Short-Term Rentals in Herron-Morton Place by the Neighborhoods Will Give the Neighborhood Association a More Accurate and Up-To-Date Understanding

Home , Downtown Indianapolis

Herron-Morton Place Association

IUPUI O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs Capstone – V473

Presented by: Neighborhood Watch Team

Kelly Barbret | Libby Bowling | Megan Gasper | Saymah Kollison | Andrew Turner

Fall 2019

Contacts

Herron-Morton Place Association Contact:

Kelly De Waal Email: [email protected] Phone Number: (317) 727-7567

Neighborhood Watch Team Contacts:

Saymah Kollison Megan Gasper Kelly Barbret Email: Email: Email: [email protected] [email protected] u [email protected] Phone Number: Phone Number: Phone Number: (317)918-5098 (812)592 -7076 (734)883-0970

Libby Bowling Andrew Turner Email: Email: [email protected] [email protected] Phone Number: Phone Number: (317)965-9417 (765)432-8962

Course Instructor Contacts

Teresa Bennett Email: [email protected] Phone Number: (317)278-9173 Unai Miguel Andres Email: [email protected] Phone Number: (317)274-2414

Table of Contents

List of Findings ...... 4 Glossary of Key Terms ...... 5 Executive Summary ...... 6 Research Approach ...... 6 Conclusions ...... 7 Recommendations ...... 7 Introduction ...... 8 Goals and Objectives ...... 9 Deliverables ...... 9 Methodology ...... 10 Literature Review ...... 10 Case Studies ...... 10 Primary Research ...... 10 Literature Review ...... 11 Herron-Morton Place ...... 11 Culture of Herron-Morton Place ...... 11 Herron-Morton Association ...... 12 Indianapolis and Short-term Rentals ...... 13 Herron-Morton Place ...... 13 Economics of Short-term Rentals ...... 14 Local Housing Prices ...... 15 Restrictions and Public Policy on Short-term Rentals ...... 15 Current Indiana Policies ...... 16 Midwestern Case Studies ...... 18 Chicago, Illinois ...... 18 Cincinnati, Ohio ...... 18 Columbus, Ohio ...... 19 Carmel, Indiana ...... 20 Ann Arbor, Michigan ...... 21

Detroit, Michigan ...... 22 Traverse City, Michigan ...... 23 Analysis and Findings ...... 27 Findings ...... 39 Secondary Research Findings ...... 39 Primary Research Findings ...... 39 Conclusion ...... 41 Recommendations ...... 42 Monitor ...... 42 Educate ...... 42 Survey ...... 42 References ...... 43

List of Findings Figure 1: Total Impact Selections ...... 27 Figure 2: Impact on Culture ...... 28 Figure 3: Impact on Public Safety ...... 29 Figure 4: Impact on Parking Availability ...... 30 Figure 5: Impact on Public Works (Sidewalks, Trash removal, Etc.) ...... 31 Figure 6: Impact on Small Business Responses ...... 32 Figure 7: Impact on Housing/Rent Prices Responses ...... 33 Figure 8: Aggregated Impact Responses, by Age ...... 34 Figure 9: Aggregated Impact Responses by length of residency in Herron-Morton Place ...... 35 Figure 10: Aggregated Impact Responses by length of anticipated residency in Herron-Morton Place ...... 36 Figure 11: Aggregated Impact Responses by number of individuals living in a household ...... 37 Figure 12: Aggregated Impact Responses for those with or without children ...... 38

Glossary of Key Terms

Short-term rental: Houses or rooms that are rented for a time period ranging from one night to one year. For the purpose of this report, short-term rentals are often rented by those from out- of-town and the transaction is done through online applications as part of the sharing economy Destructive: Causing damage or harm in areas including but not limited to private property, public infrastructure, neighborhood culture, or quality of life Beneficial: Having positive externalities in areas including but not limited to neighborhood culture and quality of life Neighborhood culture: The level of social cohesion and shared values applied across neighborhood residents Public works: Shared infrastructure, institutions, and services meant to improve quality of life, safety, and health for neighborhood residents

Executive Summary

Herron-Morton Place Neighborhood is a Historic Neighborhood located on the upper Near Northside of Indianapolis (City Data, 2019). The neighborhood was added to the listing of the National Register of Historic Places in 1983 to preserve the historic value of the remaining structures in the area (Berkson, 2018). With this listing comes certain regulations that must be maintained in order to ensure the preservation of key historic elements in the neighborhood.

