Detroit City Council Cracks Down on Airbnbs

One of my neighbors runs an Airbnb from their home, and we have no complaints. You can't even tell that they have a rotation of overnight guests, as they sort of blend in with the revolving traffic of the neighborhood. And since they aren't renting out a number of rooms, they aren't using up a bunch of the dwindling residential parking our local commercial businesses seem entitled to use as their overflow. Although if several properties in the same area were doing this, I could see the potential problem.

It does seem rather sneaky on Councils part, the timing of this crackdown, with several new "boutique" hotels in the works that would be in direct competition with the hundreds of Airbnbs currently available. I don't have a problem with regulation, as I'd hate to see us go the route of so many cities that allow the use of housing that would normally go to long term renters or owners. But to tell someone who rents a single room out of their own property to paying guests overnight that they can't?

How do other Detroit residents feel about this? Have any of you had experience with Airbnbs living in other cities? Is there a bigger picture that we are missing here?

https://www.metrotimes.com/news-hits...go-into-effect

This is becoming a big issue everywhere in cities across the country.I would not be quick to question the city councils motives,they are actually trying to get a handle on it before it gets out of hand,like in the case of the pot dispensaries.Nice seeing them proactive.

In the 1990s in Orlando when the British pound was high they were buying up houses paying over market value because you could rent a 3 bedroom house out to other tourists for $1500 to $2500 a week,multiple family's would get together and split the costs.

First they implement a bed tax but then they outlawed them.

Why? Because it pushed locals out of the market and actually hurt established neighborhoods because you never knew who your neighbor was from one day to the next and they became targets because of the large amounts of cash they came over with.

My house was next door to one,6 Am Saturday morning they would be yelling and jumping in the pool,they were on vacation after all so it was party time all the time.

The problem and biggest argument with AirBnb is that if I own the property I should be allowed to do as I wish with it.

While I agree with that 100% we all know that is not the case.

If one places a bnb in a residential neighborhood then I should also be allowed to place a massage parlor next door,fair enough.

When somebody pays more for a house in a specific neighborhood because of its stability and percentage of home owners that should be respected and they have a legit claim to stop them,if you buy a house next to a train track you know it is going to be noisy beforehand this is changing neighborhoods after the fact.

Airbnb nation is doing a massive social media campaign with this now.

If you have a house that you live in and rent out a room for extra income that is one thing,if you have a house and pretend it is a hotel you are running a commercial enterprise,no homestead exemption,pay for a business lincese,be inspected by division of hotels,have the required safety equipment that is required when dealing with the public.

Older homes have 30" doors,change those to the 36" code,provide handicap excess,provide two means of exit per sleeping room in case of fire etc.

I can almost gaurentee one safety related death and the whole airbnb thing will implode,there are cases also where the guests chose not to leave and the homeowner had to go through the lengthy eviction process.

None of that really matters though because the core issue is owning property does not automatically give you the right to use it as you want outside of the laws set in place.

Remember months back where the girl moved to Detroit and was shocked when they told her she could not keep the goats in her back yard?

People come up with all of these newest and brightest ideas thinking that the generations before them were to stupid to come up with them,then they find out the real reasons why the idea did not exist and are shocked.

So far every city they have gone up against in pushing this has won their argument.

They are more lenient in tourist trap cities where hotels and such are in short supply but it is government and sooner or later they will regulate it to the point it is not profitable.

It is even hard to be in the gray erea with these because you are putting your business on the web which is advailable to anybody with prying eyes.

While living next door you may not have any complaints or issiues with it which is all well and good,but if you decide to sell and are required to disclose it how many potential buyers are going to have the same feelings?

I think that ADA could shut this down in a heartbeat if they pressed it,there is a guy here that makes a lot of money going into business and then sueing under the ADA act,no use in fighting it either you are in compliance or you are not and if you are dealing with the public ADA is federal so it opens up a whole can of worms.

Richard, from your post, I'm guessing that you are not a regular AirBnB user. Its a great experience, and 99% of AirBnB's do not harm the neighborhood. It is not a competition to hotels. Its an entirely different experience. Of course the hotels hate it. What a surprise.

Its a huge mistake to lump them in with hotel regulations. Should there be some inspections? Sure. Apply the same rules? No. Makes no sense. They are not hotels.

We will harm Detroit's renaissance by trying to kill what we don't understand.

I have no problem with AirBnb,the op asked for more information about it,I posted that it is a hot potato everywhere now.

The argument is based on it is my property and I should be allowed to do as I wish with it.

That is based on comments when AirBnb posts for support on social media but if one has a neighbor that does not keep their property up to code they will be quick to comment on it.

Why spend millions on demolitions and force people to fix their homes,anybody that owns property knows that you really do not own it to the point where you can do as you wish.

A lot of people look at like,wow cool I can just sign up and make bank without thinking of what is involved,guest trips and gets hurt and sues,insurance company says its commercial and not residential policy.

AirBnb is six letters and irrelevant ,the question that Detroiters have to answer is should it be allowed as a commercial enterprise in a residential setting.

If the city says yes and changes the zoning regulations to allow it how can do they do that without opening the door for other commercial enterprises in a residential zoning.

The first time one AirBnb is allowed into a neighborhood every other house automatically will increase in value based on the profit value of a AirBnb,good for the seller,bad for the adverage person looking for and a affordable house in a decent neighborhood.

