My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packet_2025-08-05
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2025
>
08/05/2025
>
Agenda Packet_2025-08-05
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/30/2025 5:11:00 PM
Creation date
7/30/2025 5:07:38 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Agency
Clerk of the Council
Date
8/5/2025
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
595
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Long-Term Solutions to Short-Term Rentals <br /> <br />2024-2025 Orange County Grand Jury Page 11 <br /> <br />Table 3: Recent selected legal findings related to STRs <br />Case Decision <br />People v. Venice Suites, LLC, 71 <br />Cal. App. 5th 715, 732-34 (2021) <br />Specificity in zoning language is necessary. <br />Length of occupancy was not specified in <br />code and therefore STR usage would be <br />permitted. <br />Keen v. City of Manhattan Beach, 77 <br />Cal. App. 5th 142 (2022) <br />The term “residence” alone is not effective in <br />banning STRs. A specific STR ordinance is <br />necessary. <br />Coastal Protection Alliance Inc. v. <br />Airbnb, Inc., 95 Cal. App. 5th 207, <br />270 (2023) <br />Operation of STRs in coastal zones does not <br />in and of itself constitute an increase in <br />density or intensity requiring changes in <br />zoning. <br />Kracke v. City of Santa Barbara, 63 <br />Cal. App. 5th 1089 (2021) <br />Coastal cities need to secure and comply with <br />Coastal Commission rulings before drafting <br />any limiting ordinances pertaining to STRs. <br /> <br />These rulings highlight gaps in city ordinances and may provide grounds for appeal of STR <br />citations. In light of these rulings, the cities of Anaheim and Santa Ana amended their codes to <br />incorporate language that plugs the gaps, resulting in more effective STR enforcement. <br />Managing Permit Scarcity <br />Limits on the number of STR permits create a quasi-monopoly. In some cities, the permit limit <br />was set at a point in time when no limit existed. The cities selected a number slightly greater than <br />the inventory then in existence. Once the limit was set, these cities saw an acceleration in <br />applications up to the limit. <br />In some cities, STRs are excluded only in certain zones. Single family home (R1) zones and <br />Homeowner Associations (HOAs) often have exclusions. Other cities permit unlimited STRs in a <br />“vacation home zone” near the beach or an attraction. Still others allow one STR in a fixed <br />radius (typically 300 feet), which effectively limits permits. <br />At least three cities (Newport Beach, Dana Point, and Orange) have created waiting lists in <br />response to having more applications than available permits. However, STR operators rarely <br />voluntarily relinquish their permits. If an STR has been converted to a long-term rental, then it is <br />no longer subject to TOT. Unless the STR operator informs the city of the conversion, a city that <br />only collects TOT annually (as at least one city does) will not know for a year that the unit is no <br />longer operating as an STR. At that point, as they have not received any TOT from the unit, the <br /> <br /> <br />City Council 10 – 13 8/5/2025
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.