With the introduction of short-term rentals including those found through platforms like Airbnb and VRBO, the Herron-Morton Place Association has expressed concerns regarding the effect on neighborhood culture, safety, and economy. There is a national dialogue regarding short- term rentals and their impact to the communities where they exist. Kelly DeWaal of the Herron- Morton Place Association brought these concerns forward, asking Teresa Bennett and her Fall 2019 V473 Capstone class for assistance.

The Neighborhood Watch Team is comprised of five Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs Undergraduate students who took on this task. The Neighborhood Watch Team agreed to conduct research and compile a final report that is relevant to Herron-Morton Place’s concerns regarding short-term rentals. The team conducted a survey, compiled a literature review, and reviewed case studies to analyze data and determine the actual and perceived impact short-term rentals have on Herron-Morton Place.

Research Approach The Neighborhood Watch Team conducted both primary and secondary research to fulfill the needs of the clients. The secondary research took the form of reviews of case studies on short- term rentals in areas similar to the Herron-Morton Place, which included Boston, Carmel, Chicago, and Cincinnati. The Neighborhood Watch Team also reviewed legislations such as HEA 1035 and the Chicago Municipal code, and the economic effects of these bills, including but not limited to housing/rent price as well as taxation possibilities. Our primary research included a survey that was distributed to 180 members of the Herron-Morton Place Association. This survey included demographic questions as well as questions regarding the residents’ opinions concerning the culture, safety, parking availability, public works, local business, and housing/rent prices. These perceptions were elicited through a Matrix scale with options of; Very Beneficial, Beneficial, Slightly Beneficial, No Impact, Slightly Destructive, Destructive, and Very Destructive. With 53 residents’ responses the Neighborhood Watch Team was able to complete a thorough analysis of the information gathered.

Conclusions Through the use of primary and secondary research, the Neighborhood Watch Team concluded that the prevalence of short-term rentals is not current concern. The majority of the survey respondents indicated there was “No Impact” on the daily functions yet, a portion responded “Slightly Destructive” for the neighborhood culture. Through secondary research it was found that Herron-Morton Place is made up of 3-6% short-term rentals. In other cities of similar size where regulation has occurred, there is a much larger percentage of short-term rentals in place.

Recommendations As a result of the conclusions the Neighborhood Watch Team would make the following recommendations; • Continue to further evaluate short-term rentals to ensure they are operating at a standard that aligns with the culture of the neighborhood • Educate the individuals that are operating short-term rentals about the established requirements they must follow • Continue with an annual survey of the opinions of the residents

Introduction Short-term rentals, especially those from websites such as AirBnB and VRBO, are a relatively new dilemma hitting communities within the past decade. Short-term rentals cause an influx of outsiders to enter local communities, sometimes for a night or two and occasionally for a few months. Due to this being an extremely modern occurrence, the long-term impact of short- term rentals is unknown. Nationally and internationally cities have issued bans, limits, taxes, and regulations on short term rentals when they reach a level that the municipality deems detrimental. Many proponents of short-term rentals feel that this is a new way for individuals to generate additional income and showcase areas in an authentic way. On the other hand, those opposed to short-term rentals feel that the lack of regulation and financial incentive to rent for a shorter period leads to an overall negative impact on smaller communities.

Kelly DeWaal, a representative of the Herron-Morton Place Association, brought the concern of short-term rentals and their impact to Teresa Bennet and her Fall 2019 Capstone Students. Residents of Herron Morton Place has questions about the long-term effects of short-term rentals on neighborhood culture and economics, as well as frustrations with the way some short-term rental properties operated. Herron Morton Place is comprised of 25 blocks situated between North Pennsylvania Street, Central Avenue, East 22nd Street and East 16th street. The area has been designated a historic neighborhood since 1983 (Berkson, 2018), and is subject to certain regulations as such. Residents take pride in the well-preserved historic structures while embracing modern construction on vacant lots, which contributes to a unique and celebrated neighborhood feel. High levels of property maintenance, vibrant small businesses, and public arts add to the creative and welcoming neighborhood culture. The ability of property owners to profit from an influx of short-term residents with no stake in the area raised concern for some in the neighborhood who wish to better understand the dynamics of the practice. See Appendix B for the complete proposal.

Little research has been done on areas of size and situation comparable to Herron-Morton Place regarding short-term rentals. Existing research and aggressive legislative action has taken place in much more populous cities where the rates of short-term rentals are extremely high and the economic consequences are more overt. A small neighborhood in a Midwestern city where the alarm has been raised by a subset of residents presented a unique set of considerations and several unknowns.

