Short Term Rentals (like Airbnb) have been BANNED!
Real Estate Broker · Cleveland Dayton Cincinnati Toledo Columbus & Akron, OH · Member since 2013 · 30k+ posts · 20k+ votes
Recently two of the higher end suburbs (Broadview Heights & Seven Hills) in the Cleveland market banned short term rentals.
I never got involved in the Airbnb craze myself. Not my business model. I've got a ton of plates spinning running all of my other businesses so I never saw the need to get into it. Money seemed low for the high level of labor and risk involved.
I've spent a pretty decent chunk of money on my house. I also live in one of the higher end suburbs in the Cleveland area. I would be the 1st one in city hall trying to get it outlawed in my city if my neighbors where using their homes as hotels &or Airbnb's.
My $0.02 is that short-term rentals are ultimately about property rights.
As the owner of a property, I believe that I should have the right to use it in the way I see fit so long as it does not bring harm to the surrounding community.
Naturally, opponents of STR's argue that AirBnB harms communities, but I think that is a thin argument because it's based on peoples feelings & perceptions vs. provable facts.
Banning STR's is a use of police power to restrict rights without compensation that should make people concerned. It may be your rights that the city or state comes after next.
The dilemma is that one person's business opportunity is another person's public nuisance. Code enforcement people are caught in the middle. While some code enforcement actions may be motivated by individual prejudice, others take place only after a nudge from complainants (the story makes the evening local news).
When I owned my home (which was quite old and grandfathered from most code upgrades), I was advised to get any problems fixed by a licensed contractor, but never contact the city myself over the matter. City inspectors may be professional, but they have a way of erring on the side of caution when they do their jobs.
As a user of AirBnB, I don't get what all the hoopla is about. Most people rent them to save money over a hotel and it is more private than a hotel. You usually have access to a kitchen to cook, etc.
From the comments above, it seems that there is association with AirBnB with low class social and economic status; that is very untrue. People tend to rent in areas they can afford so someone who is low class wouldn't be likely to be renting in a high class neighborhood. The higher class the neighborhood, the higher the rate. Any riffraff that exists most likely won't be paying those prices, they will be in the price range they can afford.
To even use AirBnB, you have to have a credit card, be registered, and there is a rating system. This isn't a pay by the night with cash hotel system. So every time you rent, you are rated by the property owner, and the renter rates the property owner and the room, etc.. It is actually a very cool way to travel and has some safety features built in.
Truthfully, the only reason they are being banned is because the cities aren't getting their outrageous 12+% hotel tax and zoning money, and they are mad about it.
I know San Fran banned them because there is such a shortage of property and people were buying property in the city to make into AirBnB's, thereby eliminating housing that people needed to live and work there. That I can understand, but we all know Cleveland doesn't have a shortage of properties. The poster of this string (James Wise) can attest to that.
If they are worried about zoning/sales tax or whatever, they should create some type of AirBnB license or whatever, so they can get their 2 cents of the pie; that's all they care about in the end.
If you think about it, it is very much like a person who rents a condo at the beach, are you against those too? It is not like running a hotel, it is very different. It is much more like letting a relative stay at your place while they are in town. You can't sell food at an AirBnB, you don't supply personal grooming essentials like a hotel, and at many AirBnB's (but not all), the owner is at the property at the same time as the renter.
I think they are a wonderful way to offer economical housing, and I think the cities are just mad cause they aren't getting a slice of that pie.
James Wise I come from Houston where there IS no zoning. That being said, no, I am not in favor of residential properties next to factories and refineries like we have here. But residential properties, no. It should be up to the owners as long as it doesn't produce a public nuisance. I'm actually looking to buy a small apartment complex here and perhaps use one of the units for AirBnB type revenue generation.
I think with good regulation, they can add something to a community. In my town, whole house rentals are not allowed, but individual rooms are as are 2nd dwelling units on a property, by definition that means they are smaller properties, not large houses. They allow locals to actually keep their homes because they bring in so much money. It also means that long term housing is not being taken off the market since the owner must live on site. And lastly, since the owner must live on premises, it means that the guests truly do become guest of the community, not random strangers walking into an empty house. Additionally, there is not enough lodging in our tourist town for all the tourists who come and spend a LOT of money, which feeds the economy. So they serve a good purpose for the local economy, too.
