Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutShortTerm Rental Survey Results as of 5-10-23 Have you personally experienced negative or positive impacts from Shor t Term Rentals in your neighborhood? Please list what positive and/or negative impacts you have experienced. Haven’t noticed We have one next door. No issues, but would prefer a long term renter or homeowner instead. Would like neighbors. Yes My wife and I have lived in Danby for over 50 years, we've raised our family here, my son still lives in Danby and my daughter lives down the road in Candor and we have never once heard about any problems on this issue. I bet most people never even knew there were 91short term rentals. No No No, Have not. P I have experienced positive effects only. It’s great to welcome guests from all over the world to our area. It is great for the community and for our family. We have been welcoming people here for over 30 years. No, I haven’t been affected by short term rentals. I have not been personally affected by short term rentals. Positive- Have rented a short term rental near our home to allow out of town family members to stay nearby to us when visiting. Negative- limited housing stock to consider purchasing No No We currently manage an Airbnb outside of Danby. Having the flexibility to sometimes rent that space, sometimes use it for ourselves, allows us additional income that helps our family. It is very important to us that we are able to utilize the full benefit of the space we own. Not yet as the person on our street hasn't started renting out yet. In principal I don't have an issue with short term rentals. But I would like to point out that they remove inventory from the residential housing market, and this impacted our house purchase price last year and continues to make it hard for people who want to live in Danby/Ithaca to buy or rent (long-term) in the area. As Ithaca and Cayuga Heights are strictly limiting numbers of short term rentals it is likely to become a bigger issue in Danby and it would be prudent to address. There is an attempt to turn a single family dwelling in my neighborhood into an STR/tourist home. This was misrepresented during initial construction and has created significant discontent among neighbors given the unclear and unenforceable rules surrounding these types of properties. The towns failure to define and interpret the requirements clearly is introducing confusion among homeowners as to the expectations of such properties. The towns attempt to better define STRs is welcomed. Short-term rental is a good thing for the town of Dandy. It helps the residents pay their bills as well as allows others to enjoy our town. Getting rid of short-term rental or making it more difficult for people to do short-term rental will have a negative impact on the town. People won't be able to enjoy its natural beauty without it. Dandy is a beautiful town that needs to be shared and enjoyed with others. If it is regulated that would be more work for the town to try to keep up with as well as cost the town more money which it does not have. Short-term rental also encourages the homeowner to have a more aesthetically pleasing outside and inside of their home making our town look better. No No impact No negative impacts No Have not experienced negative or positives in my neighborhood. If my neighbor's are renting out a room or their whole house, I haven't noticed or been bothered in any way. I have not (but I will, one way or the other). No They’ve all been positive. Respectful individuals abiding by rules and finding safe places to stay. Not yet, but I expect too soon after one house on my street, who plans to rent out 5 out of 7 bedrooms, was recently approved as a tourist home / hotel. None that I know of. I think all our neighbors are full time residents. I have not experienced any issues from short term rentals. I don't think the town should be regulating this. People should be allowed to derive income from their properties by whatever means works best for them. I also think having tourists visit our area is only positive, as it helps local businesses thrive, helps people have employment, and provides revenue to our local parks etc. No No negative impacts, don’t apply any additional regulations they aren’t needed. Stop looking for an issue where none exists No No Negatives at all. Family members who came to visit were happy to be able to stay locally and not in a hotel setting. They are an important opportunity to bring business revenue to the town I like meeting new people and am happy if my neighbors have short term rentals. We have a Short Term rental property across the street and have never experienced any negative impact even when a large event (a wedding, I believe) was held there No. While I know of one nearby, I only know because the owner told me. Otherwise, I would not even know. Only positive- over 2 years of renting and we have had wonderful guests who have been very respectful. They also enjoy visiting the area and spending time here. neither. I don't discourage my neighbors from bettering their properties or their positions via the property they've paid for and occupied Nothing positive or negative to say I notice when places on my road are rented but have had no issue. N/a No impact Positive. Increased wellbeing for homeowners how use short term rentals to generate income who would not otherwise be able to afford their home or farm. Sense of pride that our community is one where guests can relax and enjoy the area. Sense of security knowing that if needed, myself or my neighbors could chose to create a short term rental to generate income. I have neither had positive or negative experiences with STR in my neighborhood. positive - visiting family was able to stay nearby in a wonderful home. None none N/A The rental brings in business and provides income to homeowners. I have not experienced any negative impacts. I have not experienced any negative impact with short term rentals Only positive ones. We rent two tents out on our property as a side business for our family. Also, our main business (South Hill Cider) benefits from more vacationers by having STRs nearby. No I had to leave the place I grew up in because of how badly the already unaffordable housing market there was impacted by short term rentals. No Never No impact negatives. house in the neighborhood rented out with loud noises late at night and drunken driving in a residential neighborhood. Not every time, but often enough to be noticeable No N/A Not much of that in my neighborhood, and no discernable effect for the little that takes place N/A No I have not experienced either. I believe we have only had limited short term rentals in our neighborhood (ie graduation weekend) extra traffic and a few folks that have trespassed No NO There is already a housing shortage in the Ithaca area for people who want to live here full-time. So I am frustrated that so many people buy extra houses specifically for the purposes of renting them out, therefore taking those houses off the market for people who need places to live. This lower housing supply then leads to higher prices for what's left. Short term rentals provide an alternative income source for residents, contribute to the touristy community, and allow the community to express itself and be welcoming to others. If someone lives out of town or is not a resident on the property they are renting, they may not be as invested in the community and may be extra focused on profit versus the the other beneficial contributions these rentals can offer. n/a Short term rentals need to be regulated by the Town in order to mitigate the impact of selfish individual property owners who prioritize making money despite the concerns of their neighbors. no Lack of permeant