The Neighborhood Watch Team, consisting of 5 Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) O’Neill School of Policy and Environmental Affairs Students, took on the challenge of addressing the impacts of these short-term rentals on the neighborhood. After

meeting with Kelly DeWaal, Neighborhood Watch Team came up with the following Goals and Objectives and Deliverables, also found in Appendix A: Statement of Work.

Goals and Objectives 1. Understanding the concerns that residents have about short-term rentals through research. 2. Research other areas that are also having the same issues with short-term rentals to provide the client with ideas. 3. Gather data from short-term rental sites and create an average of how many are listed and how much the average cost is in Herron-Morton Place. 4. Develop a final report that the provides the client with ideas and statistics to help them make decisions in the near future.

Deliverables 1. Statement of Work: Our “Statement of work” outlining specific goals and methodology used to achieve said goals. 2. Final Report: a. Map of the neighborhood featuring residences, businesses, commercial spaces, vacant spaces up for lease/sale, and areas or revitalization. b. Trend of STR over a period of 10 years. c. Identification of the utility and/or fallibility of short-term rentals for that specific neighborhood. d. Summary of HEA 1035 e. Executive Summary: A synopsis on the final report will be produced and available for the public. f. Structure of Herron-Morton Place: Neighborhood Watch Team will provide an outline of the neighborhood in depth. Listing residences, businesses, vacant lots, commercial units, etc., g. Resource Bibliography: The Neighborhood Watch team will research and provide Herron-Morton Place Association with relatable resources about short-term rentals and their impact on other neighborhoods. h. Survey of Neighbors: Neighborhood Watch team will provide survey responses from residents regarding their experiences and suggestion when it comes to dealing with short-term rentals. 3. Final Presentation: Neighborhood Watch team will provide a presentation for The Herron- Morton Neighborhood Association.

Methodology

Literature Review The literature review was focused on understanding the background of Herron-Morton Place as well as the policies applicable to short-term rentals. Herron-Morton Place is a unique neighborhood with a very specific culture and this needed to be explored to fully understand how short-term rentals could impact it. In addition, the types of law regarding short-term rentals were a key piece the client wanted to understand.

Case Studies Along with a general literature review, case studies, specifically of Midwestern cities, was a way to explore how short-term rentals were impacting culture. Nine cities were examined through city government records and local news articles, and an overview of each community was formed. The objective of each case study was to gain an understanding of how different municipalities responded to the usage of short term rentals, including how residents reacted and what legislative action, if any, was put in place.

Primary Research Neighborhood Watch Team created and distributed an electronic survey to members of the Herron-Morton Place Association. This survey consisted of 20 questions and focused on the demographics of the households in Herron-Morton Place as well as the perceived impact of short-term rentals on a variety of factors in the neighborhood. This survey was open for three weeks.

Literature Review

Herron-Morton Place Herron-Morton Place is a historically preserved neighborhood located in the near North side of Indianapolis (Herron-Morton Association, 2018). Specifically, it is located on the north side of 16th Street to the south side of 22nd Street, and from Pennsylvania Street to Central Avenue. The neighborhood consists largely of residential lots with Classical Revival, Queen Anne, and Tudor Revival architecture, Herron-Morton Place totals to 147 acres in size United Stated Department of the Interior, 1983). See Appendix C, D, and E for more information about Herron-Morton and its historic application.

Samuel Henderson, the first mayor of Indianapolis, once owned much of the land that makes up present day Herron-Morton Place (Berkson, 2018). After feeling stagnant in Indianapolis, he sold the land to join the California Gold Rush and the land was subsequently purchased by the Indiana State board of Agriculture for a permanent State Fairground (Berkson, 2018). In 1861, this land was requisitioned to be an induction center for the Civil War and was named “Camp Morton” after Governor Oliver Morton (Berkson, 2018). In 1862, the land was turned into a Confederate prisoner of war camp as the southern portion of the land evolved into “Camp Burnside” where volunteers and members of the Reserve Corps lived (Berkson, 2018).

Once the Civil War ended, State Fair activities resumed until 1891 (Berkson, 2018). At this time, three businessmen purchased the land and converted it into 280 residential lots (Berkson, 2018). Dubbing the area “Morton Place,” they lined the streets with large esplanades and set aside land for a new museum and art school (Berkson, 2018). Quickly becoming a desired neighborhood in Indianapolis, everyone from lawyers, artists, and politicians moved in (Berkson, 2018). With the invention and widespread distribution of the automobile, the tree- lined streets were widened, and the majority of decorative foliage was lost (Berkson, 2018). Continuing the devastation, between 1950-1970 a number of original homes were lost to fire and neglect Berkson, 2018). The listing of Herron-Morton Place in the National Register of Historic Places in 1983 helped preserve the majority of the remaining structures (Berkson, 2018). The extensive history of the neighborhood, view an official timeline on Appendix E. For the complete national register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form, see Appendix F.

