Note: The online Request to Speak window has expired.
The online Comment window has expired
Agenda Item
18. Public Hearing: Appeal of the Washoe County Board of Adjustment's affirmance of the Washoe County Director of Planning and Building's decision to reduce the appellant's short-term rental (STR) occupancy from eight (8) persons to four (4) persons based on a reduction in designated parking from two (2) spaces to one (1) space. The appellant is requesting an occupancy of eight (8) persons based on two (2) parking spaces.
The subject parcel is located at 916 Harold Dr., Unit #36, Incline Village, NV 89451. The Assessor's parcel number is 131-140-36. The parcel of land is 0.001 acres in size with a master plan designation and regulatory zone of Tahoe - Fairway, within the Tahoe Planning Area. The appellants and property owners are Matthew J. & Bernadette M. Castagnola.
The Board of County Commissioners (Board) shall consider the appeal based on the record on appeal and any additional evidence submitted at the Board's public hearing. The Board may affirm, modify or reverse the Board of Adjustment's decision. If the Board reverses the Board of Adjustment's decision, the Board may remand the matter back to the Board of Adjustment or directly grant two (2) parking spaces and the STR occupancy of eight persons. Virtual Public Comment Eligible. Community Services. (All Commission Districts.) FOR POSSIBLE ACTION
I oppose this appeal and changing this to allow 2 STR parking spots. These spots are needed for homeowners who do not have a garage at all. and for guests. When they are taken by STRs, which is often more cars and people than the property owners even know, it causes a tremendous problem for residents and the communities. Thank you for protecting our rights as owners who live here.
I oppose allowing STRs use of overflow or guest parking. STR owners have abused this loophole in the past making parking impossible for residents and owners. These owners should not be given special rights that other HOA members do not have.
This again? I respectfully request that the Board consider this issue based on the majority of interested parties who live here, work here, raise their families here and vote here, as opposed to the primarily profit driven interests of Incline Village real estate/development and or out of town/state parties who have no investment in our communities and neighborhoods other than making money.
I often feel that the property rights of people who actually live here are overlooked in deference to those of STR owners. I did not buy a home here to live next door to a hotel. We live in a common property neighborhood of which parking is a part of our common property. STRs should not be permitted to profit from common property parking at the expense of the people they share this property with. This is in addition to the safety, space, seasonal and enforcement issues that occur with over occupancy of STRs. I believe the current model is a reasonable compromise for all parties involved in common property neighborhoods.
I am all for property rights if you own ALL the property in consideration. Yet again, in this scenario, the applicant should have bought a home with its own driveway/ parking or they should have researched more thoroughly.
Limiting STR parking to the number of spaces assigned to a unit, and not allowing STR use of overflow/guest parking is the single most helpful regulation Washoe County has implemented to control STR problems. Prior to this regulation, STR guests would bring an uncontrolled number of vehicles, (with as many as nine for one unit!) and the number of occupants far exceeded the number allowed on the permit. With limited enforcement ability by the county, this is a problem that quickly gets out of hand due to multiple STRs in communities.
STR owners already profit from their businesses at the expense of resident homeowners. Allowing STRs to use overflow/guest parking further imposes upon homeowner rights by taking an unfair number of already limited spaces. There is no way the county could control this. If STR homeowners want the use of overflow/guest parking, they can have it by simply giving up their STR permits and enjoying their own property.
Please, do not rescind this extremely helpful and important regulation!
Thank you for your consideration,
Mary Lou Kennedy
1487 Tirol Drive
Incline Village, NV
My family and I oppose this appeal. If this case has power as a precedent, we are setting up a scenario where private businesses (STRs) can take common property (parking spaces in excess of their allotted spots as per CC&Rs/R&Rs per HOA) from other neighbors for the benefit of their private business and detriment of their neighbors.
If HOAs wish to allocate more parking to STRs they can certainly do so, and that is how it should stay.
This would dramatically affect the quality of life for full time residents of our neighborhood. We already have a shortage of parking. Historically some residents would return home from a long day at work to have no parking available at their home or on their street due to the overabundance of STR's. I strongly oppose this!
Allowing an individual owner in an HOA rent out parking on common land (property owned by the HOA and not the owner) infringes on the property rights of every member of the HOA.
What if every owner of the HOA wanted to rent out common land parking? (There are not enough overflow parking spaces to allocate two to every owner.) These owners should not be given a special privilege over the rest of the HOA members.
Further, these owners have no legal right to monetize an asset they don’t own.
Here we are again.
I object to the exemption to increasing allowable parking spaces to the short-term rental at 916 Harold Drive. Additional parking spaces in HOAs around Incline Village are vitally needed to provide additional snow storage and common space for other needs. I am on the board of an HOA and I often run into these issues.
HOAs determine allowable spaces per unit in a fair and lawful way. Under no circumstance should the county be involved in overstepping their authority in this matter. Especially in favor of transient housing that increases VMTs (vehicle miles traveled) to and from town centers, nuisances to neighbors, pollution, problems and puts a commercial use in residential zoning.
