Slashdot Mirror
Detroit Quietly Bans Airbnb (curbed.com)
A new zoning ordinance that quietly went into effect this week has residents trying to figure out what comes next for Airbnb's presence in Detroit. Many hosts have received notices that the city has outlawed Airbnb for R1 and R2 zoning. Curbed Detroit reports: The new zoning ordinance apparently went through the Planning Commission and City Council in 2017, and went into effect this week. The text added to the amendment states: "Use of a dwelling to accommodate paid overnight guests is prohibited as a home occupation; notwithstanding this regulation, public accommodations, including bed and breakfast inns outside the R1 and R2 Districts, are permitted as provided in Sec. 61-12-46 of this Code." The vast majority of Airbnb units in Detroit are in R1 and R2 districts. These do not include places like lofts, apartments, or larger developments. Airbnb has issued a statement saying: "We're very disappointed by this turn of events. Airbnb has served as an economic engine for middle class Detroiters, many of whom rely on the supplemental income to stay in their homes. We hope that the city listens to our host community and permits home sharing in these residential zones."
Well there goes the big vacation I had planned for beautiful downtown Detroit..
Wherever will I stay when I visit "The Paris of the Midwest"??? Dearborn???
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
I don't like AirBnB. They drive up home prices and contribute to making home ownership unaffordable. They make it practical for investors to 'park' their money into real estate and keep houses off the market. There's a great case to be made for banning them in any competitive housing market
But isn't Detroit the furthest thing from a competitive housing market? Then again, while a lot of the city is in ruins for all I know the number of actual livable houses might be smaller. Lord knows nobody's going to build there.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Detroit has 31,000 empty houses. Wouldn't it just be cheaper to buy a house to stay in for a few days and burn it down or something when you're done with it?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Better known as 318230.
Where does the city get the authority to tell people that they are not allowed to rent out their homes?
According to the American theory of governance, a government only has authorities that are delegated to it by The People. Well, nobody in Detroit ever had the authority to dictate whether a private individual could rent out his home, so there's no way that anybody was ever able to delegate to the city such an authority.
Whence comes this authority, I ask. WHENCE?!
"Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun" -- Mao Zedong
The reality is that they can do anything they damned well please until and unless someone with more guns either convinces them to, or makes them through force, stop. It sucks and puts people in general in a position with no really "good" choices, but there it is.
It's bad enough when those in power are generally relatively indifferent, but when they become more aggressively authoritarian, then the really bad shit starts. I think we're at the beginning of, or nearly so, of the second stage...if not already well on our way.
I don't have any answers, all I can advise is to be certain of your principles by doing your own homework and not blowing it off or taking other people's opinions as your own, and stick to those principles *especially* when doing so may be really hard or unpopular to do.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
nobody in Detroit ever had the authority to dictate whether a private individual could rent out his home
Sure they did. They had that authority over their own homes, which they voluntarily ceded to the city whenever they gave it the ability to zone. Whether via its charter or subsequent legislation, that zoning authority would have come from the people themselves, and once you establish a city with the ability to zone, you necessarily also grant them the authority to restrict commercial activities in residential zones, which is exactly what they're doing here.
It's the same principle that allows HOAs and the like to establish deeds and covenants that restrict these sorts of practices. As a homeowner, you agree to abide by those deeds and covenants when you enter the neighborhood, thus ceding your authority in that area to the HOA. In my area, quite a few of the neighborhoods have restrictions on how many unrelated people are allowed to be under one roof, specifically to prevent the 70,000 college students we have in town from turning family-friendly neighborhoods into student housing.
If you own property to rent out, you are not poor.
-Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
A property should be able to do most anything they want with their property, including deriving profit from it as much as possible, that's a reason you OWN property in many cases.
So I'll buy the house next to yours and open a disco. I can do "most anything I want", right? During the day, it will be an auto-repair shop, with vehicles pending repair parked in all the on-street parking. If you are in the right state, I'll also operate a dispensary and grow operation.
Zoning laws exist for a reason. Residential is residential, not commercial, for a reason. If you own a house you might appreciate that differentiation.
that's a reason you OWN property in many cases.
That's not the main reason most people own residential property, especially R1 or R2. They own it to live there. That's why it is single and two family zoned. And they want to be able to sell it for a reasonable price when they move away and not have to take a loss because the next door neighbor is operating a business next door.
and there are ALWAYS winners an losers in life.
Some of the "losses" is living in a residential zone and living by residential zoning rules. Although most people would consider it a win considering property values.
Agreed! I mean, who needs clean water!?
IANAL, but I don't think the property owners gave up any rights--they did not have the rights to begin with. Property ownership in the United States is fee simple. Under fee simple, the property owner does not have ultimate ownership and the state has a superior claim (allodial title).
They consented to it when they bought a house in an area that fell under zoning laws.
Real estate always comes with various strings attached. It's the buyer's duty to figure out what those are before they buy.