Riverside trustees rejected a proposal on Thursday to further pursue reinstating the village’s residential vacation rental policy.
The village board voted 4-1 to direct staff not to continue considering the policy for future approval. Trustee Elizabeth Kos was absent from the Dec. 4 meeting.
“I would like for us to take a pass on vacation rentals in the village. The possibility has gotten mixed reviews from the community. There’s no support from the neighbors,” said Trustee Cristin Evans, who was a vocal opponent of the policy when the board held a first discussion on Nov. 6. “I’m hoping that we can close this chapter tonight.”
Trustee Alex Gallegos alone voted against the motion to kill the policy after expressing his desire to see Riverside’s economic development commission weigh in on its feasibility first.
“This would be the question of, ‘Does it do well in the residential [districts]?’ That’s why I want [the EDC to consider] the question of how this would affect property values that’s come up,” he said. “EDC has been tasked for these specific questions. I don’t know the answer yet. I don’t know if I am in favor of this or not.”
Gallegos made a motion to direct staff to proceed with the issue, but it died for lack of a second.
The other trustees seemed to agree with Evans. Trustee Jill Mateo motioned to have Riverside stop considering the policy, which Evans seconded.
“I’ve heard people ask why we revisited this. The answer is somebody asked us to do that. It’s been seven years since it was last considered. There’s only one person on this board who was part of the discussion seven years ago,” Mateo said. “Enough time has passed. I think it was a legitimate inquiry to make, especially because of potential economic benefits … At the end of the day, I don’t think people are wanting this in their residential areas.”
The push to bring back a policy for short-term rentals in residential districts began in August at the request of resident Maria Bernardi, who owns a duplex. Bernardi lives in one side of the building and said she wanted to rent the other half out for short periods as a form of supplementary income.
The planning and zoning commission first reviewed a potential policy in October, but four of the five commissioners recommended against implementing one due to a lack of interest in short-term rentals in business districts, where bed-and-breakfasts have been allowed for years without any cropping up.
The commission reviewed the topic again on Nov. 17 at the village board’s direction, with three of the commissioners remaining opposed. According to a summary of their discussion, included in agenda materials for the Dec. 4 meeting, the commissioners felt it would be “difficult to accept” homes being occupied for only 60 days out of the year, the maximum number of days a home can be rented under village code, and that residents should be able to know their neighbors rather than experiencing a transient community in their neighborhood.
They also pointed to a petition against residential vacation rentals that garnered nearly 300 resident signatures in 2018 after a short-term rental home on Michaux Road drew controversy for hosting large events on the property such as family reunions and weddings.
“I was disappointed, but I wasn’t really surprised” by the village board’s decision, Bernardi told the Landmark Friday morning. “I knew this was going to be a challenge, presenting this option, especially due to the negative experience they had previously in town. I was disappointed. I really thought people were understanding that it could be done in a way that would not disrupt the quality of life in Riverside.”
The real estate broker, who rents the second half of her duplex to long-term tenants now, said she expected “some” resistance from the community but not as much as the proposal received, with some residents giving public comment and writing letters to officials to express their concern.
“I did expect some, especially from the Michaux debacle, but I thought things had changed,” she said. “[Short-term rentals] are much more used by everyone nowadays, so I was a little surprised.”
She said she felt her situation was different from the one that drew controversy in 2018, and she hadn’t expected it to factor into the discussion as much as it did.
“I believe it was at least eight bedrooms, so that immediately speaks to a party house. What I tried to propose intelligently was not a party house but a first-rate, well-run residence where people could stay. End of conversation,” she said. “I truly love this town, and I would have never proposed anything that I thought would lower the quality of life.”
