PLANNING COMMISSIONERS QUESTION SEVERAL STR REVISIONS SUGGESTED BY CITY COUNCIL
Commission weighs 7 STR Ordinance changes, kicks the can on 7 more and favors fresh film permit scheme
At its Tuesday, April 18th meeting, the Twentynine Palms Planning Commission was tasked with reviewing changes to the STR ordinance suggested by City Council at its February 28 meeting. The Commissioners rejected most of the proposed changes to the City's STR1 (short-term rental) ordinance they were directed to consider.
The current iteration of the 29’s STR ordinance went into effect in June 2022, just 10 months ago.
The Commission was presented with two lists of potential STR ordinance changes — seven referred from City Council plus an additional seven suggested by City staff — to consider in a workshop format, without votes on each item, in order to make recommendations to City Council.
At Tuesday night’s two and a half-hour meeting they plowed through the City Council -referred items, then voted to postpone consideration of the staff-referred items to the next Commission meeting.
Here’s the recap. Times are provided in case you’d like to follow along with the video.
1. Reduction in the number of VHR's per entity (28:11 to 44:04 on video)
The current ordinance limits owners to five STR licenses per person or entity. At the Feb 28 Council meeting, a Council majority including Mayor McArthur Wright, Mayor Pro Tem Steve Bilderain and Council member Joel Klink were in favor of reducing this number.
New Commission Chair Jim Krushat recounted how the original recommendation from 29’s STR ordinance Ad Hoc Committee, which met nine times in late 2021 through early 2022, was two STRs per person or entity. But when the City Council finally adopted the revised ordinance in May, 2022, the Council upped this to five STRs per person or entity.
The issue of potential obligation to recuse quickly arose. Commissioner Eileen Leslie revealed that she owns five STRs in 29, but she saw no compelling reason to recuse herself because even if the Commission recommended reducing the number she’d likely be grandfathered in. “I believe in civil rights, I believe in human rights, and I believe in property rights,” said Leslie. She also noted that the City Attorney had advised she had no obligation to recuse on this issue.
Commissioners Leslie and Jason Dickson wondered aloud why the City Council was asking the Commission to reexamine the STR ownership limit less than a year after the Council settled on the limit of five.
Commissioner Leslie Paahana worried that owners could simply circumvent any ownership limit by forming multiple LLCs, that “we’re not digging into who’s actually getting all this money.” But City staff assuaged this concern by detailing how they painstakingly investigate each LLC to verify compliance with the ownership limit.
In the end it appeared the Planning Commission had little stomach for recommending a change to the existing limit of five STRs per owner or entity.
2. Allowing VHR's connected by a carport (1:12:48 to 1:24:39)
The Ordinance only allows STR permits on single family detached homes, not multi-family dwellings such as duplexes or triplexes. But Council member Daniel Mintz was interested in asking when does two-on-a-lot become a duplex? The Commissioners agreed that this happens when two dwelling units share a common load-bearing wall. Commissioners disagreed on whether a carport connecting two otherwise separate units met this criteria then tabled this item with technical follow-up questions for City staff.
3. Reduction in insurance requirement (1:24:39 to 1:26:10)
Council member Klink, an insurance agent, joined with Council member Mintz in recommending this change but the Commission was unwilling to reduce the $1M insurance requirement listed in the current ordinance, despite reports that owners of STRs with pools were having difficulty finding insurers willing to write policies in excess of $500K.
4. Good Neighbor class requirement (1:26:10 to 1:51:21)
Few cities nationwide require STR owners to take a class in operating an STR with minimal negative impact on neighbors, but 29 is the exception. The existing ordinance requires each “owner and/or agent” to take the Twentynine Palms Good Neighbor STR class, beginning with their first license renewal following June, 2022 revision date. But recently a few STR owners have complained to the City Council that they shouldn’t be required to take a class like this because they’ve been running STRs for years with no issues.
