Here we go again!
A few months ago I warned that the owner of the Kenwood Inn, Pat Dobosz, had purchased the old Queen Anne style home at 11 Bridge ST and was planning to have it rezoned from HP-1 to Planned Unit Development (PUD) for an annex to her B&B across Bridge ST (see picture below – the dark squares are previously approved commercial PUDs).
Well, despite my hopes that she would chose a different course of action, yesterday Pat informed me she plans to proceed with her rezoning request. To prepare the way and line up supportive residents, she’s holding an “open house” at her business this weekend to explain why a single family home that has been primarily residential since it was built in 1889 and is in a district zoned to be primarily residential, now must be a commercial nightly-rental property.
Since short-term rentals are not allowed in HP-1, Ms. Dobosz will need the city to rezone the property to PUD for the benefit of her business.
Is this déjà vu all over again?
Simply stated, and at risk of boring you to tears, here are the reasons why this isn’t good for our neighborhood or our city:
• Continued commercial intrusion into HP-1 undermines its residential character.
• It is not fair to the neighbors at 15 Bridge ST and 46 Marine ST (immediately adjacent) who purchased their residences with the expectation that the neighboring structure would be used in a way consistent with existing city code.
• A PUD requires a “Need and Justification.” Ms. Dobosz purchased the historic property for $210,000 knowing full well that its zoning did not allow short term rentals. Her “need” to make a return on her investment is not a sufficient “justification” for a rezoning that would negatively impact her immediate neighbors. Interestingly, former Mayor Joe Boles served as the seller’s “executive agent” in the sale of the property to Ms. Dobosz.
• Ms. Dobosz is using the argument that she cannot renovate the house she bought without the revenue generated by short-term rentals. Approval of this rezoning by the city based on that argument is a game-changer for HP-1. If her argument is accepted as a “justification” for rezoning to commercial use, then EVERY HOME OWNER in HP-1 will have the same right and can make the same argument. How could they be denied? To this end, I spoke with an owner of legal long term rental property in HP-1, and that owner confirmed my fears. The owner said that if Pat Dobosz is given a PUD in HP-1 for short-term rentals, then he will do the same. The floodgates for short-term rental PUDs will be wide open and the residential character of HP-1 will be washed away. (Note: this not "fear-mongering" this is a logic assumption based on historical evidence)
• Ms Dobosz is making all the standard threats of converting 11 Bridge into (gasp!) student rentals since that is allowed by HP-1 zoning. Does anyone really think that if student rentals were such a problem, Ms. Dobosz would operate one across the street from her B&B? (Note: Using "studnet renters" as a scare tactic IS "fear mongering.")
• It is not fair to the neighbors at 15 Bridge ST and 46 Marine ST (immediately adjacent) who purchased their residences with the expectation that the neighboring structure would be used in a way consistent with existing city code.
• A PUD requires a “Need and Justification.” Ms. Dobosz purchased the historic property for $210,000 knowing full well that its zoning did not allow short term rentals. Her “need” to make a return on her investment is not a sufficient “justification” for a rezoning that would negatively impact her immediate neighbors. Interestingly, former Mayor Joe Boles served as the seller’s “executive agent” in the sale of the property to Ms. Dobosz.
• Ms. Dobosz is using the argument that she cannot renovate the house she bought without the revenue generated by short-term rentals. Approval of this rezoning by the city based on that argument is a game-changer for HP-1. If her argument is accepted as a “justification” for rezoning to commercial use, then EVERY HOME OWNER in HP-1 will have the same right and can make the same argument. How could they be denied? To this end, I spoke with an owner of legal long term rental property in HP-1, and that owner confirmed my fears. The owner said that if Pat Dobosz is given a PUD in HP-1 for short-term rentals, then he will do the same. The floodgates for short-term rental PUDs will be wide open and the residential character of HP-1 will be washed away. (Note: this not "fear-mongering" this is a logic assumption based on historical evidence)
• Ms Dobosz is making all the standard threats of converting 11 Bridge into (gasp!) student rentals since that is allowed by HP-1 zoning. Does anyone really think that if student rentals were such a problem, Ms. Dobosz would operate one across the street from her B&B? (Note: Using "studnet renters" as a scare tactic IS "fear mongering.")
The argument Ms Dobosz’ makes that no one would ever buy 11 Bridge and renovate it as a single family residence is proven specious by the property right next to it at 46 Marine ST. This property, built in 1900, was bought as a single family home and beautifully renovated. It is the “poster child” for disproving the argument that “nobody would ever do something like that.”
Built and first owned by the Comtesse de Montjoye, 11 Bridge ST has a fascinating history. In the hands of the right owner, it would be a jewel and there is no need to allow short-term rental operations to jump the Bridge ST “fire break” and damage the quality of life in HP-1.
Oh, in case you think that this is OK because it’s “just one small property,” Ms. Dobosz also owns the multi-family rental property on the southeast corner of Charlotte and Bridge (243 Charlotte) as well as other rental property in HP-1. Do anyone really believe that the commercial expansion into HP-1 will stop at 11 Bridge ST?
Normally I try to inject some humor into these posts, but since the city seems to have no interest in upholding its zoning code and adhering to its own Comprehensive Plan, it’s getting a wee bit difficult to find that humor; my apologies.
More to follow.
No comments:
Post a Comment