Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout16 - Local Coastal Program Amendment Related to Short Term Lodging on Newport Island (PA2020-326) - CorrespondenceReceived After Agenda Printed April 13, 2021 Item No. 16 From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 20217:52 AM To: Mulvey, Jennifer Subject: FW: Proven STR Codes for Newport Island From: Scott McFetters <smcfetters@outlook.com> Sent: Monday, April 12, 20219:37 PM To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov> Cc: Chris Harano <chris@harano.com>; gcruz@ushandball.org; Bud Reveley <budreveley@gmail.com>;'Mark Markos' <msm619@ymail.com> Subject: Proven STR Codes for Newport Island [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Honorable City Council, I wanted to thank all of you for all of your support to date to save the Newport Island community from deteriorating into another Peninsula STR hotel row. Without your help Newport Island residents would move out and the STR hotels would move in until the island neighborhood dies. All of my personal STR hotel nightmares on Newport Island have been we'll documented with the City of Newport Beach via emails, pictures, videos, testimony, etc. The STR hotel incidents including noise and illegal parking, etc. continue almost daily. New groups check out and old groups check out all in the same day. Almost every day is ground hog day! We see more groups than families. So much for the line that they are all families. If they are a family it is usually more than one in a small house on a small house with no tall walls because they were not needed when you had long term neighbors. 10 or more people partying on vacation next to the single person, couple or family of 5 that lives there permanently and goes to work or school in the morning. Nobody on the Coastal Commission or City Council would want to have STR's suddenly showing up all around them and their families as we have experienced on Newport Island. The STR's have been unsupervised hotels next to your family's house where you always had neighbors. It's a unfair and an unsafe nightmare! Utilizing the same STR codes that Pismo Beach already has in effect along with some additional codes from other coastal cities that have already been approved by the California Coastal Commission should solve most of Newport Islands STR issues. The owners will have skin in the game. Please see the link below. https://codeIibrary.amleRaI.com/codes/pismobeach/latest/gismo ca/0-0-0-21007 Thank you for your time and support! Please let me know how I can assist. Best regards, Scott McFetters Get Outlook for iOS Received After Agenda Printed April 13, 2021 Item No. 16 Subject: FW: city council hearing Newport island short term rental From: Randall Mycorn <rlmg17Ca@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, April 12, 20216:35:08 PM (UTC -08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: City Clerk's Office <CityClerk@new gortbeachca.gov> Subject: city council hearing Newport island short term rental [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. To whom it may concern, I'm Randall Mycorn, Barry Nlycorn's son. My father lives at 400 :38th St, right nest to 102 :38th St. I've known Mason for most of my life, and understand the rental situation on Newport Island. I also understand and support the resident's concern to maintain the standard of quality on the island. I've spent an enormous amount of time on the island with my family, and it's a home for me as well. ]Mason is friendly with our neighbours and considers them with every booking he receives at his house. My father, brother, and I, have met the renters many times over, and there's never been a problem or any red flags. They're respectful and don't bother us or anyone else as far as I'm aware. As someone who's house is right nest door, we have no complaints and don't foresee any in the future either. Like many Americans, Mason and his family are going through a lot of financial struggles due to COVID. Renting out his home has lifted a high weight off his shoulders just like it's done the same for many other homework's. The income from the rental is providing for him and his children. helping them meet all their basic needs, and contributes even further to the economy of both Newport Beach and wider California. Mason. being a student in law school now. is unable to provide for himself, let alone his children. without this income. Because of financial problems caused by COVID, his family is no longer able to support him as much as they used to. I hope whomever this letter finds can understand the gravity of the situation and recognise Mason's position. a position shared by countless others. Respectfully, Randall Mycorn Received After Agenda Printed April 13, 2021 Item No. 16 Subject: FW: Short Term Rental Newport Island Zoning Attachments: Letter to Planning Commission NB v12_3.pdf; NB CITY COUNCIL STR ORD.pdf From: Michael Zuccato <mzuccato@mac.com> Sent: Monday, April 12, 20217:47:46 PM (UTC -08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: City Clerk's Office <CityClerk@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: Fwd: Short Term Rental Newport Island Zoning Dear Newport Beach City Council. Please find the attached letter regarding short term rentals on Newport Island. The material issues have not changed since my last two letters to the City Council and Planning Commission but I wanted to have them on the record for the meeting scheduled for April 13, 2021. I am also attaching a copy of an email communication with the City of Newport Beach Police Department that accurately describes the level of harassment our tenants and my family have been receiving by 2 of our residents on the Island (none of which are direct neighbors). The email below is in addition to the 3 or 4 phone calls I received from the NB Police Department with false claims of violations (none were substantiated by the Police even after they visited the residence). Pursuant to the conversation I had with the police department, the person calling wasn't even living on the Island at the time of the alleged violation. As a result, valuable police time and resources were wasted by these false claims and baseless accusations. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Michael Zuccato P.S: (The guest in question extended there stay beyond 30 days) Email communication with the Newport Beach Police Department: March 8 and March 23, 2021. On March 8, 2021 at 2:11 AM, "Rivera, Vianey (Contractor)" <RVianev@newportbeachca.gov> wrote: Michael, Thank you for communicating with me via phone earlier today. As we discussed, numerous complaints came in on Sunday March 7"' regarding noise, public disturbances, and parking violations for 4015 Marcus Avenue. My site visit determined no violations were present at the time and a general parking patrol request was submitted to the Newport Beach Police Department to address the illegal parking reports. We were able to clarify that your current tenants happen to be a renown group of YouTube celebrities who did not expect fans to gathered outside your property and therefore had to hire a security guard to ensure safety for your guests. You stated that the current lease for the tenants is that of 15 -days beginning March 1" with a possibility for an extension to the stay. The City of Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 5.95.005 Sections C and D state that citations may be issued if "Numerous incidents involving excessive noise, disorderly conduct, vandalism, overcrowding, traffic congestion, illegal vehicle parking and accumulation of refuse are directly related to short term lodging units which increasingly require response from police, fire, paramedic and other City services.". Although no violations are recorded at this time, the case will remain open for the term of the lease. Feel free to contact me with any questions you may have. Kindly, sincerely, �W"OR,. Community Development Department Coce Enforcement Officer I ra`cr;e,,;,oi'oeacrcago. . t Newport, 1 ether, Good Afternoon Vianey, As our neighbors know well, we live about 5 doors down from our rental property and have been present after each complaint you have called us about. We checked each time and (like the Newport Beach Police Dept) found no evidence of any such violations. Our guests have two parking spaces in the garage but sometimes do park in front of the house to load and unload (like everybody in Newport Beach does from time to time). Parking in front of our home is not a red zone and we taken swift action if we see any of our guests park illegally. The guests in question have been very quite tenants and respectful to our neighbors. I walk by about 5 times per day usually between 8am and midnight and have witnessed no noise or parking violations. We are not absentee corporate property managers but neighbors who live here full time. Unfortunately on Monday, some neighbors confronted our guests and allegedly made racist slurs against them. Our guests called me immediately and my wife and I both walked over there to find a neighbor asking why they came back. Our guests told us all the neighbors were great with the exception of 1 or 2 people who are constantly taking pictures of the house and harassing them. I will try to get additional information to collaborate their claims but wanted to let you know what we are dealing with here. Certain people feel the more they call and use costly City resources, the more they can push their agenda. Making official complaints about limousines taking our guest to the airport, security guards and logging various unsubstantiated claims of parking violations from individuals who aren't even present on the island should examined. The tenants are still here and schedule to depart on March 29th or 30th. If they stay to the 30th, I believe they are close to being considered long term renters (30 days). Thank you in advance for your messages and please let us know if there is anything more we can do to remain compliant with all city ordinances. Sorry for taking so much of your valuable time, we appreciate all you guys do to improve our community and keep us safe. Sincerely, Michael MICHAEL ZUCCATO NEWPORT ISLAND RESIDENT December 2, 2020 Planning Commission of Newport Beach Re: Lpdate current coastal zoning regulations and their impact on short term lodging Dear Planning Commission, Thank you