
Airbnb and house-sharing firms reduced New York housing stock by 10% – study - pyrophane
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/27/airbnb-new-york-city-housing-stock-reduction-study
======
pyrophane
Trying to find the original study. It was paid for by housing advocacy groups
who generally oppose Airbnb, so I want to understand their methodology since
they certainly have a bias.

Edit:

This looks like it: [http://www.hcc-
nyc.org/documents/ShortchangingNYC2016FINALpr...](http://www.hcc-
nyc.org/documents/ShortchangingNYC2016FINALprotected_000.pdf)

Here's their underlying logic:

"If the 8,058 units defined as Impact Listings were made available on the
rental market, the number of vacant rental units citywide would increase by 10
percent and the vacancy rate would rise to 4.0 percent"

So, in other words, if all of the full-time "entire apartment" listings were
to hit the market as vacant units immediately, the vacancy rate would increase
by 10%. This is not the same thing as Airbnb reducing housing stock by 10%.

This is actually probably more interesting:

"53 percent of all Airbnb listings are located in one of the following five
“macro-neighborhoods” - East Village/Lower East Side (LES), Chelsea/Hell’s
Kitchen, West Village/Greenwich Village/SoHo,
Williamsburg/Greenpoint/Bushwick, and Bedford Stuyvesant/Crown Heights."

Something I think a lot of people don't appreciate about Airbnb's potential
impact on the housing market is that a lot of the listings are concentrated in
a few areas, so while Airbnb might not impact the housing market that much
overall for a particular city, it can have a pretty significant impact on
individual neighborhoods.

~~~
kenferry
Thanks for tracking that down. I had the same questions. I would be very
interested to see followup interviews with a representative sample to
investigate the percentage of units that would actually be on the market if
not for airbnb.

~~~
themartorana
I'm genuinely conflicted about this. On the one hand, I'm all for more
housing. It can drive prices down (although not a lot I've seen has ever
driven prices down in Manhattan) but at the same time, were I a property
owner, I'd want to be able to do with that property as I wish. They're
obviously income properties, so why are we mad about them making income in
this way?

I guess I'm asking whether or not income properties either a) are already
regulated as such (and laws are being flaunted) or b) the desire here is to
create laws that tightly scope what a property owner can do with their non-
primary residentially-zoned property?

I can't seem to form an opinion yet, so I'm mostly asking for yours, I guess.
I suppose I need a bit more education on the debate.

Edit: this isn't where I meant to put this reply. But it's here now, so, if
it's slightly out-of-thread, apologies.

Edit 2: if it's easier, can someone point me to a cogent and not-lopsided
explanation of the debate?

~~~
mancerayder
I'm a property owner in one of the identified areas, for what it's worth, and
I can give a summarized piece of the debate and some additional information
not everyone knows.

One pro-AirBnB argument has to do with property rights, and doesn't have to be
rehashed as you implied it ('doing as you wish'). Another has to do with the
idea that housing is so expensive, that a renter can help pay his/her high
rent by supplementing the income. <\- this latter argument is obviously not
part of the 'landlords are renting out entire apartment' complaint.

One anti-AirBnB argument has to do with some of the target areas being
gentrifying neighborhoods (Bushwick, Bed Stuy, others; we're not talking about
Tribeca here). In these, further increasing the scarcity of housing by taking
the apartments out of the long-term rental market increases rent and displaces
long-time, mostly poorer residents. This argument is given more by
progressives. Another anti-AirBnB argument, this time by the hotel lobby, is
that hotels have to pay different taxes, and abide by different standards of
code and safety [ similar to the anti-Uber arguments, I guess ] and that it's
not fair.

In 2010 a law was passed which made it illegal to rent the entire apartment
for less than 30 days. So if you're a renter, for example, you can rent out a
room. One item of note is that in the State of New York, occupying a unit for
30 days or more grants one to certain rights as a tenant, meaning the landlord
has significant hurdles in pursuing an eviction. I believe this set of laws [
edit: <30 days, not the tenants rights], which I believe went into effect in
2011, is referred to as the illegal hotel law.

One often overlooked fact is that the law here excludes 2 and 3 family homes
from the illegal hotel law.

The punchline I'll add is that, in the gentrifying areas I mentioned above, a
large piece of the housing stock is 2 and 3 family (especially 3 family)
homes.

~~~
eternalban
I would question the assertion that Bushwick's (and BK's in general)
gentrification is Airbnb driven. Manhattan's rental picture started getting
unreasonable around turn of the century. Williamsburg, for example, was pretty
much an urban wasteland around 1997 but was already a 'beach-head' of
adventerous/artist tribe of Manhattan exiles. Regardless, the displacement of
poor people from these areas is self evident.

What I find objectionable in terms of Airbnb is the corrosive effect that the
transitional flux has on cities and neighborhoods. Manhattan is now basically
worlds largest open air shopping center -- yes a bit shinier than before but
not the Gotham of yore (which is sorely missed).

~~~
themartorana
Thanks, guys!

------
vkou
The situation is even worse in Vancouver. [1][2]

This is a city with Manhattan rents, paid for by Cincinnati salaries... Amid a
desparate shortage of housing.

[1] [http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/british-
columbia/vancouve...](http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/british-
columbia/vancouver-airbnb-research-1.3621539)

[2]
[https://affordablevancouver.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/airb...](https://affordablevancouver.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/airbnb_and_affordability-
marjoribanks2.pdf)

~~~
nacho2sweet
I have ratted out two places in my South Granville apartment building that
were permanent AirBNB's. My place is good value, and well run, and I believe
someone should have the chance to live in it.

~~~
vkou
Did anything happen to the owners? Strata fines? Citations by the city?

~~~
nacho2sweet
My whole apartment is owned by a single company. I think they kicked them out.
We are allowed to sublease for 6 months of the year, but you have to have the
person sign a liability contract with the owning company, and they have to
stay minimum 30 days. TBH I am going on vacation for 3 weeks and I want to
AirBNB my place out, but I think that is the proper way to use the service.

The market here doesn't support the cash flow to buy and rent condos unless
you have a lot of cash, because the wages don't match what one could afford.
That Rich Dad Poor Dad shit doesn't work. So someone buying a condo can get
like $1600/month, but their mortgage, maintenance, and property taxes are
going to be like $3000/month. However I think a case could be made for buying
and AirBNB'ing if you are good at it. My gf is a strata lawyer, and I have
heard horror stories of people owning 10+ condos in a single building and
AirBNB'ing them all out.

