The morality of short term rentals

[Robert Frazier]

This is just a question I’ve been wondering as we deal with a huge housing crisis in our city.

is it moral to convert properties to short term rentals in a city with a deep housing crisis?


if a city has 500 units converted from long term to str, then the average occupancy is 70%, we have lost 54,000 nights of housing per year.


If vacancy is less than 1%, those 500 units of housing could be responsible for a significant amount of upward pressure on housing prices.

with the high cost of management for str, wouldn’t the world be better off with less of them?

[Bruce Woodruff]

Quote from @Aaron Gordy:

Right now, str is very good but that will change as the returns become less over time.

Correct - however the STR business is really still in it's infancy and will take many years to even slow down....

[Carolyn Fuller]

Quote from @Jarrod Kohl:

Quote from @Bruce Woodruff:

Regardless, that's a lot of vacant units, right? And the 'for sales' can become 'for rents', so that's really irrelevant.

Let's focus on getting the Govt out of the way so we can build more  - if really needed - not further restricting property owners when it's not even necessary...

I think this is the point that gets missed ALOT. People love to make landlords and/or STR operators the "bad guy" and ban the short term rentals (see Boston, Cambridge, Somerville) but when they make AirBNB the bad guy, they (gen pop and politicians) dont address the real problem which is no new construction and major limitations in zoning or redevelopment.

There is a way to have both STRs and a healthy housing market, but the problem is everytime someone tries to modify a dwelling or build a development all the NIMBYs pop up and kill it and then complain that rents and prices are going up.

 I agree that we need to build more housing, lots more housing, but I also think unregulated STRs are part of the long term housing crisis, as well. When Boston's regulations went into effect 3,000 units were dropped from Airbnb overnight and that was just in Boston! That is a lot of housing. That is definitely enough housing to count as part of the problem. 

[Bruce Woodruff]

Quote from @Carolyn Fuller:

I agree that we need to build more housing, lots more housing, but I also think unregulated STRs are part of the long term housing crisis, as well. When Boston's regulations went into effect 3,000 units were dropped from Airbnb overnight and that was just in Boston! That is a lot of housing. That is definitely enough housing to count as part of the problem. 

But once these 3000 units do what is necessary to become 'compliant', most go right back into the STR market, not helping the 'housing crisis' at all. So this is still really about building more affordable housing. Which means getting big Govt out of the way.

[Jarrod Kohl]

Quote from @Carolyn Fuller:

Quote from @Jarrod Kohl:

Quote from @Bruce Woodruff:

Regardless, that's a lot of vacant units, right? And the 'for sales' can become 'for rents', so that's really irrelevant.

Let's focus on getting the Govt out of the way so we can build more  - if really needed - not further restricting property owners when it's not even necessary...

I think this is the point that gets missed ALOT. People love to make landlords and/or STR operators the "bad guy" and ban the short term rentals (see Boston, Cambridge, Somerville) but when they make AirBNB the bad guy, they (gen pop and politicians) dont address the real problem which is no new construction and major limitations in zoning or redevelopment.

There is a way to have both STRs and a healthy housing market, but the problem is everytime someone tries to modify a dwelling or build a development all the NIMBYs pop up and kill it and then complain that rents and prices are going up.

 I agree that we need to build more housing, lots more housing, but I also think unregulated STRs are part of the long term housing crisis, as well. When Boston's regulations went into effect 3,000 units were dropped from Airbnb overnight and that was just in Boston! That is a lot of housing. That is definitely enough housing to count as part of the problem. 

 Yes, sorry not saying STRs don’t need any regulation. I wish Boston/Cambridge were a little more flexible but overall, sure regulations are fine. It was quickly becoming a problem in a lot of areas. I saw two small row houses in Beacon Hill bought and turned into basically a hotel. I’m not sure what the exact answer is for regulation, but I do know that it should be easier to build in Boston. (Or modify)

[Carolyn Fuller]

Quote from @Bruce Woodruff:
But once these 3000 units do what is necessary to become 'compliant', most go right back into the STR market, not helping the 'housing crisis' at all. So this is still really about building more affordable housing. Which means getting big Govt out of the way.

 Actually, it isn't big government that is in the way. It's our neighbors who are in the way. Zoning is all done at the local level which is why we all complain about NIMBYs. I'm 100% enthusiastic about more transit oriented housing and, yet, the first time I went to a meeting on the topic and discovered that MY backyard was being considered for that transit oriented housing, my eyes bulged. Ultimately, I became the poster child for YIMBYs but it was not easy. Try putting your arms around the thought of having a 19 story building go up in your backyard! It is NOT normal to embrace it.