for your time and consideration regarding an issue that will significantly impact our investments and quality of life on Newport Island. I am a 35 -year resident of Newport Beach and would like to thank the planning commission for taking the time to read my response to the recent ordinance impacting our short-term rental (STRs) on Newport Island. A few years ago, we purchased an investment property about a block away from our residence on Newport Island. We relied on existing coastal zoning regulations, coastal land use plan, city permitting, California Coastal Commission zonings along with State and City designations when making the decision to purchase our investment property on Newport Island. Although we understand the concerns of the minority of those in our community who have expressed their concerns about short term renters (parking, noise, partying, use of city resources, etc.), the facts simply don't support their claims. We have never had a short-term renter that required the police or fire departments or that lead to a complaint from our neighbors. Since we live a block away, we are available to address any issue that may arise. The only issue we had with a renter, was with a long-term renter that partially blocked the sidewalk. Someone actually took a photo of this and submitted it to the City Council incorrectly claiming it was a short- term renter. I understand there are problem operators but there are also problem long-term renters and home owners as well. I have attached a letter that was submitted to the City Council earlier this near that addressed manv of the relevant issues; parking, noise, trash, safety etc. The property rights of those who purchased properties while relying on existing zoning regulations must be protected by the City Council. There are other remedies available to the City Council that will address the concerns of our neighbors without a de facto ban on short-term rentals. Noise curfews, trash polices and parking policies should all be enforced by existing regulations and codes. Although I agree with most everyone who lives here and believe Newport Island is a beautiful place to live, it's still part of the peninsula community as is Balboa Island and the beautiful homes along River Street (just 30 feet on the other side of the canal). Here there are a dozen or so short-term rental units that are closer to our family room and in plain sight of all of us that live on Nlarcus. Is there going to be a ban on River Street and the rest of the Newport Peninsula as well? If not, the City Council's decision is discriminatory on its face and should be rejected by the Planning Commission and the California Coastal Commission. Responsible short-term renters on Newport Island provide a means for people who can't afford to live here, to enjoy this special area. The owner -occupied requirement suggested by the City Council will result in an do facto ban on STRs on Newport Island because it's not feasible nor cost effective to live in a multi -million -dollar investment rental property, especially when your residence is just one block away. I do believe the City Council and some of our neighbors who support the ban or owner -occupied requirement of STRs have the best intentions but are misguided as the reality simply do not support their claims. For example: short term renters actually use less parking than full-time residents. Full time residents also have parties in the summer and create unsightly trash from time to time. If I moved in the flight path of John Wayne Airport, I'd expect some airplane noise from time to time. People who have lived on the peninsula (including Newport Island and Balboa Island) understand this is a special vacation destination area and people have been renting short tern here for decades. We used to call them "weeklies" back in the day before the online booking platforms existed. Instead of going through the screening process used by Airbnb or VRBO, prospective renters simply called a number on the house and with the cash, they were in. For us living on Newport Island, we have some excellent remedies available to us that will help improve the quality of life here. Let's use these remedies to close down the problem short -tern rental operators and keep the good ones which will allow us to share this amazing place with those less fortunate. I'm hopeful we can be inclusive of everyone regardless of what side of this issue they are on and help build a better community. Thank you for your kind consideration and we look forward to finding a safe equitable and fair solution for everyone involved. Please reject any further changes to the STR regulations as well as the owner -occupied de facto ban on short-term rentals on Newport Island. The decision to change these regulations only on Newport Island is discriminatory, wrong and violates the property rights of those who have relied on current regulations and zoning to their detriment. Sincerely, Michael Zuecato Newport Island Resident 2 MICHAEL ZUCCATO NEWPORT ISLAND RESIDENT May 18, 2020 Re: Newport Beach City Council Ordinance Banning STRs on Newport Island Dear Newport Beach City Council, I am a 35 year resident of Newport Beach and would like to thank the City Council for taking the time to read my response to the recent ordinance banning short-term rentals (STRs) on Newport Island. A few days ago, I received an email from the City of Newport Beach notifying me of an adjustment to the ban on short-term rentals in the area. I was happy to hear this news until I noticed it did not apply to Newport Island. I do believe the City Council and Mayor have the best intentions and are working hard to keep our community safe but it's unconscionable that some in our community decided to use the pandemic as an excuse to further their personal agendas and pass ordinances banning STRs citing the emergency. After carefully reading the ordinance and transcripts from the May 12'h hearing, it appears some wanted to challenge the R1 / R2 zoning for Newport Island and apply it to the emergency ordinance. Changing the Coastal Commission's LCP in the name of an emergency in such a selective manner should be challenged. My home is in the coastal zone, Coastal Land Use: RT -D Two Unit Residential, Coastal Zoning District: R-2 Two Unit Residential. Has the City Council received any feedback from the California Coastal Commission prior to issuing the ordinance banning short term rentals on Newport Island, effectively changing the usage. Shouldn't an ordinance that effectively changes the usage and zoning be addresses in a separate hearing on its own merits? Is the situation here on Newport Island outside the norm and so dangerous that it requires separate treatment? Has there been a surge of cases on Newport Island that has been linked to short-term renters? I understand very well the problems that a few residents have with STRs but there are other remedies available to the City and it should refrain from using the emergency order to ban STRs on Newport Island. Effective remedies to consider that would limit the impact on STR owners: • Limit the minimum stay to 3 nights as was done in all other areas of the peninsula. • Fine or revoke short-term rental permits of irresponsible owners and/or permit holders. • Discontinue issuing new permits and continue to grandfather permits to those responsible owners that currently have licenses and who relied on the existing ordinances when they invested in the Island. 0 Require special cleaning processes • Limit the amount of guests in a short-term rental to 8 or 10 guests Responsible Owners In A COVED -19 Environment. Most STR owners that 1 know on the Island are responsible professionals and not careless absentee owners as depicted in the hearing. Personally, my main objective is to create a high-end luxury accommodation rental product and partner with a variety local entrepreneurs and business owners (yacht brokers, bicycle renters, restaurants, surf instructors, Duffy rentals, spas owners etc.). In this current pandemic environment, responsible STR owners like myself have implemented procedures aimed at providing a Covid-clean environment for our guest and as a result, increased security for our community. Being a resident of Newport Island and regularly socializing with neighbors, I am extra sensitive to the quality of visitors and the impact on our quality of life. We never allow disruptive partygoers and enforce nighttime curfews. So far we've been happy with the experience and am proud to have zero issues with neighbors and no calls from law enforcement. In reality, many of our guests are Newport Beach residents whom are remodeling their homes and are in need of luxury accommodations close to home. We have also accommodated many guests visiting family here on Newport Island. Notification of City Council emergency hearing on May 12, 2020. Unfortunately, I did not receive notification from the city or any online booking platform (Airbnb and VRBO) about the recent hearing. I listened to the hearing online and read the transcripts today, May 18, 2020. Parking: If parking and narrow streets are the premise in which to decide which neighborhoods should be banned from STRs, shouldn't the ban be equally applied to all similar zoned areas of Newport Beach and the peninsula? The parking situation on Newport Island is challenging but it's not due to Short -Term rentals. Before examining the parking issue further, it's important to ask residents if the parking situation on Newport Island has improved since the STR ban took place in early April. As a resident, I can say absolutely not. What is the real impact STRs have on parking in Newport Island? The real STR impact on parking: Was data presented to the City Council that explains how short-term rentals impact local parking on Newport Island? I'm confident the information will show the complete opposite. When you consider the average year around occupancy of a short-term rental is less than 40% (mine is less than 20%), it leaves parking open 60% of the year. Furthermore, short-term renters don't have access to parking permits and must use on premises parking. When comparing the impact on parking, I believe the data will show single family residents and long-term renters actually use more street parking than STRs. STRs usually have garage parking for guest while it's common for residents E and long-term renters to store items in their garage making them unavailable for parking. 