Airbnb provides much needed income to a 1 income family, provides jobs and tourists that boost the citys' income. We have tried renting long term and not all renters are respectful - we end up having to pay to address trashing our property and pay lawyers to remove bad tenants so we end up with a loss. Airbnb guests are rated and usually are very respectful. If they are not, there are simple ways to address it.
I oppose any regulations on short term rentals. A Realtor with The Charles Reinhart Company for over 34 years, I have owned my property on Snyder since 2000. After a horrible tenant I turned my property into an Airbnb in 2018, I provide my guests with all the comforts of home in a fabulous location. My neighbors are thrilled that I turned my property into an Airbnb, their friends stay at my Airbnb when they are in town and I have had several repeat guests. I help families with children at Motts, families with family members that are going through treatment at U of M, families visiting from all over the world, with students at U of M. I feel that the short term properties are maintained better because the owner is constantly at the property. I feel the service that short term rental owners provide is unique and adds to the passion we all feel about our Ann Arbor community.
I oppose restricting STR in Ann Arbor. It provides less expensive short-term lodging for visitors/tourists and is a valuable way to offset extremely high property taxes. It also provides us with an income since we only have one salary in our family. AirBnB guests and hosts are rated, so in our experience they are more inclined to be respectful.
I oppose restricting STR in Ann Arbor, these are very helpful to offset the high taxes, the high cost of living.. I have stayed at many STR's and come across numerous people who have early retirement due to disability, teachers who dont need to work second jobs because of the additional income that STR's provide. STR's help to keep Ann Arbor as as an affordable middle class neighborhood where people of low, medium and high incomes can all live in harmony.
In contrast, the downside of STR's are so few that such a massive regulation is unwarranted and uncalled for.
I oppose restricting STR in Ann Arbor. Like many of the respondents I rent my house out at times through the year to offset the cost of taxes and maintenance to our house. This is an important source of income for us and will affect us financially if it is taken away.
It surprises me that the city is choosing Option 3, which is the most comprehensive regulation of short term rentals. This is not the message I heard from the attendees of the public meetings I attended last year. The comments seemed to be largely for little or no regulation, outside of a few comments about some very particular nuisance rentals. I believe these could easily be addressed without blanket regulations for all. When our 5 children moved out of the house we decided to try renting 2 of our empty rooms. We have enjoyed filling our empty space and meeting people from all over the world. We have never had a problem with noise, parties, or other concerns. We also enjoy using airbnb in our travels, since it offers a unique perspective on the community we are visiting. I like to think we have something to offer to those who visit Ann Arbor as well. In addition, renting our space has allowed us to offset the high property taxes we pay. I wholeheartedly oppose this measure.
While you're at it, can somebody on City Council please propose a ban or severe restrictions on loud, aggressive dogs? My neighbor has several dogs that are a nuisance 365 days per year, and one in particular is dangerous. As the owner of a house I rent out seven or eight weekends per year to make ends meet, I feel targeted by this proposal, while my neighbor is allowed to house an animal that aggressively charges the backyard fence and barks every time my wife, son, or occasional houseguests occupy our backyard or driveway.
STRs provide necessary, affordable options for so many people who visit A2 for a few days (e.g. visiting prospective students and their families; people attending conferences; visiting alumni; people with family members in the hospital). People have the comforts of home in convenient locations while home-owners are better able to afford the high cost of A2 living.
I do think it is critical that homeowners who offer STRs have strict rules so that neighbors are not disturbed. Empty apartments that are used pretty exclusively for parties do concern me – I imagine those must be a nightmare for a neighborhood. Look for solutions to problems that STRs cause; don't shut down the whole thing. STRs provide a great service both to Ann Arborites and its visitors.
We rent out our primary (only) residence during game weekends to help offset high property taxes. It is my strong belief that the option for families to rent out entire homes while visiting our community creates a marketplace for greater economic growth for the local economy, not just for those who are hosting rentals through AirBnB.