Additionally, insurance companies are requiring ever more things from HOAs before they are insurable. This common space must be kept common for the purpose of unforeseen needs to meet requirements in this changing environment. Insurance companies also raise rates in HOAs that have STRs and this is an unfair burden on other HOA members. The county interfering with HOA's sets a terrible precedent and muddies the waters of authority. Parking spaces should be equally distributed and available in common space of HOAs to the benefit of all members as determined by HOA board membership and CC&Rs! If people cared about affordable housing, they would deny this appeal and outright ban STRs. Unless you do that, wealth inequality will grow and affordability will get worse for your children.
I oppose this appeal and changing this to allow 2 STR parking spots. These spots are needed for homeowners who do not have a garage at all. and for guests. When they are taken by STRs, which is often more cars and people than the property owners even know, it causes a tremendous problem for residents and the communities. Thank you for protecting our rights as owners who live here.
I oppose allowing STRs use of overflow or guest parking. STR owners have abused this loophole in the past making parking impossible for residents and owners. These owners should not be given special rights that other HOA members do not have.
This again? I respectfully request that the Board consider this issue based on the majority of interested parties who live here, work here, raise their families here and vote here, as opposed to the primarily profit driven interests of Incline Village real estate/development and or out of town/state parties who have no investment in our communities and neighborhoods other than making money.
I often feel that the property rights of people who actually live here are overlooked in deference to those of STR owners. I did not buy a home here to live next door to a hotel. We live in a common property neighborhood of which parking is a part of our common property. STRs should not be permitted to profit from common property parking at the expense of the people they share this property with. This is in addition to the safety, space, seasonal and enforcement issues that occur with over occupancy of STRs. I believe the current model is a reasonable compromise for all parties involved in common property neighborhoods.
I am all for property rights if you own ALL the property in consideration. Yet again, in this scenario, the applicant should have bought a home with its own driveway/ parking or they should have researched more thoroughly.
Limiting STR parking to the number of spaces assigned to a unit, and not allowing STR use of overflow/guest parking is the single most helpful regulation Washoe County has implemented to control STR problems. Prior to this regulation, STR guests would bring an uncontrolled number of vehicles, (with as many as nine for one unit!) and the number of occupants far exceeded the number allowed on the permit. With limited enforcement ability by the county, this is a problem that quickly gets out of hand due to multiple STRs in communities.
STR owners already profit from their businesses at the expense of resident homeowners. Allowing STRs to use overflow/guest parking further imposes upon homeowner rights by taking an unfair number of already limited spaces. There is no way the county could control this. If STR homeowners want the use of overflow/guest parking, they can have it by simply giving up their STR permits and enjoying their own property.
Please, do not rescind this extremely helpful and important regulation!
Thank you for your consideration,
Mary Lou Kennedy
1487 Tirol Drive
Incline Village, NV
My family and I oppose this appeal. If this case has power as a precedent, we are setting up a scenario where private businesses (STRs) can take common property (parking spaces in excess of their allotted spots as per CC&Rs/R&Rs per HOA) from other neighbors for the benefit of their private business and detriment of their neighbors.
If HOAs wish to allocate more parking to STRs they can certainly do so, and that is how it should stay.
This would dramatically affect the quality of life for full time residents of our neighborhood. We already have a shortage of parking. Historically some residents would return home from a long day at work to have no parking available at their home or on their street due to the overabundance of STR's. I strongly oppose this!
I oppose for all the reasons already expressed by Stephanie and Aaron.
Allowing an individual owner in an HOA rent out parking on common land (property owned by the HOA and not the owner) infringes on the property rights of every member of the HOA.
What if every owner of the HOA wanted to rent out common land parking? (There are not enough overflow parking spaces to allocate two to every owner.) These owners should not be given a special privilege over the rest of the HOA members.
Further, these owners have no legal right to monetize an asset they don’t own.
Here we are again.
I object to the exemption to increasing allowable parking spaces to the short-term rental at 916 Harold Drive. Additional parking spaces in HOAs around Incline Village are vitally needed to provide additional snow storage and common space for other needs. I am on the board of an HOA and I often run into these issues.
HOAs determine allowable spaces per unit in a fair and lawful way. Under no circumstance should the county be involved in overstepping their authority in this matter. Especially in favor of transient housing that increases VMTs (vehicle miles traveled) to and from town centers, nuisances to neighbors, pollution, problems and puts a commercial use in residential zoning.
Additionally, insurance companies are requiring ever more things from HOAs before they are insurable. This common space must be kept common for the purpose of unforeseen needs to meet requirements in this changing environment. Insurance companies also raise rates in HOAs that have STRs and this is an unfair burden on other HOA members. The county interfering with HOA's sets a terrible precedent and muddies the waters of authority. Parking spaces should be equally distributed and available in common space of HOAs to the benefit of all members as determined by HOA board membership and CC&Rs! If people cared about affordable housing, they would deny this appeal and outright ban STRs. Unless you do that, wealth inequality will grow and affordability will get worse for your children.