1 suggest we look at all available data when determining the impact STRs have on parking and be transparent with the findings. • Construction impact on parking: Construction has afar greater impact on parking on Newport Island than anything else. Perhaps we should consider a limit on construction on the island or an absolute ban during the pandemic. Available Parking Remedies: • Parking permits: Newport Island already requires permits during the summer, which are never transferred to short-term renters. Perhaps the permits can be extended year around. • Ticketing/Enforcement: As a resident on Newport Island, I'd have to disagree with the notion the police are not enforcing permit parking. 1 see it first hand and they do a great job enforcing permits. I myself have called the police when contractors blocked my driveway and I couldn't get out. The police response has been outstanding. • Restrict the amount of construction permits on the island. Currently, the he biggest parking problem on the island is caused by construction, which regularly see large trucks taking up two and three spaces on the street. Limiting the number construction permits would provide immediate relief to residents. Size of the streets? If the City Council concludes the size of the street should be a determining factor of whether or not to ban short-term rentals, they should apply the condition fairly throughout the city (not just Newport Island). There are miles of streets along Oceanfront that only have alleys without any surface streets at all. 25`h, 26'h and 27'h streets are narrower than any street in Newport Island. There are many other example of high density RI/R2 zoned areas throughout the peninsula that are now allowed to continue renting to short-term renters. Again, we can all support the ordinance if the numbers and data show it will make our community safer and it's enforced equitably and without prejudice. Coronavirus concerns unique to Newport Island? Are the handful of short -tern renters on Newport Island somehow creating more of a risk to spread coronavirus in our community than rental properties 100 feet away on the other side of the bridge? Is Newport Island somehow more dangerous to its residents than those living on Balboa Island, on Oceanfront or Seashore where it's exponentially more concentrated with tourists and short- term renters? Are hotels that are also woven into the fabric of our community somehow considered less of a risk of spreading the virus? It appears the real issue is more about zoning and less about the emergency ordinance. My family, like many other Americans around the country, have paid a huge price to help minimize the spread of the Pandemic and am proud of our sacrifices to help flatten the curve in our community. Comments and claims 3 suggesting Newport Island is someho�� so different than other areas of Newport Beach are simple baseless and misleading. Simply put, the factors listed in the ordinance are not unique or exclusive to Newport Island. As referenced above, I'm confident most members ofthe City COuncll and residents of the conununity have *ood intentions, but the decision to selectively punish Newport Island STR owners in the name of"flattening the curve" of the global pandemic is without merit and plain wrong. I_he decision appears to serve the interests ofa fe\\ who oppose the concept ofshort-term rentals and seek to adjudicate past zoning issues rather than attempts to ensure safety from the Coronavirus. Financial Impact: In addition to the safety issues facin�z our con1III Lill ity, there has been a tremendous financial impact to those of us .who rely on revenue from investments properties. We desperately need to begin rentin(I again to responsible guests and experience some much needed reliefto the longstanding rental ban. IVIv family and I respectfully ask the City Council and the Mavor to reconsider the recent ordinance and provide immediate relief by adjusting the ban to Newport Island as done \yith other STRs in the area. No matter how well intended the Cite Council's ordinance was. it's simply biased, prejudiced and will create undue hardships to those businesses already reeling from the effects of the Pandemic. Thant: you for Your kind consideration and we look foitivard to finding a safe equitable and fair solution for everyone involved. Sincere 1 c Michael Zuccato Newport Island Resident 4 Received After Agenda Printed April 13, 2021 odeagroup- April Item No. 16 oxp 12, 2021 Mayor Avery and Members of Newport Beach City Council, On behalf of Expedia Group, a family of brands including vacation rental leader, Vrbo, I am writing to express our strong concerns with proposed action on vacation rentals on Newport Island. We understand and share the city's interest in addressing serious noise and nuisance concerns and we have worked with and helped local governments around the world, including many in Southern California, to address similar concerns. In reviewing the city's short term rental ordinance for Newport Island, we'd like to share a few comments for your consideration. • The existing ordinance Newport Beach passed last summer includes clear expectations around noise and nuisance and consequences for operators who violate them. Rather than enact an unnecessary new law, the city should instead consider taking enforcement action within its existing purview, including revocation of permits as appropriate. • Banning vacation rentals outright unfairly punishes responsible operators and travelers and is not the solution to noise and nuisance concerns. By revoking permits and working with the hosting platforms to delist noncompliant properties—a process that exists in Newport Beach's existing ordinance, the city can address problem properties while protecting the rights and livelihoods of responsible owners. Expedia Group appreciates the efforts put forth by council and staff to address the concerns on Newport Island and hope that you'd instead consider the existing tools in your toolbox to enforce the regulations just recently enacted. Thank you for your ongoing positive working relationship with us and we look forward to continuing the discussion. Please do not hesitate to reach out to me directly at astinson@expediagroup.com with any questions you may have as this discussion continues. Sincerely, Alyssa Stinson Regional Government Affairs Manager Expedia Group (D 1 1 1 1 Expedia Group Way West I Seattle, WA, 98119 1 USA I T +1 206 481 72001 F +1 206 481 7240 expediagroup.com Received After Agenda Printed April 13, 2021 Item No. 16 Subject: FW: City council Newport Island Hearing Comments From: Mason IFY <masonfye@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 3:21:22 PM (UTC -08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: City Clerk's Office <CityClerk@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: City council Newport Island Hearing Comments To the Newport Beach City Council, My name is Mason Ye. I am a resident of 402 38th Street on Newport Island. This place is home to me and home to my fiance and our children. My son was born at Hoag across the street and spent the first parts of his life in this house. Originally, this house belonged to my parents. I remember the day they bought it, more than five years ago, and how happy all of us were. This was before my kids were born into the world so it was a home to our family at first. Due to complications from Covid, my parents have had to move back to their home country overseas, where the rest of our extended family and my siblings live so they would have someone to help care for them, given now I have children of my own. Their wish before leaving was for our family to hold onto this home however necessary so that my kids can grow up in this beautiful, special community of Newport Island. They placed it into a trust and entrusted us to take good care of it, and take good care of it we have. I consider this community my home. My kids have played with the other kids on this island. My godfather, Barry, literally lives right next door to us. His son, Randall, and I have grown up together. We consider ourselves so very fortunate to live next door to someone we consider family. My dad may not be here now, but my kids and I have Barry's love and support right next door. We are very protective of our community and our home, which is why it was so difficult at first to come to terms with the fact that we would have to short- (and sometimes long-) term rent it out in order to make ends meet during this unprecedented pandemic. When the house remains empty due to a lack of renters, we continue to spend as much time there as possible because it is our home. My parents' family business has suffered, making it so they need to keep what they have to care for themselves. My business, helping companies and people around the world enhance businesses of their own, has fallen apart from its peak because of Covid. My fiance is taking on part-time work (she's a student currently since she had to place her studies on hold to help raise our children while I worked to build my business). I am currently also a student, working part-time as a paralegal, before starting law school in the upcoming fall semester. Covid has caused serious financial strains to my family, as it has to so many other families. I am a father to two young children, 5 and 3 years old. The income we derive from renting out our family home is crucial in helping us pay the property taxes, the upkeep, and for us to stay afloat while living nearby thanks to the generosity of certain members of our extended family until this pandemic passes through and all of our jobs and businesses can be restored. This has been the only option that allows us to handle the expenses of this home during this pandemic while allowing us to hold onto it as well. Even so, we are always reminded that this is our home, and because of that, we have been so ridiculously picky about the tenants, and in particular the short-termers, that we are willing to forgo income from a potential tenant for the sole reason that we have a gut feeling they may not be in full respect of the community, and we have decided to partner with a boutique vacation rental management company consisting of a duo of founders that feel the same way. Every booking inquiry this house has received, we limit it to no less