Laserfiche WebLink
work with neighbors dealing with the impacts to find solutions that work for everyone with as little additional regulation as possible. <br />Councilor Pyror – said what’s lacking the most in the conversation is clarity because the council istrying to approach the short-term rental issue as a simple problem that needs a solution; notedthat if there is a problem, it’s a more complicated variable than initially thought; said the councillacks information such as how many houses are currently being rented in this manner;encouraged council to slow down long enough to evaluate the scope of the problem rather thancreating new problems by trying to solve the issue without having all of the information needed;said there are tools to deal with nuisance situations – other mechanisms that don’t require a banor over-regulation; supported regulations that respond to due diligence, but the level should bebased on facts. <br />Councilor Evans – said he would support Councilor Syrett’s motion because the council needs toslow down and gather more data, including if there’s trend towards abuse of the situation byshort-term rental owners these rentals, statistics on local vs non-local property owners, andthe experiences of other communities; warned against shaping regulations on research thecouncil don’t have; shared anecdotal information about a friend who is operating a short-termrental as a secondary and needed source of income and is concerned that the City willoverregulate. <br />Councilor Taylor – said there is plenty of information available because there are 32 cities inOregon that already have regulations; suggested reading an article in the New Yorker aboutBarcelona, Spain being overrun by short-term rentals; said the government’s role is to controlnatural impulses that cause issues and that people don’t have the right to make money at theexpense of their neighbors; said the City is not banning short-term rentals if it allows people usetheir own homes with owner occupancy requirements; expressed concern that this is an urgentmatter that should not be delayed for a committee. <br />Councilor Clark – disagreed with Councilor Taylor and said, while he doesn’t yet have cleardirection about what information he’d like back to address this, he would like to find a way toincentivize, given that more triplexes and duplexes will be built as a result of HB 2001; shouldconsider whether to encourage or discourage the creation of more small units that are intendedto be short-term rentals; supported having more time to think and talk through the nexusbetween this issue and ADU conversations. <br />Councilor Zelenka – said he would like to know how many short-term rental units there are inEugene because if there really are 7,000, then that is significantly impacting the affordablehousing market; asked about the distance between short-term rentals, noting that is key inexpectations about neighborhood livability and people’s right to earn supplemental income, andwhen those two rights clash, that’s when the City Council steps in; said there are many thingsregulated in neighborhoods, such as allowable home businesses in homes and the social hostordinance may be a model that could be applied in this situation; agreed that regulationshouldn’t happen without some data, but not having all the data shouldn’t prevent regulation ofconditions or behaviors that are detrimental. <br />Mayor Vinis – said what has been powerful about this conversation is that the people whotestified at the public forum on Monday provided a very different perspective from the inputcouncil already received -one that called attention to the needed income-generating aspect ofshort-term rentals. <br />Councilor Syrett – appreciated the public comment from the individuals who are successfulshort- term rental hosts; supported learning more about the implications of the draft ordinance,noting that a deeper discussion that includes all sides of the issue will result in a betterordinance. <br />January 27, 2020, Meeting - Item 2A