Oppose. This does not accomplish the goals it sets out to achieve. Ann Arbor will continually face housing challenges and high rental rates due to the transience of its population in a university town. Those challenges should be addressed holistically and not through a piecemeal approach that targets short-term rentals. The neighborhood impact of an Airbnb is on balance no more negative than, for example, housing rented to college students or other temporary residents.
I strongly oppose options 2 and 3 of this proposal. Option 1 is acceptable and appropriate to address all of the issues expressed in the report. Particularly concerning in the recomendations are references to airbnb potential negative impact on affordability. This is simply stated with absolutely zero supporting evidence or facts or data. An accurate assessment of affordability impact of airbnb can be found by following this link: https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2019/11/20/1950337/0/en/National-Report-Examines-Impact-of-Short-Term-Rentals-on-Housing-Affordability.html. Another argument that can be used to counter the "affordability" issue to counter the number of housing units being taken OUT of circulation by Airbnb is how many NEW units have been built in the same time frame or are currently being built. New housing available more than offsets any that are being taken out of circulation by Airbnb. Housing availability is not just a one-way street.
I am writing in opposition to the proposed over regulation of STRs.
Ann Arbor has always strived to be an inclusive, welcoming community. Unfortunately, by severely limiting the possibility of STRs as proposed, Council would be closing the city off to many who want to visit including many people who specifically seek out non-owner occupied STRs due to their availability, comfort, and privacy.
I encourage Council to take a more measured approach that addresses the concerns and respects the rights of ALL property owners. STR owners and Hosts aren’t greedy, out-of-state corporations only interested in profits. We’re a diverse, civically-minded and engaged group of constituents passionate about our community and want to share it with others by welcoming them to Ann Arbor through STRs. We ask Council to craft policy based on actual data and not conjecture, but with this recommendation, and the Carlisle Wortman report referenced, that simply isn’t the case.
I oppose the measure. Airbnb is a big help for housing affordability. It would be harder for me to be able to afford my home if I couldn't rent it out a couple times a year for big football games, U of M graduation, etc.
The sharing economy is also the best way for visitors to experience downtown given its limited space. Reducing the options negatively impacts us residents, our friends and family who visit, and our local businesses that benefit from the increased foot traffic.
The vast majority of US cities do not regulate Airbnb. Let's not be one of the few cities that struggle to see the benefits afforded to us by new technology.
I oppose this measure. While Ann Arbor is a great place to live, work, and play, it still faces stiff competition when attracting the best talents/professionals to its industries (startup companies, hospitals, universities, etc.) Our State’s dismal infrastructures, lengthy winter months, lagging population growth rate do not prove attractive to most newcomers; particularly when they are being recruited nationwide. Non-Owner-Occupied STRs afford these potential Michiganders the opportunity to discover the jewel we all call Ann Arbor in the weeks and months leading to their decisions to moving their families without the restrains and exorbitant cost of hotel rooms/environment. Non-Owner-Occupied STRs continue to showcase our beloved Ann Arbor in ways our limited hotels cannot offer. Nestled in the heart of the city, STRs offer visitors the chance to live, dine, walk the neighborhoods, partake of the summer festivals, live football weekends, and experience the city like any Ann Arborites.
I am opposed to this measure since the arguments against non-owner-occupied STR does not solve any of the issues the proposal means to affect. Most non-owner-occupied STR are in locations of the city that will not be placed into the hands of those needing affordable housing. Many individuals looking for non-owner-occupied are interested in a home-like environments over the sterile hotel environments and provides a better pricing option that then can revert to the tourists spending more in our local restaurants and shops. It is reasonable to consider more regulations of STR but to completely ban this popular form of tourism is naive and irresponsible for a city that thrives on those tourism and hospitality.
Oppose - STR provide out of town guests with many cost savings options.