Culture of Herron-Morton Place Once the 21st century hit, Herron-Morton Place began a new portion of its lifespan. Families have begun to repopulate the area and Herron School of Art and Design is now designated

within Herron-Morton Place as a charter high school. Joanna Taft, Director of the Harrison Center, was interviewed regarding the changing demographics of Herron-Morton Place and stated “Recently Herron-Morton rebranded their neighborhood. They decided they wanted to be known for arts, diversity and porching. I suggested to them that they might want to consider partnering with other neighborhoods to enhance the diversity of their community” (King, 2018). Taft continued speaking about how Herron-Morton Place is working actively to be a place focused on community and the concept of knowing your neighbors (King, 2018).

Herron-Morton Place has a long history of culture pertaining to the arts. In 1902, the John Herron Art Institute was unveiled within the district (Berkson, 2018). In 1926, a theater was introduced on Alabama Street and named the Civic theater. Leased by Footlite Musicals and renamed Hedback Community Theater in 1974, the theater is still in use (Footlite Musicals, 2019). In 1976, the 15th annual ‘Talbot Street Art Fair’ moved into the Herron-Morton Place neighborhood and has since stayed there ever (Berkson, 2018). In addition, Herron-Morton Park hosts a variety of small concerts and local artists providing a continued influence of music and community within the neighborhood (Downtown Indy, 2018).

Herron-Morton Association Founded in 1976 and legally incorporated in 1978, Herron-Morton Place Association was created with the intent to: “To promote the common good and general welfare, To bring about civic betterments and social improvements, To provide educational, charitable and recreational programs and other needed community services for the benefit of the residents of the Neighborhood (Berkson, 2018).” The Association and the Foundation are complimentary groups that work together to better the lives of Herron-Morton residents. By putting on events, organizing neighborhood cleanups, and holding monthly Association meetings, the Association advocates for maintaining a healthy and happy community.

Herron-Morton Place is located within the near northside neighborhood of Indianapolis. With a population of approximately 1,3339 and 528 households, it has grown since its beginnings into a culture rich hideaway within the city (City Data, 2019). Herron-Morton Place averages between 1.9 and 2.5 people per household depending on which data source is utilized. In addition, the average age is 32 years old. The majority of households contain two working adults and only 1 car. (City Data, 2019). See Appendix F for a full demographic report.

Indianapolis and Short-term Rentals Short-term rentals have been consistently growing over the past decade in the United States (Statista, 2019). Short-term rentals used to be an underground, hard to locate business sector, but the internet has enabled the creation of a business model that is part of the peer-to-peer sharing economy (Einav, Farronateo, and Levin, 2015). In fact, Indianapolis is one of the top trending U.S. cities for AirBnB (Hocker & Assocaites, LLC, 2018). According to data from AirDNA, Indianapolis’ short-term rentals are experiencing “explosive growth” based on these three factors: 1. Hosts benefitted from 17.4 percent revenue growth between 2018 and 2019 2. Number of available spaces for short-term rentals has grown 39 percent between 2018 and 2019 3. Occupancy rates have gone up 6 percent since 2018

Indianapolis has consistently been ranked as one of the fastest growing short-term rental economies since data started being collected (Sission, 2019). Indianapolis is not a typical destination city. While it may not have year-round attractions, it does host a number of large conventions and sporting events. In 2019, it was found that over 4,700 guests rented short- term rentals in the Indianapolis area over Memorial Day weekend (also known as Indy 500 weekend) bringing in over $700,000 of supplemental income to the hosts. According to a spokesperson for AirBnB, the 2018 Indianapolis 500 brought in 3,200 guests by comparison (Fox59, 2019).

Herron-Morton Place According to AirDNA, a company that monitors short-term rental listings, prices, and prevalence, Herron-Morton Place has between 20-30 listings at any time (AirDNA, 2019). This is approximately 3-6% of households listing themselves as a short-term rental. Rentals range from entire homes with detached carriage houses to singular spare rooms within a larger estate. See Appendix G and H for full AirDND reports.

In addition, AirBnB, the most popular site used for short-term rentals has the following information for all listings within the state linked. Guests who book AirBnB listings that are located in Indiana State, IN will pay the following taxes as part of their reservation: • Gross Retail Tax: 7% of the listing price including any cleaning fees for reservations 28 nights and shorter. For detailed information, please visit the Indiana Tax FAQs website.

