Short-term rental rules proposed in Noank
Public meeting planned for June or July, and group of operators is fighting draft ordinance
“Make a plan to support our community and minimize problems. We need to make sure we aren’t requiring eyeglasses for people who can’t hear.”
MARY ANN MCCANDLESS, SHORT-TERM RENTAL OPERATOR, IN A LETTER TO COMMISSIONERS
Groton — Nearly two years after withdrawing a previous proposal to regulate short-term rentals, such as Airbnb and Vrbo, the Noank Fire District Zoning Commission has come out with a new draft ordinance. This would regulate rentals that last less than 30 days.
The ordinance would prevent rentals to more than one party during a two-week period and limit occupation by short-term renters to 45 days per year. At least one renter in each group must be over age 25, and gatherings of more than 16 people are prohibited.
The short-term rental, or STR, operator or designated agent must respond within 20 minutes of being contacted about an emergency or complaint.
Short-term rental operators must have a permit, which they can only get if they have owned the property for at least three years, and which must be renewed every year. The draft ordinance also requires a certain amount of off-street parking based on the number of bedrooms for rent, prohibits signs advertising rentals, and lays out penalties for violations.
Sylvia Rutkowska, an attorney representing a growing number of short-term rental operators and their allies, said her clients “are prepared to take whatever measures that are legally available to them” to fight the proposal.
Under the 2019 proposal, a unit couldn’t be rented more than 34 times per year, and someone had to respond to a problem within 60 minutes. There was a public hearing in June 2019 but the commission withdrew the proposal that summer, after residents expressed disappointment at not being involved in the drafting process.
The commission held workshops that August and September and then went into “development mode,” Chairman Rick Smith said, holding “business meetings” and no longer taking public comment. Members were satisfied with the draft propos
al earlier this year and then met with their attorney in executive session.
The next step is holding what Smith calls an “informational public input meeting.” Smith said that gives the commission latitude to subsequently make changes in business meetings before going to a formal public hearing. After that, the only options are for the commission to approve, withdraw or make minor changes.
Smith said the commission is contemplating having a special meeting this week to schedule a public input session in June; otherwise, that session probably wouldn’t be until July.
In the commission’s April 20 meeting, member Lynne Marshall said 90% of the feedback might just be “complaining about things, and things we’ve already heard.” Smith agreed, saying he hopes with the other 5% or 10%, “we’re going to get some people who say, ‘I don’t like what you’re doing but if you’re going to do it, do it this way, not that way.’”
Smith told The Day on Friday, “We’re hoping for a robust public informational meeting that all sides feel like they’ve been heard.”
Rutkowska, who was retained in the fall to represent the interests of short-term rental operators and supporters, said her clients “have not felt heard to this day.” She called the proposed regulations arbitrary and spoke of trying to preserve property rights.
Rutkowska submitted a Freedom of Information Act request with the commission that was fulfilled in March, and she said the most shocking thing “was the mocking tone of some of the emails between commission members and staff.”
One example she cited was a December 2019 email from Smith to Zoning Official Bill Mulholland that said it “would be deliciously ironic if we went through all of this and ended up with a rule that is MORE restrictive” than attorney John Casey’s initial draft.
“I use humor to deflate tension in stressful times,” Smith said Friday. He said his attitude was, “If we end up, down the road, with something that’s more restrictive or people like less, wouldn’t that be ironic? I wasn’t saying that that’s what I wanted to have happen; I was just opining.”
The current situation
In November 2019, the commission said there were 25 short-term rentals in the fire district. Commission member Dana Oviatt said last month he came up with 26 or 27, and a recent review by The Day showed 28 distinct listings on Airbnb and Vrbo, with some of those also appearing on Wimdu, HomeToGo, Flipkey, Tripping or Tripadvisor.
But the commission also has referenced a report from short-term rental compliance company Harmari that says there are 46 active and intermittent listings in Noank.
CEO Allen Atamer said in an email that Harmari monitors 60 short-term rental websites four times a week at random times. He estimates that figure will be 20% to 30% lower when removing duplicate listings. He also said there may be discrepancies in the geographic boundaries, and noted that some Airbnb listings show up as much as 0.3 mile from their true location.
More than 20 short-term rental operators and supporters, calling themselves Noankers for Responsible STRs, wrote to the zoning commission in late March and early April opposing the regulations.