Airbnb provides much needed income to a 1 income family, provides jobs and tourists that boost the citys' income. We have tried renting long term and not all renters are respectful - we end up having to pay to address trashing our property and pay lawyers to remove bad tenants so we end up with a loss. Airbnb guests are rated and usually are very respectful. If they are not, there are simple ways to address it.
I oppose any regulations on short term rentals. A Realtor with The Charles Reinhart Company for over 34 years, I have owned my property on Snyder since 2000. After a horrible tenant I turned my property into an Airbnb in 2018, I provide my guests with all the comforts of home in a fabulous location. My neighbors are thrilled that I turned my property into an Airbnb, their friends stay at my Airbnb when they are in town and I have had several repeat guests. I help families with children at Motts, families with family members that are going through treatment at U of M, families visiting from all over the world, with students at U of M. I feel that the short term properties are maintained better because the owner is constantly at the property. I feel the service that short term rental owners provide is unique and adds to the passion we all feel about our Ann Arbor community.
I oppose restricting STR in Ann Arbor. It provides less expensive short-term lodging for visitors/tourists and is a valuable way to offset extremely high property taxes. It also provides us with an income since we only have one salary in our family. AirBnB guests and hosts are rated, so in our experience they are more inclined to be respectful.
I oppose restricting STR in Ann Arbor, these are very helpful to offset the high taxes, the high cost of living.. I have stayed at many STR's and come across numerous people who have early retirement due to disability, teachers who dont need to work second jobs because of the additional income that STR's provide. STR's help to keep Ann Arbor as as an affordable middle class neighborhood where people of low, medium and high incomes can all live in harmony.
In contrast, the downside of STR's are so few that such a massive regulation is unwarranted and uncalled for.
Balaji
I oppose restricting STR in Ann Arbor. Like many of the respondents I rent my house out at times through the year to offset the cost of taxes and maintenance to our house. This is an important source of income for us and will affect us financially if it is taken away.
Short term rentals fill an unmet need in our community. I oppose Option 3 which does not allow vacation rentals that are non-owner occupied.
I oppose any regulations for short term rentals.
It surprises me that the city is choosing Option 3, which is the most comprehensive regulation of short term rentals. This is not the message I heard from the attendees of the public meetings I attended last year. The comments seemed to be largely for little or no regulation, outside of a few comments about some very particular nuisance rentals. I believe these could easily be addressed without blanket regulations for all. When our 5 children moved out of the house we decided to try renting 2 of our empty rooms. We have enjoyed filling our empty space and meeting people from all over the world. We have never had a problem with noise, parties, or other concerns. We also enjoy using airbnb in our travels, since it offers a unique perspective on the community we are visiting. I like to think we have something to offer to those who visit Ann Arbor as well. In addition, renting our space has allowed us to offset the high property taxes we pay. I wholeheartedly oppose this measure.
While you're at it, can somebody on City Council please propose a ban or severe restrictions on loud, aggressive dogs? My neighbor has several dogs that are a nuisance 365 days per year, and one in particular is dangerous. As the owner of a house I rent out seven or eight weekends per year to make ends meet, I feel targeted by this proposal, while my neighbor is allowed to house an animal that aggressively charges the backyard fence and barks every time my wife, son, or occasional houseguests occupy our backyard or driveway.
STRs provide necessary, affordable options for so many people who visit A2 for a few days (e.g. visiting prospective students and their families; people attending conferences; visiting alumni; people with family members in the hospital). People have the comforts of home in convenient locations while home-owners are better able to afford the high cost of A2 living.
I do think it is critical that homeowners who offer STRs have strict rules so that neighbors are not disturbed. Empty apartments that are used pretty exclusively for parties do concern me – I imagine those must be a nightmare for a neighborhood. Look for solutions to problems that STRs cause; don't shut down the whole thing. STRs provide a great service both to Ann Arborites and its visitors.
We rent out our primary (only) residence during game weekends to help offset high property taxes. It is my strong belief that the option for families to rent out entire homes while visiting our community creates a marketplace for greater economic growth for the local economy, not just for those who are hosting rentals through AirBnB.
