Results of Townhomes Survey Regarding Leasing

Results of Townhomes Survey regarding Leasing

Survey Emailed June 21, 2017; surveys responses received through July 5th are included.

Number sent = 105

Number responding = 47

Q1: Do you support a restriction on short-term rentals?

66.7% - YES

31.1% - NO

1.2% - NO OPINION

Q2: If YES to Q1, do you support a restriction of?

90 DAYS - 33.3%

60 DAYS - 20%

30 DAYS – 46.7%

Q3: If YES to Q1, should the maximum number of rentals per calendar year be?

4 TIMES – 73.3%

6 TIMES – 26.7%

8 Times – 0%Q1: Do you support a restriction on short-term rentals?

Comments :

We purchased a townhome in AMR because short-term rentals were not allowed. We paid $30 to $40/sf more than comparable townhomes elsewhere (including our neighbors the Ponds) so that we wouldn’t have a resort/motel feel with housekeeping companies arriving many mornings to swap out for the next guest.

Who came up with this crap? in a community with short-term rentals because the neighborhood may be noisier, common property may not be as well taken care of, and/or home exteriors and landscaping could deteriorate. • Renters are less likely to know of and/or follow rules regarding pets and pet waste, noise, exterior lighting, not feeding wildlife, etc. • Renters are less likely to take good care of common property than owners. • Vendors entering the rented property for cleaning and other services may disrupt the community (2)

Renting will decrease the value of our homes. We specifically bought our home because not a good rental neighborhood due to distance from slopes. Owners who cannot afford to live at Angler without renting should move to a less expensive neighborhood.

Any short term rental policy should not restrict the ability of the homeowner to allow invited guests to use their townhome for periods less than thirty days.

As a long term, full-time home owner, I agree with all of the downsides listed to renting property and would actually prefer no rentals at all. On the other hand, in this resort community with so many seasonal and weekend owners, I can see the benefit of occasional CAREFUL rental.

Allowing rentals will result in owners investing less in their homes, so we would like to only see long-term rentals (greater than 3 months) to be allowed.

We are against rentals for townhomes. It is disruptive and renters do not take care of property like and owner would. This includes fishing at the lake, the Yacht Club, etc. Renters can be noisy, bring too many people into the community and generally disrupt what we love about our community -- a sense of community!

I believe that short term rentals (i.e. VRBO vacation rentals) greatly diminishes the quality of the neighborhood and the value of the property. I do think there is some wisdom in having the same rule applied to all neighborhoods and therefore I would support adopting the same rule that the cabins neighborhood has adopted.

We support a rental restriction of 90-day minimum. But we checked 30 day minimum because we feel it would be more acceptable to the neighborhood.

No dogs should be a stipulation in rentals

If rental period is during the summer, the owner should be required to hired a gardener to maintain personal landscape areas

I don't see how this will be enforced no matter what is decided, but here is my $.02 worth. Thanks!

I am against prohibiting short term rentals. As a Realtor in Summit County, restricting short term rentals impacts the resale of a property. Buyers want the option to be able to rent it out when they are not using it. As an investor, I purchased my AMR property with the intent of being able to rent it out. I am legally required to rent it out or pay a large amount of capital gains taxes. I will be renting out when I am traveling. At a minimum, I would like my unit to be grand fathered into Short Term rentals as that was the situation when I bought it. The justification about cleaning up after renters dogs, we could address this by not allowing renters to have dogs. I would support this change. I have heard that there has only been one issue with a short term rental in the 9 years of AMR's existence and it was related to a dog. The renters were spoken to and the problem rectified. I think we are getting too many rules. We already have a lot of rules. Let's trust that people will be responsible adults. If they prove us wrong, then implement a mitigation.

Prefer No Rentals. If rentals occur, tenant should not be able to use Yacht Club or Fish in lake. Homeowner should be required to file paperwork with Management Association listing who (names, cell phones, etc) is renting and duration of lease. Should only be able to rent to single families, no ski worker community housing.

Thanks for caring about this!

I believe that this survey is bias in its nature in trying to impose restrictions on ALL of us. I advocate no or minimal rental restrictions for three reasons. Our Freedom, Our Finances and Our Future. Our government, both federal and local, have been slowly taking away our rights and freedoms. Why would we vote to limit our freedoms on property that we own,when we don't know what is in our future.Maybe not now, but in the future you may want to rent out your property or need to sell and want to attract the widest market possible. Voting to limit rentals will reduce your value and limit your market. Please keep the following facts in mind: Information from a 25 year Real Estate veteran in Summit County; 1. Average property holding period is 5-7 yrs. 2. 80% of all properties are condos or town homes. 3. 35% full-time residents 65% second homes(biggest market) 4. Ask Your Real Estate broker their opinion. The successful developer of AMR ,Tim and Dawn Crane , during their ownership have rejected the idea of rental restrictions. They recognize the limitations and loss of freedoms that such a restriction would impose on each owner. Please think about your future if this should come to a vote.

This survey seems very limited in choices for all homeowners. there could be more options rather then 30,60,90 days. What about 2,3 or 7 day rentals. how about simpler restrictions like no pets or a minimum age? The options listed seem overkill and are directed towards eliminating owners freedoms

First, we feel the ballot question itself is extremely leading against rentals. The whole attempt at a fair survey appears biased. While we recognize that short term rentals can lead to issues and problems, those are not limited in a neighborhood like ours to just renters. Home owners and their extended family and friends can and do present similar neighborhood problems and disruptions as renters can if not properly regulated and educated. We have a neighbor who rents and we had a small problem which was handled easily and has never posed another problem because the homeowners realized they need to better explain the neighborhood rules to future renters. That said, we've also had issues with those home owners' family members parking in our driveway. And, we have folks across the street who violate rules all the time. For instance, the owner at 273 Fly Line feeds the wildlife on every trip and used to drop his garbage in the developer's construction bin. In addition, the owner at 275 Fly Line have had noisy wind chimes next to their home since before we moved in and it creates a noise nuisance on a regular basis. Our point is that issues will arise whether rentals are allowed or not. And, with high nightly rates at a place like AMR, we feel it is likely that problems with renters are minimal. If home owners are proactive with a list of rules and regulations and do not allow dogs, most renters will be respectful. As for your argument about excessive traffic created by cleaners, nothing prohibits owners from using cleaning services as well when they leave. As full time residents we in fact have a cleaning service in our driveway every other week. There's really no reason why allowing short term rentals will reduce market value at AMR overall but we can tell you definitively that it will reduce the number of prospective buyers in a resort community such as ours. That in turn can hold back property values as property use is diminished. You may want to research the model used by Ruby Ranch regarding short term rentals - they allow them but post explicit rules to home owners to follow. If they are violated, the home owner may lose their privilege to rent in the future. They have a public website you can easily find.

if we already have the language in the declarations, let's just stick to it.Who came up with this crap? in a community with short-term rentals because the neighborhood may be noisier, common property may not be as well taken care of, and/or home exteriors and landscaping could deteriorate. • Renters are less likely to know of and/or follow rules regarding pets and pet waste, noise, exterior lighting, not feeding wildlife, etc. • Renters are less likely to take good care of common property than owners. • Vendors entering the rented property for cleaning and other services may disrupt the community (2)