residents impacts closeness of community and volunteer availability Lack of transparency in the process and little to no consideration of the impacts to adjacent property owners. A land owner can initiate a short term rental operation without notifying neighbors and without consideration of potential negative impact to property values of adjacent properties. Neighbors have had good financial services with short term rentals-- very positive. It has allowed us to utilize a second home on the property, and provided us with a modest income, greatly effecting our standard of living. It provides tourists a unique environment to stay and in general has not negatively effected our property or neighborhood. Having STR units available in Danby is a net positive. It allows residents to find near-by accommodations for visitors in Danby's pleasant rural setting. no To date, I have had only positive experience airbnbing an upstairs apt at my home. It was only from May to Oct and mostly families, sometimes groups of friends. I was always on-site. I do think if someone is absent and renting out a whole house for more than 4 months/year they should register so the town can track trends. And if the house is being rented to groups of over 5 people with close proximity to neighbors who could be affected by traffic, cars, noise etc there should be ways to contact the owner if issues arise. 30 min is a bit tight though. none none no impacts No, no impacts I'm aware of. Don't always know whether short term housing is located... None. We should be sure that no state or county regulations govern this already before creating one in the town that "reinvents the wheel." Was pleased to hear that friends from out of town were able to find lodging nearby in Danby for 2-3 nights. No negative experiences. Short-term rentals take month-to-month rental property away from the market. This pushes month-to-month prices up for rental and increases prices from those looking to purchase homes. This has a significant negative impact on our community. Danby residents who do not own their homes will face inflated rental prices that force them to move because landlords are choosing to convert their long-term rentals into short-term rentals. This can also make it more difficult for people to buy a home in our areas. We know that Ithaca (and many other cities) have restricted short-term rentals, this will push the short-term rental problem onto the neighboring communities around Ithaca, such as Danby. Short-term rentals are removing houses from the property market and diminishing our communities, altering the community atmosphere and character of our neighborhoods. It will change the feel of our neighborhood with a revolving door of strangers living in a short-term rental. Dandy township needs to put rules in place and enforce these rules to limit short-term rentals. A limit should be placed on the number of days (such as 30 or 60 days) a short-term rental can be rented out per year. This needs to be enforceable by the township. No negative impacts experienced. Some positive impacts noticed: Neighbors can afford to stay in the neighborhood without having to subdivide or develop their land- due to short term rental income All positive! 1. There's no lodging near us except STR's! 2. We've rented a neighbor's AirBnb apartment ourselves and loved it! 3. We can't afford our taxes on our dream without this supplemental income. 4. We've gotten to know neighbors better as they love renting our vacation home. Only positive! We have personally enjoyed the places we've stayed at, and one time stayed at another AirBnb in danby! We've done this business for 10 years now - NOT a SINGLE compliant from a neighbor - not one! families often leave staying " this is the BEST family time we've ever had." In 2013, our 1st year, a wealthy family from CA stayed. Her mother donated the funds for the Hockett Recital Hall. The step father said, "We've been all around the world with the family and this was the absolute best time we've ever had." Sadly, 3 weeks later he died of a heart attack surfing. WHY would you want to diminish these beautiful human experiences? WHY?? No. There is uncertainity around the property directly next to us and I assume it is a being used as such. It is not the ideal situation and contributes to the housing crisis in our area if so. But again, I am not certain that it is the case. No no Positive! Without going into personal detail. My current location became vacant. On a single person's income I could not afford retaining but for a short term rental. You people act like everyone has limitless resources AND because someone decides there could be an issue you jump on it, expend all these resources while NO ONE in my neighborhood has reliable internet. Where is the house to house survey on that? Bartos claimed he was doing it at a cost & I have heard the results. Lots of neighbors doing it for years. All positive to me. Not a problem No I haven't! I moved to danby to get away from regulations! No, however we have friends who have had negative experiences and eventually sold their home to move away from the short term rental next door to them. I have only experienced positive impacts from STR in my neighborhood. Kim and Russ Nitchman live just down the street on 986 Steam Mill Rd. They have been lovely neighbors, and they also offer short-term rentals of their property. I've never been negatively impacted by any of their renters. Most of the time, I don't even know when they have renters in town. They have also rented to me and my extended family for family reunions. These have been wonderful occasions where we've made memories that I will treasure. I have three brothers, all of whom are married with children. It is very difficult to find a place for us to get together and have a place for everyone to sleep. I would be deeply saddened, for many reasons, if Russ and Kim were not able to maintain their business because of overregulation. My parents operate a full-apartment AirBnb in their home and they made significant improvements to their house and property with this additional income. Not yet No No impacts No impacts directly experienced. I have a neighbor or two who offer places for people to stay short term and it is a positive part of their lives and livelihoods. I don’t know if the Log Country Inn is considered a short term rental - it is a community asset and we have used their accommodations for mobility-limited family members on several occasions. I've personally experienced negative impacts from short term rentals in my neighborhood. For two years, there were two Tentrr (glamping) sites and a cabin by my house. The primary purpose of all three was to rent for money - no one lived on site; the owners lived out-of-town. Specifically there were these issues: 1. Litter. Several times, customers would throw or drop trash our their windows on the road, which I would pick up. 2. Excessive noise. Mostly (though not exclusively) from the cabin, including extremely loud fireworks. 3. Trespassing. Customers frequently got lost and ask directions; it's one thing to knock on the front door (which people did) but twice, customers walked around our house, one to the back to our house, peering in - very creepy, the second walked right into my mudroom, pounding on my back door. Another customer parked, not in our driveway, but in our space next to our barn for over an hour. Some other people let their dog run in our field. 