM HOUSE, EVEN IF YOU ONLY WANT TO WANT TO RENT ONE OF THEM, YOU CAN'T DO IT UNLESS YOU HAVE THREE OFFSITE PARKING SPACES. THAT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. >> SURE, IT DOES. >> IN THE DRIVEWAY LONG ENOUGH. >> IF YOU ONLY RENT ONE IF YOU RENT IT AS A ONE PARKING SPACE MAXIMUM, THEN THAT'S THAT'S CERTAINLY A REASONABLE THING TO DO. YOU'RE PENALIZING SOMEBODY FOR HAVING TWO EXTRA BEDROOMS. IF IT WAS A ONE BEDROOM HOUSE, THEY COULD DO IT. >> IS THIS ORDINARY THE PROPERTY OWNERS LIVING IN THERE AND THEY HAVE. >> I'M NOT SAYING THEY'RE NOT NECESSARILY LIVING THERE. >> THEY'RE MAKING A THREE BEDROOM HOUSE AVAILABLE TO? >> TO A FAMILY WITH TWO KIDS ALL THE TIME. >> YOU SEE IT. >> I GUESS I WOULD PROHIBIT? WHAT THREE BEDROOM HOUSE DOESN'T HAVE A DRIVEWAY LONG ENOUGH FOR THREE CARS? >> MOST OF THEM. >> A LOT OF THEM BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO TANDEM PARK. >> BUT YOU WOULD HAVE TO BE PARKING REQUIREMENTS IF YOU BUILT A THREE BEDROOM HOUSE. >> YOU DON'T HAVE TO PARK THREE CARS OFF OF THE THREE OFF THE STREET ON A THREE BEDROOM HOUSE. THAT'S NOT A IS GOING TO HAVE CREDIT FOR STREET PARKING. >> BUT THAT'S ALREADY BUILT IN. >> I'M JUST SAYING YOU'RE OVERRIDING ALL OF THE STANDARDS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. >> BUT THIS IS FOR FOR PROPOSITION. >> THAT IS A TRUE STATEMENT. >> THIS IS FOR THIS. THIS IS NOT A HOMEOWNER. THIS IS A BUSINESS. >> AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, YOU'RE GOING TO ENCOURAGE SOMEBODY TO TEAR UP THEIR FRONT LAWN OR THEIR BACKBONE CAN'T PUT IT IN THE FRONT LAW. BACKYARD ALL THE GRASS AND I'M JUST SAYING I DON'T THINK YOU SHOULD PROHIBIT ITS USE. RESTRICT IT TO. >> I THINK WE HAVE THE ANSWER TO THAT. SORRY. I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH ALL THE CODE STANDING HERE. BUT CURRENTLY, IF THERE IS ANY CHANGE TO A PARKING, THEY COULD JUST APPLY FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION, AND IT WOULD BE UP TO THE CITY COMMISSION TO DETERMINE IF THAT WOULD BE GRANTED OR NOT BASED ON THAT PROPERTY SPECIFICALLY. >> WHO WOULD HAVE JURISDICTION OVER THAT? WOULD THERE BE PUBLIC COMMENT LIKE ALL [OVERLAPPING] >> THAT'S CORRECT. IT WOULD COME THROUGH JUST THE WAY THE OTHER SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS DO, SO IT WOULD COME TO YOU, IT WOULD BE ADVERTISED, THERE WOULD BE A SIGN ON THE PROPERTY, YOU WOULD HAVE YOUR FIRST PUBLIC HEARING HERE, AND THEN YOU WOULD CONTINUE ON WITH [00:50:01] A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COMMISSION WITH A PUBLIC HEARING. >> WHY NOT LIMIT THE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS THAT COULD BE RENTED TO THE ALLOWABLE PARKING, INSTEAD OF SAYING YOU CAN'T DO IT AT ALL? >> WHAT IF THE HOUSE EXISTS WITH THE BEDROOMS AND THERE'S ONLY TWO PARKING SPOTS? WHAT DO YOU DO? WALL OFF THE BEDROOM? >> [OVERLAPPING] ABOUT FOUR BEDROOMS, IF YOU HAVE A FIVE BEDROOM HOUSE, YOU HAVE TO LOCK A BEDROOM OR SOMETHING. [LAUGHTER]. >> CAN YOU LOCK IT? IS THAT A LOT? IT SEEMS ARDUOUS AND A LITTLE CONTRIVED TO GO OUT OF THE WAY TO PREVENT IT ALMOST. >> I'M LIKE, EVERY TIME I'VE RENTED A MULTI BEDROOM AIRBNB SITUATION, IT'S BEEN MY FAMILY, PERHAPS ANOTHER FAMILY, WE'VE HAD EITHER ONE CAR FOR THREE OR FOUR BEDROOMS, TWO CARS FOR UP TO EIGHT BEDROOMS. I DON'T SEE MANDATING FOR OFF STREET PARKING SPACES. ESPECIALLY WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO DEAL WITH STORM WATER AND ALL THESE OTHER ISSUES, AND WE ALREADY HAVE AN EXCESS OF PARKING IN TOWN THAT SOMEBODY COULD PARK, AND CAR PULL OVER, WHATEVER. THERE'S ALL SORTS OF SITUATION. TO BE HONEST, MOST PEOPLE COULD PROBABLY WALK FROM MOST OF THE PARKING DECKS THAT ALLOW OVERNIGHT PARKING TO PRETTY MUCH ANYWHERE IN THE CITY. >> [OVERLAPPING] DOES THE DEFINITION OF OFF STREET PARKING SUCH THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO SHUFFLE CARS? >> PROBABLY. >> ANGELA. >> IT WOULD BE TO HANDLE OVERFLOW. I ONLY TOOK OUT A SNIPPET, BUT EVERY USE IN THE CODE ACTUALLY HAS A PARKING REQUIREMENT, FROM RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL. WE HAVE TO HAVE SOMETHING TO BASE IT ON, OTHERWISE, RIGHT THEN WE CREATE A WHOLE NEW PROBLEM. BACK UP ON ROADS, PEOPLE NOT KNOWING WHERE TO PARK. WE THINK OF SHARED PARKING AGREEMENTS ON COMMERCIAL. IF THERE'S SOMETHING WHERE THERE'S ON STREET PARKING, OBVIOUSLY, YOU AND I PROBABLY USE IT ALL OF THE TIME. WHEN LOOKING AT THE SHORT TERM RENTALS, WE WERE REALLY JUST TRYING TO CONFIRM THAT NOTHING WOULD BE A DISRUPTION TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. >> WE'RE JUST DEBATING WHETHER YOU MAINTAIN THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH THE EXISTING PARKING REGULATIONS PER USE. IF IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE, WHATEVER THAT PARKING REGULATION IS, VERSUS DOUBLING IT TO ONE PER BEDROOM. I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. >> THAT PROBABLY CUTS AVAILABLE PROPERTIES DOWN BY 85%? >> [OVERLAPPING] UNLESS THEY ASK FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION. >> BUT IF YOUR SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS TO GO THERE AND SAY, I WANT TO DO AN AIRBNB AND ALL YOUR NEIGHBORS COME IN, I DON'T WANT YOU TO DO ONE PERIOD. I DON'T EVEN WANT TO HEAR IT. THEN, WHY WOULD YOU PERMIT ONE GROUP THAT JUST HAPPENS TO HAVE TORN DOWN THE TREES AND STUCK A BUNCH OF PARKING IN THEIR BACKYARD TO BE ABLE TO DO IT? IT'S LIKE YOU'RE FAVORING THAT, AND SEEMS LIKE WE'RE FAVORING THE WRONG THING. >> TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, MR. MCFARLAND, [LAUGHTER] ABOUT OFF STREET PARKING. AS LONG AS THE PARKING IS BEYOND THE FRONT FACADE OF THE BUILDING, BECAUSE WE DO NOT ALLOW PARKING IN THE FRONT YARD TECHNICALLY. AS LONG AS THEIR DRIVEWAY IS LONG ENOUGH, THEY CAN TANDEM PARK. THAT IS, WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE SEPARATE PARKING SPACES AS IF IT'S LIKE COMMERCIAL DOWNTOWN PARKING. THEY CAN DO TANDEM PARKING. >> CAN YOU PARK IN THE DRIVEWAY IN BETWEEN THE FRONT FACADE OF YOUR HOUSE AND THE STREET? >> TECHNICALLY, NO. THERE NEEDS TO BE SUFFICIENT LENGTH OF THE DRIVEWAY THAT GOES BEYOND THE FRONT FACADE AND MAYBE INTO THE REAR YARD TO COMPLY WITH THE OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS. I KNOW WE'RE GOING IN CIRCLES WITH THE OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS. I JUST WANT TO REITERATE THAT, IF THERE IS A DESIRE FOR A PROPERTY OWNER WHO'S INTERESTED IN OFFERING A SHORT TERM RENTAL, BUT THEY ARE SEEKING A REDUCTION IN THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS, THEY JUST FILE A SPECIAL EXCEPTION JUST LIKE ANY OTHER PROPERTY OWNER LOOKING TO REDUCE THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS, AND THEY COME THROUGH THIS BOARD AND THE CITY COMMISSION. IT OFFERS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT. THEY COULD BE IN SUPPORT OR BECAUSE THERE'S PLENTY OF ON STREET PARKING, BUT IT'S ALSO AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COMMUNITY TO COME OUT THAT ARE IN THE VICINITY, AND THAT WOULD HAVE A CONCERN WITH OFF STREET PARKING. THAT WAS ONE OF THE BIG CONCERNS EVEN GOING THROUGH THE MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING ORDINANCE WAS OFF STREET PARKING. [00:55:02] THE WAY THAT IT'S DRAFTED I THINK IS CONSERVATIVE, YES, BUT THAT'S BASED ON THE COMMUNITY SENTIMENT THAT WE HEARD PREVIOUSLY. >> DO YOU MEAN MISSING MIDDLE OWNERS WERE ALSO QUITE A FEW PEOPLE WHO STOOD UP AND WANTED THE PARKING MINIMUMS WIPED COMPLETELY? I'M NOT SAYING THAT WE DO THAT, BUT I'M SAYING LIKE, THERE'S DEFINITELY A CONTINGENT OF THE CITY WHO DON'T SEE THESE PARKING MINIMUMS AS SOMETHING THAT'S NECESSARILY BENEFICIAL AND LONG TERM. >> I'VE GOT ANOTHER GENERAL COMMENT AND SOMEWHAT COULD GO TO WORDS UNDER ITEM K, UNDER SHORT TERM RENTAL, WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT THE PRIOR TO USE SHORT TERM RENTAL MUST OBTAIN A SHORT TERM RENTAL PERMIT, COPY OF THE PERMIT, BLAH, BLAH, POST IT. I FEEL THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME REQUIREMENT THAT THE SHORT TERM RENTAL OWNER NOTIFY THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS OF WHO TO CONTACT. BECAUSE IT'S THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS THAT ARE GOING TO NEED TO HAVE A PHONE NUMBER AND AN EMAIL ADDRESS BUT PROVIDE PHONE NUMBER. IF THERE'S A PROBLEM, THEY NEED TO KNOW WHO TO CONTACT. OTHERWISE, WE'RE GOING TO CALL THEM. BUT THEY'RE GOING TO CALL THE CITY POLICE. THEN THE POLICE WILL RESPOND. BUT THE POLICE THEN ARE GOING TO BE LIKE, WELL, THEY'RE GOING TO CALL WHO AT THE CITY AT 1:00 AM TO FIND OUT WHO TO CALL, BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE RENTING IT ARE CAUSING A PROBLEM. I FEEL LIKE EMPOWER THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS TO KNOW WHO THE PROPERTY MANAGER IS, SO THEY CAN SAY, "HEY, WHOEVER RENTED IT LAST NIGHT LEFT A BIG MESS ON THE FRONT LAWN." THEN THAT WAY, IF IT DOESN'T GET CLEANED UP, THEY CAN THEN CONTACT THE CITY AND LIKE, "HEY, THERE'S A BIG MESS ON THE FRONT LINE, AND THEN THE CITY CAN THEN TAKE SOME ACTION." >> I THINK YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE CITY. >> THAT'S KIND OF SEPARATE, BUT IT'S LIKE TOGETHER. WHAT THE THIRD PARTY VENDOR AND THE PERMITTING SOFTWARE COMPANY WOULD DO IS, IT'S ACTUALLY A 24 HOUR HOT LINE. YOU WOULD CALL IN THAT NUMBER, IT DOESN'T STOP ANYONE FROM CALLING THE POLICE. OBVIOUSLY, IF IT'S SOMETHING BIG, YOUR 24 HOUR HOT-LINE IS PROBABLY THE LAST THING ON SOMEONE'S MIND, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY THAT NUMBER THAT WE WOULD CREATE, THAT NUMBER THAT ANYONE CAN CALL. THEN THAT COMPANY WOULD THEN IN TURN FOLLOW OUR INTERNAL PROCESS ON WHO NEEDS TO BE CALLED, WHAT TIMELINES, THINGS LIKE THAT. >> I WANT TO BRING YOUR ATTENTION TO SECTION 6.5.7 UNDER OVERNIGHT LODGING. IT'S SUBSECTION B1, AND IT'S WHERE OVERNIGHT LODGING IS ALLOWED AS A LIMITED USE, IT IS SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING. ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS, IS THAT, THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, ONCE THEY DETERMINED THAT THE APPLICATION IS COMPLETE, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY SHALL BE POSTED WITH A PLACARD FOR 15 DAYS IN A CONSPICUOUS LOCATION, NOTIFYING THE PUBLIC, THAT AN APPLICATION TO ESTABLISH OVERNIGHT LODGING, SUCH AS SHORT TERM RENTALS, HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE CITY AND THE PLACARD SHALL INCLUDE INFORMATION OF WHERE AND WHEN THE PENDING APPLICATION CAN BE VIEWED. AND SO THOSE NEIGHBORS CAN THEN REACH OUT TO THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, TO LOOK AT THAT DESIGNATED PROPERTY MANAGER AND OBTAIN THAT INFORMATION. I THINK WE HAVE THAT COVERED ALREADY IN THE CODE. >> THE SHORT TERM RENTAL OWNER, IF THEY GET THE PERMIT, THEY'D HAVE TO POST THE SIGN THAT SAYS IT IS NOW A SHORT TERM RENTAL. >> ACTUALLY, WE WOULD BE POSTING IT FOR 15 DAYS PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THAT PERMIT. >> THAT DOES COVER JUST ONE OF THE PEOPLE WHO LIVED AROUND THE HOUSE TO KNOW WHO TO CALL. >> ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR CASEY? >> ONE MORE. [OVERLAPPING] >> FORGIVE WITH OUR DISCUSSION. [LAUGHTER] >> JUST GOING BACK TO THE REQUIREMENT AND DUPLEXES, WALK UP FLATS, STACKED FLATS, NO MORE THAN ONE DWELLING UNIT FOR BUILDING SHALL BE USED. CAN YOU JUST WALK THROUGH THE THOUGHT PROCESS THERE AS TO WHY ONLY ONE IN A BUILDING FOR 200 UNITS? >> SURE. BASICALLY, WE DON'T END UP TURNING A COMPLEX INTO FULL SHORT-TERM RENTALS. >> BUT IN THAT SITUATION. >> I PICK SOME NUMBER, WE PICKED ONE, [01:00:01] BUT IT COULD BE THREE, FIVE. I MEAN, YOU'RE JUST TRYING NOT TO GET 200 UNITS. I GET THAT. BUT ONE IS I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD THE LOGIC. >> I GOT ONE OTHER QUICK QUESTION FOR YOU, CASEY. THERE'S ALL THE STUFF ABOUT PERMIT. I DON'T SEE ANYTHING ABOUT A FEE. DOES THAT NEED TO BE SPECIFICALLY. >> WE WOULD ADOPT THAT SEPARATELY THE CITY COMMISSION WOULD SET A FEE SCHEDULE JUST LIKE WE HAVE EVERY OTHER PERMIT. >> THAT FOR PERMIT AND ALL AND PAY ALL APPLICABLE FEES. WE DON'T HAVE TO SAY AND PAY ALL APPLICABLE FEES IN ORDER TO MAKE IT? >> NO, NOT NECESSARILY. WE HAVE A FEE FOR EVERY PERMIT PROCESS APPLICATION. WE HAVE A SEPARATE FEE SCHEDULE. WE'LL JUST CORRELATE TO THAT. >> I ASSUME THAT THE INTENT OF THE FEE IS SUCH THAT IT WILL THEN COVER THE COSTS OF THE THIRD PARTY. >> IT'S JUST DESIGNED TO COVER ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS. >> ALSO FOR THE ANNUAL INSPECTIONS. >> THEY WOULD ACTUALLY PAY THOSE SEPARATELY. LIKE THE FIRE MARSHAL HAS A SEPARATE FEE SCHEDULE FOR THEIR ANNUAL INSPECTION AND THINGS LIKE THAT. >> THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO SAY SHALL BE SUBJECT TO ANNUALS I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY THERE'S IT'S CLEAR THAT THEY GOT TO PAY FEES IN ORDER FOR ALL OF THIS TO THIS GAP. >> WE HAVE TO CREATE A WHOLE APPLICATION FOR THEM TO WALK THROUGH. THAT WILL SPELL EVERYTHING OUT. >> AT THIS TIME, I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THE FLOOR UP FOR ANY SUPPORT FOR THIS ORDINANCE. ANY OPPOSITION? I DON'T HAVE ANYBODY ONLINE. NOW I OPEN IT UP TO DISCUSSION. >> NOT TO BEAT THE DEAD HORSE, BUT I WOULD PROPOSE THAT YOU LIMIT THE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS OR SLEEPING ROOMS TO WHAT IS ALLOW PARKED ON SITE RATHER THAN PROHIBITING IT ALTOGETHER IF YOU DON'T MEET THE FULL NUMBER OF BEDROOMS WITH OFFSITE PARKING. IF YOU HAD A TWO BEDROOM HOUSE WITH TWO WITH ROOM FOR TWO CARS, LEGALLY, YOU CAN DO THAT. IF YOU HAVE A THREE BEDROOM HOUSE FOR TWO CARS, LEGALLY, YOU CANNOT. THAT SEEMS LIKE A WRONG ASYMMETRY TO HAVE IN THERE. THAT WOULD BE MY ONLY SUGGESTION IS YOU LIMIT IT TO TWO OF THE RENTAL, YOU CAN STILL DO TWO OF THEM. YOU CAN DO WHAT YOUR PARKING ALLOWS, BUT NO MORE THAN THAT WITHOUT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION. >> I TEND TO AGREE TO SOME CHARACTER PERSPECTIVE. JUST THINKING ABOUT SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD IN PARTICULAR WHERE YOU MIGHT BE INCENTIVIZING PEOPLE TO PAVE OVER GRASS. >> I THINK THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO INCENTIVIZE PEOPLE WANT TO DO. >> I GET BOTH SIDES, I GET GREAT POINTS, BUT I TEND TO AGREE WITH YOUR SENTIMENT. LIKE YOU'RE TRYING TO MAINTAIN THE CHARACTER OF THE SINGLE FAMILY. >> YOU'RE SAYING IF YOU HAVE TWO SPACES IN A FOUR BEDROOM HOUSE, THEN YOU'RE ABLE TO RENT UP TO TWO OF THESE. >> THAT'S WHAT I SUGGEST THE ACCENTS. >> HOW DOES THAT PLAY OUT THEN FOR SOME OF THE OLDER HOUSES THAT HAVE NO DRIVEWAY, THEY'RE JUST NOT ELIGIBLE AT ALL TO LIKE FOR SOME OF THESE HOUSES THAT HAVE LIKE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKING, AND THEY HAVE ALLOCATED SPACES FOR THEIR HOUSE? >> I THINK THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT DO HAVE TO GO TO THE SPECIAL DEMONSTRATE THAT YOU HAVE THE FRONTAGE. >> THEN DO WE WANT TO USE THE RATIO OF ONE CAR PER SPACE OR DO WE WANT TO USE THE HOTEL RATIO OF 0.75 CARS LIKE THE ONE IN THIS SCENARIO. >> I JUST LIKE THE ONE PER GUEST SLEEPING. >> WITH NEIGHBORHOOD REQUIREMENTS. >> WELL, THE NEIGHBORHOOD REQUIREMENT IS ONE PER HOUSEHOLD, LIKE ONE PER DWELLING UNIT WHERE WE'RE SAYING BEDROOM A FOUR BEDROOM WOULD ONLY REQUIRED ONE PARKING SPACE VERSUS. >> NOT LESS THAN ONE. >> BECAUSE IT'S GOING INTO RESIDENTIAL AREAS, NOT COMMERCIAL AREAS. I THINK ONE CAR PER GUESTROOM SLEEPING. AND THAT LIMITS HOW MANY. JUST TO SLEEP ROOMS YOU CAN. >> THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HOW PEOPLE USE HOTELS AND THESE SHORT-TERM RENTALS, SHORT-TERM RENTALS ARE MORE LIKELY TO GET A GROUP OF PEOPLE COMING FROM DIFFERENT PLACES AND JOINING UP OR SPENDING THE WEEKEND, EACH BEDROOM OCCUPANT COMING IN THEIR OWN VEHICLE WHEREAS YOU JUST DON'T SEE THAT WITH THE HOTEL, NOBODY. >> HOTELS ARE IN A TOTALLY DIFFERENT PART OF YES. >> IT'S JUST COMPLETELY. >> IT'S TOTALLY DIFFERENT PART OF WHERE THERE'S PARKING GARAGES AROUND AND THINGS LIKE THAT. YOU DON'T HAVE THAT. >> THEY WERE IN THE COMMERCIAL AREA. >> THEY WERE IN THE RESIDENTIAL AREA. >> TO MAKE SURE, COULD YOU REPEAT YOUR ORIGINAL STATEMENT LIMIT, BECAUSE I THINK I WROTE IT DOWN BACKWARDS. >> LIMITED THE AVAILABLE SLEEPING UNIT OR BEDROOM UNITS TO THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES UP TO THE SAME MAXIMUMS, BUT LIMITED TO THE NUMBER OF OFF STREET PARKING SPACES AVAILABLE. [01:05:03] >> SLEEPING ROOMS OR OCCUPANCY? >> SLEEPING ROOMS. >> WHAT'S GOING ON? >> THE SAME THE SAME TERMINOLOGY. WE JUST WASN'T TRYING TO AVOID THE PENALIZING SOMEBODY FOR HAVING AN EXTRA BEDROOM. IN THAT SAME VEIN, THEN I WOULD UPDATE TO WHERE THE LISTING SHALL INCLUDE THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF VEHICLES. I WOULD SAY THAT WE SHOULD HAVE THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF VEHICLES SHOULD BE SET TO THE OFF STREET PARKING SPACES THAT ARE AVAILABLE AND WE'RE TRYING TO MINIMIZE IMPACT, THAT SEEMS THE RIGHT WAY TO DO IT. >> ANYTHING ELSE ON PARKING. >> SAY THAT AGAIN. THE NUMBER OF GUEST ROOMS OR SLEEPING ROOMS THAT MAY BE RENTED, SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE NUMBER OF OFF STREET PARKING? >> TO ALLOWABLE PARKING, NOT NECESSARY OFF STREET PARKING. THAT'S THE WAY I HEARD THAT. >> WHICH IS DEFINED AS OFF STREET PARKING UNLESS YOU GET A EXCEPTION, RIGHT? >> ALLOW PARKING. I'M TRYING TO THINK IT. >> I THINK THAT'S THE OFF STREET IS THE TERM THAT'S IN THERE. >> GO AHEAD. I'VE BEEN TAKING COPIOUS NOTES. >>THE KILL HOURS. >> NO. I JUST WANT TO GET IT RIGHT BECAUSE ULTIMATELY, THIS DRAFT ORDINANCE HAS TO GO TO THE CITY COMMISSION AND PENDING THE OUTCOME TONIGHT, THAT COULD BE ON MONDAY NIGHT. WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PARKING AND THE OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS. IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT SECTION 713, THIS IS WHERE WE'VE ADDED THE USE OF SHORT-TERM RENTAL, AND THEN THE PARKING SPACE RATIO IS ONE PER GUEST ROOM. WHAT I'M HEARING YOU SAY IS THAT WE NEED TO CHANGE IT, BUT WE NEED TO BE VERY SPECIFIC AND THIS IS WHERE IT GOES. WE CAN'T HAVE A LONG EXPLANATION. IT'S JUST SOMETHING SUPER SIMPLE. WHAT ARE YOU SUGGESTING? >> ONE PER RENTABLE GUEST ROOM. >> I THINK WE'RE SAYING ONE RENTAL ROOM PER OCCUPY OFFSITE SPACE. YOU'RE TYING NUMBER PRINCIPAL UNIT YOU'RE TYING THE NUMBER OF PRINCIPAL BEDROOMS, BASED ON HOW MANY PARKING SPACES YOU CAN ACCOMMODATE. >> THAT'S CONCERN. >> BUT THAT'S NOT REALLY HOW I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO END UP WITH AN ENFORCEMENT ISSUE. >> BUT I MEAN, YOU'D HAVE TO GO AND YOU'RE LIKE, WELL, HOW MANY BEDROOMS YOU GOT? I GOT TWO. LET ME GO, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU GOT A LITTLE SMALL ONE OVER THERE TO PULL OUT COUCH. YOU REALLY HAVE THREE. I MEAN, I JUST THE PROBLEM EXISTS