The Savannah City Council should be commended for adopting a reasonable compromise on regulating short-term vacation rentals in the city’s Historic District, an issue that has festered for months and pitted well-meaning groups of property owners with similar goals against one another.
The council unanimously endorsed the city’s staff’s recommendations for controlling the growth of STVRs, as well as the larger issue of new hotels, but there is still some fine-tuning to be done before the changes become official.
In a unanimous vote, the council voted to move forward with revisions to the STVR ordinance by limiting the amount of vacation rentals to 20 percent of the residential properties in a ward.
The percentage was chosen as a compromise between the Savannah Downtown Neighborhood Association, which wanted a 15 percent limit, and vacation rental representatives, who pushed for a 35 percent cap, said Bridget Lidy, director of Savannah’s Tourism Management & Ambassadorship Department. That seems a fair split as it allows some STVRs, but also protects certain areas from being over-saturated.
Vacation rentals that are owner-occupied would be exempt from the cap, Ms. Lidy said.
That’s fair as well, as an owner will be sensitive to neighborhood concerns about excessive noise and bad behavior that detracts from the quality of life, and can eventually hurt property values.
The changes were spurred by concerns of residents about the growing number of STVRs in the city and the impact on the amount of long-term rentals available, as well as quality-of-life issues related to trash, noise and parking. Rental owners have argued the concerns are overblown, and that properties have helped rehabilitate blighted, vacant properties, provide jobs and increase the city’s tax base.
There are elements of truth on both sides and the city must be careful about wrongly restricting private property rights. At the same time, the city should adopt a no-tolerance policy toward STVR operators who are deemed chronic violators of the rules because of repeat neighborhood complaints. In such instances, STVR owners should lose their city permits and be subject to increasingly stiffer fines to convince them to clean up their acts and be good neighbors.
A motion by Alderman Bill Durrence for a 90-day halt on the issuance of permits for new rentals failed due to a lack of a second from the rest of the council. Durrence said he was surprised at the lack of support since it could be at least two months before the changes are adopted.
He shouldn’t have been that surprised. A temporary halt on new permits would have unfairly penalized property owners who have already made important financial decisions based on the ability to get an STVR permit from the city. Besides, the 15 percent cap should be in place to prevent certain blocks or neighborhoods from going over the city-approved limit.
Fortunately, all sides seemed unanimous in wanting to preserve the special character of the Historic District, which makes this area so desirable for residents and visitors. This compromise seems to advance this important goal.
However, the city should continue to monitor this situation. If limits and strict enforcement of the STVR rules don’t fix the noise and bad behavior problems, then officials should revisit the situation and consider other solutions.