4. Speeding. I'm on the dead end of a dirt road and the rental units were just beyond the dead end. Our property is on both sides of the road - the barn is across the road from our house. We're frequently going back and forth across the road, as are our chickens. Customers would fly up the road, driving over the speed limit. it has not bothered me in the past; I have made some extra money cleaning an Air BnB for the host (very sporadically, as needed) We lived in Boiceville for a year and there was an AirBnb rental there. On New Years eve someone rented it and threw a massive party. It was CRAZY. It sounded like a tsunami. There were people all over the community, breaking bottles, screaming, sitting on residents' cars, fighting one another. Police were called multiple times but the party goers kept returning. It was pretty scary honestly. There was massive damage done to the unit. Bruno was up in Geneva I think and not on premise. Aside from that, we have used AirBnbs all across Europe and also some in the USA. It's been a great way to travel, especially when you're with a larger family group and can rent out an entire house together. Call me crazy, but I was traveling with my husband, two babies, and my elderly parents, and I used to bring along a battery powered smoke/explosive gas detector just to be on the safe side. No No personal experience We have not experienced any negative impacts from Short Term Rentals in our neighborhood and we would happily welcome any of our neighbors to rent their property if they chose to do so. The positive impact? As STR hosts, we have made much-needed repairs and improvements to our property with the additional income and pay our ever-increasing property taxes. no impacts no significant impact n/a There were short term rentals close to us and IC students used them to have noisy/wild parties. not here We live on a dead end rural road that previously had 5 owner-occupied residences on it. Then a non-owner occupied duplex was built and that has changed the character of our neighborhood. Having a multi-unit dwelling of transitory renters instead of longterm owners has added an uneasy element on our street. Some of the things we most valued about our rural character were changed overnight. it will always be a shame. If you value our rural character, then protect it, do not commodify it. When it is gone, you can't get it back. We live on a dead end rural road that previously had 5 owner-occupied residences on it. Then a on-owner occupied duplex was built and that has changed the character of our neighborhood. having a multi-unit dwelling of transitory renters instead of longterm owners has added an uneasy element on our street. Some of the things we most valued about our rural character were changed overnight. It will always be a shame. If you value our rural character, then protect it, do not commodify it. When it is gone, you can't get it back. none Short term renters should have their dogs on leases! Residents should have the ability to have short term renters as long as minimum requirements are met so neighbors have no negative consequences. Negative: None Positive: 2 nearby rentals all provide welcome lodging for a family wedding in July 2023 No no no Positive experience. We have camped in a short term rental and loved it Tenwood is directly behind our property and they have always been great neighbors. They look after their property well and their guests never cause any problems. No - not here, but in an AirBnb I prefer not to be in a house with owner. I do believe that both owners needing to generate some income to meet rising costs and a need for affordable housing for this area exist and should be addressed in this area - close to downtown, yet rural, that said, I don't think that over regulation is needed or advisable for town of Danby harmony. I have not personally experienced negative or positive impacts from short term rentals in my neighborhood. No, School taxes are off the charts - people, in many cases, are just being entrepenureal and doing the best they can to get by. If this is becomming a problem, get Cornell to start to paying taxes. no No impacts in my neighborhood other than foot traffic. I would estimate we have HUNDREDS of short term rental visitors within 2 miles of us. Most are and will continue to be under the radar. Non short term renters have rights too. Laws are already in place. Use existing laws first. Wait and see if problems come. No. A neighbor has 2 tent platforms in summer but there is no impact on the neighborhood. I live down the road from Nitchman's Tenwood Lodge and Ive never noticed increased noise, litter, or traffic from their guests. In fact, I benefit from living near Tenwood! when my family from MI comes out for a visit, they're often able to stay there. Having my folks within a walkable distance is much more fun than having them book a hotel in town and need to drive back and forth every day of their visit. I get to show them what I love about living in danby, and we spend less time (and gas) in the car. We have more time together to explore the state parks, forests, and other unique natural features because of this arrangement. The Nitchmans are good hosts and neighbors, and I've recommended the Tenwood to others. I've also had friends stay at an AirBnb on Steam Mill road and the proximity meant we had more time to explore North County Trail! no No, we don't understand what the problem is that triggered this issue. Is it making low income housing unavailable? Noise? Unruly tenants? safety? (ie who ensures that rentals have working smoke alarms?) We have rented at Tenwood Lodge a couple of times and it has been so helpful to be able to have extended family nearby for holidays. They live in PA and our home could not accommodate 16 people. Tenwood let us enjoy the visit in comfort. Well maintained with clear rules set out in the lease. Echoing my husband's comment, I would like to know the reason for this potential regulation - have there been issues with STR in the past? I know that in some cities there is an issue with people who don't live in the area swooping in to buy and rent properties. I agree this is a problem, but unaware that Danby is a hotbed for this! Positive - we have a small house and it allowed for relatives to stay close to us after we had our baby P- It allows visitors to have options when coming to the area as a tourist or to visit family and friends. P- It supports a unique experience for visitors and for them to pass the word word about the beauty etc of Danby. N- In condensed residential areas, it can be a concerning to consistently see strangers walking around. N- It reduces housing opportunities for families that would like to move into the area. N- It reduces condensed residential areas from establishing a consistent and mature neighborhood. No, however there is a property down at the end of our road which is used a short term rental and we have had no problems. I have NOT personally experienced negative or positive impacts from short term rentals in my neighborhood. Furthermore I believe you should allow any landowner to use their property as they wish to earn income or whatever No No experience with negative or positive impacts I have never had a negative experience, and have had numerous Positive experiences. Please do not change a system that is working well. I've lived in Danby for 29 years and have never even heard of a concern with short term rentals. NO Friends and family unable to find and/or afford housing None at all, and we live down the road from Karenville. In past years, we have rented out our entire home for a few days during commencement weekend and this has been a positive experience for us and did not negatively affect our neighbors as far as we know. No No No Is there anything else you'd like to share with the Town Board regarding shor t-term rentals in Danby? Attach additional pages if necessary. If there are no issues, the town board shouldn't be putting restrictions where there is not a problem. People pay there taxes and if someone wants to help pay for those taxes