Supervisors Chuck Washington (3rd District) and John Benoit (4th District) have asked their colleagues to consider a revised ordinance governing short-term rentals in Riverside County. The new proposal came before the board at its Jan. 12 session.<\/p>\n
The original proposal was discussed and debated at the Nov. 17 and Dec. 8 meetings. It was tentatively approved 4-1, subject to revisions. The board agreed to redraft the ordinance and bring it back in the future.<\/p>\n
Benoit introduced the proposal and made clear that it was subject to revision after his colleagues had time to review it and discuss it with their constituents. He stressed that his intention is to regulate the industry and not ban it.<\/p>\n
While the principal focus was the Coachella Valley, Idyllwild realtors were concerned about several sections and how it would affect the rental market on the Hill.<\/p>\n
Revisions to the original proposal include elimination of occupancy limits. The memorandum to the board states, \u201cThis change is consistent with the intent of not creating a burdensome system of regulation.\u201d<\/p>\n
In response to the Idyllwild group\u2019s concerns, the revised ordinance will allow on-street parking specifically in the Idyllwild and Pine Cove neighborhoods. \u201cIdyllwild is specifically exempt from the street-parking ban,\u201d said Verne Lauritzen, Washington\u2019s chief of staff. This was done because of the \u201clack of adequate space for on-site parking\u201d in these areas.<\/p>\n
The third modification clarifies that the ordinance does not permit short-term rentals where deed restriction or private covenants already prohibit them.<\/p>\n
\u201cSupv. Washington is very pleased we\u2019re accommodating to the concerns raised by people in his district,\u201d Lauritzen said.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supervisors Chuck Washington (3rd District) and John Benoit (4th District) have asked their colleagues to consider a revised ordinance governing short-term rentals in Riverside County. The new proposal came before the board at its Jan. 12 session. The original proposal was discussed and debated at the Nov. 17 and Dec. 8 meetings. It was tentatively […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":58,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"ngg_post_thumbnail":0,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"amp_status":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\n