than four nights, in order to maintain the sanctity of the calm, relaxed neighborhood. So far, we haven't had any short-term tenants that shorter than a two- week booking. We check in with our next door neighbors constantly, both of whom have been extremely satisfied without vetting process so far and the measure we take to preserve the community's ambiance and family-oriented qualities. We have agreements with every tenant stating they if any of our neighbors so much as complains, they must leave immediately, no matter the time of day. For parking purposes, they also agree to no more than two vehicles, both of which must be parked in the garage. We have hardwired security cameras surrounding the property, keeping a constant eye on everything that happens around the house. We have been and intend on continuing to be residents of this island and we understand the annoyances that residents of this island face. We love this community because of it's genuine, family-oriented qualities. I have made continuous efforts to maintain these qualities for the community. We would be more than happy to observe and respect any increased strictness measures in order to preserve the community. Whether that means increasing the minimum number of nights stayed or otherwise, but please do not take away short-term rentals on Newport Island. There are several kind-hearted, considerate short-term rental homeowners on the island who feel the same way we do and also wish to preserve the community and we don't believe we deserve to be punished because most of us are doing this because of the financial complications Covid has caused. We understand after hearing from some of the residents, some of which don't even live on the island full time either before or during the pandemic, that two issues that are bothersome are parking problems and rowdy short-term tenants. We empathize with this, and we hate it as well, which is why we as short-term "landlords" take the enhanced measures we do. But with all due respect, it doesn't seem right to discriminate Newport Island from the rest of our lovely city. Newport Island is a public island, and each Island (Lido, Balboa, etc.) all have parking issues. I consider us lucky on Newport Island to have Zone 1 parking passes enacted in the summertime, unlike the other islands. Could we not explore the possibility of enforcing those passes year-round like other parking pass locations on the peninsula? I know our hard- working officers at the police station are always looking out for the residents of this town and enforce the Loud and Unruly Gathering Ordinance (LUGO Laws) vigilantly. Is this not a wonderfully protective measure our city's stewards have already enacted? Many measures have already been taken to combat the primary problems addressed by residents, year- round and otherwise, and we understand sometimes existing measures can evolve. But to fully ban this particular source of income that is desperately needed by some of us only in the geographical location of Newport Island feels almost discriminatory because those folks residing on the other islands of Newport, and the rest of Newport proper in general, who are supplementing their Covid-damaged incomes in the same manner we are aren't affected by this ordinance in question. We respectfully request and plead the planning commission to strike down this proposed ordinance. We love our home, our children love our home, my parents wish to return one day to their home, but some of us are getting a bad stroke of luck right now and given this is the only way that allows several of us on the Island to keep our homes, we don't feel like we deserve to lose our homes, especially if we are willing to work with the city to not only find a mutually agreeable solution that does not result in a ban but also wish to preserve the sanctity of our special Newport Island community and relations with our neighbors at the same time. Thank you all for considering what my family and I have to say. We greatly appreciate it. Sincerely, Mason, Ashly, Bella, and Damien 402 38th Street, Newport Island z Received After Agenda Printed April 13, 2021 Item No. 16 From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 3:10 PM To: Mulvey, Jennifer Subject: FW: STIR -----Original Message ----- From: Melissa Markos <mnk218@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, April 12, 20213:09 PM To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: STIR [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. >> Dear city Council, >> My name is Melissa and I have lived on the island for 15 years with my family. I have two young children and I moved to Newport Island because I knew that I could raise my children in a safe peaceful neighborhood. The island has been wonderful, there's a sense of community here that you cannot find many places. Our family loves it here. That is up until the last two or three years when short term rentals exploded and now we find ourselves in the middle of a small hotel zone. >> There has been a dramatic increase in noise, congestion, parking problems, & safety issues. When we've confrontEd a short term rental guest and ask for their cooperation we are met with a lot of resistance. My husband at one point asked a guest to slow down because they were racing up our small street and he was told in no uncertain terms to go screw himself. >> Recently there was a rental to the Nelk Boys (YouTubers) famously known for rude behavior and with them brought a lot of extra congestion and a fan base that blocked the street when I was trying to pick up my daughter. >> I moved here so I could raise my children in a safe environment while enjoying our beautiful city and now I find myself questioning if I made the right decision. >> It does not seem right to me that the rights of the homeowners to live in a beautiful residential neighborhood is tossed aside so that a few business owners can make a profit. >> I don't want to think about moving because the situation will keep getting worse. Please do the right thing and vote for this amendment to bring back our beautiful residential neighborhood. >> Melissa Markos 1 Received After Agenda Printed April 13, 2021 Item No. 16 From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, April 12, 20212:00 PM To: Mulvey, Jennifer Subject: FW: Short Term Lodging Amendment on Newport Island From: Mark Younglove <markyounglove@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, April 12, 20211:19 PM To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: Short Term Lodging Amendment on Newport Island [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Honorable City Council members: Short term rentals in Newport Beach are not "newcomers" to the city. They have been a part of the city's economy and culture since its inception. They are a healthy and productive asset to the community. I am in disagreement with the proposal to reduce the number of short term rentals by essentially outlawing them on Newport Island. I believe this is discriminatory against the individuals and families who want access to Newport Beach and to the owners of the rentals. The City's recent push to regulate and restrict access to short term rentals is contrary to public policy and is discriminatory. Short term rentals provide affordable access to California's public beaches for those who would not be able to afford beach communities' comparatively higher -priced hotels. This will directly impact financially disadvantaged people's access to public land without providing any benefit to the City. This proposal is likely in violation of Coastal Commission and CEQA regulations and intent. Moreover, if the City continues on its trend toward eliminating short term rentals, it will only increase congestion. People will be forced to drive to the beach instead of utilizing the off street parking of short term rentals. STRs are a benefit to owners who want to use their home some of the time and additionally receive some rent when it is not being used. STRs, with the high price of real estate in Newport Beach, result in cap rates under 5% are not good investments from a purely monetary perspective and therefore will not "overrun" Newport Beach. . Particularly in light of the fact that your Planning Commission voted 6-1 to deny this amendment, it is confounding why any proposal that would exacerbate these issues would be taken seriously. Norton Younglove Co-owner, 517 36th St, 92663 Received After Agenda Printed April 13, 2021 Item No. 16 From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 10:25 AM To: Mulvey, Jennifer Subject: FW: Newport Island -----Original Message ----- From: Joan Foster <joan@westcoastturf.com> Sent: Monday, April 12, 202110:20 AM To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: Newport Island [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Council, For the past 65 years we have had the privilege of owning a house on NEWPORT island. And before that my grandfather and uncle each owned a house on the island. It has ALWAYS been an quiet, family oriented retreat for us over the many years. We felt it was safe to let our children and grandchildren play at the park and in the neighborhood without worry. However, with these new short term rentals that are coming into our neighborhood, it is no longer that way. There are people renting who are only there to party, leave trash and race down the streets in their cars. It is changing the atmosphere of the area and most of all the safety of the area. There are people who have bought homes there for just the purpose of renting them to anyone who will pay the price. We also have a right to protect our investment and value in our homes. Having an owner on the premises would reduce the amount of disruption to our wonderful island. Joan Foster 4022 Channel PI Newport Island Sent from my iPad Received After Agenda Printed April 13, 2021 Item No. 16 From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, April 12, 20219:32 AM To: Mulvey, Jennifer Subject: FW: Short term lodging From: Jeff Friedman <JFried man@turnerfiber.com> Sent: Monday, April 12, 20219:27 AM To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: Short term lodging [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. To: Honorable Mayor and members of the City Council My wife and I have lived in Newport Beach for over 40 years. Growth and changes are inevitable and we