by renting out short term rental stays should not be an issue for the town board consider. I don't think that 5 people on the town board should try to control what other people do on their own property. No Short term rentals are a way for people to offset the high cost of living in this area, and there are already plenty of rules and regulations about how we conduct our personal affairs on our own property; we don’t need any more. We also pay plenty of taxes, we don’t any special new ones. Reduce regulation, Promote capitalism. We live and move to places like Danby to avoid government interference and interruption. We have successfully managed ourselves and our households for two hundred years. We as property owners, and taxpayers, have the right to do what we want, when we want on our own property. Even if that means renting all 22 rooms in my house, that is my choice. We do not need anymore arbitrary legislation that stifles the ability for individuals to generate more income or use their land and property how they see fit. Even if you were to pass measures to ban or create permits for short term rentals, I assure you I will continue to do short term rentals without a permit or inspection without a second thought. Our primary concern is out-of-area buyers purchasing local housing stock, not residing here, and making too much money compared to living on the property or renting it out long term, preventing local workers/community members from living here, pricing people out, and raising costs for residents. No I'm not typically a proponent of regulating what people can do with their property as long as they are respectful of others, and don't impinge on other people's quality of life. I am of the opinion people should be respectful of their neighbors, be kind, courteous, and develop positive relationships with others that live here. If I were a neighbor of a short term rental, I'd just like to be respected as far as noise is concerned and frequency of renting. If someone needs to make a little extra money for some reason (even to afford continuing living here maybe) and renting their house for a graduation weekend or a few weekends a year, makes that work out for them, I'm for that and I think that's in their right to do without hassle. On the other hand, I'm not for people buying up property with the sole purpose of renting it out weekend by weekend as an income property that do not live here themselves. I'm for the local people in town that are living here year round, but that might want/need to rent out their home for a few weeks a year to make a little extra money to make ends meet. As long as this is done respectfully to others, I have no problem with it, and would hope it could be worked out without a lot of unnecessary rules that make life difficult for people. In a more rural community like Danby, it is very important to me as a homeowner and landowner here that we do not regulate or overly limit people's capacity to create short-term rental that brings new economic influx to our community and region, and important income to families. There can be an argument made that short-term rentals conflict with local housing needs, but particularly in our community. These are two separate housing types and do not need to be seen as in conflict with one another. In other words, allowing people to do Airbnb or other types of short-term housing, and creating new short-term housing, should be seen as complementary to any efforts to improve the stock of long-term housing in affordable rentals. The Town Board needs to mind their own business. We pay taxes and should be allowed to do what we'd like on our property within our dwelling. If you want rules and regulations (even more than our town board is already subjecting us to), then move to a City. Leave us country folks alone. Mind your own! Neighbor's concerns have to be taken into account as part of the draw of a town like Danby is the rural feel and 'quiet life' which can be very altered by short-term rentals if not properly run. I appreciate that many guests are fine, we have stayed in these types of properties as a family and enjoyed them and been quiet, but it only takes one rowdy group every couple of months to create a lot of anxiety for neighbors that then worry every time a new guest party shows up. Clear requirements and penalties for improper use/noise disturbance etc should be laid out and ENFORCED. STR rule/reg enforcement should be addressed. A list of unenforceable rules will not be useful. Short-term renters don't usually have signs that are big and bulky so that is not a concern. Most short-term rental is a couple people five at most. I believe the town has enough to worry about I don't think this needs to be added to it this would be an overreach of the town. Trash and litter are not a concern because the homeowner would want a clean looking property for the next rental. Parking is not a concern so long as they're not parking on the road. Traffic impact would not be noticed in the small town of Danby for a couple of renters the town gets a year. Regulating large events or parties is an overreach of the town. And then be the houses are more spaced out than Ithaca for example and they should be allowed to have as many friends and family over as they want at any time. No I understand that there might be concerns from some residents who may live in close proximity to neighbor's who are renting their property. I can even respect the need for some regulations to help address those unique needs. But my fear is that there will be an overreach of local government that paints with broad brush strokes across our community. There's enough diversity of properties and spacial dynamics that any regulations proposed should be carefully managed to avoid this overreach. In an abundance of caution, I would err on the side of minimal regulations. My fear is that these regulations will hinder my ability to earn additional income on my property. Additionally, I'm curious to hear what the actual concerns are here and whether anything has played out in reality to require such regulations. If so, let's address those challenges in a nuanced fashion. Again, avoiding blanket requirements that only create hurdles & headaches for responsible business & property owners. I see use headed toward a community-wide feud similar to what's happening in Caroline if we keep heading in this direction of expanded regulations & onerous requirements. The current definition of "Tourist Home" in the zoning law needs to be improved. The ambiguity it currently has allows property owners to get away with building mini-hotels in residential neighborhoods. I urge the board to consider a maximum number of rental days of around 30. A primary residence should be used for exactly that, residence, not a rental. There are many articles around the detrimental effects of Airbnb (and other related STRs and sharing-economy platforms) when the allowable rental days are high. In fact, Cayuga Heights recently went through this and settled on 28 days. The town can avoid future issues by implementing a similar policy. Thank you. Noise is probably my biggest concern as a neighbor. While I identify as very liberal and progressive, I continuously find it frustrating that the town government is constantly trying to enact more laws to regulate how people live here and utilize their land. While I believe environmental conservation is important for Danby, I do not support noise ordinances or regulations on short term rentals. I would support scrapping the need for people renting out a room or part of a property to register as a tourist home and I do not support the creation of any further rules around short term rentals. We are a small community where housing costs (including property taxes) are