Nearly all Airbnbs could be banned in parts of Columbia if city passes proposed rules

Roughly nine out of every 10 current Airbnb rentals in and around the majority of downtown Columbia might not be legal under new proposed restrictions in the capital city. In the nearby 29205 zip code encompassing Five Points, 98% of those rentals could be illegal.

It all depends on a proposed ordinance being debated by city leaders, residents and entrepreneurs building short-term rental businesses in Columbia. As written, the proposed law would prohibit Airbnb and other short-term rental hosts from renting homes they don’t also live in if those homes are in residentially-zoned areas, which most homes are.

The idea came up last summer, when permanent residents in neighborhoods with Airbnbs first brought the issue to the attention of City Council. Now a year later, the city hopes to finalize Airbnb regulations by the fall, and the aforementioned restrictions are still favored by at least some city leaders.

“Hotels should be in areas zoned commercial,” said at-large Councilman Howard Duvall.

Duvall is leading an ad-hoc city committee tasked with proposing some kind of regulations for short-term rentals in Columbia, which some residents say negatively affect quality of life in neighborhoods and eat up valuable rental units that could be occupied by long-term tenants.

In addition to banning certain rentals in residential areas, the ordinance would require short-term rental operators to receive city permits and pay annual registration fees. The cost would be $100 for owner-occupied rentals and $500 for rentals that are not owner-occupied.

The largest point of contention has been what to do with houses in residential neighborhoods that the owner does not live in but uses solely for short-term rentals.

“What you have is a boutique hotel in a residential area,” Duvall said.

But people who operate these rentals in Columbia say eliminating the option to rent in residential areas would decimate their businesses.

Of 208 active rental options in Columbia’s 29205 zip code, 204 are full houses, according to the data analysis site Airdna. It’s unclear how many of those homes are occupied versus not occupied by the property owner, but rental hosts say the majority of properties are the latter.

The ordinance would still allow an owner-occupied household to rent out a spare bedroom or other space on their property. And non-owner occupied rentals would still be legal as long as they weren’t in an area zoned for residential use. The problem for rental hosts is that most houses are built in residential areas.

“Let’s not think that everybody that’s an investor owns 15 houses in the neighborhood,” said Gustavo Bueno, who rents out a quadraplex he and his wife also live in full time.

He and his wife are interested in buying another property to use for Airbnb rentals, one they wouldn’t live in. If the proposed ordinance passed, the pair would leave Columbia and launch their business in a different city.

Bueno explained this situation at the ad-hoc committee’s last meeting in late April. Those who spoke to the committee at that time overwhelmingly opposed the strict rules being considered.

Some suggested that the ordinance as proposed would decimate the city’s tourism incomes. Other operators who own both short-term and long-term rentals say the long-term rentals are more likely to fall into disrepair than the short-term properties, stressing that concerns about short-term options driving down property values are unfounded.

The right policy

There seems to be an agreement among Airbnb operators that bad actors can create problems for neighborhoods.

Concerns about the ties between short-term rentals and crime and safety aren’t new or unique to Columbia. In response to growing concerns, some cities have capped the number of active rentals while others seek to permit and track operators.

“Put things in place that weed out the bad apples, absolutely,” said John O’Neal, who used to host for Airbnb out of his own home in Columbia. “I don’t know what the right policy is, but I’m absolutely on board with reasonable regulations.”

O’Neal’s concern with the proposed rules is that it would limit the rental supply largely to single rooms for rent in houses the owner still needs to live. And he knows there’s a need for short-term rentals in Columbia.

A few years ago, O’Neal wanted to make some extra money, so he and his wife rented out a spare room in their house. He soon realized that they were filling a desperate need in Columbia for travelers who still wanted the comforts of home, like a kitchen and backyard.

One of his regular guests taught at the University of South Carolina three days a week but lived the rest of the time in Atlanta with her husband. She would drive into Columbia each week, stay at the Airbnb and then drive home after her Wednesday classes to spend the rest of the week with her husband.

“The reality is the demand is there,” he said. “Extra bedrooms in homes is not going to make up the demand.”

Part of the question comes down to what a neighborhood should and shouldn’t be.

Short-term rentals are meant to serve people who won’t be staying very long. That also means a neighborhood is guaranteed to miss out on a would-be stable homeowner in that property. For some, that lack of neighborhood connectedness is part of the concern.

When the city of Charleston passed a similar ordinance in 2018, amending a previous ban on the practice, the law’s preface stated that regulation was necessary to prevent harm to the function of neighborhoods, “being first and foremost a residential community, where people actually live, not a place of transient occupancy.”

Despite the Charleston law, however, the city has struggled to enforce the rules, and illegal short-term rental operations continue to operate in the area, according to reporting from The Post and Courier.

One proposed compromise is to more clearly roll short-term rentals into the city’s existing rental ordinance. But Duvall is skeptical.

“I don’t think that goes nearly far enough,” he said. He added that he is open to compromises, but he firmly believes that non-owner occupied rentals should be treated like the boutique hotels he says they are and limited to commercial zones.

Short-term rental operators have been tasked by the city committee with suggesting compromises on the proposed ordinance, which Duvall plans to discuss the next time the committee meets.

The city committee hopes to meet at least twice more before bringing a final recommendation back to the entire city council. Duvall said they likely won’t meet again until July.