• County Inkeeper's Tax: 2-10% of the listing price including any cleaning fees for reservations 28 nights and shorter. For detailed information, visit the County Inkeeper's Tax website.

Economics of Short-term Rentals One of the most obvious arguments for short-term rentals is that it is a way to increase income for property owner. At the end of the day, it is a business and someone is benefitting from the charges they place upon renters. One study showed, that an individual could bring in over $2,533 dollars annually by operating short-term rentals at an average rental cost and occupancy rate (AirDNA, 2019). Being amenity unregulated within the City of Indianapolis, it is an easy way to accumulate disposable income for the owner.

Pillow, a company aimed at helping owners and operators of short-term rentals compile data on the average earnings of standard apartment units of various floorplans across the US (Lee, 2018). From this data, Pillow determined the earnings for the following apartment sizes: studio, 1-bedroom, 2-bedroom, and 3-bedroom (Lee, 2018). It was found that a standard 1-bedroom apartment could reasonably go for $137/night meaning if it was occupied by a renter 30 nights a year, an owner would earn $4,110 (Lee, 2018). The average nightly rate goes up to $178 for a standard 2-bedroom and $304 for a Standard 3-bedroom apartment (Lee, 2018). For a studio, an individual could make around $118 per night (Lee, 2018). These nightly premiums can really add up (Lee, 2018). For example, a 2-bedroom apartment with a monthly rent of $1,800 could likely charge a nightly rate of somewhere around $180 on AirBnB (Lee, 2018). If this apartment was rented just 10 days each month, the revenue accumulated would equal the cost of rent (Lee, 2018).

Within the Herron-Morton neighborhood, the average cost per night of a short-term rental is $140 (AirDNA, 2019). In some cases, the income is directly going to people who live within Herron-Morton. This is generally the case for rentals advertised on AirBnB specifically. On the other end, companies or individuals outside of Herron-Morton residents can own and rent property there without residing in it.

Short term vacation renters are spending a significant amount of time in local communities (Giuliano, 2019). The average business traveler spends 3.8 nights in an AirBnB property compared to only 2.1 nights in a hotel, meaning guests are spending more money during these longer trips (Giuliano, 2019). The fact that vacation rentals are often cheaper than hotels indicates that vacation renters have more disposable income when they visit a neighborhood, reshaping the local economy (Giuliano, 2019). Vacation rentals are also having an effect on the

hotel industry, with demand for AirBnB properties resulting in a decrease in hotel room revenue (Giuliano, 2019). The rise of the rental industry has brought a notable shift in traveling habits, as renters explore residential neighborhoods, contribute to the local economy, and stay in rented properties for longer (Giuliano, 2019).

Local Housing Prices While there has long been the speculation of short-term rentals and home-sharing causing higher rent prices, there has been minimal academic and numerical based research to prove this idea. Much of the research regarding short-term rentals has been qualitative in nature and focused on the opinions and perceived culture implications of this type of commerce occurring in a community. However, the Department of Economics at University of Massachusetts has begun serious empirical research regarding the effects and correlation of home-sharing on average rent prices. Boston and Indianapolis are similar in size making this study extremely relevant to our research. With populations of 694,583 and 867,125 respectively based upon reports from the US Census Bureau, these cities will most likely experience similar effects on rent (World Population Review, 2019).

In Boston, a “direct correlation between AirBnB density and the price of such [multi-listed properties] housing” was discovered (Merante and Horn, 2016, pg 21). In fact, their data showed as much as $93 in mean monthly asking rent for individual units (Merante and Horn, 2016, pg 19). This is a pivotal study due to it being the seminal quantifier of the correlation with AirBnB usage and housing prices. However, before this study, both New York City and San Francisco conducted less extensive research. New York City confirmed the correlation between AirBnB listings and an increase in asking rents for long-term housing in 2015 (AirBnB in NYC Housing Report). San Francisco came to the same conclusion as published in this Policy Analysis Report (City and County of San Francisco, 2015).

Restrictions and Public Policy on Short-term Rentals International cities known as major tourist destinations have experienced an increase in short- term rentals at a rate that has changed their housing markets rapidly. In these cities the housing market becomes saturated with short-term rentals to the extent that housing costs are no longer accessible to locals, causing public outcry. Legislative bodies have enacted everything from taxes and limits to outright bans, and many have required registration through the city government that places exhaustive regulations on short-term rental properties and issues fines for violations. Barcelona went as far as to fine AirBnB $600,000 for listing unlicensed properties on its platform, which AirBnB contested and did not pay. London is perhaps one of the friendliest cities towards short-term rentals, having amended their housing legislation to be

more friendly towards homeowners wishing to rent their house for less than three months a year. Berlin enacted a total ban on short-term rental properties, but the ban was overturned shortly after passing. See Appendix I for global short-term rental restrictions.

