Let's Reach a Compromise on Short-Term Rentals

 As the regional chamber of commerce and economic development organization for the Lynchburg region (Counties of Appomattox, Campbell, Amherst, and Bedford, along with the City of Lynchburg), the Lynchburg Regional Business Alliance and its membership would like to weigh in on the short-term rental discussion. The Alliance is dedicated to advocating for pro-business and economic development-friendly policies that better our community. We realize this is not an easy discussion to have due to unprecedented nature of these properties/rentals and thank you for your willingness to listen to the community’s feedback.

Based on the analysis of the Alliance’s government relations committee, it seems as though some of the policies being discussed would hinder the use of short-term rentals, almost to the point of making the city a “no-go zone” for these entrepreneurs and short-term rental development. While the planning commission removed the 120 day operational limit and adjusted the three violations rule, which is recommended and applauded, there are still some provisions the Alliance opposes that hinder free enterprise and, therefore, would suggest some amendments or revisions.

The government relations committee raised concern over the congruence of mandating the “Owner Occupied” policy in some zoning districts and some not. This policy (owner occupancy) would strongly hinder any possibility of an entrepreneur to purchase, develop and maintain multiple properties within the city, and as such would be the antithesis of the kind of policies the Alliance advocates for — championing free enterprise and helping businesses and individuals thrive. There was also, in general, a desire to keep the policies as consistent as possible across the city as this would alleviate confusion and assist the city in potential policing of these properties.

Members of the committee also request the removal of the current proposal of no more than four unrelated individuals in a unit. This does not take into consideration the size of the house or apartment, meaning the current stipulation would not allow a three-bedroom home to accommodate three couples. The Alliance would recommend short-term rentals consider the commonly accepted Fair Housing Law of permitting two persons per bedroom. This compromise, or something similar to it, will keep apartments or housing developments that only have one or two bedrooms from being overcrowded, while allowing larger homes, such as three- or four-bedroom homes to accommodate what the home was built for.

The committee also concluded short-term rental platforms (such as Airbnb and VRBO) are very apt to self-regulation. Due to the strict policies, these platforms mandate their users adhere to and use a very public rating system (both for the host and the guest); the overwhelming majority of these short-term rental properties would be under intense governance by their platform of choice. Out of 365 short-term rental listings in the city from the past two years, only 17 complaints have been documented. So, we would agree with the current three violations rule if the language “violations of state or local laws, ordinances or regulations” stays. Though the planning commission voted to adjust the original policy to “three (3) violations in three (3) years,” we would still request these violations be collected and imposed on an annual basis.

Furthermore, there are many current policies in place that are perfectly equipped to combat any potential issues these properties may cause. Many of the concerned citizens who supported these regulations listed grievances that could be handled by current statute (such as trash, noise and parking concerns). Let me be clear, however, it is important to the Alliance that these complaints be founded and only acted upon if current laws or regulations are being violated.

Finally, if more restrictive policies are needed at a future date, the Alliance stands ready to offer positive rules and guidelines that foster the entrepreneurial spirit while attempting to diminish those identified issues. The Alliance recommends the Lynchburg City Council adopt policies like these that do not over-regulate a relatively small problem. All of these policies are based on City Council’s directive to “allow” short-term rentals within city limits. Accordingly, each policy council considers should be looked at through this lens; proposed regulations should not prohibit a short-term rental from operating effectively.

On May 14, City Council should table this issue and request the planning commission work with those for and against to find compromise that nurtures entrepreneurship and free enterprise. As they stand, these proposals are simply not good for Lynchburg.

The Alliance supports the following policies for short-term rentals:  An annual registration fee of $150 with a $500 penalty for not registering. No approval required, only registration, or the collection of a tax similar to a hotel tax instead.

» The current definition of a short-term rental, including the 30-day occupancy limit.

» Additional parking spots, with potential exemptions to downtown or similarly zoned units.

» Adherence to Uniform Statewide Building Code.

» Occupancy considerations based on the number of bedrooms rather than a flat rate.

» Three founded complaints (quantified as grievances that violate current code or statute, not simply a disgruntled neighbor) over the course of a year, would result in revocation of the permit.

» No requirement for owner-occupancy.

» Congruent policies across the locality.

Chris Faraldi,
Director of Government Relations 
Lynchburg Regional Business Alliance