EITHER WAY. >> I THINK WHAT JOE. >> YOU'RE SAYING IF YOU HAVE A FOUR BEDROOM HOUSE AND ONLY TWO PARKING SPACES THAT THEN IT CONVERTS TO ONLY A TWO BEDROOM RENTAL HOUSE. >> THAT'S RIGHT. >> BUT YET YOU STILL HAVE TWO MORE BEDROOMS THAT PEOPLE CAN BE SLEEPING IN ON THAT PROPERTY BECAUSE WE CAN'T MONITOR IT 24 HOURS A DAY. >> THAT IS GOING TO BE A MAJOR ENFORCEMENT ISSUE FOR THE CITY TO DO IT THAT WAY. >> CALL IT TWO BEDROOMS AND TWO SOMETHING ELSE OR IS THE FACT THAT THE ROOM IS A BEDROOM, NOW YOU NOW FORCE THEM TO GO BECAUSE THEY HAVE FOUR BEDROOMS, YOU NOW FORCE THEM TO GO THROUGH A SPECIAL PERMIT JUST TO HAVE THE USE. >> WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST IS MAYBE CONSIDERING ONE PER TWO GUEST ROOM. >> 0.5 PER GUEST ROOM. >> THAT WOULD BE EITHER WAY TO DO IT, BUT IT'S NOT AS RESTRICTIVE. >> CORRECT. >> DIFFERENT WAY. >> THAT WAS MY INITIAL THOUGH THAT SEEMS PERFECTLY REASONABLE TO ME. >> WE STILL NEED TO TIE IT TO SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T CHANGE. >> CORRECT. >> THE BEDROOMS WON'T CHANGE. >> I THINK THAT'S REASONABLE. DECATUR HAS PLENTY OF ON STREET PARKING, AND IF ONE CARS PARKED ON THE STREET, IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IT'S THE END OF THE WORLD TO ME. IT FEELS LIKE IT'S NORMAL LIKE LIFE, BUT EITHER 0.75 OR 0.5 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. >> IF WE DO WELL, AS HOTEL IS 0.75? >> CORRECT. >> WHICH JUST USE THE SAME NUMBER AND THE HOUSES ARE ONE PER UNIT, SO THE ENTIRE THING IS ONE. >> IF YOU HAVE A ONE BEDROOM RENTAL, YOU'D GO TO ONE PARKING SPACE. YOU HAVE A TWO YOU GO TO TWO PARKING SPACES BECAUSE YOU'RE AT 1.5, YOU ROUND UP. WE NEED TO SPECIFY YOU ROUND UP, NOT ROUND DOWN. THAT NEEDS TO BE IN THE ROUND UP, SO IT GOES TO TWO. YOU HAVE A THREE, YOU'RE AT TWO. >> [INAUDIBLE] . >> I'M GOING TO 0.5. >> 0.5. >> IF YOU'RE ONLY TRYING TO GO. >> TO ROUND UP. >> YES. >> AGAIN, YOU GOT TO ROUND UP. >> 0.5, AND YOU ROUND UP. >> BE CLEAR. WE ROUND UP. >> OR YOU CAN HAVE. >> WE ROUND UP. >> 0.5, WE ROUND UP. >> I CAN HAVE ONE FOR THE FIRST TWO BEDROOM AND 0.5 FOR SOMETHING. >> WELL, THAT'S THE SAME. >> YOU CAN GET THREE ADDITIONAL FOR EACH ADDITION GUEST ROOM. >> YOU CAN GET THREE ADDITION FOR EACH ADDITIONAL GUEST ROOM. >> SOMETHING LIKE THAT. >> ONE PER TWO GUEST ROOMS. >> NO. YOU JUST SAY 0.5, [01:10:02] THEN YOU ROUND UP BECAUSE THEN IF YOU HAVE TWO, YOU'VE GOT ONE. IF YOU HAVE THREE, YOU HAVE TWO. >> THAT'S ALL. >> IF IT'S 0.5 ROUND UP. >> 0.5, SO IT WOULD BE THE SAME. >> IT'S A FORMULA THAT WORK. >> I THINK THAT WORKS. >> WHAT I'M HEARING IS 0.5 PER GUEST ROOM. ROUND IT UP. >> ROUND IT UP. OKAY. >> ROUND IT UP TO THE NEAREST PAGE. >> WE'RE GETTING CREATIVE. I LIKE THIS. >> TO THE NEAREST WHOLE NUMBER. >> ROUND IT UP TO THE NEAREST WHOLE NUMBER. >> DID ANYBODY PRINT THE ORDINANCE? >> THE PARKING DRAFT ORDINANCE? >> THE ADDED IN. I DON'T HAVE THE WHOLE. >>THE OTHER ANGEL IN THIS SECTION. >> YOU'LL JUST BE ABLE TO DO THE PARKING. >> IT'S RIGHT IN HERE. IT SHOULD BE PAGE. I STAPLED ALL OF THEM TOGETHER FOR YOU. IF YOU JUST GO TO THE THIRD PAGE. >> I'LL JUST CONSIDER THAT ONE. >> NO, I CAN'T SEPARATELY. >> IN THAT PAGE THE PARKING SPACE RATIO THAT LITTLE FORMULA OUT. RIGHT NOW, IT JUST SAYS GUEST ROOM YOU SLEEP IN ROOM ELSEWHERE. I THINK IT NEEDS TO SAY PER GUEST ROOM OR SLEEPING ROOM. OTHERWISE, BE CONSISTENT. THEN WE'RE CONSISTENT THROUGHOUT. >> THEN DO WE HAVE OUR STRIKE CERTIFIED WHERE'S UP HERE. >> YES. THAT IS THE OTHER NOTE THAT I HAVE MADE THAT WHEREVER IT SAYS, CERTIFIED PROPERTY MANAGER IS THAT WE WOULD CHANGE THE WORD CERTIFIED TO DESIGNATED. >> YES. THAT'S WHAT I HAVE. >> IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? >> I THINK THAT THE SECOND POINT RELATED TO PARKING WOULD BE THAT L TWO SHOULD BE SET TO THE OFF STREET THE MAXIMUM NUMBER THAT'S LISTED IN THE ADVERTISEMENT SHOULD BE OFF STREET SPACES THAT ARE AVAILABLE. >> MAXIMUM NUMBER OF VEHICLES? >> LIKE, IT SAYS THAT THEY HAVE TO ADVERTISE THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF VEHICLES, AND I THINK WE SHOULD JUST DESIGNATE THAT SHOULD BE SET TO LIKE THEY CAN'T JUST SAY EIGHT VEHICLES IF THEY ONLY HAVE TWO PARKING SPACES. >> WE GIVE THEM THAT WHEN THEY SUBMIT THEIR PERMIT APPLICATION. THIS IS JUST TRYING TO SIMPLIFY IT. BUT EACH HOUSE COULD POTENTIALLY BE DIFFERENT. WHEN THE PERMIT COMES THROUGH, WE WILL AS THE CITY SET THE MAXIMUM OCCUPANCY, SET THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF VEHICLES, PROVIDE THE NOISE ORDINANCE AND THINGS LIKE THAT. THEN THAT WOULD JUST BE TRANSPOSED AND STAY CLOSE TO THE DOOR. >> I THINK THAT DEFINITION DEFAULTS TO THE 7.1.3. >> I'M GOOD AT NUMBER. I REALIZE THE CITY WAS SAYING I THOUGHT THIS WAS THEIR ONLINE ADD. THEY COULD DO WHAT THEY WANTED. >> IF I MAY SUGGEST UNDER THE DRAFT ORDINANCE, AND THIS GOES BACK TO SOMETHING THAT MR. BRAMBERG BROUGHT UP ABOUT LEGACY SHORT-TERM RENTALS OR THE GRANDFATHERING, I DON'T LIKE TO USE THAT TERM, BUT THOSE LEGACY SHORT-TERM RENTALS IS MAYBE ADD A NEW SECTION 6. RIGHT AFTER SECTION F5, ADD SECTION 6 THAT SAYS ALL CURRENT OPERATORS MUST BECOME COMPLIANT WITH THIS ORDINANCE WITHIN 90 DAYS OF ADOPTION. >> WHAT HAPPENED LIKE SOME OF THESE RENTALS ARE RENTED A YEAR OUT. HAPPENED FOR CHRISTMAS. >> YEAH, RIGHT NOW. >> WILL THEY FIND? >> THEY GOT TO GET PERMIT. >> ANY THING THAT HAPPENS THEY WILL ACCOUNTED ON IT. >> IF THEY DO NOT GET A PERMIT, THEN THEY HAVE TO CANCEL THOSE RESERVATIONS. THAT IS THE RISK THAT THEY HAVE, AND THAT'S NOT THE FIRST TIME THAT RESERVATIONS GET CANCELED. THEY NEED TO HAVE THAT IN MIND, AND THEY NEED TO BECOME GUIDELINES. >> THEY'VE GOT IT RENTED FOR CHRISTMAS, AND THEY FILE THIS PERMIT AND THEN THE CITY COMES IN AND DOES INSPECTION FINDS ALL KINDS OF CODE VIOLATIONS, HEALTH. >> THAT IS A BIG COMPONENT OF THIS ORDINANCE, AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WAS VERY SAFER. THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO OUR FIRE MARSHAL, THERE IS A HEALTH AND SAFETY ASPECT BECAUSE THIS IS ESSENTIALLY A COMMERCIAL USE. IT'S A LODGING USE, AND SO WE NEED TO HAVE THAT EXTRA CARE. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE UNITS THAT ARE BEING RENTED AS A SHORT-TERM RENTAL ARE SAFE IN HABITABLE FOR LODGING PURPOSES, MUCH LIKE A HOTEL OR MOTEL. >> I AGREE WITH ALL THAT, I AM SYMPATHETIC TO THE FACT THAT, I GET THAT IN 2022, WE HAVE COMMUNITY INPUT ABOUT THIS AND THEN THERE'S A MISSING CONCERN AND YOU DID ALL THIS RESEARCH AND I KNOW THE COMMISSION EXPECTING REPORT AND I'M SUPPORTIVE OF ALL THIS STUFF, [01:15:01] BUT I AM A LITTLE BIT SYMPATHETIC FOR AN INVESTOR WHO'S BEEN OPERATING SOMETHING. THEN MAYBE THEY DIDN'T PROACTIVELY LOOK AT THE PRAYING COMMISSION AGENDA TODAY AND THEN MONDAY IT'S ADOPTED AND IT'S LIKE, HEY, YOU GOT TO CANCEL YOUR RESERVATION. >> NO. THEY JUST NEED TO APPLY FOR THE FOR THE PERMIT WITHIN 90 DAYS. >> BUT IF YOU'RE IN THE CONDO BUILDING AND YOU'RE ONLY ALLOWING ONE AND THERE'S FIVE IN THERE. I MEAN, IT'S LIKE SORRY. I DON'T KNOW. I'M SYMPATHETIC TO THE ADVERTISING PIECE. I WISH WE COULD SORT OF GIVE PEOPLE A LITTLE BIT MORE NOTICE AND MORE TIME TO READ THIS, DIGEST, COME BACK AND READ IT. >> WELL, IF IT'S A CONDO ASSOCIATION, AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVEN'T REALLY TALKED ABOUT, OR EVEN SAY THE ARLO, SOMEONE WANTS TO LEASE THEIR UNIT AS A SHORT TERM RENTAL, THEY HAVE TO HAVE THAT APPROVAL FROM THE CONDO ASSOCIATION OR THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, OR THE OWNERSHIP, IF IT'S AN APARTMENT BUILDING, THEY NEED TO HAVE APPROVAL FROM THE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT OR PROPERTY OWNER. >> THAT WAS ONE OF MY COMMENTS. WE SAY HERE WE WANT TO HAVE HOA APPROVAL. THE OWNER SO PROVIDES THAT THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR APPROVAL FROM THE HOA. SO LET'S JUST SAY THERE ARE FIVE UNITS AT A CONDO BUILDING AND THE HOA APPROVES FINE. WHY DO WE HAVE TO LIMIT IT TO ONE? >> I DON'T THINK WE'RE LIMITING IT TO ONE. WE'RE NOT LIMITED TO ONE. THE LIMIT TO ONE IS FROM? >> E, WE'RE SAYING THAT WALK FLATS, NO MORE THAN ONE DWELLING UNITS ARE BUILDING. >> THAT OF CONDO IS NOT A WALK UP FLAT. >> IT'S NOT FLAT. >>I'M GOING TO DEFER TO CASEY ON THIS ONE. >> WHAT ELSE WOULD IT BE? I MEAN, NOT WALKING FLAT, BUT A, SORRY, STACK FLAT. IT'S CALLED THE STACK FLAT. >> I'M SORRY. REMEMBER WHAT LETTER IS IT? MY APOLOGIES. >> MARK, WHAT YOU'RE GETTING TO IS IT'S IT'S IT'S A SMALL BUILDING THAT HAS SAY 2-4 DWELLING UNITS. WELL, ONCE IT GETS TO 50, IT'S NOT A WALK UP FLAT. THAT'S COMMERCIAL. >> THIS IS JUST SPECIFIC TO DUPLEXES, WALK UP FLATS AND STACKED FLAT. >>. BUT IF IT'S 50, YOU DON'T HAVE 50 STACKED FLATS >> MAYBE THAT'S FINE. >> BUT I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'VE GOT A WALK UP FLAT THAT'S CONDOMINIUMIZED, AND IT'S GOT FOUR, AND ALL FOUR OR LET'S SAY THREE OF THEM ARE CURRENTLY DOING SHORT TERM RENTALS. THIS WOULD SAY, WELL, TWO OF YOU GOT TO GO. ONLY ONE OF YOU GETS TO KEEP DOING IT. >> DO THEY TREAT A CONDOMINIUM OWNERSHIP BUILDING DIFFERENTLY THAN A RENTAL APARTMENT BUILDING IN THIS CODE RIGHT NOW OR NOT? >> WELL, IT SOUNDS LIKE CONDO BUILDINGS LIKE WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO WITH 30,40 PLUS UNITS ARE PROHIBITED BECAUSE THIS SAYS ONLY SINGLE DWELLING UNITS IN APPLIANCE WITH THE CODE FOR SINGLE DWELLING FAMILY.. >>MAYBE I'M MISTAKEN. MAYBE THE DEFINITION OF THE BUILDING