Sonoma County vacation rental rules advance

The Sonoma County Board of Supervisors gave partial, informal approval Tuesday to a set of rules governing vacation rentals, but postponed a decision on its most disputed element.

With two of its five members absent, the board agreed after 2?-hours of public testimony to endorse limits on noise levels, the number of guests, special events and pets, among other activities. The rules affect up to 640 residential-style vacation units in the county but do not cover a smaller number of units along the coast.

Supervisors put off the the bigger issue — deciding what kind of permit to require. One, a $150 basic zoning permit could be used for all existing rentals, while a more costly use permit — running up to $3,800 — has been discussed for new rentals with six or more guest rooms, or those with multiple units. Supervisors requested more time to study the affect of those costs and requirements on rental businesses.

That major issue aside, Tuesday's hearing was nevertheless a turning point in a nearly two-year debate marked by heated opposition from real estate interests.

After earlier changes by the planning commission and those by supervisors Tuesday, many of the same groups said they were on board with the ordinance.

"We think we've come along way," said Liza Graves, of the Sonoma County Vacation Rental Managers Association. "Generally we're in agreement with most of the items."

Others, including the North Bay Association of Realtors, said that current zoning rules were adequate, or could be made so, and that any new rules might hurt tourism businesses in the area.

Others called for no regulation at all.

"Abandon this effort!" rental owner Barry Hachmyer told supervisors. "These standards are unreasonable, unenforceable and unnecessary."

The issue has been a county priority especially since January, when a deck built without proper permits collapsed under a crowd of young people partying at a Guerneville-area vacation rental, seriously injuring a teenage girl.

Under criticism, planning commissioners made several key concessions to the ordinance in June. Supervisors agreed with some of those changes Tuesday and overruled others.

They endorsed:

-- A maximum overnight occupancy limit of two people per guest room plus two extra guests, allowing a five-bedroom house, for example, to hold 12 guests.

-- A maximum daytime occupancy that includes the overnight limit plus six guests. In both cases children under 3 are exempt.

-- Prohibiting amplified outdoor sound (stereos, live music) without a special use permit.

-- Setting quiet hours at 10 p.m. to 7a.m.

--Enforcing General Plan noise limits on all outdoor activities during quiet hours.

-- Exempting up to six owners of a rental house from the ordinance.

-- Prohibiting special events in areas zoned single-family residential or rural residential.

-- Prohibiting nuisance dog-barking.

-- Setting Jan. 1, 2011 as the effective date of the ordinance.

-- Exempting all reservations made before the

effective date, not to exceed the first nine months of next year.

Several homeowners spoke in support of the rules, saying vacation rentals needed to be reigned in.

Laraine Diebold complained of loud parties at a rental near her Kenwood home. "I'm really upset about this," she said.

Supervisors agreed that increased oversight was needed.

"I know there are some who think I'm the wicked witch of the west for even bringing this issue up," said board chairwoman Valerie Brown. "But I believe in rules. I have to live by them, and I think others should too."

Supervisor Mike Kerns was ill and Supervisor Paul Kelley was in Sacramento for a meeting of the state water commission. The board will review the issue Nov. 9 to decide on the permit issue and cast a formal vote.