City staff has drafted ordinances to implement Council’s decision to allow short term rentals in all residential areas for no less than seven days and no more than 28 days a year. The code amendments are scheduled for a Planning Commission recommendation hearing on Tuesday, September 12, 2017. See www.delmar.ca.us/563/Short-Term-Rentals/. Council requested that the ordinances include: an as unobtrusive as possible process for residents to inform the City when they are going to rent or do home exchange for less than 30 days, a time line for existing short term rentals to come into compliance, and proactive enforcement. The expected implementation of the new ordinances is May 2018.
In the meantime some supporters of short term rentals without any limitations have filed a lawsuit claiming that the City’s actions violate the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the California Coastal Act. CEQA requires a review for projects with significant environmental impact, and the Coastal Act requires beach cities to guarantee public access to coastal areas.
Two plan options have been created for the 2+ acre lot on Jimmy Durante Boulevard, a site that is designated in the Housing Element of our Community Plan for housing at 20 units per acre:
• 48 units with 7 affordable and 41 market rate.
• 38 units with 6 affordable and 32 market rate
Planners are seeking guidance from the public, Planning Commission, and DRB before submitting one option for formal review in several weeks. The draft EIR for both options is expected in several weeks.
The former gas station site on 11th and CDM on which an office complex was approved by voters will now get a revised proposal for a new vote. Planners will be introducing their new “residential hospitality” proposal in several weeks. It will be similar to a boutique condo hotel, allowing for flexible owner use and nightly or weekly rentals. The plan will include a commercial use component fronting the street. The draft EIR is in progress and expected to be released for public comment in the fall.
The Superior Court recently ruled for the City in the City Hall/Town Hall lawsuit. Specifically, it denied the writ of mandate in the lawsuit challenging the City Hall/Town Hall EIR.