No decision made on two potential regulations
A packed house of concerned citizens welcomed the Highlands Planning Board on Monday night for the board’s July meeting.
The lone agenda item under “new business” was public comment and discussion of two proposed options regarding the regulation of short term rental units in town limits. Many of the guests who chose to speak during the public comment period reiterated points they have been making for more than a year as the STR debate has grown into the town’s premier issue.
During Thursday night’s town board of commissioners meeting, the board approved sending two potential plans to regulate STRs to the planning board for consideration. The first option would essentially eliminate STRs as an approved future land use in R1 and R2 zoning districts. The second option would allow STRs to continue to operate in all zoning districts until amortization took effect, thus banning STRs at a set date some years in the future.
Jennifer Huff spoke on behalf of the “Save Highlands” pro-STR group and noted that the process by which the two options came to the planning board was not within the town’s standard operating procedure.
“The way this process usually works is the town board asks the planning board to review an issue, come up with a proposed solution, and send it back to the commissioners for consideration,” Huff said. “In this case, the town commissioners have given you two options to choose from. What is being considered tonight is not how the process is supposed to work.”
Tom Coley, who described himself as a resident of Highlands for 50 years, implored the planning board to take action regarding the elimination of STRs in residentially zoned districts.
“To put it simply, the quality of life in our neighborhoods is being threatened by the conversion of single-family homes into short term rentals,” Coley said. “The value of surrounding homes is being diminished by the noise, overcrowding and commercial use of these properties. I can speak to this personally since I live on a road with several short term rentals, including a notorious party house that routinely has loud parties on the deck until 1 a.m. in the morning or later.”
James Worrell, speaking on behalf of the Highlands Neighborhood Coalition, asked the planning board to follow the town’s recently adopted comprehensive plan, which has a section related to short term rentals.
“You should be able to look at the comprehensive community plan and see which of these two options best aligns with that plan,” Worrell said. “Option two, which introduces amortization, is the most in line with the community plan because it eliminates STRs in zones R1 and R2… The community plan was adopted less than 30 days ago, and this is really the first issue that should be guided by it. I hope you, and the town commissioners, feel obligated to abide by that plan which was developed with the community’s interest in mind.”
Following public comment, the planning board discussed definitions and potential land uses in each zoning district before ultimately deciding they didn’t have enough information to recommend either option presented to them by the board of commissioners.
“I would like to know if we can discuss these two options with the legal counsel that developed them,” planning board member Chris Wilkes said. “We have been advised twice that the town attorney would be made available to us and that has not happened. From my perspective, this is too big an issue for us to just read over the two options and pick one without better understanding of what’s in them.”
Highlands town planner Michael Mathis informed the board that the town’s legal counsel “didn’t feel comfortable” attending Monday’s meeting, but rather provided a statement essentially saying each of the two options is “within the law and defensible in court.”
“That would be a fine answer if this was an SAT question looking for a definition, but it’s not,” planning board member Brad Armstrong said. “As we have seen multiple times in the past year, the regulation of STRs is a big decision for the future of the town and I feel like we should have access to at least speak to the attorney who developed these options.”
Board chair Darren Whatley agreed and added that the planning board does not have to choose either proposed ordinance as it was written.
“We can take these two options apart, add things, subtract things, and put them back together if we choose to do that,” Whatley said. “Either way, I think we need more time.”
The board agreed to schedule a follow-up meeting on Tuesday, Aug. 2 at 5:30 p.m. to further discuss the two proposed STR ordinances and potentially confer with the town attorney.