By Gagandeep Ghuman
Published: June 9, 2019
Squamish citizens may not be able to use their secondary suites or coach houses for short term rentals if council agrees with a staff suggestion at an upcoming council meeting this Tuesday.
A recent public consultation by the district outlined three options on short term rentals. Staff is recommending council goes with the most restrictive one, which allows STRs only in primary residence.
If the council agrees, locals will only be allowed to create short-term rentals on their principal residence, and not in secondary suites or coach houses.
Staff says this is the best option for now as allowing homeowners to rent basements or coach houses for short term will diminish long term-rentals.
“This best meets the goal to protect the long-term rental housing supply, as it restricts short-term rental to principal residences only, while the owner or permanent tenant is temporarily away,” according to the staff report.
This approach, staff suggests, will reserve secondary or accessory units for long-term rentals. However, staff isn’t recommending a permanent ban on STRs in secondary unit, but more of a wait and watch approach.
That means first allowing and regulating STRs in principal residences, then taking stock before expanding the bylaw to include secondary units or coach houses.
If such a bylaw was implemented, staff estimates an upwards of 250 short term rental units in primary residences would be available. This would legalize slightly less than half of the entire short-term rental listings and most of the partial or shared unit listings.
The district has monitored short term rentals in the community throughout 2019, using a third party researcher.
As of May 2019, there were 120 more properties available for short term rentals compared to May of last year. The percentage of whole home rentals has also increased to 80 per cent up from 75 percent in August of 2018. Staff estimates the number will keep increasing.
Short term rentals can be a lucrative and flexible option for local homeowners, but technically they are not allowed, with the exception of licenced traditional Bed and Breakfast accommodations.
Noting that the STRs will keep increasing, the district wants to regulate them through a bylaw.
“In the absence of major enforcement action, it is likely that STRs will continue to proliferate,” the report says.
Barb Engstrom says
I sat in on the public consultation and the majority of people in attendance stated that if short term rentals were not permitted they would not open their suite to long term rental for the reason that they need the space for extended family visits and that the Changes to the Tenancy Act does not protect landlords. I’m disappointed that the district has not listened to what people want.
David Lassmann says
I noticed long ago that a lot of people in Squamish seem to have a lot to say about what should be done with other people’s property and money. Welcome to the wonderful world of Socialism Canada. Wouldn’t it be nice if we could go back to the days when it was up to the owner to do what they wished with their property? Except of course for zoning restrictions and so on. Say goodbye to free enterprise!
S Warburton says
If the District wants to make changes to add restrictions to new coach house building permits so be it, but we started ours 9 yrs ago to accommodate our family visiting from afar, prior to the existence of Airbnb. We spent a very large amount of money based on the budgeting we would be renting the space as a bed and breakfast when not needed as a guest space. As noted above, our suite will never be in the long term rental pool. Ours was maxed out at 550 sf , all one room (except bathroom) with no internal storage/closet space – it is not even designed for someone to live in permanently. The new permits allow 900 sf which can actually be a 1-2 bedroom with storage, so it’s not right that all coach houses be lumped into the same category. If a bylaw is passed it should be for new permits only, so that the owners can make a decision economically if they want to proceed. But to change the rules for those with a major investment already outlayed is frankly unethical and worse. Please remember private home owners did not create the housing crisis, lack of long term foresight and planning at various governmental levels did.
S2 says
I feel the same as S. I purpose built my suite for family and the occasional rental. When I spent the money to do this there were no restrictions. I now have a suite not built for long-term living (no storage and not really big enough) that I’m being told I can’t do what it was purpose built for…. This needs to be curtailed in the permit process not just willy-nilly after. Total BS.
ET says
All of your comments so far really just say that you don’t care about being part of a community and all you care about is money. So buy a business license then!
David Lassmann says
ET, you miss the point! Some people choose to rent out a property as a month to month rental. Some choose to rent out as an annual lease. Some want to rent out on a daily basis. The point is that the owner should choose and not have the method of rent dictated by government. And what landlord renting out month to month takes out a business license to do so? The issue is more involved than you think because both our provincial government and our local government have interfered with the practice of free enterprise when it comes to rental housing. The provincial government has passed a tenancy act that is disadvantageous to landlords. Our local government is forcing developers to build subsidised “affordable” housing. All of this is likely to have long-term negative impacts on the housing market. Investors have and will find better places to put their money. Our governments are now in the business of subsidising rental housing. Welcome to the Socialist Province of BC.
Dorothy says
People should have the freedom to rent their property the way they see fit, wether short or long term. All I know is that landlords have less power than tenants thanks to the tenancy branch and thus will loose money when dealing with unruly tenants, they don’t pay, do not want to move out, then the landlord has to pay a bailiff to come remove the tenant from the premises which after all the necessary paperwork has been done takes a long time. Unless you have been a landlord you have no idea what a headache certain tenants can be. The district needs to understand this before coming up with draconian laws!
LT says
If you would like a voice at the table, please email our council (council@squamish.ca) and cc the city planner Aja Philp (aphilp@squamish.ca). Prior staff recommendation only 10 letters were received.