I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS NOT EVEN ADDRESSED. >> I'M SORRY. IT'S THE BUILDING TYPES I'M TRYING TO PULL. >> WALK UP FLATS ARE DEFINED AS THREE AND FOUR UNITS. SO THOSE ARE THE DUPLEXES, TRIPLEXES AND QUADPLEXES. THE EXAMPLE THAT YOU'RE SAYING ABOUT FIVE CONDOS IS NOT A WALK UP FLAT? >> WHAT'S A STACK FLAT? >> THAT WOULD BE ESSENTIALLY A STACK FLAT OR TOWN HOMES OR WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE. >> THE ARLO? >> THAT WOULD BE STACKED FLAT. >> IT IS STACK FLAT. THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. A MULTIFAMILY BUILDING WE'RE SAYING. >> I MEAN, MULTIFAMILY. >> WHETHER IT'S THE CONDOS OR WHETHER IT'S THE CONDOS NOODLE, WHATEVER. YOU HAVE ONE. THAT'S MY POINT. IF THE HOA SAYS, HEY, YOU ARE OKAY WITH FIVE OR SEVEN, WHY WOULD WE BE OKAY WITH FIVE OR SEVEN? >> BASICALLY, YOU WANTED TO SAY, LIKE IF HOA GUIDELINES. >> BUT AN APARTMENT BUILDING DOESN'T HAVE HOA GUIDELINES AND THEY'RE NOT CONDOMINIUMIZED, SO THERE MAY THERE MIGHT BE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE TWO. >> WE NEED TO. >> I'M TRYING TO GO ONE AT THE TIME. I THINK GENERALLY SPEAKING, IF YOU'RE A PROFESSIONALLY MANAGED APARTMENT OWNER, YOU'RE NOT ALLOWING IT. >> ISN'T THE ARLO MIXED USE? >> YES. >> THAT'S NOT. THAT'S DIFFERENT. >> DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN THE APARTMENTS AND CONDOMINIUM I THINK IT'S PROBABLY [INAUDIBLE]. >> IT'S NOT AN INVESTMENT SITUATION. IT'S IN AN APARTMENT BUILDING. >> LIKE I SAID, I HAD TO PULL IT OPEN THE CODE, SORRY, Y'ALL. BUT SO THE CODE SPECIFICALLY SPELLS OUT THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF USES. WHAT YOU'RE SPEAKING ABOUT WITH THE ARLO WOULD ACTUALLY BE THE MIXED USE SHOP FRONT, THAT IS NOT ONE OF THOSE THAT ARE SPELLED OUT IN HERE. REALLY, YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE ONES THAT WE DISTINGUISH AS MORE RESIDENTIAL BY DESIGN, EVEN THOUGH THEY MAY BE IN OUR DOWNTOWN AND YOU SEE THEM. >> I THINK PART OF THAT IS THE ALLOWING WHATEVER DUPLEXUS TRIPLEXUSPLEXUS WAS FOR MISSING [01:20:01] MIDDLE AND THIS WAS ABSOLUTELY GO TO THE COUNTER OF WHAT THAT INTENT WAS. I SEE WHY WE WOULD WANT TO BE PARTICULARLY RESTRICTIVE WITH THAT. >> BUT USUALLY FOR APARTMENTS, WHEN YOU SIGN THE LEASE, IT CLEARLY SAYS YOU CANNOT. >> MOST CONDO WILL ALLOW A CERTAIN NUMBER AS LONG AS YOU'RE FIRST IN LINE IN THE HOA SAYS IT'S OKAY. WE'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING THAT SAYS WE'RE NOT OVERRULING THAT. >> HOMEOWNERS, HOAS, CONDOMINIUMS ARE DIFFERENT. IF YOU REMEMBER, THIS ISN'T A LONG TERM LEASE. SOME OF THEM MAY ABSOLUTELY CONSIDER THIS A BUSINESS, AND IT MAY BE PROHIBITED, WHICH IS WHAT WE FIND OUT. YOU'RE CORRECT, MANY TIMES THAT YOU'RE ALLOWED TO, YOU KNOW, IF I WANTED TO RENT YOUR CONDO FOR THE YEAR. >> I WOULD ALSO DO THAT AND NOT TELL ANYBODY. >> WE KNOW THAT TOO. >> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? >> IT'S A START FOR US. >> I'M NOT TRYING TO BELABOR. THEY'RE ALL ARE THE BEST EXAMPLE, BUT THAT'S AN APARTMENT BUILDING. BUT LOOKING AT THE BUILDING TYPES HERE, JUST IN THE WHOLE CITY, YOU'VE GOT [NOISE] THE TAX CARRY. I'M SORRY. >> I THINK THE INTENT IS FOR THERE TO BE NO MORE THAN ONE SHORT-TERM RENTAL ON EACH DISTINCT PIECE OF PROPERTY, TO AVOID THERE BEING MULTIPLE SHORT-TERM RENTALS AND IT TURNING INTO A HOTEL-TYPE SITUATION, WHICH NEGATIVELY IMPACTS THE NEIGHBORS. >> I AGREE. THAT WAS A BIG POINT OF DISCUSSION AND FEEDBACK WE HEARD FROM RESIDENTS IN 2022 WHEN THIS WAS BROUGHT FORWARD, THAT THEY DID NOT WANT EXCESSIVE SHORT-TERM RENTALS IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. >> WHICH IS WHY I GUESS I'M SUGGESTING THE HOA OF A BUILDING WOULD BE A BETTER ARBITER THAN US JUST SAYING ONE PER BUILDING. IT JUST SEEMS REALLY RESTRICTIVE TO ME. >> I THINK MOST HOAS DO ALREADY HAVE THAT IN THEIR BYLAWS. >> WELL, AGAIN, WE'RE NOT SAYING IT'S ONE PER LARGE CONDOMINIUM. >> THAT'S WHAT THE STATUTE FALLS UNDER, I THINK. >> IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THESE BUILDING CATEGORIES, THERE'S DETACHED, THERE'S CIVIC. SAM, YOU WANT TO LOOK FOR IT? THERE IT IS. >> YOU GOT IT. RIGHT THERE. >> THERE'S DETACHED, ATTACHED, DUPLEX, ATTACHED HOUSE WITH A TOWNHOUSE, TOWNHOUSE, WALK-UP FLAT, STACKED FLAT. I THINK WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ARE STACKED FLATS. ALL THESE BIG CONDOMINIUM BUILDINGS, I THINK THEY'RE CALLED STACKED FLATS. YOU GUYS WOULD KNOW BETTER. >> THAT'S CORRECT. [OVERLAPPING] SOMETHING LIKE TALLEY STREET WOULD BE A STACKED FLAT BECAUSE THERE'S NO COMMERCIAL ON THE BOTTOM. IT'S DESIGNED FOR RESIDENTIAL ONLY. >> BUT THAT ISN'T A SINGLE ENTITY THAT OWNS IT. [OVERLAPPING] THERE IS A CO-AUTHOR OF CONDOMINIUM. >> THOSE ARE INDIVIDUALLY OWNED WITH A MANAGEMENT COMPANY. >> COULD WE INSTEAD SAY IF A DWELLING UNIT IS NOT GOVERNED BY AN HOA, THEN THIS IS THE RESTRICTION THAT APPLIES. I'M WITH YOU, I THINK THEY'RE ALLOWING AN HOA TO BE THE ARBITER. >> I THINK THAT ALLOWS AN EASY WAY TO [OVERLAPPING] >> CONVERT. >> YEAH, SOMEBODY COULD BUILD A STACKED FLAT AND DEVELOP THEIR HOA. >> WE'RE A STACKED FLAT. [OVERLAPPING] >> CONTROLLING YOUR OWN HOA. [NOISE] >> I COULD SAY 10% OR 5% OR SOMETHING. I'M NOT SUGGESTING IT HAS TO BE CRAZY, I'M JUST SAYING ONE JUST SEEMS RESTRICTIVE, MAYBE IT'S FIVE. >> A LOT OF PEOPLE OWN A CONDOMINIUM WITH THE ATTEMPT THAT IF THEY'RE GOING TO SPLIT TIME AND SPEND HALF OF IT IN EUROPE. [OVERLAPPING] >> YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. >> THEY DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT. IT'S A DIFFERENT DEAL IF YOU'RE SUBLETTING IN A RENTAL BUILDING, BUT IF YOU OWN YOUR CONDOMINIUM AND YOU'RE WITHIN THE HOA GUIDELINES. >> WHAT ZONING AREAS [OVERLAPPING] IS THE STACKED FLAT ALLOWED TO BE BUILT IN? >> BUT THEY'RE PROBABLY LOOKING FOR SOMEBODY TO STAY THERE THE HALF A YEAR THEY'RE NOT THERE, NOT [INAUDIBLE]. [OVERLAPPING] >> IT MAY BE THREE MONTHS OR SOMETHING. >> ANGELA OR CASEY, WHAT CAN WE DO WITH A STACKED FLAT? [OVERLAPPING] >> BUT THIS IS SHORT-TERM, TWO MONTHS? [OVERLAPPING] >> THREE MONTHS WOULD NOT FALL UNDER THAT. >> THIS WOULD FALL UNDER THIS. >> OH, SURE. WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT STACKED FLATS, HOLD ON. STACKED FLATS HAVE NO COMMERCIAL COMPONENT TO IT, SO WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ARLO OR ANY OTHER OF THESE CONDOMINIUM BUILDINGS, YOU HAVE TO GO ONE SECTION DOWN UNDER THE BUILDING TYPES, WHERE IT SAYS COMMERCIAL MIXED-USE BUILDING TYPES. THAT'S WHERE YOU'LL SEE THE MIXED-USE SHOP FRONT BUILDING TYPE. WE WOULD NOT CONSIDER THE ARLO TECHNICALLY AS STACKED FLAT BASED ON THE DEFINITION THAT'S HERE. BUT STACKED FLATS ARE PERMITTED IN THE RM-18, AND THEN ALSO RM-43, [01:25:01] PROFESSIONAL OFFICE, AND THEN THE C1, C2, AND C3 ZONING DISTRICTS. >> WHICH ONE? FORTY-THREE, IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID? >> RM-18, 43 PO C1, C2, C3. >> THEN COULD WE SAY SINCE YOU DON'T WANT IT TO GO UP TO AN OBSCENE HEIGHT, SOMEBODY ESTABLISHES AN HOA AND SAYS 100% CAN BE LEASED, COULD WE HAVE IT BE SET TO THE LESSER OF 10%, 20%? BECAUSE I GUESS THEY'RE STILL HELD TO THE HOA EITHER WAY. >> WITHIN THAT PERCENTAGE, SEE IT'S REASONABLE. >> IF YOU 10% ROUND IT UP. [OVERLAPPING] >> HOW DOES IT TREAT THOSE COMMERCIAL MIXED-USE ONES? >> [OVERLAPPING] IN THIS CASE, THEY'RE JUST NOT ADDRESSED, WHICH MEANS YOU COULD HAVE MORE THAN ONE. >> YES. >> I THINK THE WHOLE TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT THOUGH, LIKE THE ONES ON WHATEVER COLLEGE, COMMERCE, IT'S 50. >> YOU COULD HAVE MORE THAN ONE BECAUSE WE DON'T CONSIDER THAT A DUPLEX, OR A WALK-UP FLAT, OR A STACKED FLAT. >> [OVERLAPPING] THESE MAXIMUMS DON'T APPLY TO THESE OTHER MULTI-FAMILIES. [OVERLAPPING] >> I GUESS DO WE WANT TO INCLUDE THEM IF TO YOUR POINT, SO THAT SOMEBODY DOESN'T BUILD A 100-UNIT CONDO AND MAKE THEM ALL SHORT-TERM RENTALS AND BASICALLY MAKE A HOTEL BY SCREWING THEM. >> THEY CAN'T DO THAT. [OVERLAPPING] >> IT WOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS A HOTEL. >> HEY, YOU-ALL. TAKE A LOOK AT THE ZONING THERE. DO YOU SEE THESE DARK COLORS I'M POINTING TO HERE? THAT'S RM-18. THOSE ARE THE PLACES WHERE SOMEONE COULD BUILD A STACKED FLAT OF HOWEVER MANY CODE WOULD ALLOW ON THAT PARCEL. THAT'S AN APARTMENT COMPLEX RIGHT THERE. THAT'S WHERE YOU LIVE JASON AND ACROSS THE STREET. NO, THAT IS TRIBUTARY. WHERE IS THAT? THAT'S ON CHURCH. >> NEXT TO GLENLAKE PARK? >> NO. THOSE ARE ALL APARTMENTS IN THERE, AND THAT'S APARTMENT BUILDING THERE. THAT'S RIGHT ON COLLEGE AVENUE. >> I THINK IT'S THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT ANGELA JUST SAID. I THINK ANGELA IS SAYING THAT THERE WOULD BE RM-43 AND 18, THE MULTIFAMILY STACKED FLATS WOULD BE ANYWHERE IN THE CITY. >> NO. >> THIS IS WHERE STACKED FLATS WOULD BE ALLOWED? >> CORRECT. >> OKAY. >> THAT HAS NO RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT, LIKE A GROUND FLOOR RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT. >> I GUESS MY POINT IS AND IT'S GETTING TO WHAT YOU MARKED. I THINK WE COULD ALMOST STRIKE STACKED FLAT FROM THIS ONE THING BECAUSE OF WHERE THOSE AREAS CURRENTLY ARE AND WHAT USE IS CURRENTLY ON THEM. IT'S ALL FAR MORE THAN FOUR PIECES. THEY'RE REALLY MULTIFAMILY AREAS WHERE IF SOMEONE DID A STACK FLAT, AND THEY CREATED IN IT. IT COULD PUT IT INTO A CONDO SCENARIO WHERE THEY SAY THREE UNITS CAN BE. IT'S NOT IN THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME