On Tuesday, it is my intent to introduce an amendment that would remove the amortization of Type 2 STRs and bring the question back at the conclusion of the moratorium period.
While I am not completely sure as to whether or not Type 2 STRs truly belong in the middle of neighborhoods, there are three major reasons I believe this is the correct course for us at this time.
1. We have spent a lot of time on this issue, primarily beefing up enforcement tools and rules so that our Code department can go after the "bad actors." There appears to be some evidence that this is working, as several of the worst actors have since sold their properties, and several other properties either were denied licenses or lost their license to operate. This is consistent with the middle-ground goal that I defended from the dais last fall.
2. I am concerned that banning Type 2 STRs will not stop them from operating. Instead, I believe it will cost the city money and control over such properties. We have tools in place, such as the 3% cap per census tract, which allow us to maintain an amount of control over the proliferation of these properties and we are have additional rules to limit clustering. There is clearly some demand for this product. As long as that demand exists, property owners will find ways around a ban, and that could undercut our ability to limit Type 2s. At this point, I think we are better off regulating them and strictly enforcing our rules.
3. The moratorium in place will limit present expansion and, after the year review, an extension of limiting new Type 2 STRs could be discussed in the context of how other cities are doing with attempts to shut them down.
I have a tremendous amount of respect for advocates on all sides, and I think we, as a community, have come to a place where we all agree that "bad actors" can't be tolerated. The willingness of homegrown companies like HomeAway to help us weed out the bad actors can help us control this industry for the benefit of all involved.