HomeMy Public PortalAboutPublic Comment Klaus Heinemann Submission # 512587
IP Address 24.130.56.117
Submission Recorded On 08/28/2020 2:23 PM
Time to Take Survey 22 minutes,46 seconds
Page 2
Name
Klaus Heinemann
*Email
kwh@mcn.org
Phone(optional)
(408)731-0794
*Public Comment
Section 5.02.030 C—Application Process: FEE We are already paying significant taxes and fees(10%TOT,2%BID,property tax).Why not credit the registration fee back in
the quarterly TOT return(similar to how the Sate of California treats business fees). Section 5.02.040 M—Advertisement: Please amend"...shall list the maximum number
of occupants permitted by the transient occupancy registration certificate"with"...or the number of occupants permitted by the owner,if less."For example,we are even
more strict with the number of occupants permitted in our house than the Town would consider acceptable.(The Town would permit 10 people plus small children in our
house,while we rent up to no more than 8,including children).If we have to advertise the Town's wording,this might attract larger groups than we permit. Section 5.02.050
D—Grill and Barbecues:Are Propane operated grills prohibited on decks,when placed properly on a fireproof mat?The 10-foot distance requirement would practically only
allow those somewhere in the driveway/parking area of a property. I believe the current requirement is more like 1-foot from the house wall,when the hinged lid is opened,
is it not?Section 5.02.050—Special Events:There should be no objection to events if the number of people involved is within the number of guests allowed on the STR
property,and if no traffic,parking,noise or other problems in the neighborhood are caused by the event.Where is the justification for categorical prohibition of such events?
Why would anybody care if I use my home for a wedding if there are no traffic, parking,noise or other problems?Chapter 9.20—General Noise Regulations:These
provisions should be applicable to all residences. Why would homeowners who occasionally make their homes available to third parties be singled out-- in in terms of public
nuisance--to be subject to a more restrictive conduct than permanent residents?
If your comment exceeds 2000 characters,please use the attachment function below to attach your comment in a separate document.
Attachment
**SKIPPED**
Please ensure that you enter your email address in the box below and click the SUBMIT button to receive a copy of your submitted responses for Public Comment.
Comments on the Draft Town of Truckee STR Ordinance
By Klaus Heinemann
##### Skislope Way, Truckee
kwh@mcn.org
Section 5.02.030 C — Application Process: FEE We are already paying significant
sums and fees (10% TOT and 2% BID, and horrendous property tax). Why
not credit such paid fees back in the quarterly TOT return (similar to how the Sate of
California treats business fees).
Section 5.02.040 M — Advertisement: I would recommend re-wording
"...shall list the maximum number of occupants permitted by the transient occupancy
registration certificate" to be amended with "or the number of occupants permitted by
the owner, if less." This may seem fairly irrelevant, but not for those owners who are
even more strict with the number of occupants permitted in their house than the Town of
Truckee would consider acceptable. For example, the Town would permit 10 people
plus small children in our house, while we rent up to no more than 8, including children.
If we have to advertise the Town's wording, this might attract larger groups than we
permit.
Section 5.02.050 D — Grill and Barbecues: Is it truly the intent to prohibit Propane
operated grills on decks, when placed properly on a fireproof mat? The 10-foot distance
requirement would practically only allow those somewhere in the driveway/parking area
of a property. I believe the current requirement is more like 1-foot from the house wall,
when the hinged lid is opened, is it not?
Section 5.02.050 — Special Events: This section appears to be skillfully — and
rightfully so — worded to not object to such events if the number of people involved is
within the number of guests allowed on the STIR property, if no traffic, parking, noise or
other problems in the neighborhood are caused by the event. Is my interpretation
correct? If not, i.e., if such events are categorically prohibited, I would respectfully
request to entertain my interpretation. Why would anybody care if I use my home for a
wedding if there are no traffic, parking, noise or other problems?
Chapter 9.20 — Reneral Noise Regulations: What about running a power generator
during brownout periods? These things are typically quite noisy. If the Town considers
use of generators in such instances as reasonable or even desirable for protection of
public health, they should perhaps be mentioned in 9.20.030. Proactively addressing
this issue would prevent homeowners from attempting to run a generator inside, say
inside the garage, which would be a health hazard.
Last year, Airbnb addressed the noise issue by recommending the installation of a
("Minut") noise meter. We immediately purchased and installed such a device (costing
<$100) and find it reasonable to the extent that it takes subjectivity out of the equation.
Perhaps the Town might consider attaching some neutral "decibel" standards to
Chapter 9.20.020.
General Applicability
Is seems to me that, when I first read the entire documentation, there was a mention
somewhere that this should be applicable as a standard to all residences, not just
STRs. Upon re-reading I could not find that passage. If excluded intentionally, why
would these provisions not be applicable to all residences? Why would homeowners
who occasionally make their homes available to third parties be singled out to be
subject to a more restrictive conduct than permanent residents in terms of public
nuisance?
Klaus & Gundi Heinemann
klaushPmcn.org
Sunnyvale and The Sea Ranch, CA
https://www.healingguidance.net/paradigm-shift