AREAS. >> YEAH. I THINK STAFF APPRECIATES THAT CONTEXT THAT WAS GIVEN BECAUSE YOU CAN SEE ON THIS MAP OVER HERE HOW VERY LITTLE LAND AREA IS IN THOSE ZONING DISTRICTS. IF WE WERE TO STRIKE THE TERM STACKED FLATS IN SECTION E THERE, IT STILL COVERS THE DUPLEXES AND WALK UP FLATS, WHICH IS OUR MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO PREVENT BEING OVERTAKEN BY SHORT-TERM RENTALS. >> NOW, IF WE LEAVE IT, YOU COULD GET MORE THAN ONE THROUGH EXCEPTION. >> I THINK I MISSED SOMETHING FROM THIS DEFINITION THAT'S WHY I SAID WE HAD THIS DONE ALONG TIME SO I APOLOGIZE. I'M NOT EVEN SURE I FOLLOW YOUR REPORT HERE. I WAS MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THE BIG MULTIFAMILY BUILDINGS, SO APOLOGIES. >> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? DO WE HAVE A MOTION? >> DO WE WANT TO STRIKE THAT CLAUSE IN THERE? I THINK WE STOLE. >> I WOULD SAY NO. JUST BECAUSE LET THEM COME THROUGH EXCEPTION. I WAS JUST POINTING OUT WHERE THEY WERE. >> YEAH. I'M COMFORTABLE LEAVING IT IN THERE AS WELL. >> THERE'S NOT A CONFUSION AS TO WHAT THOSE MEAN? [01:30:02] >> WHAT DO WE HAVE IN OUR NOTES? >> WE HAVE WELL, THE ORDINANCE THAT IS BEFORE US. I HAVE HEARD STRIKE CERTIFIED AND REPLACED WITH DESIGNATED WHERE APPROPRIATE CONCERNING THE PROPERTY MANAGER DEFINITION, AND THAT'S THREW OUT. TWO, CHANGE 7.1.3 TO 0.5 PER GUEST ROOM. [OVERLAPPING] >> OR SLEEPING ROOM. >> OR SLEEPING ROOM, AND ROUND UP TO THE NEAREST INTEGER. >> YEAH. [OVERLAPPING] >> ANGELA'S ADD TO SECTION 6, ALL CURRENT OPERATORS OR LEGACY RENTALS MUST BECOME COMPLIANT WITHIN 90 DAYS. >> JUST FOR THE RECORD A LITTLE I 90 DAYS IS PRETTY FAST CONSIDERING HOW FAST THIS IS MOVING FOR PEOPLE. I MEAN, I GET THE INTENT OF SAFETY AND STUFF, BUT I JUST HOW ABOUT 120 DAYS? >> BECAUSE YOU MAY HAVE TO POSSIBLY HAVE TO DO SOME SOME WORK OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. >> HUNDRED AND TWENTY DAYS. >>THAT'S A HAPPY PER ME. >> I MEAN, WHAT IF YOU BOUGHT A BUNCH OF FURNITURE LAST WEEK AND YOU'RE PLANNING ON DOING THIS FOR, I MEAN, AND IT'S LIKE, NO, SORRY, WE DID THIS LAST WEEK. >> IF IT'S A NET BE CONDITION THAT IT TAKES MORE THAN 120 DAYS TO DO THE REPAIRS, THEN YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN RENTING IT IN THE FIRST. >> WHAT ABOUT REPAIRS? >> I'M GOING TO GET A PERMIT AND IF YOU DON'T COMPLY WITH THE WAY WE'VE DRAFTED THIS, YOU KNOW, YOU JUST MADE A BIG INVESTMENT A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO. I DON'T KNOW. >> I THINK CURRENTLY THERE IS THE 18 MONTH PHASE IN FOR A LOT OF THESE TO GET APPROVED AND BUILT, AND WE'RE STILL WITHIN THAT. I DON'T THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT. >> IF YOU OWN I'M NOT SURE I FOLLOW. I MEAN, BUT FOR THE ADUS AND THE DUPLEXES, YES, THERE'S 19 MONTHS, BUT IF YOU OWN A CONDO AND YOU JUST ON A HOUSE. I JUST I GOT. I'M SYMPATHETIC TO PEOPLE WHO HAVE MADE INVESTMENTS THAT, YOU KNOW, WERE ACTING WITHOUT A TON OF NOTICE. I JUST I'M INCLINED TO GET MORE NOTICE. >> IS THERE A PART OF WHAT'S BEFORE US THAT APPEARS ONEROUS IN TERMS OF THE TIME COMMITMENT TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE? >> IF YOU HAVE A FOUR BEDROOM HOUSE AND YOU HAVE TWO CARS, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A BUNCH OF STUFF THAT WE'RE NOT JUST ADDRESS THAT WAS THAT? >> WE JUST ADDRESSED THAT WITH THE CHANGE IN THAT? >> THAT'S REQUEST. >> THAT'S TRUE. THAT WAS THE VAGUE TRUE. >> I THINK THE BIGGER THINGS WOULD BE IN THIS SINCE IT IS LIKE AN HOTEL THAT YOU'RE NOT FAMILIAR WITH TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S UP TO CODE LIFE SAFETY CODE IS PROBABLY IN PUBLIC INTEREST. >> THAT'S A SHORT-TERM RENTALS. >> THE READY REALLY SHOULD BE THERE ALREADY. >> THIRTY DAYS OR LESS. >> THIRTY DAYS OR LESS. WE'RE NOT TALKING ANYTHING LONGER THAN LIKE AS FAR AS A RENTER BEING THERE, IS 30 DAYS OR LESS. >> IT WOULDN'T BE DISPLACING ANYBODY WHERE THEY'RE LIVING. IT MAY BE AN INCONVENIENCE TO THE OWNER. BUT THE OWNERS WHO MAY BE INCONVENIENCED SEEM TO BE THE ONES WHO MAY NEED TO PUT IN A LITTLE EXTRA CAPITAL AND WORK TO MAKE IT IN THE CONDITION THAT THE CITY FINDS ACCEPTABLE. >> I'M COMFORTABLE WITH EITHER 90 OR ONE 20? >> I LIKE THE 120 JUST BECAUSE THERE'S PROCESSING TIME AND YOU GOT TO FIND SOME GOT TO [INAUDIBLE]. >> THERE'S A CITY A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME TO GET THE PROCESS. >> TO GET THE WORD OUT AS WELL. >> KIND MESSAGES. >> HUNDRED AND TWENTY DAYS. >> NOT TO THROW ONE MORE BUT IS THERE A REASON WE HAVE A LIMIT OF FOUR BEDROOMS BROUGHT UP THAT THERE'S FIVE BEDROOM HOUSES IN THE CITY THAT I GUESS, ARE THEY NOT ELIGIBLE FOR BEING A FIVE BEDROOM HOUSE AND DO WE WANT TO MODIFY THAT SO THAT? >> WHERE WAS THAT AGAIN? >> RATHER THAN MOST FIVE BEDROOM HOUSES PROBABLY HAVE THREE PARKING. >> SAYS SHORT- TERM? >> LIMITED FOUR BEDROOMS ARE SLEEPING TOTAL. WHICH LETTERS? I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT PARKING. >> 6.3. >> LIMITED TO FOUR BEDROOMS IN A SHORT-TERM RENTAL, AND I'M ASKING IF WE WANT TO ALLOW. >> I STILL FEEL LIKE HERE SHOULD BE LIMITING IT TO FOUR RENTALS CALLED ONE IS NOT A BEDROOM. YOU CAN'T USE IT AS A BEDROOM. >> I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT UP BECAUSE. >> I THINK YOU WELL, I JUST HOPE WE NEED TO STAY CONSERVATIVE ON THIS AT THIS POINT IN TIME. I JUST WE'RE STEPPING INTO UNCHARTED WATERS HERE IN A LITTLE BIT. >> I THINK THE LIMIT ON FOUR GUEST ROOMS OR [01:35:01] SLEEPING ROOMS IS TO LIMIT THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS. >> WHICH WAS OF MORE CONCERNED. >> THAT'S LIMITED IN THE NEXT ONE, I THINK FOR MAXIMUM OF TEN PERSONS IS ALREADY LIMITED. >> BUT IT'S BASED ON MAS NUMBER BEDROOMS ROOM SLEEPING ROOMS PLUS TWO. FIVE, YOU'D BE UP TO 12. >> THE EXTRA GUESTS WOULD PUSH IT TO 16. >> I WANT TO MAKE SURE. >> BUT WE DON'T THINK WE'RE PROHIBITING ANYBODY FROM HAVING A FIVE BEDROOM HOUSE TO DO THIS IF THEY'RE ONLY USING FOUR OF THEM. DO I GET THAT RIGHT OR ARE YOU SAYING THAT? >> IF YOU HAVE A FIVE BEDROOM HOUSE, YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO HAVE A SHORT-TERM RENTAL. IT WAS SPECIFICALLY WRITTEN THAT WAY. >> WHAT IF YOU LOCK OFF ONE OF THE BEDROOMS ONLY RENTAL? >> THAT'S JUST GOING TO END UP MORE INTO ENFORCEMENT ISSUES. WHEN WE GO TO PERMIT SOMETHING, IT'S NO DIFFERENT THAN WE WOULD LOOK AT COMMERCIAL. TYPICAL LIKE WE STILL HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS AS SOMEWHAT OF A COMMERCIAL USE AND ACTUALLY HAVE METRICS THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY TRACK AND DO IF THEY WOULD EVER WANT TO MAKE RENOVATIONS TO THE HOUSE TO COMPLETELY ELIMINATE A ROOM, BUT WE CAN'T JUST TELL THEM, OH, YOU HAVE TO LOCK THAT DOOR SO NOBODY COMES IN. WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN ALSO ENFORCE OUR OWN REGULATIONS WHEN WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE WALKING INTO THE HOME EVERY WEEK, EVERY MONTH, EVERY TIME A RENTAL CHANGES OVER. >> A BASEMENTS THREE BEDROOM AREA. >> GOING BACK TO AN ARGUMENT THAT WAS UP EARLIER ABOUT THE PARKING SPACES AND THEY'RE GOING TO JUST PAVE OVER EVERYTHING. IF WE ALLOW MORE THAN FOUR, TEAR DOWN THE HOUSES THERE, BUILD A MEGA HOUSE, OCCUPY AS MUCH LAND POSSIBLE AND BASICALLY TURN IT INTO A MINI HOTEL. >> WELL, I THINK FOR ME WHEN DRAFTING IT AND I WASN'T HERE OBVIOUSLY. THE COMMENTS THAT I CAN GO BACK TO WERE THE ONES AT THE CITY COMMISSION. THERE WAS A LOT OF COMMENTS, BUT IT WAS ALSO BROUGHT UP THAT WHETHER IT'S THE RIGHT TERM OR NOT, THEY DON'T WANT THESE TURNING IN TWO PARTY HOUSES. THEY WANT THEM TO FUNCTION JUST AS THEY WOULD FUNCTION IF THEIR NEIGHBOR WAS STILL LIVING THERE. THAT'S ONE THING WE CAN'T ALWAYS FIGURE OUT WHAT'S THAT MAGIC NUMBER, BUT THIS WAS THE ATTEMPT TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE AREN'T JUST COMING FOR THEIR BIG WEEKEND EVENT THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE OVERCROWDING, THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE SITUATIONS OF MORE CARS, MORE PEOPLE WORKING. HONESTLY, I KNOW WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME WORKING ABOUT CARS, BUT PEOPLE CAN GET ON MARTA, PEOPLE CAN WALK, UBERS CAN BE DRIVING IN JUST MAKING SURE THAT IT STILL FUNCTIONS LIKE A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. YOU DON'T HAVE CATERING COMING IN EVERY NIGHT BECAUSE NOW YOU HAVE 15 PEOPLE TO FEED, THINGS LIKE THAT. >> NOT TO BELABOR THIS, BUT IF WHAT DETERMINES THAT IT'S A FIVE BEDROOM HOME VERSUS FOUR LIKE IF THEY APPLY AND SAY THIS IS A FOUR BEDROOM HOME, BUT SAY, LIKE THE TAX RECORDS SAY IT'S A FIVE BEDROOM, AND THEY SAY, OH, THIS IS NOW A GAME ROOM. >> IT'S NOT A BUILDING OFFICIAL AND FIRE MARSHAL WOULD LOCK THROUGH. THAT IS HOW THEY WOULD DETERMINE THOSE ROOMS BASED ON BUILDING CODE AND FIRE ACCESS. >> WHICH IS OUT THE TAX RECORDS IS SET UP. HE'S BASED ON CODE. >> IS THE DEFINITION OF A BEDROOM OR GUEST ROOM ONE THAT HAS A CLOSET? >> PER BUILDING CODE, A BEDROOM PER SE HAS TO HAVE A CLOSET, BUT THAT'S NOT TECHNICALLY HOW THIS IS DEFINED. >> BE A BEDROOM WAS COVERS THE BLOCK COUCH. >> THEN THAT EXPANDS TO OTHER ODD POSSIBILITIES LIKE MARK WAS SUGGESTING. >> ONCE AGAIN, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING IS SAFE. YOU'RE STAYING IN A HOUSE THAT YOU'VE NEVER BEEN IN, IF SOMETHING WAS TO HAPPEN, IS THERE EGRESS, DOES DOES EVERYBODY, THINGS LIKE THAT. >> COULD YOU GET A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO IF YOU HAVE A