I honestly don't think we can solve our housing crisis until zoning is no longer controlled at the local level and is given to big government to control for the benefit of all instead of the individual home owner. If zoning stays at the local level, NIMBYs will keep housing production from happening. NIMBYism is normal human behavior. YIMBYism is just plain not normal. 

By the way, Cambridge is the first city in the nation to successfully elect a super majority of city councilors who were willing to change our zoning laws to facilitate the production of affordable housing. Zoning reform, at least in Massachusetts, REQUIRES a super majority!!!! It's nuts! It meant that even in Cambridge, there was blood on the ground over this battle for AFFORDABLE HOUSING, the holy grail in my fair city! I was STUNNED when close friends spoke up at city council meetings. It always started with "I'm all for affordable housing but..." Not a single home owning friend of mine supported the Affordable Housing Overlay zoning reform bill. 

NIMBYism is NOT about big government. It is about individual interests versus community interests.

[Bruce Woodruff]

Quote from @Carolyn Fuller:

Actually, it isn't big government that is in the way.

I honestly don't think we can solve our housing crisis until zoning is no longer controlled at the local level and is given to big government to control for the benefit of all instead of the individual home owner.

Actually it is big Govt. Look at any city as an example. We're not talking about putting new housing in an existing neighborhood, (of course you'll get NIMBYS, as we should,) that's just stupid. Identifying an area appropriate for new housing and getting Govt to let business go to work is the answer.

And seriously, you want to relinquish local control to the State or Feds? I don't even know what to say.....jesus...

[Carolyn Fuller]

Quote from @Jarrod Kohl:

 Yes, sorry not saying STRs don’t need any regulation. I wish Boston/Cambridge were a little more flexible but overall, sure regulations are fine. It was quickly becoming a problem in a lot of areas. I saw two small row houses in Beacon Hill bought and turned into basically a hotel. I’m not sure what the exact answer is for regulation, but I do know that it should be easier to build in Boston. (Or modify)

It should absolutely be easier to build more housing all over this country but until our zoning laws are moved to the state or federal level homeowners everywhere will behave like normal human beings. That is, they will fight like heck to keep more housing from being built in their backyards. And, unfortunately, they seem to win those battles more often than not.

By the way, I think some of those Boston/Cambridge places are still being operated as virtually-run hotels. I've been doing a bit of local research and some of the big Airbnb companies like Sonder and Thatch (and maybe BlueGround), are still listing themselves on Airbnb, but as hotels. I'm assuming they actually have hotel licenses now. A local Central Square developer gutted and remodeled a building near us into a boutique B&B but it came online in the middle of the pandemic and he ran out of money. So he's sold it or leased it or something. Now Sonder is running it as a low-cost, no-frills, virtually operated hotel - no breakfast, no front desk, no coffee, no mini-fridge - just a bed and bathroom and a smart phone app, at half what a room in a nearby hotel would cost and even a bit less than we charge for our 1 bedroom apartment. It's an interesting business model.

[Carolyn Fuller]

Quote from @Bruce Woodruff:

Quote from @Carolyn Fuller:

Actually, it isn't big government that is in the way.

I honestly don't think we can solve our housing crisis until zoning is no longer controlled at the local level and is given to big government to control for the benefit of all instead of the individual home owner.

Actually it is big Govt. Look at any city as an example. We're not talking about putting new housing in an existing neighborhood, (of course you'll get NIMBYS, as we should,) that's just stupid. Identifying an area appropriate for new housing and getting Govt to let business go to work is the answer.

And seriously, you want to relinquish local control to the State or Feds? I don't even know what to say.....jesus...

Bruce, I live in a city. Trust me, it is my neighbors who fight tooth and nail against new housing in "appropriate" areas. Unless you define "appropriate" as at least a mile from anyone else, there will be a neighbor who is dead set against new housing being built.

Also, not sure why you would oppose new development in existing neighborhoods close to public transportation. I personally think they are the most appropriate places for new homes. New offices and labs are going up literally DAILY in my fair city, adding thousands of new jobs. It would be environmentally insane not to build more housing near transportation hubs that could get the workers to these new jobs without adding tons of traffic to our streets.

[Bruce Woodruff]

Quote from @Carolyn Fuller:

It would be environmentally insane not to build more housing near transportation hubs that could get the workers to these new jobs without adding tons of traffic to our streets.

Build them wherever they are wanted. Let the people choose.

Some people want to live in little boxes in a dirty city and take public transportation (filled with criminals and homeless) to their jobs.