are pleased to see and are fully in support of Resolution 2021-30; which seeks to add stricter regulations on Short Term Lodging on Newport Island. The Internet has revolutionized all of our lives. How we shop, buy groceries, obtain our news, get driving directions, etc.... We all know this story. There is no going back, but how we move forward is in the hands of our elected representatives. Our desire to live in Newport Beach was driven by our childhood memories of vacationing for a few weeks every year near the beach. These were weekly summer rentals occupied mostly by families. Newport was a great vacation destination. But that is changing. The Internet has facilitated an opportunity to exploit vacation rentals into hotel party hot spots. STR's may be profitable for the city and for a few businesses that sublease properties by turning them into STR's. But this is not conducive to full time residence. We live on Newport Island and chose this location because it offered serene living, its close proximity to Lido village and the beach. There clearly is a problem, evidenced by the outcry of the full time residences of Newport Island. I urge to pass Resolution 2021-30. Thank you for consideration of this matter. Regards Jeff and Lynn Friedman 3704 Channel Place. Newport Island Ps... on a side note; We own a rental property in Portland Oregon and we have been complying with their 30 day minimum rental regulation. At first we thought this would hurt financially, but we have a 93% occupancy rate and the neighborhood as retained the family feel. Sent from Jeff Friedman's mobile Received After Agenda Printed April 13, 2021 Item No. 16 From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, April 12, 20218:19 AM To: Mulvey, Jennifer Subject: FW: STRs NEWPORT ISLAND -----Original Message ----- From: Gina Unsworth <ginaunsworth@yahoo.co.uk> Sent: Sunday, April 11, 20217:33 PM To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>; Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: STRs NEWPORT ISLAND [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Honourable Mayor Avery and City Council Members I am writing to you in hope that you will please review my points below and please consider my concerns regarding Short Term Rentals on Newport Island. My points are many and so are split into categories and I apologize in advance for it's length but back it up by saying that a platform of only 2-3 minutes does not allow me to cover all my issues within a city meeting context. Please note that I am sending this knowing that it was taken off the February 9th agenda to allow staff time to update the amendment to address concerns raised by the Coastal Commission. I hope that by sending this it may aid you in your task at hand of coming up with the new revisions to the amendment to gain coastal commission approval. 1 -Background 2 -Why is Newport Island vocal? 3 -Ordinances 4 -Citations 5 -Permits & Rights 6 -Summary BACKGROUND I have been a resident and homeowner on Newport Island for almost 15 years, my husband here for over 30 years and his family as owners for over 45 years. The Island itself is almost 100 years old so my family have been here for almost half of Newport Island's existence. This was chosen as our family home because it was a small and residential community, and the family has stayed here over 45 years because of that. The real spirit of Newport Island started back in in 1954 when the residents founded the Newport Island Association under the leadership of Mr. Jim Edwards who was the first president. The main purpose of the association was to promote civic pride in the Island and to secure benefits for our area and to promote a sense of community. Over the years residents have contributed to the association for the beautification of the bridge and the park at Christmas, Easter Egg hunt, 4th of July Parade and other times throughout the year all of which develop a sense of community and pride. However, over the last 3 years there has been an increase of 475 +% of STRs on this small Newport Island and the character and ambience has changed and not in a positive way. WHY IS NEWPORT ISLAND BEING SO VOCAL? Newport Island residents are speaking up loudly and clearly. Not because of snobbery or elitism (as some may tend to interpret), nor is it in belief that out of all the STR operators in Newport Beach, the worst 18, or only the unbelievably bad operators are within the confines of the island. We do not speak out because we think that we are special or above anyone else. We are speaking up loudly and clearly because what we have had until the last few years, is a sense of community and a peaceful area in which to reside and that is being taken from us and the safety and well being of many of the residents is being impacted in a negative way. Residents are speaking up because the fabric of the community is being stripped away without any regard for Newport Island's community, or the majority of the island's residents who do not wish their quality of life to keep deteriorating. It has been the city who has allowed a 475% increase in a STRs within in a small square mileage area and within a short period of time, without ordinances to protect residents. Consequently, the response has become loud and vocal not because we like the sound of our own voices but because we have been subjected to this disruption without any protections being put into place. I have sat at many city meetings and heard short term rental companies define residents of Newport Island as a small but whiney group. To stand up proudly for one's belief is not to be whiney. To stand up for the home and character of a neighbourhood which your family has called home for over 45 years is not 'being a squeaky wheel'. Nor is it to be politicized and made out to be a lobbying effort. I am merely a resident for over 15 years who has had firsthand experience of the negative impact caused by STRs. • ORDINANCES The fact that ordinances have only been put into place since August 2020 is also a reason that many residents are now vocal. The ordinances themselves are not sufficient to be able to protect residents. It is a band aid too late. The ordinances have also made STR operators vocal as though somehow the potential for ordinances and control has singled them out unfairly. Had there been the ordinances in place before the surge in STR growth that would not be the case. I do not believe that it is the unfairness but more the fact that they have been brought into existence which is being viewed as 'unfair'. (Fairness would mean STR operators clamouring for R1 zones to also be allowed the same rights). I totally understand the growth in this industry, and I do not need to remind the city council that putting ordinances in place is to protect residents and part of the duty of the city council. The lateness of weak ordinances is something which needs to be rectified and soon. The success or rework of ordinances can be achieved with the bonus of the last few years of residents giving feedback which is what Newport Island residents are doing. Had ordinances been put in place before the permit plan had been implemented or before its surge in growth then the city may have saved itself some of the backlash issues happening today. It may have also meant that maybe some STR operators may have thought twice before applying for a permit. Regardless now is the time to really listen to the feedback and the city's own findings and put into action healthy, proactive ordinances which safeguard the residents and not just the business ventures of absentees. The city Council itself has made its own finding. 5.95.005 Purpose and Findings- Has 11 negative points all acknowledged and confirmed by the city. • CITATIONS The citations as they stand do not really act as a deterrent and they are also terribly difficult to get issued. Accumulation of citations being one of the few ways to get an STR operator's permit revoked. At this point I would like to acknowledge that within meetings and letters on the subject, some STR operators on Newport Island have agreed that there are bad operators. It is also unfair to allow bad operators to continue in their business fashion and to then taint the good operators. The duty of monitoring the behaviour of the transients has been put into the hands of the island residents. That is unfair and not how any city program should be run. It relies on the residents being the watchdogs, taking details and calling it in. Some behaviours which I have myself have witnessed, such as urination in public, setting off illegal fireworks can not ever be documented or witnessed by the police and so cannot lead to a citation. Yet in itself it is abhorrent, offensive behaviour which is happening here on Newport Island. This behaviour was most definitely from STR transients not 2 residents. I know that over the last few months there have been many complaints which has to tell the city council that this is not an issue to be brushed aside. You really are asking residents to be watchdogs for a hotel industry. Parking is the only tangible violation that a resident can realistically document. When photo evidence has been submitted and put before the planning commission the response was' well how do we know its not a resident making the violationT What on earth is a resident to do? If it is not good enough evidence, then please find a better way of policing the ordinances or of informing the planning commission of how these are issues. It is unfair to pit neighbour against neighbour by asking them to monitor an industry which they did not ask for within our neighbourhood. By doing so the city has put even more anguish onto the residents and some of those residents have been here for over 45 years and many are seniors. The very fact that the city has had to set up a 24-hour hotline for STR code enforcement/ complaints has to speak volumes. It's very being, and necessity must surely help you to understand the situation which has been thrust upon the residents. • PERMITS AND RIGHTS Whilst I understand homeowners have rights to use their home to make a profit there has been little consideration for the rights of the residents. Residents should have rights to be allowed to enjoy their home and residential area, in a safe and peaceful manner which allows them to be able to go out and work to make an honest living by getting a good night's sleep. Or allowing them the enjoyment of their abode through daytime, night-time, weekends, and holidays. The transient traffic with the noise, safety issues and its negative impact is eroding away at the small community character. Do not forget the residents chose Newport Island because it was not the war zone. I have also heard opponents say that they have property rights and can do what they want. Would that then lead to us all not requiring building permits or laws? It is a moot point out of context; I too have equal rights. This is a permit program. And a program that many other cities have banned completely. Recently Huntington Beach has made a move towards allowing STRs and in some of its areas are noting that they must be owner occupied. To have owner occupied for them is not an issue and so it can be implemented. The coastal commission has also approved that in several areas. Overall though I can guarantee that if the benefits of STRs outweighed the negative then every city, not only in Southern California, but the whole world would have an STR program in place. It would not have been banned by any if everything about STRs were positive. Nor would it be banned within R1 zones. The city Council itself has made its own finding which again I point to below. 