Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianL99
Perhaps your viewpoint is backwards?
|
Perhaps not
Quote:
|
Folks buy homes in Residential zoning districts, they have a reasonable right to assume that the home next door to them, won't become a hotel.
|
Where has any two or three bedroom house been torn down and replaced by a multi-unit facility with a front desk? You can name it a hotel to try to make your point but that doesn't change reality. It is still a single family home with the normal number of persons residing in it.
Folks should not make assumptions, folks should make themselves aware of laws and covenants and what rights they and their neighbors have. This discussion seems to be about buyer's remorse and a desire to take away neighbor's rights to quell that remorse.
Quote:
In most cases, a "hotel" is worth more than a "home".
If STR's are eliminated in areas where the didn't belong in the first place, status quo continues, albeit rolled back to where everything should have been in the first place.
Of course, some folks are all about how much money they can make and don't have any qualms about destabilizing the neighborhoods where they buy homes.
|
STRs are currently situated exactly where they belong.
Demanding legislation that will result in vacant homes, an increase in homes on the market, the loss of property rights, increased restrictions and higher taxes just doesn't sound like a path to increased home values.