Within the United States, there have been a variety of different approaches to tackling the issues imposed by short-term rentals (Simmons, 2019). Looking at Appendix K, it is clear that a variety of United States cities have begun some sort of regulation. Cities that have known housing shortages such as Los Angeles and San Francisco are some of the most heavily regulated with other tourism heavy cities also on the list. What is not displayed are the smaller community or municipality regulations.

Due to the growing tourism in the Pacific Northwest, many small towns within Washington have begun regulating short-term rentals (Staff, 2018). Upon investigation of the city policies of both San Juan and Leavenworth, Washington, there are many similarities. Both cities require registration of all short-term rental facilities and that it regulates. Smaller details such as parking, trash, and noise restrictions are also covered. These policies are put into place at a city level, but the cities are much smaller than Indianapolis.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, cities such as San Francisco and New York City, both being large metropolitan areas, have some of the strictest policies regarding on short-term rentals. See Appendix J for summary of short-term rental restrictions in the United States. See Appendix K, L, M, and N for details operating short-term rentals in specific U.S. cities.

Current Indiana Policies Within the State of Indiana, there are a couple housing policies that can be utilized to govern short-term rentals. In 2018, House Bill 1035 was signed into law in Indiana by Governor Holcomb and is a way to protect responsible owners of short-term rentals (Hocker & Assocaites, LLC, 2018). Specifically, the law creates: 1. Prohibition on regulation of short-term rental of an owner's primary residence permitted under any applicable ordinance 2. Special exception, special use or zoning variance in the event the rental unit is not the owner's primary residence 3. Prohibition on interpretation and enforcement of zoning regulations that have the effect of unreasonably restricting or prohibiting all short-term rentals of property

4. Gives local government authority to require an owner to obtain a single permit for each property, regardless of the number of dwelling units or attached accessory structures 5. Gives government permission to charge no more than $150 for an initial permit and for permit revocation, but prohibits fee for permit removal 6. Allows restriction of short-term rentals within a conservancy district Within the State of Indiana, a conservancy district refers directly to an organized special taxing district that is created to address issues related to a water resources management (Indiana Department of Natural Resources). While this may seem like an odd protection, it was specifically lobbied for at the state level. Similar to Historical Districts, conservancy districts are determined and governed by an office at the state level. In addition, many communities did not have their short-term rental laws grandfathered in. Carmel, which passed its own regulation on short-term rentals just months before House Enrolled Act 1035, was outraged because their restrictions were made moot by the new state law (Hocker and Assocaites, 2018). For complete HEA 1035 see Appendix O.

Midwestern Case Studies

Chicago, Illinois As a metropolitan area within the Midwest, there are many parallels between Indianapolis and Chicago. One major difference is that Chicago has a specific ordinance for governing short-term rentals. Enacted in 2016 by the Chicago City Council, the Shared Housing Ordinance breaks down specific licensing requirements for three different types of short-term rentals: Shared Housing Unit Operator, Vacation Rental, and Bed & Breakfast (Marotti, 2018). In addition, they separate out online renting platform into two categories: Short Term Residential Rental Intermediary and Short Term Residential Rental Advertising Platform (Marotti, 2018).

Upon release, this ordinance made Chicago the first city in the nation to require licensed companies to provide the city with basic shared housing unit information, submit bimonthly reports regarding rental activity, and adhere to a quality of life plan to ensure ongoing compliance with the city’s ordinance (Chacon, 2017). To ensure neighborhood quality of life is protected, the ordinance established a “prohibited buildings list” to enforce building prohibitions on rental activity with more than 1,500 being added at time of enactment Chacon, 2017). The city does stand to gain from this regulation. More than $2 million in revenue is expected to be generated annually for the City by collecting a four percent surcharge on the booking of any shared housing unit or vacation rental (Chacon, 2017).

This caused uproar in 2018 as more than 2,4000 AirBnB hosts were emailed rejection letters from the city stating that their license applications were denied (Marotti, 2018). The city has repeatedly stated they worked with corporate AirBnB to try and correct the issue but they needed to put their foot down (Marotti, 2018). The city also made it clear that rejected applications are not indefinite (Marotti, 2018). If the information is corrected, the host can continue their business without interference (Marotti, 2018). One long-time AirBnB host, Jennifer Serrano, stated “We’re definitely wanting to conform to everything that Chicago wants us to do, jump through all the hoops to be registered, but they’re not making it easy (Marotti, 2018). They’re making it near impossible” (Marotti, 2018). See Appendix P for complete Chicago Municipal Code.