I've also seen some neighborhoods elsewhere gutted by Airbnbs. They bring in so much money and with little regulations have totally taken over since owners fare better moving elsewhere. Leaving the community with very few actual residents, so it just becomes a town of little hotel rooms and no locals! I think some reasonable regulation is very important, but outright bans seem over the tops in regards to government over reach. As with so many things, everything in moderation...
so Charlene McNamara is this something you personally have seen or is it just something you heard about online?
I used to work for a company who primarily marketed to short term renters and are very big into AirBnB. One of there properties went from making $18,000 annual long term to double short term. The wear and tear on the house was also significantly less.
Mind you, they also had a different property stay vacant for months.
I think it can work real well but you have to know the type of property/area that will work well short term.
My $0.02 is that short-term rentals are ultimately about property rights.
As the owner of a property, I believe that I should have the right to use it in the way I see fit so long as it does not bring harm to the surrounding community.
Naturally, opponents of STR's argue that AirBnB harms communities, but I think that is a thin argument because it's based on peoples feelings & perceptions vs. provable facts.
Banning STR's is a use of police power to restrict rights without compensation that should make people concerned. It may be your rights that the city or state comes after next.
Exactly. That was my first thought. Who exactly "banned" Air BnB? So the government is going to tell you how you can and can't rent out your OWN property? I don't know how everyone doesn't want to reduce or eliminate government altogether after something like this. This should really scare you.
Air b and B is short term and some have them in the house they live in. I have a large bedroom in my home that I rent out. I bought and paid for this house I should be able to have a guest or a few if I want them. So if they do not pay does that change every thing? I hope when folks have guests they are reasonably quiet , do not disturb the neighborhood and have plenty of parking that will not grieve any one.
This comment is the topic in the posts that were just before mine.
I think while everyone argues about the benefits and disadvantages of STRs, there is a very real opportunity to reinvent “Hotels”.
Lake Tahoe is currently in the throws of the STR battle with groups ready to grab their torches and pitchforks over the whole issue.
Meanwhile, there are extensive incentives and ways to build new large unit hotel rooms with kitchens and all the things people look for in an Airbnb type property. That is in one of the most regulated tourist markets too.
Sooner or later, people need to respond by smartly replacing the single room hotel model with better accommodations that suit the average travelers today. My only hope is that the long term vs short term battle doesn’t ruin whole economies before that happens.
South Lake Tahoe is now home of the $2,000 parking ticket for STRs. Wouldn’t you rather stay in an 1800sqft “hotel” room with a full kitchen and no chance of a $2,000 ticket?
Agreed....When my wife & I got married we did so in Florida. Our room was essentially a condo on the ocean. You could actually purchase some of the suites.... Full kitchen, living room, bedrooms etc.....This is the way to go. Tons of big skyscrapers on the ocean are setup like this. A mixture of apartments, condos & hotel rooms. Very cool. We don't really have much like it in Cleveland.
How do you know if someone is AirBnbing their unit unless it directly caused you harm? So if it isn't, then what business is it of yours?
Providing a safe and up to code unit for anyone in a space that can accommodate the number of residents is the only area government should be concerned about. And if the occupants of any rental are disrupting the quiet enjoyment of your property and of any common areas, then there needs to be protection against that. If you don't like what someone does in the privacy of their home or property just because it doesn't adhere to your comfort level, then move.
This is not about public safety or protecting people's property. It's about hotels and the hospitality industry starting to put pressure on politicians to protect their income stream.
FULL DISCLOSURE: I have two properties that are in communities that allow short term rentals. I have rented to AirBnb users and I have used AirBnb personally.
I agree with everyone that’s replies. We should be allowed to do what we want with a property. But you should not want to short term rent in a neighborhood. It’s not fair to the people that live there. Would you buy a house knowing the next door neighbor was airbnbing? How much do you like loud music and puke?
There is a difference between an “AirBnB” and a Vacation Rental.
I dont think i would view it any different than any other rental unit. There are noise ordnances in most munis. If someone is violating them then they can be cited like any other person.
"This is not about public safety or protecting people's property."
You are correct..... this is about community.
I want to know, make friends with and rely on them to be there when I need their assistance and vice versa. I want neighbours not a business next door. People that are going to contribute to the health and growth of my community not their business interests. Someone to watch my home when I am away and let my dog out when necessary. Someone whose kids will be playing with my kids. I do not want some sort of motel operation operating in my community with rotating strangers passaging through that have zero commitment to my community. I want to live in a community with community values not business values.