Community Development Director Keith Gardner pointed out the ambiguity of “owner and/or agent” in the ordinance wording, saying some owners and agents had asked to be exempted owing to this language. Commissioners came down firmly on the side of eliminating this ambiguity so that all owners — as well as property managers — would be required to take the class at least once.
The Commission displayed little willingness to exempt owners with a sterling track record from the class.
Susan Peplow, who teaches one of the Good Neighbor classes, advised that it’s a 90 minute session via Zoom so it doesn’t entail in person attendance.
The Commission then got bogged down around the thorny issues of refresher classes and how owners would be informed about ordinance changes. City staff advised that they could email all owners regarding an ordinance change, and had done that when the ordinance was revised back in June, 2022.
In the interest of simplicity, Commissioner Max Walker favored requiring all owners to simply take the class yearly, “once a year take the class upon getting your initial license and then [every year] when you're renewing your license.”
Finally the Commission asked Eric Menendez of the Desert Beacon, an STR management company, who facilitates one section of the class, to return with a few options for refresher classes.
5. STR's built for Vacation Home Rental (1:52:22 to 1:56:30)
The current STR ordinance contains no limitations concerning when a home was built. Mayor Wright, Mayor Pro Tem Bilderain and Council member Octavious Scott favored limits on “purpose-built STRs” including possibly forcing owners to reside in or rent long-term new residential construction for some period before they’d be allowed to apply for a STR permit.
Commissioners Paahana and Walker considered this effectively a moot issue, given that the City’s cap of 500 STRs is filled or nearly filled.
The Commission agreed unanimously that owners shouldn’t be able to apply for an STR permit until construction of a new home is completed. This accords with current City policy, but Gardner pointed out that the current code doesn’t explicitly state this. The Commissioners agreed with Gardner that the ordinance should be updated to clarify that an STR license application could be accepted only for a completed home.
It appears doubtful that the Commission will suggest a ban to the City Council on STR of new residential construction.
6. Density per neighborhood (1:56:30 to 2:06:18)
The current ordinance specifies a cap of 500 total STRs in 29, but contains no limitations on where these 500 STRs are located.
Mayor Wright, Mayor Pro Tem Bilderain and Council members Scott and Klink advocated for adopting some method of limiting density of STRs thus this item before the Commission.
Commissioners appeared to ignore the grandfather clause brought up when discussing limited the number of permits per entity arguing that it was “too late” to consider density limits. Commissioners Paahana, Leslie and Krushat agree that if the City wanted density limitations, the time to implement that was back when there were just 100 STRs. “The community is going to have to deal with this 500. I believe it’s too late in this case,” according to Paahana.
Per Commission Chair Krushat, “I don’t see a fair way of doing the density of VHRs per neighborhood.” Agreeing, Paahana says “No disrespect to the City Council that we cannot figure out this issue. It was tried [back] when it was more possible, when there were only 100-ish to deal with. But now that we're almost at the cap of 500? Who are you gonna tell, “Sorry, homeowner, no more for you, because the geo-mapping says there's too much here?”
The Commissioners argue that the cap of 500 now effectively functions as a proxy for explicit density limitations.
Commissioner Walker says that two years ago he favored density limits, but his research revealed that it was impractical: “There's not software that’s going to make that happen. Setting the density per neighborhood, people want it. I agree, it's something the community would like to have. But I don't think it’s something the City is capable [of]. I don't think they could expend the resources to make that happen.”2
In short, it appears that the Commission isn’t going to recommend any STR density limitations to the Council.
7. National Park buffer zone (2:06:18 - 2:20:57)
Mayor Pro Tem Bilderain’s concerns about construction in the buffer zone prompted this discussion. The JTNP buffer zone is an overlay area mentioned in the Twentynine Palms General Plan, which describes the buffer as a 4,188 acre area of the City where “intensification of existing allowable development densities is strongly discouraged.” The current STR ordinance contains no reference to the Joshua Tree National Park buffer zone.