high and there is interest in visiting the area for tourism. I support ways in which people are able to help cover their housing costs and ease the financial burden of living in this community. I don't agree with the concept that allowing short term rentals makes housing more expensive or limited for people in our community. The less regulations there are around this, the more efficiently people can use their housing which ultimately makes it less expensive and more accessible for everyone. Do not create additional regulations, it’s an attempt to solve a problem that doesn’t exist. There is not an issue with short term rentals in our town and so no regulation is needed. Allow people to use their properties here in Danby as they see fit, back off with the overreaching attempt to control every little thing. No Not everything needs to be over regulated. Hands off other people's property!!! Residents should be allowed to rent their own property as they see fit, without restrictions from the town. Based on information in the mailing, I do not think there should be more regulations for Tourist Homes than Short Term Rentals which should allow for the inclusion of accessory buildings. Owner who operated short term rentals tend to spend more money and time updating and keeping their properties clean. You won’t find garbage, litter and broken items strewn across the property. Additionally the renters tend to treat the property with more respect than a long term rental and does not leave property damage. Anyone serving on the Town Board who encourages rental, zoning, noise, logging laws and anyone in the community that does vote on such measures need to at all times be equipped with a hat with an insignia, a decal on their car, or some defining characteristic that identifies them to the rest of us as People Who Need To Create Laws Rather Than Compromising And Communicating With Their Neighbors It’s our property do what you can to generate revenue Danby taxes are outrageous need to subsidize some how. If you don’t own property you Don have an opinion I don’t think we should regulate short terms rentals in towns like Danby. I think property owners should have the right to make money off of their property. Most short term rental guests and providers are caring and responsible. This is Danby, parking/noise/parties are a not a concern. Plus we already have laws about noise and trash and stuff. My only real concern would be if a big corporation bought up land and houses to rent out short term. I personally don’t care if there are short term rentals, just that the owenership of them is putting money and income into people who have the best interest of the town rather than shareholders. This is a fine line to walk because how do you regulate who can own what, and the easy answer is to just not allow STRs but that would hurt people who do care about the town. So listen to everyone’s concerns and find a way to allow freedom for people to do what they want with their property without losing what makes Danby a nice place to live. Don’t turn this town into Caroline…I’m not ready for signs everywhere and for there to be “A War in Danby, Time to Pick A Side!” I wish there was a way to ensure that single-family homes were not bought up by operators to exclusively use as short-term rentals when the market is so difficult for middle-income families. But I also acknowledge that the families that do have short-term rental opportunities can rely on them for important income stability and I don't want to restrict that. No I have a few rentals in Danby on our property and use the time in between leases for short term rental for income to pay for taxes. Please stop trying to impose regulations and taxes on residents Residents should be able to do what they want with their property. The Town Board needs to shelve this entire issue. Property owners can and should make their own rules. This has NEVER been an issue/community problem. No more regulations or laws Are there current serious issues with the almost 100 short -term rentals in Danby? Have there been complaints of excessive traffic, trash, noise, etc.? If there are currently no major concerns, then allow people to subsidize their income w short-term rentals. If these concerns do come up and are impacting our small, country lifestyle, then perhaps some minor regulations would be appropriate. Are neighbors wanting to share in an owner's profits via taxation? That is utterly immoral. STOP looking for new ways to take people's income. If they didn't need the income, they wouldn't be renting out their homes. Let them keep the money they've earned! We have one of the highest taxes in the country here in NY. Just please let people keep their own money, for Pete's sake. There is only one thing you should be focusing on. Make it harder for non-resident serial buyers, corporations, and companies to buy properties for short-term rental. They are choking out new homebuyers and will eventually kill off the Danby community. Missing from the above is any reckoning of the impacts of scale. A camp ground with multiple sites should have more oversight and regulation to mitigate potential impacts than a single dwelling unit rental I think property owners should be held accountable for the renters' behaviors. I feel people should have the freedom to use their home as a short term rental provided it stays under the regulations of a use that exceeds those of building code for safety reasons (ie renting 10 rooms is a hotel). I feel given the rural nature of Danby the clientele that these properties will attract will likely be more self-contained quiet families or groups unless someone advertises having ATV trails on their property. This road has become very buy, not only with neighbors and their tenants, but with more construction vehicles. We'd ask that something be done to help slow or alleviate that noise and dust. It is getting "too people-y" as my niece puts it. Responsible short term rental owners do not need interference by the town. Responsible owners would consider things like noise, parking and trash not interfering with neighbors. Issues should be handled on a case by case basis if and when they arise. I think there should be two tiers of regulations. If a person is renting out the same house that is their primary residence, then I think those people shouldn't be regulated. I don't think they should have to pay any extra taxes. I think they should be allowed to rent out their house in peace, because they probably could really use the extra income. But if a person is not renting out the same house that is their primary residence, then I think those people should be severely regulated. It would be my preference that those people would not be able to have short-term rentals at all, because it's taking a residence off the market for full-time residence, so no one then gets to live there full-time. This area needs all the extra housing it can get because housing costs are so high. If this group of people were allowed to rent out their property, then I do think it should be steeply taxed. I suppose there's a third tier as well, which would be people who live on the property and have a second structure or a second room that they want to rent out. To me, I care about it differently depending on the wealth of the homeowner. If it's a person who is struggling financially and really needs the income in order to stay afloat, then yes that person should be allowed to rent out any space on their property with no extra taxation or other financial or regulatory burdens. But if it's a person who is wealthy and doesn't need the money, then I'm totally fine with them getting heavily taxed. The ranking survey above was difficult because there are so many what-ifs for each question so I’d interpret the data very carefully. There are also other codes in place, or that soon will be, that address some of these proposed topics (noise, litter, zoning code). I don’t see a need to be redundant, but a reminder is always nice I suppose. Maybe they can be pointed to in the document but necessarily made part of it. I think the goals should be to increase short term rentals (STR) while not competing with longterm rentals. I see this best being done by encouraging the renting of rooms/non-dwelling units within existing homes, and alternative stays (hipcamp type). The rental of complete dwellings that would otherwise serve as a longterm residence by those not living on site should probably be discouraged. The question above “ How important would it be for a short-term rental regulation to address the following concerns?