The California Coastal Commission has voted in favor of limiting the number of vacation rentals along the coast of Monterey County and banning commercial vacation rentals in Big Sur and the Carmel Highlands.
The Coastal Commission works to regulate the use of land and water in the coastal zone — the area covered under the state’s Coastal Act spanning the length of California’s coastline and extending generally 1,000 yards inland — and monitor public access to the coast, including access via vacation and other short-term rentals.
Currently, Monterey County has no regulations on vacation rentals. The county spent nearly a decade exploring options for vacation rental regulations before arriving at the rules presented on Wednesday.
Monterey County Housing and Community Development director Craig Spencer told the Coastal Commission that commercial vacation rentals have outsized “social economic impacts” on “the fabric of our neighborhoods.” He cited trash, noise complaints, and parking as examples.
“We have approved many vacation rentals, we welcome visitors to our beautiful section of the coast,” Spencer said. “But we cannot continue to be in a position where we don’t have any rules and regulations.”
Under the proposed rules, vacation rentals can make up no more than 4% of single-family homes in each area. However, the cap would only apply to short-term commercial rentals, not to houses where the owner lives on the property or to houses that are rented out less than three times a year.
The Coastal Commission also voted in favor of approving the county’s proposal to completely prohibit commercial vacation rentals in Big Sur and the Carmel Highlands. The county cited the outsized impacts of vacation rentals on the “wild, rural, and unspoiled nature” of Big Sur and the “unique resource limitations” in the Carmel Highlands as reasons for the ban.
What the new regulations would do
Overall, the regulations would limit to 334 the number of unhosted short-term rentals rented out more than three times a year — also known as commercial rentals — along the Monterey County coastal zone.
Currently, the area contains approximately 400 vacation rentals, the majority of which are unhosted, according to the county’s proposal document. In Big Sur, the regulations would eliminate all 37 commercial vacation rentals, the document said.
More than two dozen people and organizations spoke on the proposed regulations at the meeting. Some spoke in favor of the regulations, asserting that vacation rentals disrupt neighborhoods, damage the surrounding habitat, and limit affordable housing. Others argued that vacation rentals allow lower-income families to visit the coast for accessible prices while keeping the owners of the property afloat.
Prior to the decision, vacation rental owner Lowell Strauss said in an interview that he and his wife have owned a house in Big Sur since 2016. He described the home as “rustic and artsy and eclectic” with art and trinkets the two have collected over the years filling the space. The family loves to spend time in summer and over breaks on the property. But, most of the year, they rent the property out as a short-term vacation rental through Airbnb.
“People that have worked for me at the house, that live locally, and then all of the sudden are telling me, ‘I’m not doing any work for you anymore: you do short-term rentals.’ I’m like are you … are you serious? Are you really saying this?”
Lowell Strauss, Big Sur vacation rental owner
“The only way we can really afford to keep it is if we rent it out in a short-term basis,” Strauss said. “We have people coming back year after year: families, multi-generational families that come back year after year.”
Recently, Strauss said, he has watched vacation rentals become a growing subject of contention within the Big Sur community.
“People that have worked for me at the house, that live locally, and then all of the sudden are telling me, ‘I’m not doing any work for you anymore: you do short-term rentals,’” he said. “I’m like are you … are you serious? Are you really saying this?”
Russell Jones, who spoke at the meeting on behalf of 50 short-term rental operators in Pacifica, echoed Strauss on the importance of vacation rentals to both the families owning them and those renting them.
“While none of the individuals I represent would consider themselves commercial, by Monterey County’s definition, they would be,” he said. “These folks are moms, dads, husbands, wives, who scrape together enough to buy an investment property.”
Jones shared that many of his guests come from the East Bay, Tracy, and Oakland, and “often describe needing to get away from the heat of the East Bay or wanting to spend the week with their family on the coast.”
“Most of them could not afford to visit otherwise,” he said.
The affordable housing argument
Laura Davis, deputy director of LandWatch Monterey County, an organization aimed at addressing climate change in the area, argued that limiting short-term rentals would allow for more affordable housing.
“Monterey County suffers from a serious shortage of affordable housing for the local working community,” she said. “The people who work in our community, for example, those in the tourist industry, need places to live within a reasonable distance of their employment. When a significant portion of already limited housing is used for (short-term rentals), it reduces availability and raises rents.”
Strauss argued against the idea that eliminating short-term rentals would open up more affordable housing.
“It’s just completely ridiculous. None of these things are affordable housing,” he said. “There’s no shortage of long-term housing in terms of houses for sale in these areas because they take years to sell. So what really is the issue? And the issue is wealthy people that don’t want undesirables in their backyard.”
The Coastal Commission voted 6-2 in favor of the regulations.
Commissioner Meagan Harmon voiced appreciation to the effort Monterey County devoted to researching and drafting the regulations.
“Particularly noteworthy to me: the very robust over a decade public engagement process,” she said. “And our staff made the point, I think: it was also reflected very well in the public testimony today that the solution that the county has come up with really does appear to be a middle ground and it’s not wholly supported on either side.”
The proposed regulations are now expected to return to the Monterey County Board of Supervisors for final approval in October. Last year, the Board of Supervisors voted in favor of approving the regulations pending approval from the commission.
The post Commission takes initial step to tap brakes on vacation rentals along Monterey coast appeared first on Local News Matters.