OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/North Salem, New York/Town Board & Boards
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

North Salem Planning Board Work Session on Short-Term Rentals – April 16, 2025

Town Board & Boards — Wednesday, April 16, 2025
BodyNorth Salem, New York
SessionTown Board & Boards
DateWednesday, April 16, 2025
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 1:00:09

Original source
Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

Speaker numbers apply only to this recording.

Speaker 1

0:03

Okay, I'm gonna call the uh planning board meeting to order.

0:07

Uh the first item on the agenda asked to be held over to the May meeting.

0:12

So we're gonna go right into the work session, short-term rentals.

0:16

Um I did take the matter over to the town board and gave them an overview of what we were doing, and generally speaking, they agreed that we are on the right track.

0:28

Um it was a little rough going in that um Supervisor Lucas thought that we were regulating for more than 30 days, and I think what happened here is that remember initially we were going to say

Unassigned speaker

0:44

that

Speaker 1

0:44

you couldn't do anything less than 30 days.

0:46

So we kind of had that mindset, but eventually he um he caught on and he said we're on the right track, so that was good.

0:53

Um several good comments came up at the town board meeting, and I'd like to take the time to go through each of those, um, as well as some of the ones that um I had, and I'm sure that some of you have on this last one.

1:07

So we're working off of the April 3rd draft.

1:11

Um correct?

1:12

Yeah,

Speaker 2

1:14

yes,

Speaker 1

1:15

okay.

1:16

So um I don't have anything on the first page, but on the second page, um at some point I talked about using including the professional office district, and as most of you know, we have single family homes in the professional office district.

1:33

We have them in the GB district, the professional office district.

1:38

I'm not sure if we have any in the NB district.

1:42

Um so I should look at that.

Speaker 3

1:47

Maybe I thought we said there were.

Unassigned speaker

1:52

Well,

Speaker 1

1:52

definitely PO and definitely GB.

1:55

The NB is uh right here at North Salem Center.

2:01

And I just want to see if the house down the road is in

Unassigned speaker

2:04

it.

Speaker 1

2:10

No.

Speaker 3

2:11

No.

Speaker 1

2:11

There's none at Salem Center and up.

2:18

Uh the Trump House is in.

2:20

I no, no, it's

Unassigned speaker

2:22

not.

Speaker 1

2:23

So we don't

Unassigned speaker

2:24

we

Speaker 1

2:24

don't have any homes in the NB districts.

2:28

So we could eliminate that if we wanted to, or just add the PO district.

Speaker 4

2:33

Well, I definitely think we should add the PO if there is a home in the PO district, but I mean NB, I guess if there's none, there's no reason to include it.

2:43

Unless in the future would there be one in the future?

2:45

Is that possible?

Speaker 1

2:46

It's anything's possible with an administration changing the boundaries of districts.

2:53

So let's let's add PO and um keep

Speaker 4

2:58

the NB.

Speaker 1

3:00

I would just just highlight the NB for now.

3:03

Will I'm gonna go and do a um a double check on the town's GIS, but looking at the map, it appears as though we probably shouldn't bother with the NB district.

3:16

Okay.

3:18

Um also on that page under the definition of dwelling unit.

3:25

The can you remind me, Will, why we have the highlighting there?

3:29

Is that something you were suggesting?

3:31

I think on the next page it tells us if that's staying or going.

Speaker 5

3:36

Highlighting on the definition of dwelling.

Speaker 1

3:39

Uh the definition of dwelling, you have boarding or rooming house, fraternity house, and inner lodging highlighted in yellow.

Unassigned speaker

3:47

Um

Speaker 5

3:48

that's on the dwelling unit.

3:49

Um because those things aren't anything that's in the code.

Unassigned speaker

3:55

Okay,

Speaker 5

3:55

so that's part of that whole idea.

3:57

It's aside are we gonna include these things they aren't and then put them given definitions, or we don't have any definitions of why are we talking about

Speaker 1

4:05

exactly so we could just delete all those words and it wouldn't affect anything.

Unassigned speaker

4:11

Right.

Speaker 1

4:12

So they

Speaker 5

4:13

don't exist anywhere and the code.

Unassigned speaker

4:16

And that would resolve Warren's concern about it.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Short Term Rentals█████████████████████████████████████████41%
Zoning And Land Use████████████████████████████28%
Building Code Compliance███████████11%
Legal And Compliance███████7%
Engineering And Infrastructure█████5%
Public Safety███3%
Procedural███3%
Comprehensive Planning██2%
Summary of Proceedings

North Salem Planning Board Work Session on Short-Term Rentals – April 16, 2025

The North Salem Planning Board held a work session on April 16, 2025, to continue refining draft regulations for short-term rentals. The board reviewed the April 3rd draft line-by-line, incorporating feedback from the Town Board meeting and legal research. Key topics included definitions, operational standards, enforcement mechanisms, and coordination with existing codes. The board reached several consensus decisions and tasked Planning Board member Will with incorporating changes for a final review at the May 7th regular meeting, after which the proposal will be forwarded to the Town Board for a public hearing.

