Save NYC sublets and vacation rentals from anti-competitive bill
savenysublets.com
savenysublets.com
A good first step would be imposing a limit of one rental property per person on the site, and making at least basic efforts to enforce it.
To be fair, this is basically an NYC problem. I haven't seen nearly the same level of shadiness on AirBnB in other cities, where people renting out spare rooms and couches seems to be the norm. But in NYC, a lot of the AirBnB listings are unlicensed hotels and unlicensed hostels, not people renting out spare rooms. I wouldn't be surprised if a good number were affiliated with organized-crime groups, either, since those are the main operators of unlicensed hotels.
London, too.
Why do you care?
> I wouldn't be surprised if a good number were affiliated with organized-crime groups, either, since those are the main operators of unlicensed hotels.
When renting a room is outlawed, only outlaws will rent rooms.
"A tenant renting a residence pursuant to an existing lease in a dwelling having four or more residential units shall have the right to sublease his premises subject to the written consent of the landlord in advance of the subletting. Such consent shall not be unreasonably withheld."
N.Y.S. Real Property Law, Section 226-b(2)(a).
So that Brooklyn waiter shouldn't be too hard to find.
If they want to help people do whatever they want with their houses in the country or in suburbs, Airbnb should knock themselves out. But in the city, where they help introduce really obnoxious neighbors, they should go away.
ps -- when I lived in Yorkville, my gf and I paid $3700 for our apartment. If you think I have exactly no tolerance for loud neighbors, well, you're right. That's not even on the high end of middle class housing in that area.
In general, there is a place for people to stay and party -- and that's in business districts. Or in hotels that are subject to increased sound insulation requirements and further regulatory requirements requiring noise, with penalties for not enforcing compliance from the guests up to and including loss of licence.
I'd assume this has a lot more to do with hotels being undercut.
Sometimes those in #2 get consolidated so many such units are operated by one person, making more or less a quasi-hotel. And having hotel units next door to you is somewhat different than having an apartment with a long-term tenant next door to you, which is presumably what you signed up expecting.
Cities are chaotic. Cities are loud. How about if you want peace and quiet, you move somewhere where they occur naturally, like the middle of nowhere?
When you're in the city you have neighbors. Some are there decades and the walls seperating you can be paper thing as far as sound travels. Cities can be loud during the day, but at night the businesses are closed and the residents are still there.
Whether you are subletter, leasee, or owner keep in mind your neighbors can shut you down so be mindful of them as well.
Anyway I don't like bills that restrict people's free will like this. But from the comments on NYT I see some people support it because they don't want their building treated like a hotel. If airbnb what this bill taken down they better do something fast because, although the hotel industry wrote it, it is gaining support amongst residents.
Isn't the point of all legislation to restrict people's free will in one way or another? (Just a quibble; I realize this statement is not central to your comment.)
I grew up mostly in the suburbs or in smaller cities (Columbus, Lexington), and I've lived my entire adult life in cities (New York first, Philadelphia now.) In my experience, which is limited to those two cities, I've found that the base level of noise is higher in the cities regardless of time. Trash trucks, ambulances, police cars, delivery trucks, drunks walking home, cabs cruising for fares, and tons of other noisy events occur at all times of day and with a greater frequency than I experienced in the suburbs.
I overreacted to earl's post. I pictured him as the type of person who can't handle any late night noise, regardless of the day of week or the holiday associated. I pictured the kind of guy who won't sign the block party application, or who pins notes to your door or car.
I lived by people like the one I describe, and I can't stand them. Maybe I'm unique--one of my first apartments was within a 1.5 block radius of a very active fire station, four bars, a liquor store, and a 24 hour gas station. You get used to noise pretty quick, or give up sleeping in environments like that.
But, politically, I do have a point: I don't see why earl's right to be free from potentially noisy, short term neighbors should lead to legislation that will cripple an industry that hasn't had the time to find its legs. We're killing innovation by some to avoid possible annoyance of others.
That doesn't seem like a fair trade, or a likely one. I doubt anyone paying to spend a few nights in earl's neighborhood is really there to throw a kegger and urinate in the hallway.
(It might be hard to fathom, but not everybody is a college student or an unmarried 23 year old, and some people even have to get to work early on the weekends -- myself included, during crunch times).
If you can't handle treating other people living in the next room with basic courtesy, you should yourself seriously consider living in the suburbs.
I sure wouldn't want to live next to you.
However, it's still pretty rare for inconsiderate people to grow up and show some consideration just because you ask.
I've lived in cities for my entire adult life, and I find that choosing the right building and neighborhood is imperative. When I've had bad neighbors, it's rarely just one.
With a short-term tenant, there isn't a next time to prevent, and chances are good that they'll just turn the music down until the cops leave (and possibly find ways to mistreat your property in retaliation).