5.95.005 Purpose and Findings- Has 11 negative points confirmed by the city. At this juncture I would like to point out again the obvious which is "this is a permit program not a property right". By requesting the restrictions to Newport Island no one is trying to deprive anyone of making a living. There are alternatives for homeowners to make an income from their property, including long term rental. I have sat through many meetings and heard STR operators say that they want to have less restrictions / none of the proposed restrictions because they need the income from the property, earn a living etc, or that they are being treated unfairly. I would like to suggest that maybe to plan the whole of one's business around a relatively new business model of Airbnb and others who are less than 13 years old may not be the best way to go. And I say that in a helpful way as it is an industry too young to know what a downturn in market may mean not only for the STRs but for the city also. Many cities around the world have experienced displacement of workers who can no longer find affordable accommodation near to their work. Many cities around the world have experienced the negative impacts of STRs and taken steps to limit the damage. They are further ahead than we are. Who is thinking ahead about the water shortage, power outages, carbon footprint and all the other current day issues? Secondly, (unless I misunderstand the appointment of local government) it is not the city's duty to ensure homeowners make a profit from any business venture let alone one without any guarantees. Nor would it be the city's duty to ensure that if I were to set up my own business, whatever my plan may be, that it should succeed. That I would never ask of the city council. Just because a business plan pertains to owning a house does not give an STR operator rights to a successful business venture or extra backing from the city council. That is why unfairness lies. • SUMMARY The city can be pro-business without turning everyone's home and neighborhood into the war zone. 3 Surely the city has some sort of responsibility to guarantee the social functioning of housing and to avoid a saturation of tourist accommodation which causes negative connotations with coexistence of homeowners and the tourist industry? Again, the coastal commission at times have made recommendations that it should not exceed 5% for some areas. Newport Island is way higher than that. There is a reason that R1 zones are not given the ability to have STRs, so it is already a playing field which is not level. Therefore, to revise and increase restrictions within Newport Island is not being unfair by the city's own definition. To have owner occupied would benefit the good STIR operators by eliminating the poor operators who do not care about the neighbourhood. And consequently, could potentially mean more business for them. It may also be of benefit to vacationers who want to enjoy a peaceful vacation. The city council are voted in by residents not by STIR companies. I would ask the honourable city council members to please review what is in the best interests of its city residents in the residential area of Newport Island. I understand that the Coastal Commission does not want to restrict access to the beaches however considering that Newport Beach has 1440+ STIR permits (a far greater number than any neighbouring beach community) then I do not understand how Newport Island Resident's ask, which is to 'have owner occupied' could be deemed to be restricting coastal access? Therefore, I would implore the city council members to stand behind Newport Island residents and allow us to take our case to the coastal commission. Your solidarity would stand for a great deal in the making for our case to be heard. I also do not believe that given all the letters and stories which the council members have heard from residents negatively impacted by STRs (especially our elderly community) that my request would fall on deaf ears as I know that the city is behind helping its community. The fact that the city has had to even make a 24-hour compliant hotline has already spoken volumes as to the issues which they know are at hand. Given all the above I would ask you to please consider the necessary restrictions are applied to Newport Island to maintain the integrity of a community of residences is which only shy of 100 years. Please find it of necessity to forward to the coastal commission by voting unanimously to approve the recommendations. For reference I am in favour of: 1 -Owner occupied 2 -Improved city monitoring of STRs with a view to making permits easier to lose and harder to get. 3 -Increased and improved ordinances pertaining to STRs 4 -Banning STRs altogether I thank you for your time and consideration. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you require any additional information. Please let me know how I may be of further assistance and service in your task at hand. Yours sincerely Gina Unsworth, Resident Newport Island 4 Received After Agenda Printed April 13, 2021 Item No. 16 From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, April 12, 20218:18 AM To: Mulvey, Jennifer Subject: FW: STRs On Newport Island From: hbarlowl <hbarlowl@roadrunner.com> Sent: Sunday, April 11, 20216:43 PM To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: STRs On Newport Island [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear City Council: As a resident and owner at 3708 Channel Place since January of 1977, 1 am appalled at what is tolerated by 'the city' and sheriff's department when it comes to STRs and the resultant abuse of our laws and ordinances by short-term renters and visitors. This extends to the beaches, boardwalk and waterways, but is particularly annoying on our normally quiet and peaceful island. Please abolish STRs altogether, holding property owners responsible for all damage and violations by their'guests', along with visitors who violate parking, speeding, 'no wake' and other laws. Though I am unable to attend the meeting on Tuesday, I will be following up on these issues. Thank you for you attention to the these matters. Very Truly Yours, Hal Barlow (949)612-8278 Sent from my T -Mobile 4G LTE Device Received After Agenda Printed April 13, 2021 Item No. 16 From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, April 12, 20218:18 AM To: Mulvey, Jennifer Subject: FW: Short Term Lodging on Newport Island From: Joan Randolph <jrandolph@newportmgmt.com> Sent: Sunday, April 11, 20212:49 PM To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: Short Term Lodging on Newport Island [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Thank you for your consideration in keeping Newport Island a lovely island for the City. My family purchased a lot in 1941 and have maintained a beautiful home there for over 60 years. Family members still maintain homes on Newport Island today. We also have had a very successful business in Newport Beach. My parent's home sold for over 5,000,000.. and resold as 3 lots for over 5 and 6 million each. I think the Short Term Leasing Companies are not doing as good a job as they could to require short term renters to have more responsibilities as tenants to be considerate of other people living on the island. It is very degrading to have constant loud parties, reckless driving, and loud, large groups of people. Kindly consider the refusal of Short Term Leasing as it is now being operated. Help keep the living here a pleasure for everyone. Thank you, Joan Edwards Randolph 3908 Channel Place, Newport Beach, Ca. 92663 Received After Agenda Printed April 13, 2021 Item No. 16 From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021818 AM To: Mulvey, Jennifer Subject: FW: STIR Newport Island -----Original Message ----- From: Delores Cruz <dariascruz@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, April 11, 20212:28 PM To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: STIR Newport Island [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Council Members, I am writing to you to support recommendations that require STRs on Newport Island to be owner occupied and owner managed as well require a minimum number of on-site parking spots for tenants. I also hope that a cap on the number STRs on island can be addressed. In the 40 years that I have lived on the island it is only in the last two to three years that I have seen an increase in congestion on the island. It used to either personally know or recognized everyone that I saw on the island. Sadly that is no longer true. I experience more foot traffic, more noise and less available parking. I am in my late 80s and no longer feel safe living alone. I lock my front gate and nightly take down my flower pots that rest on my gates as they have been knocked over multiple times by drunken pedestrians. Thank you for reading my concerns regarding regulating STRs on Newport Island. D. Cruz Received After Agenda Printed April 13, 2021 Item No. 16 Subject: FW: Newport Island STLs From: Lani Christensen <lanisamiack@mac.com> Sent: Sunday, April 11, 2021 11:31 AM To: Dept - City