Per Community Development Director Gardner, “The staff’s perspective is that [the buffer] does not allow for general plan amendments or zone changes to increase density in the National Park buffer zone. There have been some comments saying that VHRs by their nature increase increase development density. Staff does not agree with that. What [the buffer] prohibits is any subdivisions or zone changes to increase the density from five acres to one acre lots, or half acre lots, quarter acre lots, whatever. This is why we're here — to see if the Commission agrees with us.”
In other words, City staff’s position is that is that the JTNP buffer zone has nothing to do with STRs, and that STRs should be treated no differently than any other residential structure in the JTNP buffer zone.
Krushat certainly agrees with staff: “Short term rentals in the National Park buffer zone make no difference. As long as they’re done within our established code and are within our established zoning it's okay.” Paahana, Dickson and Walker agree.
But Leslie wants to do further research before she’ll concur, saying, “We're allowed to say some things are special. So while that is the current rule, we're allowed to carve out some other special rules, because it is the National Park.”
8. Tabled Staff Recommendations
The Ordinance sections that staff recommended for discussion were tabled for a future meeting. They were outlined in the staff report, without additional clarification as to why these needed examination:
1. Number of VHR's allowed per parcel.
2. Parking, Section 19.41.065
3. Conditions of Approval, Section 19.41.065 and 19.41.070
4. Response time for nuisance complaints, Section 19.41.070
5. Storage of recreational vehicles.
6. Structural alterations
7. Issuance of additional permits such as Film, Temporary Use Permit, Home Occupation Permit, etc
Film Permits & Temporary Use Permits (5:13 to 24:13)
Currently in 29 there’s no such thing as a film permit. If you want to film commercially, you must apply for a temporary use permit. The City now wants to bring 29 into alignment with other nearby jurisdictions wanting to encourage filming by making it more straightforward to get a film permit.
Toward this end, staff researched how other cities in Southern California handle film permits, and prepared draft ordinances for the Commission which 1) Create a film permit as a new permit type, and 2) correspondingly modify 29’s existing temporary use permit ordinance to exclude filming.
The new film permit is either minor, for shoots of seven days or less, or major, for shoots eight days or longer. Approval timelines would be expedited, especially for the minor film permit.
The Commission approved the draft ordinance 4-1. Walker voted against it after expressing doubts about the new ordinance reining in adult filmmaking in the City.3
On the heels of approving the new film ordinance the Commission unanimously voted to approve a draft temporary use permit ordinance which excludes filming.
Disclosure: Desert Trumpet co-founder and editor Cindy Bernard is currently Chair of the Public Arts Advisory Committee, which is a part of the City of Twentynine Palms.
Standard terminology is STR or short-term rental. In its ordinance the City of Twentynine Palms instead uses the term VHR or vacation home rental. In practice the two terms and abbreviations are interchangeable.
Density based on adjacency was considered by the STR Ad Hoc Committee, with then Community Development Director Travis Clark endorsing that density based on adjacency was possible with the software he was developing. However, adjacency died in a close Committee vote.
The next evening, the same ordinance was brought before the Public Art Advisory Committee (PAAC) which recommended the following changes and clarifications:
1. Exempt student films from permit fees
2. Discourage filming in the JRNP buffer zone or require a City approved conservationist on location
3. In exempting “crews” of under five from permits, substitute “talent and crew” for “crew” for clarity.
Share your thoughts in the comments below or in our live chat in the Substack app.
Please note that we do not allow anonymous comments. Please be sure your name is on your profile prior to commenting. Anonymous comments will be deleted.
Good neighbor classes? Seriously?
It was challenging for the commission to conduct a thorough discussion and allow for public participation during such lengthy meetings. The commission, in my opinion, takes debate seriously and shouldn't have been given the duty of covering so many topics in a single session. This report is a good summary of the evening.