Cincinnati, Ohio Cincinnati is newly regulating short-term rentals. Passed in 2019, the City now requires registration of short-term rentals and has placed a 7% excise tax on properties (Parton, 2019). Cincinnati City Council states they had three primary reasons for enacting this legislation:

1. To recognize short-term rentals as a popular practice for local residents 2. To provide a regulatory environment while focusing on “responsibility and accountability” among operators and limiting neighborhood impact 3. To authorize penalties, fines, permit suspensions, or revoke short-term registrations in some situations.

Only one month after passing this legislation, Local 12, a local news station, found that an apartment complex near the Great American Ball Park was experiencing dissatisfied residents due to the short-term rentals (Smith-Randolph, 2019). One of the original residents, Barbara Smurda, stated “I did not move here to live in a hotel, and that's what I feel like I'm living here now” (Smith-Randolph, 2019). Another resident, Scott Hickman, stated “I don't know who's next door to me, so it's concerning (Smith-Randolph, 2019). Who knows what kind of background checks they do? Everyone here, to my knowledge, has a credit check, a background check. I don't know who's living here for two days at a time” (Smith-Randolph, 2019). Cincinnati City Councilmember David Mann sympathized with these residents and continued to assure them the legality of everything would be under scrutiny (Smith-Randolph, 2019). Mann cites safety and limited housing supply as his key reasons to continue reforming and researching additional legislative plans for Cincinnati (Smith-Randolph, 2019).

Columbus, Ohio Similar to Indianapolis in some respects, Columbus is not a year-round tourist attraction. The main reason visitors flock to this city is sports- specifically Ohio State University football. In fact, Columbus’ AirBnB hosts collected a combined $2 million by opening their homes and apartments to about 22,000 guests for Ohio State football weekends in Fall 2019, according to the short-term rental company (Colombo, 2019). In order to see the potential added income for these events, AirBnB broke down the earnings by weekend for the 2019 collegiate football season. • Aug. 20-22: $232,000 in host income with 2,675 guest arrivals • Sept. 6-8: $236,000 in host income with 2,780 guest arrivals • Sept. 20-22: $241,000 in host income with 2,750 guest arrivals • Oct. 4-6: $348,000 in host income with 3,691 guest arrivals • Oct. 25-27: $340,000 in host income with 3,429 guest arrivals • Nov. 8-10: $269,000 in host income with 3,160 guest arrivals • Nov. 22-24: $351,000 in host income with 3,561 guest arrivals Events and one-day attractions can add a significant addition in income- even more so than the highly competitive, classical tourist locations (Colombo, 2019).

In addition, Columbus is one of the several cities that has begun issuing permits in order to operate AirBnB and other short-term rentals (Colombo, 2019). Through the city’s Department of Public Safety within the city, short-term rentals must be issued a permit in order to lawfully operate (City of Columbus, 2019). In order to get a valid permit, applicants must apply in person at the Department of Public Safety License Section at 4252 Grove Road (Colombo, 2019).. They must submit a signed and notarized Short-Term Rental Application and pay the related fee of $20 (Colombo, 2019). The permit cost for a person’s primary residence is $75 per calendar year (Colombo, 2019). The permit cost for any non-primary residence is $150 each per calendar year. (City of Columbus, 2019). See Appendix Q for complete short-term rental application.

Carmel, Indiana As previously mentioned, Carmel is one of the cities within Indiana that took issue with House Bill 1035/ HEA 1035. The City Council of Carmel had many mixed reactions to the legal side of enforcement their own regulations on short-term rentals (House Enrolled Act No. 1035, 2014). HEA 1035 grandfathered in municipal regulations that were passed before January 1st, 2018. The Carmel Ordinance for short-term rentals was placed before that deadline, but new procedures regarding registration and restrictions were passed as an amendment after the deadline. This is the point of contention.

Legally, the Carmel ordinance states that rental properties can only be located within certain districts (House enrolled Act No. 1035, 2014). They can apply for exemptions and a hearing officer will review those. In addition, there is a one-time $100 application fee and an annual $50 renewal fee (Darling, 2018). Another restriction is that the home cannot be rented for more than 30 days (Sikick, 2018). Carmel Mayor, Jim Brainard, feels his city can continue to tighten their restrictions on short-term rentals. "The deadline says that if you already have an ordinance about vacation rentals, you're allowed to amendment… We could amend it five-years from now if we wanted to” (Darling, 2018). On the other side of the argument, supporters of the state law say it would promote tourism and economic development, as well as generate tax revenue (Chuang, 2018). Carmel representative Jerry Torr stated that legally nothing can be done until the court makes it’s determination on the differentiation between passing ordinances or amendment by the January 1st deadline in order to be grandfathered in (Chuang, 2018).