“ assumes regulations are needed to mitigate the scenarios listed. An example being trash or litter, and I admit I don’t know the regulations on trash or litter, if there are any, but why would they differ if a homeowner has a short-term guest? One of the best decisions I’ve made was to move to Danby. We live in a beautiful area and I’m proud people feel it is worthwhile to create short- term rentals so visitors can enjoy all our area has to offer. As a traveler myself, I’m grateful for the opportunity to stay in short-term rentals when I’m visiting new places. The hosts are the best guides to their areas; they saw the value in opening their spaces to visitors, and are usually eager to share their local knowledge. I’m happy to know others can have similar experiences in our area. i don't think that Danby is densely settled enough to warrant regulation and think that at least now (can always revisit in 10 years if situation changes) short term rentals in an area generally provide more benefits than risk of harm. Noise or litter concerns could be addressed via the same routes that noise or litter resulting from homeowner behavior would be. Typical zoning requirements cannot prohibit viable business ventures from operating in a community. A well conceived zoning plan can allow all businesses to operate in a controlled manner (and controlled districts) with minimal impact to the businesses and their neighbors. When a zoning ordinance allows for operation of a business in ALL zones there is a risk for conflicts with other property owners. The relatively rapid rise in the number of short term rental activities has outpaced the ability of municipalities to manage the change. Most property owners probably never conceived of a short term rental in a residential neighborhood. Ideally the zoning would define appropriate areas for short term rentals, much like the idea of defining the appropriate locations for single family, multi family and high density housing. Unfortunately I would expect that it is too late to address the control of location as there are probably short term units in every district. The designation of specific areas could still be managed by allowing existing operations to be grandfathered. As a minimum I would encourage the implementation of regulations/controls to identify the operations and generate appropriate tax revenue from the operation. These short term units should be treated in a manner similar to any hotel/motel. Avoid redundant /overlapping regulation. Room tax has nothing to do with arts and culture, if anything it should help with affordable housing, if short term rentals affect that There should be a limit on the number of short term rental locations in danby owned by any ONE entity. Having several rental units on one property is a fine, but a single entity should not be able to own and operate rental units on more than 2 or 3 properties in danby. My concern for rental properties is to prevent an external company from buying up properties to use as rentals. Local land owners should be able to short-term rent on their property. If a property owner is comfortable with short-term rental of their property they should be able to do it without the town having to approve it or set special requirements/stipulations. In the end, the property owner is the one that will be help responsible if any problems occur. I think the board should proceed w a light touch/ Most short-term rentals are positive. Focus on where and why issues have arise and address those. If someone wants to rent short-term on their property they should be allowed to do it without having to jump through a bunch of hoops (regulations). No. Thanks for the survey Limit the number of people who can be short-term renters at one time per operator. "Require operator to reigster with the town" and "require operator to collect and pay lodging taxes" --> county- for Tompkins Occ Tax "Increase in room tax revenue (funds arts and culture)" --> was just increased from 3 to 5% in past 2-3 years "Require fire and building safety inspections" --> this is a C of O All of the above are the TB assuming these small business owners/operators are irresponsible idiots. Regulation is not what danby needs in this area "Require operator to collect and pay lodging taxes." --> Absolutely - that's the current law. No new law needed - we do it! AirBnB does it! "Require operator to get a license" --> NEVER. Why? Justify it. "Require operator to register with town." --> registration comes before rights are infringed upon. "Limit the number of short term rentals in certain areas in Danby." --> No! Why would you want to cut off your nose to spite your face? Any idea how much tourism stimulates the local economy? "Financial incentive to renovate or build" --> Yes go after the dilapidated zombie homes in danby. Support life, liberty and pursuit of happiness for land/home owners! That's our heritage! If danby would become pro business, and support STR there would be freedom and an economic blessing on our town and region. I believe that the town should not be involved in regulating short term rentals if the use of the rentals is residential. If the rental is expected to host parties or events then there should be regulations on that type of activity. Many people including myself and my neighbor look for local short term rentals as a way of having a "staycation". This keeps money local even when wanting a vacation. "Require operator to collect and pay lodging taxes." --> Tompkins County does this. Enforcement costs more money. What is the cost benefit ratio of 91 units over 1500 households? What are town's priorities in terms of benefit to tax payers! These feel like you are trying to create problems by planting these issues in people's mind. Has anyone studied the ACTUAL 91 locations about issues? Again this feels like a distraction. 