Council<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov> Cc: Mark Markos <msm619@ymail.com> Subject: Newport Island STLs Dear City Council Members, My name is Lani Christensen and I live at 3905 Channel Place on Newport Island. I'm 64 years old and have either lived on Newport Island or visited my grandparents who lived on Newport Island for my entire life. My grandparents first bought a home here in the 1940s, and became full time residents in 1954. My parents moved onto the Island in 1956 to be near their parents and raise their three children here. My husband and I raised our children here, as has my sister. When my sons were little, they had their great -grandma, their grandma and grandpa, another grandma, their aunt and uncle and one cousin all living within a block of each other. I think that's pretty special. And, what's even more special, is that I am not unique in this. There are quite a few families on Newport Island who have similar situations and histories. Families with multiple generations living here for many decades. It's one reason why we residents think Newport Island is a very special and unique family neighborhood. I tell you this to illustrate how family oriented Newport Island is. And because of the natural boundaries a small island provides, it has been a very safe neighborhood in which we can raise our children. Lifelong friendships are forged here by kids playing in our park (the land for which my grandparents donated to the city), then advancing to hide and seek, and then inventing their own game of "Island Tag". Many parents consider all the Island children "our children" and look out for them accordingly. We look after our community elders as well, not just during this past year but always. We highly value "family" and "community". These are not just buzz words for us. We actually live by them, and you can see it manifested here everyday. Newport Heights is considered a "family neighborhood". Dover Shores and Lido Island are considered "family neighborhoods". Please put Newport Island in your "family neighborhood" category, even though we are in West Newport Beach. We are not Seashore Drive. We are not zoned to have businesses mixed among our homes. Life on Newport Island has completely changed since we became inundated with Short Term Lodgings. There are now so many people here on vacation all year round. They don't know (or care) how many families have young children here, walking to the park or learning how to ride a bike. They don't know (or care) how many elderly residents we have who are just trying to take a walk. So, they speed in their cars, blow through stop signs, whip around corners, and make it very dangerous for us. And that's when they're sober. Additionally, there are so many crazy loud parties, yelling in the streets, mobs of people walking around, their every other word the F -word. We don't want to hear that, and we don't want our children to hear that. I am a good community member and a good citizen, and I take care of our property. I don't like hosing vomit off the sidewalk in front of my house or picking beer cans out of my garden. The latest treasure I cleaned up was a pair of thong panties, left in my drive way. Parking is very limited on Newport Island, and has always been a challenge. To add STL parking makes this untenable. Cars double park and block the street. They block residents' garage doors. They park on the sidewalks, forcing our kids and elderly to walk in the street, putting them directly in harms way of the speeding cars. Our Newport Island neighborhood is too small and too dense to sustain this high influx of visitors. It's unsafe and has seriously altered a family oriented way of life that has been built and maintained over generations. Newport Island has had a long existence as a unique family, residential only neighborhood. Please don't allow it to become an extension of Seashore Drive. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Lani Christensen Received After Agenda Printed April 13, 2021 Item No. 16 Subject: FW: Newport Island STRs From: chris@harano.com <chris@harano.com> Sent: Sunday, April 11, 20218:09 AM To: Dept - City Council<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>; Leung, Grace <gleung@newportbeachca.gov> Cc: Scott McFetters <smcfetters@outlook.com>; Gary Cruz <gcruz@ushandball.org>; Mark Markos <msm619@ymail.com>, Bud Reveley <budreveley@gmail.com> Subject: Newport Island STRs Good morning City Council I want to first thank the members of council and city staff who have listed to the resident complains and are coming up with reasonable code and rules to hold STIR operators accountable for their actions. STRs are a scourge on Newport Island. The fully negative impact cannot be appreciated until one opens up in your neighborhood or across the street or next door to you house. Secondly, as a reminder of how important this issue is to us, last night the STIR at 4006 Channel had a loud and raging party. As the party broke up about 2 am my security footage caught the two young men going across the street to tip over the outhouse that is being used during construction at 4017 Channel. At the time I heard a loud noise but didn't know what it was. This morning we can all see and smell the tipped over outhouse. Again, thank you for your attention to the issue and your help to get the situation under control. We all really appreciate your assistance. With the improved code I hope this can be my last email to City Council on this topic. Thank you! Chris Harano 4012 Channel Place pp� pppp- .............. Received After Agenda Printed April 13, 2021 Item No. 16 From: Rieff, Kim Sent: Monday, April 12, 20218:15 AM To: Mulvey, Jennifer Subject: FW: Agenda Item STL - Newport Island From: Anita Seiveley <aseiveley@yahoo.com> Sent: Friday, April 09, 20215:02 PM To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: Agenda Item STL - Newport Island [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Council Members: We have owned our home at 410 38`h Street since 1993. We have enjoyed the island very much and have watched it change over the years. We understand things change, but the recent lifestyle changes on the island in the past few years have become unbearable. We have been inundated with numerous Short Term Lodging. Unfortunately, most pack the house above capacity, have numerous vehicles, bikes, skateboards etc. Become loud, crude and unruly. We have witnessed raucous parties during all hours of the day and night. Including but not limited to, speeding cars, drunk people peeing in public, littering, sleeping in cars, fighting and damaging personal and public property. I know this is not the first you have heard of this and I appreciate you efforts to resolve the situation thus far. I strongly encourage you to support Owner Occupied/Owner Managed STL's on the island. Thank you very much for your support. Sincerely, James Collings Anita Seiveley 714-928-3167 aseiveley@yahoo.com Sent from Mail for Windows 10 Received After Agenda Printed April 13, 2021 Item No. 16 Subject: FW: Newport Island STIR petition Attachments: NI signed petitions.pdf From: Mark Markos <msm619@ymail.com> Sent: Saturday, April 10, 20217:32 PM To: Dept - City Council<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: Newport Island STIR petition Petition from Newport Island Please see attached signed petitions. After having attended several city meetings and speaking personally with most STIR owners and operators, a consistent theme from those not residing on the island, was that the issue was not one that was supported by most of the residents on the island. Instead this was largely a small, well organized group of detractors. Having lived on the island and having communicated with many residents, I knew that was not the case. I drafted a petition that asked for signatures from those supporting a regulation to make "owner occupied/owner managed a requirement to hold a STIR permit on Newport Island. The incentive was to make sure that STIR properties were properly managed by someone who experienced the full effects of living near a STIR and which more importantly took in full consideration the life style of island residents when they rented out their STIR. Third party and out of town operators are more concerned with income and were not taking into consideration the dynamics of the island's demographics or the fact that it is mainly a residential area. The island has limited parking, high density housing, occupancy is mostly retired and small families and people go to work each day. It is not a tourist or party neighborhood. Over 90% of the properties on the island are owner occupied and that includes properties that have one and two dwellings on a lot. There are not many rentals on the island and those few that are rental properties seldom turn over. The response from Newport Island residents was over whelming in favor of the requirement. In fact many residents commented "No STIR on Newport Island". To date was have garnered 139 signatures. That represents 96 properties or 85% of the properties on the island that are either not STIR permit holders or vacant lots (construction, escrow) . We are getting additional signatures every day as many home residents are not easily reached. It is clear that it is an overwhelming majority of the residents who want more regulations put on STRs on the island and I hope you concur that it warrants your consideration. Regards, Mark Markos Newport Island Community Association a a� .Q U W O `• ai O Q • CL 3 ++ �� U) � V (Q o L C ig 0 0 a � o U) Z cu cuY E N o +�+ 0 c L a U o .c cm Q C 0 3 CD j2 z 30 cuZ N �. N O o @ � O O O z U N U U � L ALS� ami CL ,W 0 O - F-- C U 3 O O V Cc 0 O^CL .0)0 V� O CL a 3 a o z w o � d = E a N� a CL 0 O IL o a� Q (a c� r� N Qt - \3 O cb Ln© ` CD v V L ! Z2 3 d � N Q 7 U O CL O O V � W O O 3 O o a o a) Z cu a) c c Y m O O U o m CL 3 � o L E2 Z N L (aO O c 0) N c c O m O L U N Y.n A U Q� L c U � O O U L O O Po U) N c L O 7 a)L O � � Q m d o Z O 'a L c O o E }I C N Q CL ° o w� o aow m a NJ � H ID Co E 3 U � r�- V 0 3 Z INO to 01 UN ✓ V /� l t Rf c�1 a U o V � � S N � G r L 7 ti 72) i r v v o m c J 0Z CL =3 C: CL 3: z (D -se E E 0 0 0 > >1 (D z co a) C\j 2:' :3 M 0 0 a) 2) 0 0 Cl) C: 0 N Q C: E (D-0 L) 0 C: 0 c L) =3 Al.