Multiple people who rent out their homes noted they’re doing so to defray high property taxes, with some trying to hold onto a family home. Operators noted they do their diligence to find respectful renters and aren’t running “party houses.”
Airbnb reviewers often positively describe their Noank accommodations as quiet. “We were able to enjoy the peaceful and calm life, the fresh, delicious and non pretentious sea food and the warm hospitality of the area,” one review says. Another says, “Literally a hideaway from a mad world. Relaxing environment.”
Some neighbors who don’t rent out their homes also have voiced opposition to the proposed regulations, saying they can’t tell the difference between renters and owners, and that renters support local businesses.
But from 2019 until now, the zoning commission has also heard from people who want more restrictive regulations. Some would prefer allowing short-term rentals only when the owner is living on-site, and others expressed that shortterm renters don’t become involved in the community.
Commission member Nip Tanner said last month that, from “things I’ve heard walking around the village, I think there’s a much larger percentage of the population that is very concerned about short-term rentals that we haven’t heard from.”
The stated purposes of the proposed ordinance include preserving the close-knit neighborhoods and civic life that “otherwise might be lost if STR activity were allowed to continue unabated,” protecting the fire district from noise and excessive traffic, and discouraging people from replacing long-term rentals and permanently occupied homes with short-term rentals.
The commission has been criticized for not specifying the source or scope of disturbances.
Smith said in the April meeting that “whether we had one, 10, 20 complaints is not relevant,” that “just because it didn’t happen on Pearl Street doesn’t mean it won’t happen next week or next year or (on) any other street in Noank. Zoning rules have to regulate uses, not users.”
Rutkowska said she agrees that zoning rules must regulate uses but reached the opposite conclusion. She argued the commission is trying to create short-term renters as a separate category of user, saying her clients “would emphatically say that the way these people actively use the property is the same way you and I use the property” — sleeping, eating, relaxing. And problems with noise and traffic can also come from the permanent residents.
She said her clients want the commission to focus on what’s actually going on and “tailor the solutions to those actual problems, with the assistance of these hosts.”
Operator Mary Ann McCandless encouraged commissioners in a letter a month ago, “Make a plan to support our community and minimize problems. We need to make sure we aren’t requiring eyeglasses for people who can’t hear.”
What is — or isn’t — happening elsewhere
The Groton Town Council had a discussion on shortterm rentals at a meeting in March. Town Mayor Patrice Granatosky said the council “will be receiving recommendations from the Planning staff regarding our options on how to proceed.” The Economic & Market Trends Analysis that Camoin Associates produced for the town in 2016 suggested refining regulations “to accommodate new uses and businesses emerging in the sharing economy such as Airbnb, Home Away, Uber, etc.”
In Norwich, a committee that includes the mayor, City Council president, planning director and corporation counsel has been meeting to work out language for a new ordinance regulating short-term rentals. Planning Director Deanna Rhodes will present the proposed ordinance to the City Council at a public forum in late May or early June, Mayor Peter Nystrom said. It would encourage short-term rentals in the downtown Norwich area and within a half-mile of public transportation.
New London Mayor Michael Passero said his city is not actively pursuing regulation but he hopes to find a solution, as it’s “not infrequent” for him to get calls from neighbors. He’s heard concerns about parties, but also from operators who say they couldn’t afford their house if they didn’t rent it out every other weekend.
“We’ll be interested in following Noank’s experience very closely, because we’re dealing with many of the same issues,” Passero said. “It’s a matter of trying to balance competing interests and property rights, and we have not, in New London, come up with a successful solution that we’re ready to propose, either through a city ordinance or through the planning and zoning process.”
In Stonington in 2017, town planning staff interpreted existing zoning regulations to say that rentals under 30 days were not a permitted use and issued a handful of violation notices to homeowners about whom they had received complaints. But the town then reviewed the regulations and backtracked, saying that if residents wished to have the town regulate short-term rentals, they would have to propose an ordinance and voters would have to approve it at a town meeting. That never occurred.
“We’ll be interested in following Noank’s experience very closely, because we’re dealing with many of the same issues. It’s a matter of trying to balance competing interests and property rights, and we have not, in New London, come up with a successful solution that we’re ready to propose, either through a city ordinance or through the planning and zoning process.” MICHAEL PASSERO, NEW LONDON MAYOR