MONTPELIER — When it comes to quick fixes to a chronic housing shortage officials in central Vermont’s Twin Cities are now eyeing “low-hanging fruit” that is growing on two very different regulatory trees.
Acting on the recommendation of their housing committee city councilors in Montpelier this week agreed to pursue an ordinance designed to discourage “short-term rentals” in hopes of quickly creating more long-term housing.
The next night planning commissioners in Barre turned their attention to a unified development ordinance that was adopted in 2019 following a massive consultant-led rewrite of the city’s zoning regulations. Among the housing-friendly ideas commissioners agreed warranted further discussion are abandoning new density requirements, reducing minimum lot sizes and setbacks, and relaxing — if not eliminating — parking requirements.
Though officials in both communities are thinking in longer — and, in some cases much longer — terms about housing, there is a desire to do something that would create housing units far faster than they can be built on Montpelier’s property on Country Club Road, or rebuilt in a redeveloped version of Barre’s flood-ravaged north end.
It’s why on back-to-back nights the phrase “low-hanging fruit” was used to describe ideas — and beginnings of ideas — that could be enacted quickly and might make a difference.
How much of a difference is far from clear, and there may be unintended consequences that outweigh the benefits of both.
Still, there is a sense of urgency — one you could hear as Rebecca Copans pitched the housing committee’s short-term housing proposal to city councilors in Montpelier on Wednesday night and again on Thursday when David Sichel, chair of the planning commission in Barre, invited the panel to rethink four-year-old regulations that were the product of a three-year process.
Copans conceded there are better solutions to Montpelier’s housing crisis than Airbnbs and other short-term rentals, but none with the potential to make some units available as fast.
“Our goal is to support people who work here, who volunteer here … who attend our schools and who want to live in Montpelier, but just can’t because they can’t find housing,” she told a generally receptive city council.
Copans said the committee’s quest to make room for “year-round” residents would be aided — if only in a small way — by passage of an ordinance similar, but not identical, to one that is on the books in Burlington.
“By passing this ordinance we would be sending a message that Montpelier is a place to live, it’s not a place to buy up long-term housing and take those long-term houses off the market,” she said.
It isn’t clear how big the short-term rental problem is in Montpelier and it is even less clear how many of the 78 recent listings, which involved “72 unique properties,” would be affected by the proposed ordinance crafted by the committee.
The ordinance wouldn’t apply to inns, hotels and traditional bed and breakfasts, and those who rent some, or even all of their homesteads would be exempt. Housing rented seasonally to lawmakers would also be exempt, as would housing occupied by traveling nurses.
Copans said those who have invested in properties that aren’t their declared homestead and are being used for short-term rentals would have two choices.
“They are welcome to turn their short-term rentals into long-term housing, or they are welcome to sell,” she said. “I feel like we need to draw a line in the sand and say that we’re going to prioritize people that live here, and whose kids go to our schools and who volunteer and participate in our community.”
People not so different from Dan Lindner.
Now retired, Lindner and his wife operate an Airbnb on their Upper Main Street property. The proposed ordinance wouldn’t prevent that from happening, but Lindner told councilors he feared a proposed 8% tax that is among the committee’s recommendations wouldn’t be good for business.
Lindner, who uses revenue from his Airbnb to supplement Social Security and pay his property taxes.
Copans acknowledged the committee heard from another Airbnb operator that he uses that income to keep rent he charges on another unit affordable.
Despite those concerns the committee believed the council should adopt the ordinance and pursue a charter change that would likely be needed to levy a new 8% gross receipts tax on those still allowed to operate short-term rentals.
Unlike an annual $110 registration fee, which would be paid by property owners, the new tax would be paid by their customers.
The proposed ordinance also includes a requirement that those still allowed to remain in the short-term rental business in Montpelier track everything from the length of stays, the number of days rented, to the amounts they charged.
Copans said that information would be useful.
“We don’t have the data that would show that this is (short-term rentals) is a problem,”
Councilor Tim Heney said he isn’t sure that it is and is reasonably confident the proposed solution would yield underwhelming results.
“We really are going to free up very few units,” he predicted, adding: “This is not a great use of our time.”
Councilors heard from other committee and community members, who supported the change, if only to head off a problem that may not yet exist.
The council agreed to begin the process with an eye toward adopting some form of the ordinance proposed by the committee.
Meanwhile, planning commissioners in Barre expressed interest in tweaking zoning regulations in an effort to bring more housing units on line.
Less than 48 hours after the Barre City Council approved one interim zoning proposal in hopes of making it easier to develop accessory dwelling units, Sichel suggested the committee consider a broader proposal.
During the discussion that followed some wondered with density requirements that didn’t exist in earlier versions of the city’s zoning regulations, should be reconsidered in hopes of quickly creating more housing units.
Easing or eliminating parking requirements could be paired with such a proposal, making it easier for property owners to add units for which they don’t have the parking the current ordinance requires.
Other ideas floated ranged from shrinking the minimum lot size and relaxing setbacks to making it more difficult to demolish residential properties. All of the ideas were short on specifics, and it isn’t clear whether the changes the commission wants to consider when it meets next month would be applied to all of the city’s zoning districts, or only some of them.
Mayor Jake Hemmerick and other council members who attended the session said they were supportive of changes that would create more housing and would be inclined to support them.
“I’m in a place of ‘yes’ with pretty much everything right now when it comes to getting more housing units on line in the city,” Councilor Teddy Waszazak said.