FIVE BEDROOM, IF YOU'RE I MEAN, I GIVE AN EXCEPTION TO SAY YOU WANT TO DO THERE'S FOUR. I MEAN SOMETIMES THERE'S FOUR RENTABLE ROOMS AND ONE I'M COME HERE. >> IT'S A WEIRD PROPERTY OWNER COULD REQUEST A VARIANCE, AND THAT WOULD GO BEFORE THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. >> ALL THEIR HOUSE. >> IF THEY HAVE A FIVE BEDROOM HOUSE, AND IT DOESN'T MEET THE CODE THAT WE'RE SUGGESTING HERE, THEY CAN ASK FOR A VARIANCE TO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WOULD BE SMART TO APPROVE IT. BUT THEY CAN CERTAINLY APPLY FOR A VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR A USE IN A SHORT-TERM RENTAL WITH FIVE BEDROOMS. THEY WOULD VARY FROM THAT CODE SECTION THAT SUGGESTED HERE THAT A MAXIMUM NUMBER OF BEDROOMS, WHICH IS SET AT FOUR FOR SHORT-TERM RENTALS, [01:40:01] THEY WOULD ASK FOR AN INCREASE TO FIVE BEDROOMS. >> I THINK THAT'S A SALES. >> I THINK THE ONE THING YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER, CODES CAN CHANGE. I DID LOOK AT WHAT IS ON THE WEBSITES RIGHT NOW ABOUT WHAT IS ACTUALLY RENTING HERE IN THE CITY. I MEAN, I LOOKED AT THAT. I TOOK THAT INTO CONSIDERATION BECAUSE IF WE'RE DRAFTING CODES THAT NONE OF THEM THAT ARE ALREADY OUT THERE ARE GOING TO MEET, ARE WE REALLY MEETING THE BENCHMARK THAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET AT. BUT OTHER THAN LOOKING ONLINE, I'LL TELL YOU THEY CHANGE EVERY WEEK. SOME PEOPLE MAY NOT WANT TO RENT IT THAT WEEK, SOME MAY HAVE IT UP. BUT I THINK IT WAS REALLY JUST THE WAY THAT WE CAN CAPTURE IT, GET THEM PERMITTED AND SEE WHAT IS ACTUALLY BEING USED TRULY, OTHER THAN WHAT'S JUST POSTED ONLINE. BECAUSE OUR BUILDING OFFICIAL, OUR FIRE MARSHAL, THEY'RE NOT GOING INTO THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES UNLESS THEY HAVE A PERMIT FOR SOMETHING. EVEN JUST READING AN ONLINE LISTING, IT COULD LOOK DIFFERENTLY WHEN THEY WALK IN. >> I JUST I'M NOT ADVOCATING THIS. I'M JUST STATING THIS THAT WE AS A GROUP FEEL LIKE THAT MAX OF FOUR IS SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T WANT TO BE EXCEEDED EVER WE ADD A SENTENCE IN HERE, NO VARIANCE TO THIS REQUIREMENT SHALL BE ALLOWED. >> I DON'T THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA. >> WE COULD. >> I MEAN, FOUR IS ACTUALLY A LITTLE BIT OF AN ARBITRARY. >> I'M NOT AGAIN, WE CAN'T NEVER PART ADVOCATING THAT. >> THAT BUNDLE OF PROPERTY RIGHTS, A PROPERTY OWNER SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO APPLY FOR A VARIANCE. >> IF SOMEBODY DO HAVE THREE BUDGET. >> IF LIKE THE FOUR AND LET THEM GO FOR A VARIANCE IF THEY WANTED MORE. BECAUSE THEN ALL THE NEIGHBORS WILL KNOW THAT THEY'RE GOING FOR A VARIANCE AND THEY CAN WEIGH IN. >> WHY IS FOUR BETTER THAN FIVE. >> BUT BECAUSE THE SHEER NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT WILL BE AN IMPACT ON THE NEIGHBORS. >> YES. ANY NUMBER THAT IS IN B HERE, THERE'S GOING TO BE EXCEPTIONS TO IT. DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THAT NUMBER IS. >> THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO OCCUPY A FIVE BEDROOM HOME FOR A WEEKEND IS A LARGER IMPACT ON THE NEIGHBORS THAN THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE OCCUPYING A FOUR BEDROOM. WITH THE NUMBER OF CAR, IF EVERYONE DECIDES THEY'RE GOING TO GO OUT TO A RESTAURANT, FIVE CARS DEPART, FIVE CARS COME BACK, SHUFFLE AROUND, STAY UP LATE, PLAY MUSIC THROUGH THE HOUSEHOLD SPEAKERS, WHATEVER. >> I CAN SEE IT. FOUR IS MORE THAN THREE, AND THREE IS MORE THAN TWO [LAUGHTER] BUT YEAH. >> HAVE A SYMPATHETIC. SOMEBODY'S GOT A FOUR BEDROOM HOUSE WITH A BASEMENT THAT'S GOT A CLOSET IN IT AND YOU'RE LIKE, WELL, YOU CAN'T OUT YOU KNOW IN THE BASEMENTS LIKE A GAME ROOM OR SOMETHING, AND IT'S LIKE A LOT OF THESE B&B HAVE POOL TABLES AND STUFF. I DON'T KNOW. I THINK THE ABILITY TO COME BACK AND GET IT, I THINK THAT'S FINE. [OVERLAPPING]. >> I GUESS I WOULD SAY THAT I REALIZE THERE'S ALWAYS AN ENFORCEMENT THING. THAT'S NOT REALLY A GOOD REASON TO DO IT. SOMEBODY WHO COULD STRETCH TO A FIVE BEDROOM, I DON'T SEE WHY IF YOU LIMIT THEM TO FOUR, WHY THAT WOULDN'T BE THE SAME AS A FOUR BEDROOM. WHY YOU WOULD PENALIZING SOMEBODY FOR HAVING SOMETHING THAT MIGHT COULD BE A BEDROOM. I'M JUST SAYING IT COULD BE MISUSED TO PREVENT THEM FROM DOING WHAT THEY COULD DO IF THEY HAD A FOUR BEDROOM, AND THEY ONLY REALLY WANT IT. MAYBE THEY ONLY DO WANT TO RENT FOR. MAYBE THEY ONLY HAVE PARKING FOR THE FOUR ANYWAY. YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? IT CREATES AN OPPORTUNITY FOR SOMEBODY TO PROHIBIT THEM FROM DOING SOMETHING THEY PROBABLY SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO, ESPECIALLY IF THEY'RE ONLY PLANNING TO RENT FOUR OF THEM. THAT'S THE ONLY THING I'M A LITTLE QUEASY ABOUT WITH THAT. ONCE YOU CROSS OVER TO SOMETHING THAT COULD BE CALLED TO SLEEP, WELL, YOU COULD PUT A COUCH THERE WITH A FOLD OUT IN IT, THEREFORE, YOU'RE PROHIBITED. THAT SEEMS LIKE WE DON'T WANT THAT TO HAPPEN. >> WHAT I'M HEARING FROM BOTH OF YOU IS THAT THERE'S NOT A REAL CLEAR DEFINITION AS TO HOW THE CITY WILL DEFINE A GUEST ROOM OR SLEEPING ROOM. IS IT ANY ENCLOSED ROOM WITH A DOOR WHERE ONE COULD PUT A PULL-OUT COUCH? >> BECAUSE YOU COULD PUT A PULL-OUT COUCH IN FRONT OF THE TV. >> YEAH. HOMES HAVE BONUS ROOMS, WHICH, BY THE DEFINITION OF A BEDROOM IS NOT A BEDROOM BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE CLOSETS, BUT IN THIS RENTAL SITUATION. >> THAT'S WHY WE ADDED IN THE TERM SLEEPING ROOM BECAUSE IT COULD BE, BUT IF IT STARTS GETTING USED TO MAKE SOMETHING INELIGIBLE, THEN I DON'T FEEL LIKE THAT'S THE INTENDED. >> I GUESS YOU GUYS ARE TAKING ON SOME OBLIGATION OF ENFORCEMENT. [01:45:02] WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THESE LISTINGS THAT HAVE THE STATUTORY THINGS. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE PERMITS UP ON THE THINGS. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE ON SOME LEVEL OF ENFORCEMENT, AND MAKE SURE PEOPLE HAVE THE PERMITS POSTED. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> I DON'T KNOW WHERE TO DRAW THE LINE WITH THE NOTION OF I DON'T KNOW. >> I JUST FEEL LIKE IT'S WRONG TO SAY YOU CAN'T DO IT IF YOU HAVE A FIVE BEDROOM. I THINK IT'S PERFECTLY FAIR TO SAY YOU CAN'T DO MORE THAN FOUR OF THEM. >> YEAH. [OVERLAPPING] >> IT JUST FEELS LIKE THAT'S THE RIGHT WAY TO LIMIT IT. NOT TO SAY YOU HAVE ONE MORE, SO IT'S AN ALL OR NOTHING THING UNLESS YOU CAN GO CONVINCE ALL YOUR NEIGHBORS. >> GO KNOCK A ROOM OFF YOUR HOUSE. [LAUGHTER] >> WOULD IT BE BETTER TO SAY SHORT TERM RENTALS MAY HAVE A MAXIMUM NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT STAY OVERNIGHT? >> THAT'S WHAT'S IN C. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GET. >> IT'S ACTUALLY PRETTY BIG NUMBERS. >> YEAH. >> TWELVE. [OVERLAPPING] >> SOME FORMULA THAT INCLUDES THE MAXIMUM STILL SITS AT 10 IN C. >> IT'S COVERED. >> WELL, IF WE SUBSTITUTE THE FORMULA FOR JUST A HARD MAXIMUM NUMBER, THAT MEANS THAT A TWO BEDROOM HOUSE COULD HAVE 10 PEOPLE IN IT, CRAMPED IN THERE WITH IT. >> RIGHT. BUT EVEN IF YOU CHANGE FOUR TO FIVE AND YOUR MAXIMUM STAYS AT 10. >> YOU JUST HAVE REMOVE THAT. [OVERLAPPING] >> YEAH. JUST REMOVE THE RESTRICTION. >> I THINK IT'S BETTER BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S SOMETHING FUNNY ABOUT A CROSSOVER SPOT WHERE YOU SUDDENLY BECOME INELIGIBLE AND IT'S UP TO SOMEBODY TO SAY THAT LOOKS LIKE SOMEBODY COULD SLEEP THERE. THAT DOESN'T FEEL LIKE WHAT THE INTENT IS. EXHIBIT ALL USE OF IT, ESPECIALLY IF IT'S A CONTAINED, WELL WITHIN THE CONTAINED. >> IF IT'S PERMITTED FOR FOUR BEDROOMS AND YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE PERMIT UP AND YOU'RE WATCHING THE LIST THINGS AND YOU EXCEED THE PHONY VIOLATION, THERE PROBABLY IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE SOME LEVEL OF ENFORCEMENT ON THIS. >> BUT THERE'S ENFORCEMENT ANYWAY, BECAUSE SOMEBODY'S GOT TO GO IN AND CHECK IT. >> ANNUAL FIRE INSPECTION. [OVERLAPPING] >> THEY GO IN AND THERE'S FIVE BEDS, THEN THEY'RE OUT OF COMPLIANCE. >> BUT THAT INSPECTION IS SPECIFIC FOR THOSE PARTICULAR CODE ITEMS. >> NOT NECESSARILY. >> YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SLEEP THERE. >> RIGHT. >> THE OWNER COULD VERY QUICKLY SWAP OUT THE PULL-OUT COUCH OR THE BEDDING MATERIALS. >> IF SOMEBODY GOES AND TROLLS IT ONLINE AND IT SHOWS THERE'S FIVE BEDROOMS, THEN IT'S NOT HARD TO GO AND SEE WHAT THEY'RE DOING WHILE YOU'RE DOING IT. >> WELL, IF IT'S NOT THE TIME FOR ANNUAL INSPECTION, WHO'S GOING TO BE THAT PERSON? >> IT DOESN'T EVEN MATTER THOUGH IF IT'S ON ISSUE ON THE NEIGHBOR OR NOT. [OVERLAPPING] >> I GUESS I GOT A QUESTION FOR YOU. WHERE WOULD YOU DRAW THE LINE? IS IT FIVE? IS IT SIX? >> I'M JUST SAYING LIMIT IT TO FOUR RENTAL. THAT IS IT. YOU CAN ONLY RENT FOUR. IF YOU'VE GOT FIFTH SLEEPING AREA, YOU CAN'T USE IT. IT'S A BONUS ROOM. IT'S A GAME ROOM, WHATEVER IT IS. >> REALLY, WE'RE SAYING, WE'RE LIMITING IT TO 10 PEOPLE. >> SOMEBODY HOUSE, YOU'RE SAYING, HEY, IT'S OKAY FOR YOU TO SLEEP ON THE COUCH, THE FOURTH. >> THAT ENFORCEMENT IS IN THERE TOO. IT'S 10 PEOPLE, WHATEVER THOSE OTHER NUMBERS. [OVERLAPPING] >> YOU LIMIT IT TO JUST 10 PEOPLE, PERIOD. >> JUST LIMIT IT. >> THEY GOT THE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS. >> DOES THAT CAUSE AN ENFORCEMENT ISSUE? >> WELL, I ALMOST FEEL YOU'RE GETTING INTO WHAT TYPE OF FURNITURE IS GOING TO BE IN THE ROOM. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? WE'RE NOT LIMITING IT TO NUMBER OF PEOPLE PER ROOM. [OVERLAPPING] >> YOU ARE LIMITING IT. >> YOU'RE LIMITING IT. WE'RE TRYING TO SET UP DIFFERENT LAYERS TO KEEP EVERYTHING SAFE AND CONSISTENT. >> RIGHT. >> YOU DO HAVE DIFFERENT THINGS THAT COME INTO PLACE. THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AND THE FIRE MARSHAL. I THINK SOMEONE BROUGHT UP A BASEMENT. WELL, IF YOU HAVE A BASEMENT AND THERE'S NO MEANS FOR EGRESS, THAT CAN'T BE COUNTED BECAUSE THAT IS GOING TO BE THE SAFETY ISSUE THAT GETS TRIGGERED. LET'S JUST SAY YOU HAVE FIVE BEDROOMS, BUT WE SAY YOU'RE ONLY GOING TO HAVE FOUR BEDROOMS, BUT I WAS GOING TO SLEEP IN THE ROOM, I DON'T KNOW, WITH MY HUSBAND, BUT NOW, HEY, I CAN HAVE MY OWN ROOM. I THINK YOU'RE GETTING INTO THE NUANCES. WE WERE JUST TRYING TO LAYER IT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE WAS SAFE, THAT IT STILL FUNCTIONED AS A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME. BUT THEN IF WE KEEP PICKING AND PICKING, WE'RE GOING TO CREATE OUR OWN ISSUES IN THE FUTURE. >> BUT WHO DETERMINES THE BEDROOM? I GUESS THAT'S THE ALTERNATE. WHO DETERMINES WHAT THE BEDROOM, LIKE IF YOU COME IN? >> I THINK THE [OVERLAPPING] INSPECTOR. >> BUT I'M SAYING FROM THE CITY'S PERSPECTIVE, WHEN THEY'RE DOING THE WALK THROUGH OR WHATEVER. IF YOU WALK INTO, SAY, [01:50:02] IT'S A BASEMENT WITH EGRESS, WITH A CLOSET, BUT IT'S FILLED WITH GAMES, POOL TABLES, WHATEVER, AND THE OWNER IS NOT INTENDING FOR IT TO BE USED AS A BEDROOM, DOES THAT NOW DISQUALIFY THE ENTIRE HOUSE? >> THAT'S RIGHT. >> IT DOESN'T SEEM RIGHT. >> YOU'RE SAYING YOU HAVE 10 PEOPLE, PERIOD. WHO CARES IF IT'S SIX BEDROOMS. >> IF I MAY ADDRESS THE COMMISSION, I HAVE A SUGGESTION BASED ON THE CONVERSATION. IF WE LOOK AT THE TRACT CHANGES, THAT VERSION, IF YOU GO TO LINE 22 WHERE WE HAVE SUBSECTION B IS TO GO AHEAD AND STRIKE THE FIRST SENTENCE WHERE IT SAYS, SHORT TERM RENTALS MAY HAVE A MAXIMUM OF FOUR GUESTROOMS OR SLEEPING ROOMS. JUST STRIKE THAT SENTENCE. KEEP THAT SECOND SENTENCE WHERE IT SAYS ALL GUESTROOMS AND SLEEPING ROOMS MUST MEET ALL BUILDING AND FIRE CODE REGULATIONS. UNDER C IS ADD A LITTLE BIT MORE LANGUAGE WHERE IT WOULD SAY, MAXIMUM OVERNIGHT OCCUPANCY FOR SHORT-TERM RENTALS SHALL BE TWO PERSONS PER SLEEPING ROOM OR GUEST ROOM PLUS TWO ADDITIONAL PERSONS PER PROPERTY OR MAXIMUM OCCUPANCY AS DETERMINED BY THE FIRE MARSHAL, BUT UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE SHALL THE OCCUPANCY EXCEED 10 PERSONS. >> I LIKE THAT. >> I LIKE THAT TOO. MAXIMUM OCCUPANCY FOR SHORT TERM RENTALS SHALL BE THE LESSER OF THE OCCUPANCY DETERMINED BY THE FIRE MARSHAL OR TWO PER SLEEPING ROOM, GUEST ROOM, PLUS TWO ADDITIONAL UP TO MAXIMUM OF 10. >> YEAH. THAT'S GOOD. >> WOULD THAT WORK? >> GOT IT. >> YEAH. [OVERLAPPING] >> OKAY. FINE. [LAUGHTER] >> WHY 10? WHY NOT 11? [LAUGHTER] >> JUST TO GO FROM 10-0. >> I THINK THE ISSUE IS YOU'RE ASKING SOMEBODY TO REBUILD THEIR HOUSE FOR [INAUDIBLE]. >> I THINK THE MAIN POINT IS YOU'RE TRYING TO GET IN. [OVERLAPPING] >> TEN IS GOOD. >> IT'S UNREASONABLE. >> MAXIMUM OF 10. >> THAT'S IT. NOT MORE. PERFECT. >> I HAVE FOR LINE 22, STRIKE THE FIRST SENTENCE. THEN ADD IN THE SECTION C WHICH IS LINES 25 THROUGH 27 ON THIS PAGE. AN ADDITIONAL FIRST PER PROPERTIES OR A MAXIMUM OCCUPANCY AS DETERMINED BY THE FIRE MARSHAL, BUT THE MAXIMUM RENTAL. [OVERLAPPING] >> UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHALL THE MAXIMUM OCCUPANCY EXCEED 10. >> TEN, PERFECT. >> MAXIMUM OVERNIGHTS. [OVERLAPPING] >> THAT'S BY THE FIRE MARSHAL. WE NEED TO KEEP IN THERE THAT IT'S DETERMINES BY THE FIRE MARSHAL. IT IS DETERMINES HOW MANY ARE, IT IS SAFE, AND THEN BUT SHALL BE NO MORE [OVERLAPPING] THAN 10. >> THE ROSTER OF THOSE TWO SOMEWHAT? >> YEAH. [OVERLAPPING] >> THE OCCUPANCY AS DETERMINED BY THE FIRE MARSHAL, BUT UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHALL OVERNIGHT OCCUPANCY EXCEED 10, OR SOME OTHER VERY CLOSE VARIATION OF THAT THAT MAKES MORE SENSE. >> COULD WE ALLOW THE STAFF A LITTLE BIT OF LENIENCY IN WORDSMITHING THAT TO BE CLEAN? >> WE'LL HAVE TO HAVE THE ATTORNEY REVIEW IT AS WELL. >> I WOULD LIKE TO. I LIKE JASON'S LESSER OF, BUT I THINK THE STAFF UNDERSTAND OUR INTENT, AND I THINK WE SHOULD ALLOW THEM A LITTLE LENIENCY IN CRAFTING THAT LANGUAGE TO BE TIGHT. >> I DON'T WANT TO [INAUDIBLE] AS WELL. [OVERLAPPING] >> THERE'S STILL THE LANGUAGE IN THERE ABOUT GUEST AND THE GUEST COUNTS AND ALL THAT. I THINK IT'S PRETTY WELL COVERED. >> YEAH. >> I DON'T WANT SOME MESS. >> DO WE HAVE A MOTION THEN? >> BECAUSE THE LAST TIME I SAID I DON'T WANT TO OPEN ANOTHER CAN OF WORMS, WE TALKED FOR ANOTHER HALF HOUR OR SO. [LAUGHTER] WHO'S GOING TO SIT HERE? >> I MAKE A MOTION. [OVERLAPPING] >> JUST THE WAY HE SAID IT RIGHT THERE. >> WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE TO STRIKE, CERTIFIED, AND REPLACE THE DESIGNATED WHERE APPROPRIATE CONCERNING THE PROPERTY MANAGER DEFINITION. TWO, MAKE A CHANGE TO 7.1.3 TO 0.5 PER GUEST ROOM AND ROUND TO THE NEAREST INTEGER. >> YEAH, OR SLEEPING ROOM. >> OR SLEEPING ROOM. ADD TO SECTION 6, SOMETHING THAT COVERS LEGACY RENTALS, THAT ALL CURRENT OPERATORS MUST BECOME COMPLIANT WITHIN 120 DAYS. THEN FOUR, TO STRIKE THE FIRST SENTENCE ON LINE 22 AND ADD TO THE NEXT SECTION, SECTION 3, [01:55:06] AT THE END OF THAT FIRST SENTENCE FOR MAXIMUM OCCUPANCY AS DETERMINED BY THE FIRE MARSHAL, BUT UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHALL OVERNIGHT OCCUPANCY EXCEED 10. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO ALLOW STAFF LENIENCY AND CRAFTED LANGUAGE TO BE AS TIGHT AND CLEAR AS POSSIBLE? >> I THINK C AND D PROBABLY BOTH NEED SIMILAR LANGUAGE. [OVERLAPPING] >> YEAH. ACROSS THE BOARD FOR ALL OF THESE. >> I SECOND. >> THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. >> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? >> AYE. >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSITION OR ABSTENTION? PASS, WITH AMENDMENTS. THE THIRD ITEM ON OUR AGENDA, [III.c. The Community & Economic Development Department is requesting text amendments to Article 6 and 12 of the Unified Development Ordinance to define the use of smoke, vape, and tobacco shops and provide associated regulation and permitting standards.] ON SOME FRIENDLY AGENDA, IS ANOTHER TEXT AMENDMENT TO ARTICLES 6 AND 12 AS THE UDO TO DEFINE THE USE OF SMOKE, VAPE, AND TOBACCO SHOPS AND PROVIDE ASSOCIATED REGULATION AND PERMITTING STANDARDS. >> THAT'S CORRECT. ONCE AGAIN, EXACTLY AS YOU SAID, THIS IS A TEXT AMENDMENT FOR ARTICLES 6 AND 12 TO ADDRESS SMOKE, VAPE, AND TOBACCO STORES. A LITTLE QUICK OVERVIEW IS ONCE AGAIN IN 6.2 THAT WILL ACTUALLY BE ADDED TO THE ALLOWABLE USED TABLE. THAT WOULD JUST BE A LIMITED USE IN THE C2, C3, AND MIXED USE DISTRICT. UNDER OUR RETAIL SALES DISTRICT, THIS WILL BE CREATED AS 6.5.11C, WHICH IS SMOKE, VAPE, AND TOBACCO STORES. WE HAVE DEFINED IT. THIS WILL BE A RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT, HAVING 50% MORE OF ITS TOTAL DISPLAY AND SHELF AREA DEDICATED TO THE RETAIL SALE OF TOBACCO TOBACCO PRODUCTS, AND TOBACCO PARAPHERNALIA. WE THEN IDENTIFY DISTANCE STANDARDS. THEY WILL HAVE TO BE LOCATED WITHIN 1,000 FEET OF EACH OTHER, AND THEN A MINIMUM OF 300 FEET FROM ANY DAYCARE CENTER, FROM ANY CITY OR COUNTY RECREATION, PARK, NATURE PRESERVE, GARDEN, OR PRIVATELY-OWNED PUBLIC OPEN SPACE, HOSPITALS, THE PUBLIC LIBRARIES, ANY MARTA STATION, AND THEN PUBLIC OR PRIVATE SCHOOLS. THE NEXT PORTION IDENTIFIES HOW WE WILL MEASURE THEM. JUST SO THAT IS THERE. THEN WE DO HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL STANDARDS FOR WHEN THEY ARE ALLOWED THAT THEY DO NOT EXCEED A FLOOR AREA OF 2,000 SQUARE FEET, MUST BE LOCATED ON THE GROUND FLOOR. THE HOURS WOULD BE BETWEEN 6:00 AM AND 11:00 PM. THEN OF COURSE, NO DRIVE UP OR DRIVE THROUGH. THEN WE ALSO DEFINE THOSE DEFINITIONS HERE IN THE CODE. >> I BELIEVE IN OUR CODE RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE OTHER DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR OTHER TYPES OF USES? >> THAT'S CORRECT. WE HAVE THEM FOR [OVERLAPPING] THINGS LIKE ALCOHOL, WE HAVE THEM FOR DAYCARE CENTERS, [OVERLAPPING] THINGS OF THAT NATURE. >> THE MEASUREMENT DISTANCE THE SAME AS THIS, BASICALLY BY ROUTE OF TRAVEL? >> YES, THEY ARE. >> OKAY. >> A THOUSAND SQUARE FEET. THAT IS SPECIFIC TO THESE USES. WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING THAT IS THIS SPECIFIC, OTHER THINGS LIKE ALCOHOL AND THINGS LIKE THAT. >> WHAT WILL ALCOHOL DO JUST ON A PUBLIC PLACE, OR DO WE HAVE ANYTHING? >> WELL, SO IT'S NOT GOING TO BE CONSISTENT THROUGH ALL OF THESE. IT WOULD ONLY BE YOUR SCHOOLS, YOUR DAYCARE CENTERS, THINGS OF THAT NATURE, CHURCHES. I'D HAVE TO PULL EACH CODE. >> I'M JUST CURIOUS IF THERE WAS ANY PRECEDENT FOR 300 FEET, OR HOW 300 FEET WAS DERIVED IN THIS? >> THE MEASUREMENT TO THE MARTA STATION, IS THAT TO THE LIKE WHEN YOU CROSS OVER, NOT TO THE MARTA PROPERTY, BUT TO THE MARTA STATION? >> TO THE DOOR. TO THE MAIN ENTRANCES OF ANY OF THESE. >> DO YOU HAVE ANY NON-CONFORMING CONDITIONS AT THIS POINT IN TIME? DOES ANYBODY KNOW? BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE PRETTY CLOSE. >> DO WE DO HAVE EXISTING BUSINESSES RIGHT NOW? IF THERE'S SOMETHING THEY COULDN'T MEET, THEY WOULD JUST BE CONSIDERED LEGAL, [02:00:02] NON-CONFORMING AND FOLLOW THOSE STANDARDS. >> ASKING TOO MUCH FOR THAT. HAVE YOU DONE A LAYOVER? IT SEEMS LIKE THIS STRIKES A VAST MAJORITY OF THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS. HAVE YOU DONE A LAYOVER TO SEE WHAT IS STILL ELIGIBLE? >> ACTUALLY, I HAVE, YEAH. ACTUALLY, I STARTED WITH DISTANCES THAT WERE LARGER. WE TAILORED IT BACK. BUT WE DID START WITH LARGER DISTANCES AND IT ACTUALLY ENCOMPASSED. >> IS THERE ANYTHING IN AVENUE? >> TO MUCH. [LAUGHTER] >> THREE HUNDRED? IT'S THAT SHORT BASED ON THIS HALF OF MEASUREMENT. WHEN YOU HAVE TO WALK DOWN THE SIDEWALK, TO A CROSS WALK, AND THEN BACK, AND THEN BACK TO THE DOOR. >> EATS UP A LOT OF THEM. >> IF YOU WANT TO GIVE ME 400, IT COVERED MORE GROUND. >> RIGHT. >> BUT ONCE YOU START TO INCLUDE THESE PRIVATELY OWNED PUBLIC SPACES, WE'VE GOT TWO OR THREE OF THEM, RIGHT IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA AS WELL. >> YOU'D BE SURPRISED HOW QUICKLY YOU GET TO 300 FEET. IT'S NOT AS THE CROW FLIES, SO IT TAKES A WHILE. [OVERLAPPING] >> THE CIGAR SHOP WOULD BE FINE. >> CIGAR SHOP IS FINE. >> ANYTHING IN THAT. THAT WOULD BE THE AREA. >> ALSO KEEP IN MIND, THEY'RE SELLING ILLEGAL THINGS. >> RIGHT. [LAUGHTER] >> SMOKING ON EVERYWHERE. >> I THINK THIS IS TOTALLY. >> WHY IS THIS CIGAR SHOPPING OKAY, JUST TECHNICALLY? >> IT'S NOT. >> WELL, IT MEETS THE 300 FEET. >> IT MEETS 300 FEET. IT'S NOT NEAR. >> BUT IT QUALIFIES AS SMOKE, VAPE. >> TRUE, BUT IT ALSO REACHED ALL OF THE DISTANCE FROM OTHER PLACES. >> BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY PLACE I COULD. >> DO YOU HAVE ONE OVERLAY AVAILABLE OR IS IT SOMETHING? >> I DON'T HAVE IT WITH ME HERE TONIGHT. ACTUALLY, I HAVE TWO LAYERS THAT WERE MUCH LARGER. >> WHY L AND NOT C? >> THAT NIGHT, OKAY. >> LIMITED VERSUS CONDITIONAL. >> SO THAT ONE MIGHT NOT BE. >> BECAUSE THE INTENT WOULD BE THAT IF YOU CAN MEET THIS CRITERIA, YOU CAN. [OVERLAPPING] >> I WILL CROSS TO MODIFY. [BACKGROUND] >> I'M JUST CURIOUS. IF WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE USE, WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE USE. I GUESS I WAS JUST CURIOUS. BUT YOU'RE OKAY WITH THE USE AS LONG AS IT'S SO MANY FEET AWAY? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> GOT YOU. >> IS THE DEFINITION OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS, IS IT RIGHT AS IT'S WRITTEN BROAD ENOUGH TO COVER ALL OF THE VAPE PRODUCTS? [NOISE] IN TOBACCO PARAPHERNALIA DEFINITION, IT MENTIONS ALTERNATIVE NICOTINE PRODUCTS, WHICH SEEMS TO COVER IT, BUT THAT'S NOT LISTED IN THE DEFINITION OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS. >> YES. WE WORKED ON THIS ONE WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY. WE WENT BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN THE STATE LAW, SO IT DOES COVER THOSE BECAUSE THEY ARE CONSIDERED NICOTINE BASE. THEY'RE JUST IN A SEPARATE FORM OF DELIVERY. >> CIGARETTE. >> BUT TOBACCO PRODUCTS, IT'S VERY SPECIFIC TO THE TOBACCO PLANT. WELL, IT SAYS E-CIGARETTE LIQUID. I GUESS THAT'S THE CATCH. >> THAT'S THE BAIT. >> THAT'S RIGHT. >> THEN HEMP PLANT IS LISTED IN TOBACCO PRODUCTS, BUT NOT IN TOBACCO PARAPHERNALIA. BUT THAT'S THE EQUIPMENT, SO IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THE SUBSTANCE IS. >> YEAH. >> CRAZY. >> LAST COMMENT ON THE DEFINITIONS. [LAUGHTER] UNDER TOBACCO PARAPHERNALIA, IT STATES ANY EQUIPMENT DEVICE, ETC. FOR SMOKING, CHEWING, ETC. OR BY ANY OTHER MEANS INTO THE BODY OF TOBACCO. EITHER THERE NEEDS TO BE A COMA THERE OR IT NEEDS TO BE DEFINED AS HUMAN BODY. BECAUSE I'M READING BODY OF TOBACCO. >> OH, INTO THE BODY. YEAH, YOU'RE RIGHT. >> THAT'S FINE. I'LL JUST CHANGE THE PUNCTUATION. [OVERLAPPING] >> THE BODY. YOU BETTER CLARIFY IF BODY MEANING HUMAN BODY. >> UNDER ADDITIONAL STANDARDS, DRIVE THROUGH OR DRIVE UP THROUGH IS PROHIBITED. IS THAT NOT ALREADY EXCLUSIVELY PROHIBITED IN THE DOWNTOWN. I'M LOOKING AT THE MAP. IT SEEMS LIKE ALL OF OUR C2, C3. I GUESS C2 FALLS UNDER THAT DOWNTOWN CORE, AND I BELIEVE DRIVE-THROUGHS ARE ALREADY PROHIBITED. >> I THINK THEY ARE WHEN THEY'RE TIED TO A RESTAURANT. I WOULD HAVE TO PULL THE CODE. BECAUSE THEN CAN STILL HAVE A DRIVE THROUGH, CORRECT? >> I THOUGHT BANKS. >> YEAH. IT'S TIED TO THE RESTAURANT. [02:05:01] >> I THOUGHT BANKS HAD AN EXPLICIT CALL OUT THOUGH. I WAS THINKING IT WAS EVERYTHING WAS PERMITTED EXCEPT LIKE WHERE BANKS ARE, BUT I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT IT, BUT EITHER WAY. THIS IS JUST ADDING TO THAT. >> THIS IS JUST ADDING, JUST TO ENSURE. >> JUST IN CASE PEOPLE GET. >> WE ALWAYS DO, BUSINESS CHANGES EVERY DAY. >> ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I'M GOING TO OPEN THE FLOOR TO PUBLIC COMMENT THEN. DO WE HAVE ANY ONE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR? IN OPPOSITION? >> NOBODY ON THE CALL. >> THERE'S NOBODY ON THE CALL. I'LL OPEN THIS UP TO DISCUSSION AMONG THE PLANNING COMMISSION. >> OTHER THAN GREG'S SUGGESTION ON HUMAN BODY, I THINK IT READS JUST FINE. >> I'LL CHANGE THAT PUNCTUATION. >> DOES THAT NEED TO GO? >> I'LL MODIFY IT. >> OKAY. YOU CAN JUST SAY TO CHANGE THAT PUNCTUATION. >> I'LL JUST CHANGED THE PUNCTUATION. >> YOU'RE GOING TO PASS THE LAWYER TOO. MAKE SURE THE LAWYER ISN'T COMING. >> HOW MANY LEGACY SUCH SHOP DO WE HAVE IN DECATUR RIGHT NOW? [OVERLAPPING] >> I KNOW WE CHANGED THAT DEFINITION. >> DOES ANYBODY KNOW? >> I'M SORRY. WHAT WAS THAT? >> HOW MANY LEGACY SUCH SHOPS DO WE CURRENTLY HAVE IN DECATUR? DOES ANYBODY KNOW OFF THE TOP OF THEIR HEAD? >> THAT ARE COMPLIANT OR NOT? >> I WALKED INTO THREE. IS THERE REALLY FOUR? I CAN CONFIRM THERE'S THREE. >> THAT WAS MY ONLY COMMENT. I WAS LOOKING AT WHAT WAS EXISTING IN 300 FEET. IF YOU DID 400 FEET, IT'D BE LIKE BASICALLY NOT ALLOWED, BUT 300 FEET IS. THERE'S A LOT OF PLACES THAT YOU GO. I DON'T KNOW. >> I THINK 1,000 FEET IS GOING TO KNOCK OUT MORE THAN YOU KNOW. >> IT TAKES YOU OUT TO [INAUDIBLE]. >> THAT'S BETWEEN THE BAKE SHOP. [OVERLAPPING] >> FOR EXAMPLE, ONCE YOU'VE GOT ONE IN CENTRAL, THAT BLOWS UP DOWNTOWN. >> TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION EARLIER ABOUT THE DISTANCE FOR ALCOHOLIC SALES, IT'S 100 YARDS, WHICH IS EQUIVALENT TO THE 300 FEET, SO YES. >> BUT THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU. >> QUICK QUESTION. ANNA SAY OWNERSHIP CHANGE IF THE SHOP, I GUESS THE USE IS ESSENTIALLY LEGACY IN WHETHER THERE IS CHANGES TO IT OR IF WORK IS DONE AND IT'S IN, SAY, A NON-COMPLYING LOCATION. WHAT HAPPENS IN THAT CASE IF THEY WERE TO DO IMPROVEMENTS AND THEY HAVE A NON-CONFORMING USE? >> I HAVE TO PULL THE NON-CONFORMING CODE. UNLESS YOU KNOW IT OFFHAND, I WAS GOING TO LOOK IT UP. WAIT. SORRY, ONCE AGAIN. A NON-CONFORMING USE OR BUILDING SHALL NOT BE CHANGED TO ANOTHER NON-CONFORMING USE, RE-ESTABLISHED AFTER DISCONTINUOUS FOR ONE YEAR, EXTENDED, EXCEPT IN CONFORMITY WITH THE UDO, REBUILT ALTERED OR REPAIR WHEN IT'S A NATURAL OCCURRENCE SUCH AS FIRE WINDSTORM THAT EXCEEDS 75%. FIVE, IT'S PROHIBITED FROM CONTINUANCE AS A RESULT OF A CHANGE OF OWNERSHIP. >> IT'S CHANGE IN OWNERSHIP IS PROHIBITED. IN OTHER WORDS, YOU CAN'T CHANGE OWNERSHIP OF IT. PERPETUALIZING SOMETHING BECAUSE IT BECAME TOO VALUABLE. THAT SOUNDS LIKE ME. >> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? >> LOOKING AT ALCOHOL, IF I'M LOOKING AT THIS CORRECTLY. IT LOOKS LIKE A COUPLE OF ADDITIONAL THINGS THAT WERE MENTIONED ARE ALCOHOLIC REHAB CENTERS, SO REHAB CENTERS INTRO. ALSO UNDER EDUCATION, IT LOOKS LIKE IT WAS UNIVERSITIES, IF I'M LOOKING AT THE RIGHT. >> THAT'S CORRECT. WE ADDED MORE THAN JUST THE ALCOHOL. THAT'S CORRECT. [02:10:04] >> WELL, WHAT I'M SAYING, LIKE, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE ALCOHOL ALSO INCLUDES REHAB CENTERS AND UNIVERSITIES? >> CORRECT. >> DO WE WANT TO INCLUDE REHAB CENTERS, ESPECIALLY IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT VAPES AND ALL THAT MAY HAVE OTHER USES? >> THE REHAB AND RECOVERY FROM ALCOHOLISM, I THINK IS A VERY DIFFERENT SITUATION THAN SOMEONE WHO MIGHT HAVE QUIT SMOKING AND COULD BE SUBJECT TO A TEMPTATION BY SMELLING TOBACCO SMOKE, BUT IT'S IN A DIFFERENT CLASS THAN I THINK OF SOMEONE RECOVERING FROM ALCOHOLISM AND BEING IN PROXIMITY TO ALCOHOL. >> PETTY INCLUSION, BUT SOME THINGS MIGHT NOT BE GOOD. >> BRINGING IN AGNES SCOTT, BUT I WAS JUST SAYING IF WE WANT TO TRY TO BRING IN LINE WITH THE ALCOHOL AND STUFF. >> WITH THE UNIVERSITY, MOST UNIVERSITY STUDENTS ARE OF LEGAL AGE TO SMOKE BUT NOT OF LEGAL AGE TO DRINK. >> THE UNIVERSITY ITSELF MAY HAVE A POLICY FOR ON CAMPUS. >> BOTH? >> I'M SORRY, BUT JUST FOR ALCOHOL. [LAUGHTER] >> WE'RE ALL CLEAR? >> SURE. >> DO WE HAVE A MOTION? >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE, WITH THE ADDITION OF A COMMA. [LAUGHTER] ALTER THE WORD. >> GOT IT. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? >> [OVERLAPPING] AYE. >> ANY OPPOSITION? ANY ABSTENTION? MOTION PASSED. UNDER OTHER BUSINESS, THERE'S A NOTE THAT THE NEXT MEETING IS JUNE, THE 11TH. [IV.a. Next meeting: June 11, 2024.] CURRENTLY, YOU HAVE NO ITEMS ON JUNE, THE 11TH. YOU CAN CANCEL IT UNLESS YOU JUST WANT TO COME AND [LAUGHTER] TALK ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE. >> IS JULY OUR MONTH OFF? >> IT IS. >> I THINK JULY, WE DON'T HAVE A MEETING. >> NO MEETING IN JULY. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> JUST TO NOTE. IF WE DON'T HAVE A MEETING IN JUNE, THE NEXT MEETING WILL BE IN AUGUST, I WILL BE IN MONTREAL. >> HEADS UP. >> I WILL BE HERE IN SEPTEMBER. >> THAT'S WHY THERE'S A VICE CHAIRMAN. >> MEETING ADJOURNED. [NOISE] * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.