91 units out of 1500 is 6%. Where is the analysis? The town of Ithaca is a very different than the town of danby and this is a misplaced priority. As times get harder, short-term rentals are a viable option, especially for older needing extra income. There is a shortage of housing for people who want to buy a home to live in. Houses that are dedicated to short term rentals impact housing supply and should not be permitted. Many of the issues listed above are important. However, it seems there are better ways to address these issues than a cumbersome short-term rental regulation. For example, there are other laws in place for regulating trash and litter. There is no need to build it into a short-term rental regulation. Of much greater importance is creating a community where local business can thrive. I also want to emphasize that while I am in favor of some regulation, I would caution the board against introducing regulation that would be burdensome to the property owners, such as exorbitant licensure fees or too frequent inspections. I'm personally not in favor of regulations on private property, but I completely understand the town's responsibilities to landowners and citizens. I think regulations should focus on safety, privacy, and neighborly stewardship. I would like to make a few additional comments. First Im so surprised and impressed to see the town reaching out to the residents for their direct thoughts and opinions on this matter. In an ever growing world where it feels like our voices matter less and less, I'm inspired knowing that the town actually wants to hear from us directly. Thank you! I only have experience with AirBnb, so I cant speak to any other short term rental company. My parents operate a lovely AirBnb in Newfield and they really love doing it. They enjoy getting travelers into the area and giving them advice on places to visit, and they're putting the extra income into improving their home and property. It's a win/win situation for the local area. We discussed the matter, and we all agreed that additional regulations would most likely deter them and other potential hosts from operating short-term rentals. I'm unfamiliar with other short-term rental enterprises, but AirBnb already has built-in safeguards that try to encourage renters and hosts to maintain good relationships. I love their system: if you are a bad guest/hosts, you get a bad review and people don't want to do business with you. Good guests/hosts get more business. Bad behavior only harms the party that's acting badly. The system is built to reward good behavior and good relationships, it's not focused on using punishment to deter bad behavior. I think additional regulations implemented by the town will interfere with this already functioning positive feedback system. The town already has noise and disruption ordinances in place, so I feel that these regulations plus the AirBnB system are enough to allow the residents the freedom to run their own businesses, and the town provides the neighbors legal protections of their own space and privacy. The AirBnB hosts already pay income taxes on any profits they make, so additional taxes would surely deter people from starting new rentals. And as for getting hosts to register with the town for any reason, I can only speak for myself, but I don't like putting my name/address on additional registries and I certainly don't want anybody coming out to my house to poke around for zoning violations. Perhaps hosts could volunteer to register with the town and the town could then conduct safety checks and implement regulatory codes and maybe even start their own reward program for hosts who above and beyond, but I think this should remain voluntary. No rentals in single family home neighborhoods. People Buy in these neighborhoods to know neighbors and who lives around them. Not to have numerous people in and out of the neighborhood No I am generally comfortable with residents using part of their homes or properties for short term rentals. It would be detrimental to the community if properties were purchased and used for short term rentals by non-residents (individuals or property management firms) to generate profit. This speculative investment practice would contribute to the shortage of affordable housing and potentially reduce social cohesion within the community. I understand the economic importance of allowing permanent Danby residents to rent a room or another building on their property to short term "tenants" (I prefer customers); the original intent of AirBnB was to do just that. But the industry has exploded such that people, many of them out- of-towners, exploit the opportunity and now build solely for the purpose of creating vacation rentals. This changes the character of neighborhoods (more transitory, less trustworthy, because you no longer know your neighbor!), increases noise, trash, and decreases the housing stock for long- term rentals. Having a carefully crafted short-term rental law will balance the economic interests of *permanent* not absentee residents, with preserving Danby's neighborhoods. I think the major concern and possible place for the town to get involved is regarding safety. There needs to be some sort of way to ensure that folks staying in STRs are safe (egress, smoke/CO detectors etc). Hotels are of course subject to safety inspections, as are restaurants, and landlords are required to get a Certificate of Compliance every few years. It seems to follow that STRs must also have something more than just a Certificate of Occupancy, which is only issued once. If the county or AirBnbs/other platforms require this, perhaps that is all that is needed. Most other issues, like trash or parking, are probably already governed by policies and laws that already in existence. I think it may also be wise to set limits on the number of units that can be managed by one entity. It seems like there are some large-ish companies that are interested in scooping up/creating STRs and I don't think a small town like Danby would benefit from big companies snatching up housing or developing land for multiple STR units. Any regulations should be guided by the intent to 1. avoid redundancy with other already existing laws or policies 2. keep STR outfits small/medium in scope 3. ensure safety of guests and 4. keep the money-making local. I have some concerns in the areas where houses are on smaller plots of land. In the more neighborhood areas I think people tend to respect the closeness of homes and issues like noise. When a house is rented it could become a problem. I think some short term rentals are important, but need regulations. To start with, the first question "Concerns about property owners increased income" is wildly inappropriate and offensive. Quite frankly the fact that the town board thought this was suitable to put on the survey is extremely concerning. Unless you are the IRS or a financial institution, my income is none of your concern, nor is my neighbors' income any of my concern. I also feel that topics such as Parking and Traffic impacts are completely irrelevant in a rural community like Danby. I do want to be VERY clear that I support responsible (and logical) regulations of STRs in Danby and elsewhere. I do NOT support what happened in the Town of Ithaca where many responsible hosts had their lives turned upside down because of the severe limitations the Town imposed. (I attended those public meetings. It was heartbreaking. Stay-at-home parents of special needs kids who depended on the in-law apartment income, retirees dependent on the rental income to stay in their home, the list goes on) We have been running a successful STR in Danby for almost 12 years without a single complaint from any of our neighbors. Our neighbors are fully aware that we host guests. We are extremely respectful of our neighbors, have noise monitoring and party monitoring systems installed on our property, and do not allow any parties or events to ensure we do not impact anyone around us (plus we have no interest in having our house trashed) Until 2 years ago we were hosting mainly families in town for graduation weekends and a few additional weeks here and there when it was convenient for us since the property is our primary residence. During the pandemic both my husband and became 100% WFH per our employers' temporary pandemic policy, which has now become permanent. In order for both my husband and I to keep our job, we had to find an alternate space to work from since the internet on Hornbrook is beyond terrible. This has been an issue for 16 years and we have gotten zero support from anyone on the board. (Yes, of course, we have contacted different providers over the years-either they do not want to do it or want over 100K to cable to us) So we pivoted and began renting out our house more frequently in order to afford a second residence with