I agree @James Wise that operating a STR is just operating a hotel, although a single unit one. The entire purpose of zoning and planning in a community is to protect the quality of life for its residence. It is all well and good to argue property owner rights, but if you change the use of your property, it does affect your neighbor. When a neighborhood transitions to mostly SFR, it is no longer a residential neighborhood. Short term renters are not residents. The quality of a neighborhood is negatively affected.
A comparison to long term rentals is invalid. People in long term rentals are part of the community. Their kids go to school in the area and they build relationships with their neighbors. They are no different than an owner occupant, beyond their monthly payment going to a landlord instead of a bank.
Most cities have strict rules around what type of businesses can be operated in residential areas. They also restrict commercial development in residential neighborhoods. It is completely logical they would put restrictions on STR. It is simply a matter that regulations in most areas have not caught up with these new services. Just like Amazon evaded state sales taxes for years, STR rental services have been evading hotel regulations. They should be subject to the same zoning, tax and inspection rules as a hotel operator. Couldn't a hotel owner just argue "property owner rights" in their case too? They follow the rules and others are able to evade them by labeling their business a STR. You infringe on the rights of others when they are subject to different rules than you are.
I agree @James Wise that operating a STR is just operating a hotel, although a single unit one. The entire purpose of zoning and planning in a community is to protect the quality of life for its residence. It is all well and good to argue property owner rights, but if you change the use of your property, it does affect your neighbor. When a neighborhood transitions to mostly SFR, it is no longer a residential neighborhood. Short term renters are not residents. The quality of a neighborhood is negatively affected.
A comparison to long term rentals is invalid. People in long term rentals are part of the community. Their kids go to school in the area and they build relationships with their neighbors. They are no different than an owner occupant, beyond their monthly payment going to a landlord instead of a bank.
Most cities have strict rules around what type of businesses can be operated in residential areas. They also restrict commercial development in residential neighborhoods. It is completely logical they would put restrictions on STR. It is simply a matter that regulations in most areas have not caught up with these new services. Just like Amazon evaded state sales taxes for years, STR rental services have been evading hotel regulations. They should be subject to the same zoning, tax and inspection rules as a hotel operator. Couldn't a hotel owner just argue "property owner rights" in their case too? They follow the rules and others are able to evade them by labeling their business a STR. You infringe on the rights of others when they are subject to different rules than you are.
Sounds like @James Wise is gathering data for a future real estate venture. Or just engaging in a conversation to stir up a debate.
Sounds like @James Wise is gathering data for a future real estate venture. Or just engaging in a conversation to stir up a debate.
Would there be an issue with either of those?
Bed and Breakfast have been around forever. Now that someone has put Air in the equation there is an issue. Explain...........
Careful @Patrick, you might get James to start a campaign to ban old skool B&Bs LOL.
Why do we need the government involved in any of this to begin with? This comes down to property rights. An owner has a right to use his or her property in any way they choose as long is it does not harm the neighbors. If neighbors are harmed then they should prove the harm and seek compensation from the one who caused it. Take individual property owners to court on individual complaints, don't punish a whole market of potential landlords.
>An owner has a right to use his or her property in any way they choose as long is it does not harm the neighbors.
The statement is not accurate. When a purchase is made it has many items conveyed in the purchase. This can include things such as easements, mineral rights or the lack of mineral rights, and of course the zoning. Zoning plays a large role in the value of the property. Zoned residential has a traditional meaning that is being blurred with the advent of STRs. It was never the intent of zoned residential to include STRs that function similar to hotels (I am referring to non-owner occupied STRs). It is also unlikely that the zoning regulations/definitions would foresee the huge popularity of STRs to make it crystal clear that STRs are in functionality hotels.
The neighbors who have purchased in a residential zone, purchased with the expectation that they were in a residential zone and not a zone that would allow hotels or STRs. They have the right to expect the zoning to be as they purchased.
It would be similar to purchasing residential but a landfill is placed next door ignoring the zoning (extreme case to make the point).
We have 2 units of STR but they are both in an area that is probably greater than 90% STR. I realize it was not always this way but it is the way it is now. Even though we own 2 STR units, I would not want a hotel built by my house and using a house as a non-owner occupied STR is basically using a house as a hotel.
In the spirit of keeping the discussion fair, I'll point out that Dan has just compared a STR to a hotel, and to a landfill. It is neither.