That is why they seperate residential zoning and commercial zoning and do not have things like massage parlors,pot dispensaries,pig farms etc in residential zones.

What is wrong with keeping 6 or 7 pigs in my back yard,they do not hurt anybody.

But that is also why other cities are not allowing them while some do,in a specific section where future buyers are well aware of what is going on before hand.

But they were profitable when they were flying under the wire,people got greedy and now it is front and center in the governments eye and now it will be regulated to death and the very independent person that it helped to begin with will be forced out by big investors.

So now they need your support,the adverage person getting into it now has missed the boat.

It is a null argument that it is apposed by hotels and BNB,which was the same argument between food trucks and brick and mortar restaurants,they deal with a Totaly different client base and does not effect each other and end up complimenting verses competition.

A slap happy lawyer will go after the deep pockets,the city,AirBnb is the one that forced the hand,the city needs to cover its butt and now good or bad has to adress it.

A homeowner should be able to do as they see fit with their spare rooms and facilities. Renting is a different matter and the residential lease you sign is where most Airbnbers get into hot water - with the realtor, not the government. I'm pretty sure NYC had Airbnb shut down as a business operation a few years ago, but their hotel association is large and with deep pockets. A very good book was written on the topic of car-share, time-share, Airbnb, Uber, etc, called The Shared Economy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

Richard, from your post, I'm guessing that you are not a regular AirBnB user. Its a great experience, and 99% of AirBnB's do not harm the neighborhood. It is not a competition to hotels. Its an entirely different experience. Of course the hotels hate it. What a surprise.

Its a huge mistake to lump them in with hotel regulations. Should there be some inspections? Sure. Apply the same rules? No. Makes no sense. They are not hotels.

We will harm Detroit's renaissance by trying to kill what we don't understand.

---

There is a difference between someone renting out a room in a house or apartment, and an investor who rents an entire house out as a short-term rental. In the former there is a resident who rents part of the property to guests; in the later there is no resident, just transient occupants. These short-term house rentals are a huge issue here in Palm Springs.

Renting a house out on a short-term basis in a neighborhood zoned residential is quite simply inconsistent with the zoning. If 30 different people could rent a house for one day each in a month, how exactly is that different from turning the house into a hotel?

AirBnB's are particularly useful when there are no other hotel rooms available, particularly when you need one short-notice. This happened to us when we went to a wedding in Brooklyn. Our hotel was overbooked, and there were absolutely no rooms available in the borough, including bed and breakfasts or motels. AirBnB found a decent apartment for less than the cost of the hotel, and it was closer to the wedding.

An outright ban is counterproductive. If you are worried about people making their homes ad-hoc permanent hotels, then put a limit on how many days they can rent them out for per year. I think 30-60 would be fine.

The options are shared room,like a youth hostel of sorts,private room,or entire place.

I think if I was renting a room for extra income it would be to a roommate of sorts other then somebody different every day.

In 2003 I passed on a 60k house in the Bahamas,it now rents under Airbnb for 15,000 a week,I have not checked private room rentals there but in places in Orlando and now Tampa in a decent house you can get a roommate for $600 to $700 a month.

In a private house I am not seeing the profit aspect of a nightly room rental because unless there are no other options you really cannot charge more for a private room verses a hotel room where people are not in a shared dwelling.

Back in the day with Disney world there used to be cheaper mom and pop motels options,then Disney built low budget hotels on property and wiped out the mom and pops.

That is where this will end up going eventually.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DetroiterOnTheWestCoast

There is a difference between someone renting out a room in a house or apartment, and an investor who rents an entire house out as a short-term rental. In the former there is a resident who rents part of the property to guests; in the later there is no resident, just transient occupants.

---

Why is this a problem? Is it that they are 'transient occupants'? Do you discriminate on that basis? Or is there something about their behavior?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DetroiterOnTheWestCoast

These short-term house rentals are a huge issue here in Palm Springs.

---

Yeah, Tell us about that. What I know is: 1) Hotels loath the competition, as it helps keep rates unaffordable, 2) AirBnB increases inequality by helping landowners make money, which drives jealousy, 3) AirBnB increases rents where rental housing is scarce, so killing them decreases rent in theory, 4) AirBnB drives economic activity into neighborhoods, including housekeeping, home renovation, home repair, restaurant traffic, at the expense of downtown areas. [[This last one should be noted in Detroit, as the 'hoods say they want economic help, but their city council would rather support Mike Ilitch than an industrious neighbor.)

I assume the Palm Springs issue is #3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DetroiterOnTheWestCoast

Renting a house out on a short-term basis in a neighborhood zoned residential is quite simply inconsistent with the zoning.

---

Zoning is a tool of white privilege to oppress, and it should be struck down as racist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DetroiterOnTheWestCoast

If 30 different people could rent a house for one day each in a month, how exactly is that different from turning the house into a hotel?

---

How about if 2 different people rent a house for one week and help bring expertise to the neighborhood urban garden? Or a young lawyer who recently graduated wants to visit real neighborhoods in 40 cities for 5 days each to really get to understand the challenges of urban life? What if a poor family has special dietary needs, and prefers renting a room with people who have a similar diet? Should all of these be swept away just because there are some uses you don't like?

^ only you can turn a Airbnb thread into it is the racist white mans fault.

So you would not have a problem if I bought the house next door to you and opened up a 24 hour sound system installation center,Ac DC at 3 am makes for good neighbors.It would be my property and my right to do as I wish.