� 0 0 0- -60 'a W .27) 0 U) W-0 CL > (D 'E a) 0 z 0 M 102 -0 E 0- 'o CL 0 cm tp v a. a &M C�o VC -11 \j 0 n U) -A A, ilk P -J oz &M O saw (D t 0 CL z c 0 t 0 0 0 O.M CL �o CD CL 0 ym VJ (ti N (D z cu E 0 cu C\l v. (D O Jr- ro .r- �o 0 m 0 CL CD r_ 0) ca O t: 0 Q. EL 0 z C3 N U (No Subject) From: Mark Markos (msm619Cymail.com) To: msm619Qymail.com Date: Thursday, February 4, 2021, 04:11 PM PST Pedtiarr, to hive all Short Perm n Nuvnnc I N� y N _ �s VL � t1 V y 1 J d --1 o � 11 J 1• v m v ` JLLLI CL ��� I' N �N NI 1 I f� I c N� p � I I' CL 0 Lor a i� i� Y� z 0 M .+r •iai 0 ism �r Mar 0 CL MOO poo F�Ev� t`r Mr �t z e}s�; R I0 E O cu N Y m E 0 0 c U O N 47 'O ns O Qi 0 s m C N N 0 a ISI �l �i �N'�' ! � ► I I ISI �I i I I jj I i ! I I I I I ! l I I j � 0 3m W t: 0 OL z LL E 9 It 0 ro m 0 fL 11 i -' 'Ic Is111 VNI 7 1 1 � _� [___ ___�]___ __--~r-`7 ` 'Q � | < . '. ' xu / , 1 :2 NJ Lq IV's V�l c)-4 co _71 Ce :2 r ti �X v Po' .z �t v- 0 ion �± t Q CL z r N �N W S;p r 0 U [S: C�, n u � � �y 1� �w t H �� wo o C I� ` PJ c �1 5 cr C� c '�J r tm _� LD 'a U U O O O •CL y O VJ 11 L O O O N z V N N � Y m 0 O O /w 0 •fes+ > c L T U O Y m 3 C O L L 4 caca Z N ` O p c C � m C 0C O 0 N T U CU (1) m C � L v O ° o 'a C O U U O V `. N M O i (D O) O P U) U) NC -0 M R o z U) C: L o ai Y Q N O z 4 _ � w .0 c E o ♦, E yoCL 0' o a) _ Y !C C am Q w E �1 V V rA Vi i Q S f J J yL S E z Received After Agenda Printed April 13, 2021 Item No. 16 From: City Clerk's Office Sent: Friday, April 09, 2021 1:20 PM To: Mulvey, Jennifer, Rieff, Kim Subject: FW: Opposition to Amendment to Restrict STR to Owner -Occupied Dwellings From: Lori Bowman <lorib425@yahoo.com> Sent: Friday, April 9, 2021 1:19:04 PM (UTC -08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: City Clerk's Office <CityClerk@newportbeachca.gov>; Dept - City Council<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>; Dixon, Diane <ddixon@newportbeachca.gov>; Avery, Brad <bavery@newportbeachca.gov>; Duffield, Duffy <dduffield@newportbeachca.gov>; Muldoon, Kevin <kmuldoon@newportbeachca.gov>; Blom, Noah <NBlom@newportbeachca.gov>; Brenner, Joy <]Brenner@newportbeachca.gov>; O'Neill, William <woneill@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: Opposition to Amendment to Restrict STR to Owner -Occupied Dwellings [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. To Newport Beach City Council Members. We are writing to oppose item #5 in Resolution No. 2021-30, the Amendment Related to Short Term Lodging on Newport Island. We do not believe that the requirement to only allow owners on Newport Island to rent for a short term if the property is an owner -occupied dwelling is a fair and satisfactory solution to the issues with short term lodging. We agree that those renters who are not following the rules and who are renting to disruptive parties should be fined or have their permits revoked. But we don't feel it is fair to penalize responsible renters who follow the rules by completely eliminating our ability to rent our property on a short term basis. We currently own a home on Newport Island with our siblings that has been in the family for over 80 years. We share the home for get-togethers. reunions and vacations with relatives and friends. We also rent the house throughout the year on a short-term basis and rely on the rental income to help with the cost of home maintenance. repair and other property -related expenses. We are responsible renters and do not rent to parties who cause disturbances or damage property. We follow all city rules related to STRs and renew our business license and STR permit on a timely basis. Our property does not fall under the "owner occupied' category and it would cause a significant drop in income and financial hardship to maintain our property if we were unable to generate short-term rental income. We are aware of the ongoing problems with short-term tenants who are disruptive. disrespectful and damage property and we understand the importance of establishing rules and policies to penalize property owners on the Island who rent to the "bad seeds". However, we don't believe that as responsible property owners we should be penalized for those owners who do not follow the rules and who rent their homes out in an irresponsible manner. Those in favor of the owner occupied recommendation claim Newport Island is a unique residential community but their reasons for supporting this recommendation - parking problems, density of homes. narrow streets. etc. - are the same problems that all other areas in Newport Beach have experienced with short term - rentals. We understand the need and importance to consider all of Newport Island property owners' and residents' viewpoints and concerns but do not believe that restricting short term renting to owner -occupied dwellings only is a fair and equitable compromise for all parties involved. Thank you for your time and consideration. Best regards, Lori & Lynne Bowman Property Owners 506 38`" St.. Newport Island lorib425(atvahoo.com lynnebee251a�yahoo.com Cell Phone: (3 10) 621-1237 Received After Agenda Printed April 13, 2021 Item No. 16 Subject: FW: Regarding the Short Term Lodging on Newport Island LCP Amendment Hearing 4/13/2021 From: Larry Leifer <lawrelei(&gmail.com> Sent: Friday, April 9, 20218:49:29 AM (UTC -08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: City Clerk's Office<CityClerk(a)newgortbeachca.gov>; Dept - City Council<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>; citymanager(&newgortbeachca.gov<citymanager(cbnewportbeachca.gov> Cc: Chris <chris(dharano.com>; Jeff Friedman <jfriedman@turnerfiber.com>, Ken Keirstead <ken(declecticfinishes.com>; Mark & Melissa Markof <msm619@ymail.com>; Martin O'Hea <mohea@bixbyland.com>; Richard Wolpow <rwolDow(L)Docnettech.com>; Scott McFetters <smcfetters(Ioutlook.com>; Jim Miller <newoortislandiim@gmail.com>; Sharon Boles <sharonabolesCa)gmail.com>; Suzanne Gignoux <suzanne.gignoux@gmail.com>; Anne O'Flynn <annofly(agmail.com>; Diane DIXON <dianebdixon@gmail.com> Subject: Regarding the Short Term Lodging on Newport Island LCP Amendment Hearing 4/13/2021 To the Honorable Members of the Newport Beach City Council: Newport Island is a compact, densely populated neighborhood that treasures its residential character. It has narrow streets, very few on -street parking spaces and a single two-lane bridge for access. It should not be a place burdened by numerous properties devoted to the commercialization of residential units akin to short stay motels. Commercial lodging properties are best zoned and located in commercial areas which are governed and enforced by well defined limitations as to occupancy, parking and standards of propriety. The City of Newport Beach has enacted specific permitting and ordinances to regulate short term rentals. They have been partially effective but rely on compliance officers and, in extreme circumstances, the police department for enforcement. For the most part the burden for action has defaulted to our Island residents. In our high density area we have experienced problems that do not get rectified promptly or prevented by city enforcement. Even though absentee owners or their booking agents are notified, the more immediate or even longer term problems do not get resolved. The only effective solution lies in restricting short term permitting to owner occupied dwellings. Other Southern California communities have handled short term rentals differently. For example, by not allowing short term rentals in residential areas altogether; by limiting the number of rentals in terms of location and density in a far more restricted way than Newport Beach has; and by allowing only owner occupied and owner managed short term rentals to be permitted. We residents of Newport Island as a consequence of our high density, inadequate parking and narrow street limitations, our neighborhood friendliness, and our inherent difference from the beachfront rental lifestyle require a more lowkey ambience that only onsite property owners of short term rentals can assure. We ask that those of you on the city council who may reside in exclusively non -short term rental neighborhoods understand and empathize with the necessity for allowing only owner occupied short term rental permits on Newport Island as the most effective means to stem the stresses that short term rentals have created. We ask for your vote in approving this Newport Island LCP Amendment. Respectfully, Larry and Susan Leifer 3706 Channel Place Newport Island 949-650-7120 Received After Agenda Printed April 13, 2021 Item No. 16 From: Ryan Vitt <ryanavitt@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 20213:28 PM To: City Clerk's Office Subject: PA -2020-326 [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello, I am a homeowner on Newport Island and wanted to write my opinion on the following. Project File No: PA2020-326 Activity No: LC2020-008 I agree with the Planning Commission decision on 12/3/2020 to deny the LCP amendment. I believe there are alternatives to zoning restrictions on Newport Island homeowners. If homeowners that are in favor of these restrictions would like the zoning modifications on their properties alone, that would be fine with me, but I would prefer the current zoning in place for my property. Thank you, Ryan Vitt 3800 Marcus Ave, Newport Beach, CA 92663 1 From: City Clerk"s Office To: Mulvey, Jennifer; Rieff, Kim Subject: FW: Regarding the Short Term Lodging on Newport Island LCP Amendment Hearing 4/13/2021 Date: Tuesday, April 13, 2021 1:35:47 PM From: Martin O'Hea <mohea@bixbyland.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2021 1:35:38 PM (UTC -08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: City Clerk's Office <CityClerk@newportbeachca.gov>; Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>; citymanager@newportbeachca.gov <citymanager@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: Regarding the Short Term Lodging on Newport Island LCP Amendment Hearing 4/13/2021 [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. To the City Council: I've already written numerous emails over the past year on this subject so no need to rehash all of the Island residents concerns which you are acutely aware of. Today the city council can finally put this issue to rest and vote in favor of its citizens and the preservation of its residential neighborhood. We all look forward to your vote tonight as the beginning of a pathway to normalcy which we all deserve as homeowners. Martin O'Hea 4001 Marcus Avenue