Others want to live in a real house in a nice suburban or rural area and drive their personal vehicles to work, even it it's an hour or more commute each way.

None of our business ....let them choose....

[Carolyn Fuller]

I love it! Clearly we will need to agree to not agree. You hate cities and I hate suburbia. Although, some of my best friends are suburbanites. <smile> 

Some of us thrive living in vibrant, dynamic, ever changing cities. And fortunately for the environment a lot of those people are millennials who want to walk to work, play and shopping, or, at least take public transportation. Although there are also plenty of empty nesters who have been downsizing and flocking to the cities, as well. 

Our biggest housing crises are in urban areas. As many have pointed out in this thread, vacancy rates in a lot of urban areas are 1% and lower, putting huge upward pressure on rents. 

[Bruce Woodruff]

Quote from @Carolyn Fuller:

I love it! Clearly we will need to agree to not agree. You hate cities and I hate suburbia. Although, some of my best friends are suburbanites. <smile> 

Deal. Although I don't hate cities, and I don't live in the suburbs. I have spent many years in each, but neither was for me.

[James Hamling]

Quote from @Carolyn Fuller:

Quote from @Bruce Woodruff:
But once these 3000 units do what is necessary to become 'compliant', most go right back into the STR market, not helping the 'housing crisis' at all. So this is still really about building more affordable housing. Which means getting big Govt out of the way.

 Actually, it isn't big government that is in the way. It's our neighbors who are in the way. Zoning is all done at the local level which is why we all complain about NIMBYs. I'm 100% enthusiastic about more transit oriented housing and, yet, the first time I went to a meeting on the topic and discovered that MY backyard was being considered for that transit oriented housing, my eyes bulged. Ultimately, I became the poster child for YIMBYs but it was not easy. Try putting your arms around the thought of having a 19 story building go up in your backyard! It is NOT normal to embrace it.

I honestly don't think we can solve our housing crisis until zoning is no longer controlled at the local level and is given to big government to control for the benefit of all instead of the individual home owner. If zoning stays at the local level, NIMBYs will keep housing production from happening. NIMBYism is normal human behavior. YIMBYism is just plain not normal. 

By the way, Cambridge is the first city in the nation to successfully elect a super majority of city councilors who were willing to change our zoning laws to facilitate the production of affordable housing. Zoning reform, at least in Massachusetts, REQUIRES a super majority!!!! It's nuts! It meant that even in Cambridge, there was blood on the ground over this battle for AFFORDABLE HOUSING, the holy grail in my fair city! I was STUNNED when close friends spoke up at city council meetings. It always started with "I'm all for affordable housing but..." Not a single home owning friend of mine supported the Affordable Housing Overlay zoning reform bill. 

NIMBYism is NOT about big government. It is about individual interests versus community interests.

 Is there a way to negative vote? I would like to give 100 negative votes on this Big-Brother BS! 

So your saying the problem is people having authority and control over what happens to the areas of there homes, communities, and that everything would be so much better if Big-Gov could just ram things straight down peoples throats weather they like it or not because Big Gov knows best....... 

Apparently you missed the whole part of "WE THE PEOPLE".... 

Everything in this, makes my blood boil, it does. 

[Bruce Woodruff]

Quote from @James Hamling:

I honestly don't think we can solve our housing crisis until zoning is no longer controlled at the local level and is given to big government to control

Is there a way to negative vote? I would like to give 100 negative votes on this Big-Brother BS! 

So your saying the problem is people having authority and control over what happens to the areas of there homes, communities, and that everything would be so much better if Big-Gov could just ram things straight down peoples throats weather they like it or not because Big Gov knows best....... 

Apparently you missed the whole part of "WE THE PEOPLE".... 

Everything in this, makes my blood boil, it does. 

I hear ya Bro, it's the worst thing I've seen on these forums. These people don't get it.

[Joe Villeneuve]

Quote from @Carolyn Fuller:

I love it! Clearly we will need to agree to not agree. You hate cities and I hate suburbia. Although, some of my best friends are suburbanites. <smile> 

Some of us thrive living in vibrant, dynamic, ever changing cities. And fortunately for the environment a lot of those people are millennials who want to walk to work, play and shopping, or, at least take public transportation. Although there are also plenty of empty nesters who have been downsizing and flocking to the cities, as well. 

Our biggest housing crises are in urban areas. As many have pointed out in this thread, vacancy rates in a lot of urban areas are 1% and lower, putting huge upward pressure on rents. 

I knew somehow, some way, someone would enter the word "environment" into this discussion...even though it has nothing to do with it.  Oh wait, I bet it does, under the "5 steps to Kevin Bacon" rule.