high-speed broadband. Should STRs become either banned or restricted we will be forced to sell the house that is meant for our retirement. I look forward to future discussions on this issue. Danby needs long-term housing, not short-term Short-term rentals have a negative impact on our property sales. I would not want to live next to one or have in my neighborhood unless highly regulated and just who would actually manage all of this? More of my taxes towards something I dont want? Rather taxes go towards current staffing needs and current town maintenance needs. So I'm a NO to short term rentals except during IC or cornell grad week. Thank you for looking into this issue in a timely manner & allowing everyone to have an equal voice. Keep up the excellent work! Please be aware that the townspeople support all of your efforts! I do not feel that I understand some of these issues, but danby is NOT urban and does not therefore face some of the risks It's our property- for over 80 years - we pay taxes-Please do not control what we do on our space! Previous survey question is worded poorly Short term rentals are important as supplemental income for many of us, especially those who are older. With the high taxes we must pay, we need the ability to generate income from our properties. It's important NOT to limit the number of days a short-term rental can be rented out. Also, we were unsure how to rate the importance of "financial incentive to renovate or build." We don't want to encourage people to build per se, but we do think giving financial incentive to renovate is a great idea. Not sure how this even came about to the Board - but there are many short term rental companies across the country who do a wonderful job in regulating short term rentals. The Town Board should "stay in their lane" and stop trying to control every little thing! I mean, you can't even purchase a pack of gum in this town. :( Thanks for including us in the process. Danby is a model of democracy. How many pages?? Where to start?? can it go side-ways - yes. Do we want these rights and freedoms - YES. Size restrictions of gatherings or units are my only concern. And those numbers should be HUGE. Limit signage- shouldn't be necessary. Building code would address fire safety, should pay county lodging tax (AirBnB collects). Probably should register with town but with no fee? Although I do not think the owner must live on-site of a short-term rental, I do recognize the risk of businesses buying up all the available housing stock and turning them into short-term rentals and limiting home ownership in danby. Perhaps the owner must live in Tompkins or Tioga Counties? A limit on the number of short-term rental properties an individual or business can own? A total percentage cap on dwelling used as short-term rentals? Aside from personal convenience of having nearby accommodations available when I have friends and family visiting from out of state, I am happy to spend lodging dollars with a local family rather than a hotel franchise in town. I feel good supporting local businesses. If decreased long-term affordable housing supply is a concern currently, then this is very important. It would be helpful to have additional infomation on this issue, in terms of complaints, concerns of residents, etc. This would help us to better judge the need for regulatory changes. We have had a rental property that was fixed up in Burdett, NY and it has brought a lot of very nice families who want to stay together to the area. They visit local parks and eat at local restaurants. Our guests spend a lot of money in the local economy. This survey is not that great. The online version didn't work (not the right permissions) and this version requires interpretation. It doesn't support quality feedback from the town residents. Consider a verified online approach next time. It is our opinion that the town should not be involved in this at all. We travel frequently to participate in activities and hobbies and we often use AIR BnB for our lodging needs. We have had excellent experiences with both landlords who were local as well as those who did not reside on the property or in the area. Furthermore, we have found that some of the most interesting areas to visit in the USA are those with NO zoning whatsoever. The majority of zoning laws are an infringement on personal liberty and mostly serve to stifle creativity and individualism. While I agree that it does not seem to make sense to have more laws regarding renting only a part of your home as opposed to the whole thing, I do not think that necessarily means we need to have more laws. What that says to me is that someone has already overstepped their bounds by stipulating what I may do within my own home. Also, I am concerned about your statement regarding renting of accessory buildings, tents, etc. Apparently there is no mention of it in the town code, yet you state that it is therefore not allowed. If it is not specifically prohibited, how do you reach the conclusion that it isn't currently possible? Since when does everything need to be written down to be allowable? I'm pretty sure there is nothing in the town code that says I am permitted to eat, breathe, and sleep. Yet we do these things and many others without specific say so. In the absence of compelling and overwhelming evidence of a serious problem, people should be able to use their home as they see fit. Danby is a rural community that does not have the problems of congestion of homes and properties. Please stop listening to "the vocal few" that are trying to pattern our rural laws and regulations in a manner best suited for urban areas. Between the latest zoning changes and the proposed noise laws, I am becoming quite dismayed. Please listen to the majority, not the vocal minority. This is a wonderful opportunity for agritourism, please do not take away the chance for my family to earn extra income. Danby is such a rural area I don’t see how noise or parking could be an issue and I believe in neighbors being able to work it out if so. I know that in Ithaca, housing has been an issue so they want to limit short term rentals, if we allow it then we might be able to help downtown Ithacans. Short Term Rental should/can be controlled by defining and enforcing existing Zoning Laws. As an Example: In a Low Density Residential Zone the present definitions for " One Dwelling Unit and Family" suggests expectations of owner occupied residencies. Dwellings used just for short term rentals are "commercial properties" they are being used solely to make money. Therefore in a Low Density Residential Zone short term rentals in properties where there is no owner living should not be allowed. In case of short term rentals in a dwelling where owner lives. This is allowed as a "Tourist Home. " The Code should be defined to make common sense. Primary use should be defined ( say by square foot or bedrooms ) and should be for owner ( main use of dwelling ). Secondary use should be rentals ( defined the same) but this would be the smaller use. Even in a Low Density Residential Zone this allows owner's to make money if they wish. Conditions such as noise level, trash removal should be built into " Tourist Home" definition. In other Zones particularly " Commercial" Zones " other regulations maybe appropriate. Having a better defined Zoning Law could make this easier than passing all kinds of regulations which the Town can't and won't enforce. I think registration of any rental property should be considered and the perhaps the properties inspected. The registration fee would need to cover the additional staff that might be needed for a rental permit plan. I think fire safety inspections are important because we have a volunteer fire dept and it may lessen the burden on them