Council expected to vote on short-term rental law

Aug. 25—NEWBURYPORT — A long legislative journey could come to an end when the City Council is expected to vote on short-term rental regulations at City Hall Monday night.

The city currently has over 150 short-term rental units in operation but no mechanism to regulate them.

Ward 5 City Councilor Jim McCauley had co-sponsored a zoning amendment to regulate and allow short-term rental units in specified districts with help from former Councilor at large Charlie Tontar last year.

"We have a quirk in our ordinance that doesn't specifically say that short-term rentals are allowed, so they are not allowed. The first thing this measure does is allow short-term rentals," he said.

Council President Heather Shand became the amendment's new co-sponsor after Tontar's departure from the council this year and the measure would also require the short-term rental homeowner to live in their unit at least 183 days a year.

The short-term rental units' primary use must also be single-family, two-family or multifamily, and guests would be able to stay for up to 31 days, while campers, trailers, recreational vehicles, mobile homes and tents would not be allowed to be rented under the proposed amendment.

Residential units located in a smart growth district would also be ineligible to be considered a short-term rental. Each unit must also be registered with the state and the city and the Zoning Board of Appeals would have the authority to grant homeowners three-year special permits.

Plum Island would be exempt under the proposed regulations, according to McCauley who said short-term rentals would also need to have a defined use and only be allowed in certain districts.

"Let's say you went on vacation and you wanted to rent out your home. But, remember, this would be listed as a commercial use, so you would have to have parking and would have to abide by noise ordinances and all of those types of things. You would also have to get a license from the city that involves inspectional services, fire, building and whatnot. Because this is no different from a motel or a B&B (bed and breakfast) or something like that. So we are bringing some of the same rules and regulations to this level as well. Because the only safeguards there are right now are an app where you get five stars," he said.

McCauley said added he understands there is a need for short-term rentals in the city but added he worries about cutting into the available housing stock.

"This allows short-term rentals, puts some guidance and regulations on them and brings some balance to people who want to run rentals and the people in the community who may or may not want to live near a short-term rental," he said.

The City Council had initially drafted a short-term rental unit ordinance addressing permitting, on-site ownership, parking, rental duration and more after two years of public hearings in December, 2021. But the measure's key provisions were eventually dismantled by a newly-seated Planning Board earlier this year.

The council eventually agreed to the zoning amendment's current provisions on May 2, and, since the measure has been pending, in one form or another, for the past two years, the city has not been enforcing its own rules, McCauley said.

"Either we pass this in some form on Monday or, if we don't pass it, then we have created an enforcement issue and there won't be any short-term rentals. So I feel we will pass something on Monday," he said.

City Councilor at large Connie Preston also proposed further amendments on Aug. 15, including allowing amnesty for investor-owner properties operating in the city as of May 31.

"The idea is to grandfather in properties that have been operating responsibly for a number of years and doesn't allow for any further additional investment properties. So no corporation could come in and buy up properties and turn them into short-term rentals," she said.

Preston's amendments would also eliminate any parking requirements.

"Ultimately short-term rental units can only operate for 120 days a year, according to the ordinance. If you have a long term rental, someone can live and park on the street 365 days a year. But if this was a short-term rental, they can only park for 120 days. So it doesn't make sense," she said.

Preston's amendments are currently being studied by city attorneys at KP Law, which is expected to be available for questions during Monday night's meeting, according to a city official.

"She believes short-term rentals should be allowed anywhere and everywhere, with little regulation. I have evolved over time on this and am of the opposite view that short-term rentals have an impact on the community. They have an impact on neighborhoods," McCauley said.

Preston answered that her amendments simply give amnesty to existing units and has all the restrictions his version has as well.

"I also believe it will be unnecessary to issue special permits, since we are already looking into creating a licensing process instead," she said.

Staff writer Jim Sullivan covers Newburyport for The Daily News. He can be reached via email at jsullivan@newburyportnews.com or by phone at 978-961-3145. Follow him on Twitter @ndnsully.