Oppose. This does not accomplish the goals it sets out to achieve. Ann Arbor will continually face housing challenges and high rental rates due to the transience of its population in a university town. Those challenges should be addressed holistically and not through a piecemeal approach that targets short-term rentals. The neighborhood impact of an Airbnb is on balance no more negative than, for example, housing rented to college students or other temporary residents.
I strongly oppose options 2 and 3 of this proposal. Option 1 is acceptable and appropriate to address all of the issues expressed in the report. Particularly concerning in the recomendations are references to airbnb potential negative impact on affordability. This is simply stated with absolutely zero supporting evidence or facts or data. An accurate assessment of affordability impact of airbnb can be found by following this link: https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2019/11/20/1950337/0/en/National-Report-Examines-Impact-of-Short-Term-Rentals-on-Housing-Affordability.html. Another argument that can be used to counter the "affordability" issue to counter the number of housing units being taken OUT of circulation by Airbnb is how many NEW units have been built in the same time frame or are currently being built. New housing available more than offsets any that are being taken out of circulation by Airbnb. Housing availability is not just a one-way street.
I am writing in opposition to the proposed over regulation of STRs.
Ann Arbor has always strived to be an inclusive, welcoming community. Unfortunately, by severely limiting the possibility of STRs as proposed, Council would be closing the city off to many who want to visit including many people who specifically seek out non-owner occupied STRs due to their availability, comfort, and privacy.
I encourage Council to take a more measured approach that addresses the concerns and respects the rights of ALL property owners. STR owners and Hosts aren’t greedy, out-of-state corporations only interested in profits. We’re a diverse, civically-minded and engaged group of constituents passionate about our community and want to share it with others by welcoming them to Ann Arbor through STRs. We ask Council to craft policy based on actual data and not conjecture, but with this recommendation, and the Carlisle Wortman report referenced, that simply isn’t the case.
I oppose the measure. Airbnb is a big help for housing affordability. It would be harder for me to be able to afford my home if I couldn't rent it out a couple times a year for big football games, U of M graduation, etc.
The sharing economy is also the best way for visitors to experience downtown given its limited space. Reducing the options negatively impacts us residents, our friends and family who visit, and our local businesses that benefit from the increased foot traffic.
The vast majority of US cities do not regulate Airbnb. Let's not be one of the few cities that struggle to see the benefits afforded to us by new technology.
I oppose this measure. I like the diversity that Airbnb's bring to our city and I think that it is good for the economy.
I oppose this.
I oppose this measure. While Ann Arbor is a great place to live, work, and play, it still faces stiff competition when attracting the best talents/professionals to its industries (startup companies, hospitals, universities, etc.) Our State’s dismal infrastructures, lengthy winter months, lagging population growth rate do not prove attractive to most newcomers; particularly when they are being recruited nationwide. Non-Owner-Occupied STRs afford these potential Michiganders the opportunity to discover the jewel we all call Ann Arbor in the weeks and months leading to their decisions to moving their families without the restrains and exorbitant cost of hotel rooms/environment. Non-Owner-Occupied STRs continue to showcase our beloved Ann Arbor in ways our limited hotels cannot offer. Nestled in the heart of the city, STRs offer visitors the chance to live, dine, walk the neighborhoods, partake of the summer festivals, live football weekends, and experience the city like any Ann Arborites.
I am opposed to this measure since the arguments against non-owner-occupied STR does not solve any of the issues the proposal means to affect. Most non-owner-occupied STR are in locations of the city that will not be placed into the hands of those needing affordable housing. Many individuals looking for non-owner-occupied are interested in a home-like environments over the sterile hotel environments and provides a better pricing option that then can revert to the tourists spending more in our local restaurants and shops. It is reasonable to consider more regulations of STR but to completely ban this popular form of tourism is naive and irresponsible for a city that thrives on those tourism and hospitality.