To BnB or Not to BnB

Last February, the Austin city council voted to stop licensing short-term rentals (via AirBnB or similar services) of homes that are not occupied by the homeowner. This has led the Texas Public Policy Foundation to sue, saying this violates people’s property rights.

Members of the city council argued that unoccupied short-term rental houses often get turned into noisy, “party houses” and that the use of those homes for short-term rentals made housing more expensive for everyone else. The first point might be legitimate, but no owner or renter wants to see their home trashed and so it is likely to be self-policed. The second point isn’t legitimate at all; it is Austin’s over regulated land-use rules that make housing there unaffordable.
In addition, the lineup wholesale generic viagra will include highlights of six past Daytona 500 races and the ESPN Original Movie 3. This viagra the pill substance is classified as a sterol (a combination of steroid and alcohol). Finally yet importantly, online pharmacy sildenafil no one could be able to flourish in any job if he does not have any side effects), damiana (helps increase sexual activity) and many other natural supplements. ED patient must use this pill to buy sildenafil online valsonindia.com bring complete fun in their life.

As violations of property rights go, this one seems pretty mild compared to what happens in many other places or even in Austin. It is nice to see TPPF take action on this, but I’d like to see even more such lawsuits against such things as urban-growth boundaries, lengthy permitting processes, and stiff impact fees.

Tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

About The Antiplanner

The Antiplanner is a forester and economist with more than fifty years of experience critiquing government land-use and transportation plans.

7 Responses to To BnB or Not to BnB

  1. Frank says:

    “I’d like to see even more such lawsuits against such things as urban-growth boundaries”

    Austin doesn’t even have an UGB. What it does have is a 37.7% growth rate in the last decade. Additionally:

    “Austin ranked first among the 50 largest U.S. metros based on net migration as a percent of total population in 2015. In addition, 7.1% of Austin residents in 2014 lived elsewhere one year earlier. That is also the largest rate among the top 50 U.S. metros.”

    So demand has nothing to do with Austin prices. It’s a non-existent UGB driving uo Austin housing prices.

    Right.

  2. prk166 says:

    Demand and income growth are factors. But in the case, the reference by Mr. O’Toole isn’t to a UGB for Austin but it’s land use rules. They have 800+ pages worth of them.

  3. prk166 says:

    What gives me a chuckle over things like this is for so long one of the mantras has been smart growth and that we need more mixed neighborhoods. Now that progressive cities like San Francisco, Austin and others are getting those mixed neighborhoods via Air BnB and others, not everyone is so keen. One can see how that mixture of interests came together to create those separations in the first place.

  4. Frank says:

    “Demand and income growth are factors. But in the case, the reference by Mr. O’Toole isn’t to a UGB for Austin but it’s land use rules. They have 800+ pages worth of them.”

    800+ pages of land use rules is meaningless, especially when it’s not compared to other cities. Austin doesn’t have a UGB or inclusionary zoning, yet housing prices are skyrocketing in Austin.

    I don’t doubt that land use regs are a factor. But can anyone show that land use regs in Austin are a primary driver of housing prices? Seems more likely that the overwhelming factor in the Austin metro area is the fact that it’s added 50,000 residents per year since 2000. ZIRP has helped fuel that population growth.

  5. bennett says:

    As an Austin resident I feel obliged to comment. Austin, the most progressive city in the country “as long as it isn’t in my neighborhood.” Everyone loves living in the live music capital of the world, “but it sure is noisy.” Austinites like living near the hip corridors, “but we need to get neighborhood parking restrictions to keep people from parking on OUR street.” SXSW is so awesome, “but who want’s short term rentals full of bands from Canada? They might not be polite to the neighbors.”

    I hate that the council has approved this nonsense. I hate that they have the support of the worst NIMBYs in the country. Everybody want’s to be here because it so cool. Once they get here they want to keep the cool all to themselves, making it impossible to be cool. Keep Austin weird? More like keep Austin for yourself. Fucking assholes.

  6. mwbrady68 says:

    I try to avoid stereotyping people who think differently than I do, but to do so with Austin is like going around the Appalachians.

  7. C. P. Zilliacus says:

    The Antiplanner wrote:

    Members of the city council argued that unoccupied short-term rental houses often get turned into noisy, “party houses” and that the use of those homes for short-term rentals made housing more expensive for everyone else. The first point might be legitimate, but no owner or renter wants to see their home trashed and so it is likely to be self-policed. The second point isn’t legitimate at all; it is Austin’s over regulated land-use rules that make housing there unaffordable.

    I would think that the municipal elected officials of Austin have better things to do than this.

Leave a Reply