Aspendell Short term rental




The Inyo Board of Supervisors stood with the Planning Commission to allow a short-term rental in Aspendell, a small community below Lake Sabrina and west of Bishop, despite a showing of home owners who really didn’t like the idea.

The house in question is on the south side of Hwy. 168 on a cul de sac at the eastern edge of the newer part of the community. Nearly 70-percent of the houses are second homes.

The conditional use permit, submitted by George and Kerry Lozito, had been unanimously approved at the Planning Commission. The Lozito’s had initiated a list of house rules that went beyond those imposed by the County ordinance. None of that mattered. 

Residents don’t object to rentals, it’s just those pesky short-term rentals that drew objection letters and a line of homeowners at Tuesday’s meeting. The concerns ranged from damage to the infrastructure, loss of peace and quiet, public safety issues, more deer kill accidents, trash, impact on property values and disrupted lives.

A number of speakers indicated they were unaware of the Board’s long, drawn-out discussion on short-term rentals prior to passing the ordinance in the spring of 2018.  Supervisor Dan Totheroh, whose district includes Aspendell, said he had sent an e-mail to the homeowners’ association to get the word out before the ordinance was passed. “The concerns expressed when the ordinance passed were incorporated into the County’s measure,” he said.

None of the Supervisors really liked what are commonly referred to as Airbnb’s, but as Supervisor Mark Tillemans said, “that train’s left the station.” All of the Supervisors agreed the Lozito’s had met all the requirements of the ordinance.

Totheroh moved to deny the appeal. The vote was 5-0 in support of the motion.


, ,

4 Responses to Aspendell Short term rental

  1. Bishop October 17, 2019 at 9:10 am #

    Why would an airbnb cause more deer kill on the roads? Like as if most traffic in Aspendell isn’t currently tourists…

    I like the way affordable housing impacts wasn’t listed, because most everyone up there is a second home owner anyway.

    Grow up Aspendell. You aren’t special.

  2. Maureen Elizabeth McClain October 14, 2019 at 6:32 pm #

    I cannot see why this is not a conflict of interest. The county makes the revenue from short term tentals, why would they vote against it? Of course it is a done deal.

  3. Joann Lijek October 13, 2019 at 2:34 pm #

    None of the Short term rental stuff is a done deal. At next Tuesdays Board of Supervisors meeting they are going over revised rules for the ordinance. Anyone who is against the current ordinance should familiarize themselves with what is currently there and propose what they would like to see in a revised ordinance in letters and emails to the supervisors. It would probably also be helpful to make your opinions known to the Planning dept, especially if you are having problems with a rental.

    I for one would like to see all non-hosted rentals outlawed. I would ACTUALLY like see see all short term rentals outlawed, but I doubt that will happen. I think the best one can hope for is that non-hosted rentals will be eliminated. For those who don’t know the difference, a hosted rental requires that the property rented is the owner’s primary residence.

    The statement that the train has left the station is that those permits granted now will stand, because that is what the current ordinance allows, so it is important that the ordinance be changed, and for that to happen the public needs to make their opinions known. Ask the Planning Department to put you on a notification list so you can attend meetings or at least write letters.

    Remember, your neighborhood may be next.

  4. Love Your Neighbor October 12, 2019 at 6:15 am #

    Another example of how profit will always Trump all other values.

    Make your money Mr. Lozito, make your money.


Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.