Planning board wants to add enforcement to short-term rental zoning amendment

LACONIA — An amendment to the short-term rental zoning ordinance was delayed by the planning board on July 1, members of which are seeking a mechanism for accountability. 

The amendment is tabled until August, currently set to return to the planning department for research and revision, after board members asked for stronger language related to enforcement. 

Proposed changes to the ordinance mandate an owner adheres to the city’s noise ordinance, forbid the display of signage advertising the property as a short-term rental and requires a property owner to submit a copy of the current rental agreement — complete with all of the provisions included in the city’s short-term lodging and noise ordinances, verbatim — to the planning department, among other items.

“I thought that we were going to have some language about ‘contract’ so that the short-term rental person had to provide a written contract stating that they’re going to meet all of the requirements,” Ward 1 Councilor Bruce Cheney said. “The reason I say that is: enforcement.”

City planner Rob Mora said the amendment includes a provision requiring a copy of the rental agreement be submitted to the planning department and for all tenants to acknowledge it. 

“In order for them to submit an application for the special exception, they also have to provide their proposed rental agreement as well,” Assistant Planning Director Tyler Carmichael said. “So we do require that.”

But Cheney said he’s concerned that, regardless of what the planning board does with the ordinance, the zoning board of adjustment could change it. Mora said the ZBA couldn’t change any of it, but could grant a variance to deviate from the ordinance if they were so inclined. 

“There’s nothing that we could do to prohibit that,” Mora said. 

Carmichael noted an applicant couldn’t receive a variance for a special exception, but could for the use itself. 

The amendment would also require an owner to submit to the planning department proof the property in question is their primary residence, along with an application for a special exception. The short-term rental use is already limited to a single residential dwelling unit that is the owner’s primary residence. 

“I’m fine with it, I just want to make the point that — as far as I know — any planning board decision can be appealed through the various processes to the ZBA, and then it would go through all the legal procedures, that’s what ZBA is,” planning board member Gail Ober said. “They are the planning board appeals process.”

Charlie St. Clair, chair of the planning board who also represents Laconia as a Democrat at the Statehouse, said constituents wonder how these rules could be enforced.

“Some of the complaints that have come to my attention, and I believe to some of the councilors', is that some of the people are not following the rules,” St. Clair said. “Whether it’s trash or cars parking where they’re not supposed to park or noise — all the usual complaints.”

Mora told St. Clair the city can take enforcement actions as the ordinance is written, and they do, but they can’t do anything if residents don’t file complaints and call the planning department. Noise ordinance issues should be directed to the Laconia Police Department.

“We’re depending on people’s honesty and, with all due respect, a lot of people aren’t very honest when it comes to that sort of thing. Not everybody, but enough that it becomes a problem for neighbors and other city residents,” St. Clair said. “I’m not sure what the answer is to that, Rob.” 

Jon Hildreth of Ward 1, during a public hearing, said he hopes the amendment would remove any existing language which could grandfather a residential unit to be used as a short-term rental property in perpetuity, regardless of which zone the property is located in. 

“We took out the language that [Hildreth] was specifically referring to, that language is no longer in there,” Carmichael said. “When it comes to a special exception or any variance that was granted, as long as the use has been in continued use, unfortunately our hands are tied when it comes to the state and the court’s ruling.”