Discussion Items

  • Deletion of Unused Terms: The board agreed to delete references to boarding houses, rooming houses, fraternity houses, and inner lodges from the code, as these uses are not defined or permitted anywhere in North Salem. The consensus was to remove them to avoid confusion. (Consensus to delete)
  • Short-Term Rental Definition: The board simplified the definition to "any portion of real property rented, leased, or otherwise assigned for occupancy by transient guests for a period of less than 30 consecutive days." The parenthetical clause regarding "no consecutive rental agreements" was removed, as it was considered unnecessary and ambiguous. (Consensus to simplify)
  • Hosted vs. Unhosted Rentals: The board discussed requiring a responsible person on site for unhosted rentals (where no owner is present) but deferred the specific language to later sections of the code under operational standards. (Deferred)
  • Comprehensive Plan Conformance: The board emphasized that the regulations must align with the Comprehensive Plan, which prioritizes protecting residential character and rural nature. Member Cynthia noted the plan mentions "residential community" over 100 times. The purpose section will be strengthened to reflect this alignment. (Directive to blend in stronger language)
  • Special Use Permit and Ownership: The board confirmed that the short-term rental permit would run with the owner and require a two-year ownership period. For LLCs or corporations, the applicant must designate an individual who holds ownership interest and will occupy the premises, similar to accessory apartment provisions. The board also directed Will to add similar language to the accessory apartment code for consistency. (Consensus to include ownership requirement)
  • Recreational Vehicles (RVs) and Campers: The board revised Section G3 to state that RVs, campers, and similar vehicles are not allowed as sleeping quarters for short-term rental guests. Such vehicles may be present only if incidental to the stay and parked in conformance with existing code §250-34 (which prohibits parking in front yards and requires screening). This addresses Town Board concerns about guests traveling with RVs. (Revised language agreed upon)
  • Minimum Stay Requirement: The board debated whether to impose a minimum stay (e.g., 2–3 nights). While some members saw it as reducing turnover and potential nuisance, others noted enforcement difficulties and the existing 13-weekend cap. Ultimately, the board opted not to recommend a minimum at this time, leaving the decision to the Town Board. (No recommendation)
  • Inspection and Permit Revocation: The board discussed the building inspector’s authority to revoke a special use permit for violations. Current code allows revocation of certificates of occupancy for specific circumstances (change of use) but not directly for special permits. The board asked counsel (Lisa) to review whether additional revocation provisions are needed, including due process requirements. (Referred to counsel)
  • Guest Register and Fourth Amendment Concerns: The board noted that requiring a guest register to be turned over upon request could raise Fourth Amendment issues if automatic fines are imposed. They agreed to tie the register requirement to fire safety inspections and ensure due process (e.g., reasonable notice) before any penalty is applied. The current language was considered acceptable for now pending further review. (Acknowledged, no change)
  • Fees: The board noted that fees for special permits and inspections are already established outside the zoning code. They will ensure the fee schedule includes new items if necessary, coordinating with Town Administrator Jim Doohick. (Deferred to administrative action)

Key Outcomes

  • Consensus on Draft Revisions: The board agreed to delete unused terms, simplify the short-term rental definition, require owner designation for LLCs, revise RV provisions, and strengthen comprehensive plan conformance language.
  • Next Steps: Planning Board member Will will incorporate all agreed changes into a revised draft and present it to the board at the May 7, 2025 regular meeting. The board expects to finalize the proposal at that meeting and forward it to the Town Board for their first regular meeting in May.
  • Site Inspection Scheduled: The board scheduled a site inspection for the Little Mountain property (1 Little Mountain Road) with Will from Hahn Engineering to assess driveway and steep slope issues. The application was held over to the May meeting.
  • Continued Research: The board will review further legal research from counsel on inspection procedures and permit revocation, and will monitor any public comments submitted to the Town Board.

Meeting Transcript

Okay, I'm gonna call the uh planning board meeting to order. Uh the first item on the agenda asked to be held over to the May meeting. So we're gonna go right into the work session, short-term rentals. Um I did take the matter over to the town board and gave them an overview of what we were doing, and generally speaking, they agreed that we are on the right track. Um it was a little rough going in that um Supervisor Lucas thought that we were regulating for more than 30 days, and I think what happened here is that remember initially we were going to say that you couldn't do anything less than 30 days. So we kind of had that mindset, but eventually he um he caught on and he said we're on the right track, so that was good. Um several good comments came up at the town board meeting, and I'd like to take the time to go through each of those, um, as well as some of the ones that um I had, and I'm sure that some of you have on this last one. So we're working off of the April 3rd draft. Um correct? Yeah, yes, okay. So um I don't have anything on the first page, but on the second page, um at some point I talked about using including the professional office district, and as most of you know, we have single family homes in the professional office district. We have them in the GB district, the professional office district. I'm not sure if we have any in the NB district. Um so I should look at that. Maybe I thought we said there were. Well, definitely PO and definitely GB. The NB is uh right here at North Salem Center. And I just want to see if the house down the road is in it. No. No. There's none at Salem Center and up. Uh the Trump House is in. I no, no, it's not. So we don't we don't have any homes in the NB districts. So we could eliminate that if we wanted to, or just add the PO district. Well, I definitely think we should add the PO if there is a home in the PO district, but I mean NB, I guess if there's none, there's no reason to include it. Unless in the future would there be one in the future? Is that possible? It's anything's possible with an administration changing the boundaries of districts. So let's let's add PO and um keep the NB. I would just just highlight the NB for now. Will I'm gonna go and do a um a double check on the town's GIS, but looking at the map, it appears as though we probably shouldn't bother with the NB district. Okay. Um also on that page under the definition of dwelling unit. The can you remind me, Will, why we have the highlighting there? Is that something you were suggesting? I think on the next page it tells us if that's staying or going. Highlighting on the definition of dwelling. Uh the definition of dwelling, you have boarding or rooming house, fraternity house, and inner lodging highlighted in yellow. Um

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com