With the Super Bowl on the horizon, many Sunnyvale residents see renting out their homes for the big game as a way to make quick cash, but the new decision on short-term rentals may put a damper on some of those plans.
The city council decided Sept. 15 in a 6-1 vote that short-term rentals will be allowed in Sunnyvale, but only with a permit, only if the host is present and with a maximum of four guests at a time, not counting minors.
The decision comes as cities across California study the emerging trend of hotel accommodation alternatives that have exploded in popularity thanks to Internet services like Airbnb, VRBO and Craigslist.
People came out in support of short-term rentals, sporting blue and white buttons with the phrase “Protect Home Sharing, Protect Affordability,” hoping that the council would not prohibit the rentals.
The council had several concerns about the sudden swell of short-term rentals of houses and apartments in Sunnyvale, particularly because all of it is essentially illegal because residential areas are not zoned in the same manner as hotels.
“We’re dealing with a disruptive business model and those business models are moving faster than what city regulations are, and that’s what we have to remind ourselves is the problem. Right now this is not legal in Sunnyvale, yet it’s being done,” said Councilman Glenn Hendricks. “I’m sure we’re going to hear some people say that since people are already doing it, it should be OK. Should we let disruptive business models drive what the policy should be?” There were worries that without the primary resident present, lodgers would be more willing to be disruptive and cause damage in neighborhoods. Some speakers were concerned that if unhosted rentals were permitted, then out-of-towners would buy affordable homes and apartment for the sole purpose of turning them into short-term rental units at a higher rental rate. A speaker argued that Sunnyvale residents renting out their homes would take greater care with who they rent to since they live in the city and would be present during hosted stays.
Majib Bar, who purchased his Sunnyvale home in 1997, asked, “What happens if someone who lives outside of Sunnyvale purchases a home and turns it into short-term rental? I like neighbors that I know. I don’t want to live next to commercial space. … I ask that there’s only short-term rental with strict limitation to ensure it does not have negative impact on our neighborhood and affordable housing.”
Some residents who were avid users of Airbnb and other similar sites argued that there is no need to prohibit renting when the homeowner or primary tenant is not present, saying that guests are carefully vetted beforehand, and many of them are professionals who are visiting Sunnyvale on business.
“Sometimes it is business people who are sick of staying in hotel rooms. I travel a fair amount and I don’t like being in hotel rooms anymore,” said Dan Paustian, a Sunnyvale resident who also hosts short-term renters. “I’d rather be in a home-like environment and I don’t necessarily want a baby sitter there.”
Another resident who spoke in favor of rentals said that he was concerned about the vote as he was planning on renting out his in-law unit to a woman who was flying in for surgery at Stanford and would need his property as a place to convalesce.
The council discussed the recommendations of city staff with Sunnyvale principal planner Andrew Miner at great length after public comment and decided on several amendments to the proposed addition to Sunnyvale’s zoning code. Homeowners will be required to post their permit number in their online rental advertisement and may rent out their primary unit as long as they are still present in the secondary unit, such as an in-law cottage.
Councilman Pat Meyering cast the lone dissenting vote, arguing that the ordinance was premature and questioning whether residents would go to the trouble of complying with the city’s new rules.
The council agreed to leave open the option to review the matter of unhosted rentals at an unspecified later date.
“I don’t like making things that are working and already in use in the city illegal,” said Vice Mayor Tara Martin-Milius. “We’re defining a use of a personal property here. I just want to re-evaluate when this experiment is over so we can amend it at an appropriate time.”
