Santa Cruz County supervisors spent another Tuesday session debating the regulation of vacation homes. It was the eighth meeting of its kind, and this time they succeeded in making some progress. They agreed to place a moratorium on the establishment of new vacation homes in the county but could not agree on how to regulate the existing vacation homes, which many neighbors consider a nuisance. After a lengthy debate they voted to send the proposed regulations back to the Planning Commission for a rewrite.
Santa Cruz County supervisors spent another Tuesday session debating the regulation of vacation homes. It was the eighth meeting of its kind, and this time they succeeded in making some progress. They agreed to place a moratorium on the establishment of new vacation homes in the county but could not agree on how to regulate the existing vacation homes, which many neighbors consider a nuisance. After a lengthy debate they voted to send the proposed regulations back to the Planning Commission for a rewrite.
The proposed rules distinguish between Live Oak, where most vacation homes are located, and the rest of the county. While everyone agrees that vacation homes should require a license, the proposal called for five-year licenses for Live Oak and a one-time license in perpetuity for the rest of the county. Furthermore, vacation homes in Live Oak could not exceed 20 per block or 15 percent of the homes in any given neighborhood. The problem is that in many Live Oak neighborhoods, vacation homes already constitute 12 percent of all properties.
The Board of Supervisors is hoping to have some type of regulation in place before this year’s vacation time rolls in.
Read more at Santa Cruz Sentinel.
