Hobbs

Hobbs v. City of Pacific Grove

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 14, 2022H047705California6,964 words

Opinion

Opinion

Lie, J.

I. BACKGROUND1

A. The Regulatory Framework For the first time in 2010, with the enactment of Pacific Grove Ordinance No. 10- 0012, the City allowed “transient use of residential property for remuneration,” subject to licensing, taxes, and other regulation. Licenses were issued upon application for a period of one year, subject to earlier revocation for good cause. By January 2011, the City had licensed 85 active short-term rentals. In 2016, the City capped the overall number of short-term rental licenses citywide at 250 and further established a density cap of “15 [percent] per block.” (Ord. No. 16-007; Pacific Grove Mun. Code, former § 7.40.25.)3 In 2017, the City reaffirmed its 250-license citywide maximum, prohibited more than one license per parcel, and required a 55-foot buffer “zone of exclusion” between licensed properties. (Ord. No. 17-024; Mun. Code, § 7.40.040.) The 2017 ordinance included several provisions regarding renewal or revocation of short-term rental (SRT) licenses. “The City Manager or his/her designee may delay or deny issuance of an STR license for any reason.” (Ord. No. 17-024; Mun. Code, § 7.40.060(g).) “No STR license shall be automatically…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.