jpo's Italy thread brought this to mind. There were comments made in that thread about popular tourist cities being hollowed out of local residents as wealthy investors buy up residential property to use as STRs.
This is a bit of a hot button topic locally. Our province recently banned STR's in most jurisdictions. Well, not an outright ban, but they banned it for non-principal resident use, and introduced a laundry list of rules and regulations that make it essentially financially unfeasible to use platforms like Airbnb, VRBO etc. The penalties are steep, and the province has recently posted a job for an illegal short term rental officer who will scour the internet
On one hand, it seems like no regulation of these platforms leads to the above consequence of locals being priced out of their areas in popular destinations. What we saw locally was that property value spiked due to the increased profitability in STR as opposed to LTR. If a 1 bedroom condo could rent for $2000/mth in the long term market, with all the risks associated with having long term tenants and their protections, that condo would only be worth so much. But, if you could bring in $3500/mth on that same condo with STR, and not have to deal with legal tenancies, all of a sudden that condo has a lot more value, and investors are willing to pay more for the unit. There are large buildings in Vancouver that have maybe a hand full of actual residents, while the rest of the units are all investor held as AirBNBs. This is obviously a problem, especially considering many of the condos were once the stepping stone in to full house ownership. Now they are priced out and that first step of financial security is gone for young people.
On the other hand... I feel like if I want to rent out my house for a month while our family is out of town I should be allowed to without having to apply for a business license and go through the tedious processes laid out by our local governments. I also feel bad for people who bought condos in buildings specifically built and zoned for STR, who are now holding assets that are worth a fraction of what they paid, as most of these units are too small to be desirable for long term living. They aren't moving on the real estate market, and not many people are interested in renting them long term. I feel like the approach our government took was too heavy handed.
Personally, I love using AirBNB when I travel. I feel like hotels are often not in an area I want to stay in, I don't want to pay for a shitty pool, a conference centre I'll never use and a mediocre restaurant on the main floor, and so on. I find I can get a lot more value out of staying in an AirBNB.
So, I'm kind of torn on the issue. I understand the need to make sure AirBNB's and VRBO's don't completely hollow out tourist areas and contribute to driving housing prices skyward, but I also appreciate the flexibility they provide when travelling for work or pleasure. I'm curious to hear from other's here who also live in tourist areas about how STR's are impacting your city, economy, and how you feel about regulating their use in general.
Long Chile was a silly place.
This is a bit of a hot button topic locally. Our province recently banned STR's in most jurisdictions. Well, not an outright ban, but they banned it for non-principal resident use, and introduced a laundry list of rules and regulations that make it essentially financially unfeasible to use platforms like Airbnb, VRBO etc. The penalties are steep, and the province has recently posted a job for an illegal short term rental officer who will scour the internet
On one hand, it seems like no regulation of these platforms leads to the above consequence of locals being priced out of their areas in popular destinations. What we saw locally was that property value spiked due to the increased profitability in STR as opposed to LTR. If a 1 bedroom condo could rent for $2000/mth in the long term market, with all the risks associated with having long term tenants and their protections, that condo would only be worth so much. But, if you could bring in $3500/mth on that same condo with STR, and not have to deal with legal tenancies, all of a sudden that condo has a lot more value, and investors are willing to pay more for the unit. There are large buildings in Vancouver that have maybe a hand full of actual residents, while the rest of the units are all investor held as AirBNBs. This is obviously a problem, especially considering many of the condos were once the stepping stone in to full house ownership. Now they are priced out and that first step of financial security is gone for young people.
On the other hand... I feel like if I want to rent out my house for a month while our family is out of town I should be allowed to without having to apply for a business license and go through the tedious processes laid out by our local governments. I also feel bad for people who bought condos in buildings specifically built and zoned for STR, who are now holding assets that are worth a fraction of what they paid, as most of these units are too small to be desirable for long term living. They aren't moving on the real estate market, and not many people are interested in renting them long term. I feel like the approach our government took was too heavy handed.
Personally, I love using AirBNB when I travel. I feel like hotels are often not in an area I want to stay in, I don't want to pay for a shitty pool, a conference centre I'll never use and a mediocre restaurant on the main floor, and so on. I find I can get a lot more value out of staying in an AirBNB.
So, I'm kind of torn on the issue. I understand the need to make sure AirBNB's and VRBO's don't completely hollow out tourist areas and contribute to driving housing prices skyward, but I also appreciate the flexibility they provide when travelling for work or pleasure. I'm curious to hear from other's here who also live in tourist areas about how STR's are impacting your city, economy, and how you feel about regulating their use in general.
Long Chile was a silly place.