Culturally, many Carmel residents are worried that their property values and quality of life will be damaged by problems such as noise, speeding and increased traffic caused by a high turnover of people who don't care about the community (Sikick, 2018). On the other side, many

residents such as Debbie McBroom, state that there should be no issue with AirBnBs because the rating system on the application allows the program to weed out potentially bad guests (Sikick, 2018). In addition, many of the larger homes in the area are rented out as a form of supplemental income for the owners. Scott Jones, a multimillionaire, rents out his large mansion as he primarily lives in a different state (Higgins, 2017). See Appendix R for complete Carmel Code on short-term rentals.

Ann Arbor, Michigan Ann Arbor’s frequent sporting, academic, and cultural events draw in large numbers of tourists, creating an expansive market for short-term rentals through platforms like AirBnB and VRBO, similar to Columbus, Ohio (Chao, 2019). However, in light of Ann Arbor’s affordable housing crisis and the threat to the hospitality industry, city officials are considering regulating short- term rental companies. There are currently 978 AirBnB listings in Ann Arbor, and over 300 of these are for an entire home ranging from homes to one-bedroom apartments. This means there are 300+ less homes available for people who want to live in Ann Arbor (Chao, 2019).

To help alleviate concerns about short-term rentals, the city of Ann Arbor is considering policies to regulate these properties (Chao, 2019). The council held three public forums in October 2019 to discuss potential regulation and gather input from residents. Regulatory considerations mentioned by city officials during the meeting included allowing short-term rentals only in certain zones, taxing the properties, requiring registration and inspection, establishing a minimum and maximum length of stay for guests and only allowing properties where the owner remains at home during the stay. However, city officials noted these regulations may not solve the concerns typically associated with short-term rentals, which mostly relate to nuisance or noise issues reported by local residents for which regulations are already present (Chao, 2019).

Consultants hired to evaluate regulatory options previously said that there are about 1,400 Ann Arbor properties that were used for short-term rentals during a one-year period concluding in July (Moran, 2019). There can be more than 300 some months and less than 200 during others, with about twice as many whole-home or whole-apartment rentals as there are individual room rentals. Ann Arbor already regulates short-term rental properties that are not owner-occupied, requiring rental inspections and certifications. It is unknown how many calls about short-term rentals have been made to police, but the city’s zoning enforcement officer received about five to 10 complaints in the last year (Moran, 2019).

The meetings covered the pros and cons of regulation, noting that other cities regulate short- term rentals to maintain neighborhood integrity, bring in tax revenue, prevent nuisances, hold

renters and homeowners accountable and level the playing field between these properties and hotels (Chao, 2019). Without regulation, they also discussed that the city could not ensure that existing short-term rentals are up-to-date or safe for renters. Absence of regulation would also not reduce any potential negative impacts of these short-term rental properties and would be raise competition for business among these properties and traditional hotels/motels. The city can also not receive tax revenues without regulation (Chao, 2019).

Detroit, Michigan AirBnB has long been discussed at the city level in Detroit, Michigan (Williams, 2019). In early 2018, the city decided not to enforce an ordinance the council approved several months prior prohibiting owner-occupied units to be used for paid overnight guests (Williams, 2019). The ordinance caught some city officials by surprise and prompted a legal review; it is still not being enforced today (Williams, 2019). Detroit is working on an updated version of the ordinance introduced in September (Williams, 2019). It is unclear when a new version will be submitted to the city clerk for the Detroit City Council to review (Williams, 2019). The latest proposed version of an ordinance introduced in September allows for short-term rentals in owner- occupant properties (Williams, 2019). Property owners who remain home while hosting guests would not be subject to regulations and do not have to register their properties with the city (Williams, 2019). Owner-occupied properties where owners won’t stay on the premises while hosting guests will be subject to regulations such as a registration fee, a 90-day limit to operate and a 1,000-foot distance between other properties registered as short-term rentals (Williams, 2019). As currently proposed, short-term rentals would not be allowed in homes that are not owner-occupied (Williams, 2019).

Councilwoman Janee Ayers, who introduced the ordinance, has said she doesn’t want to stop people from making money but does not want to see neighborhoods turn into hotels (Williams, 2019). The city’s law department says the ordinance would address the biggest concern the city receives from neighbors about “party houses” by regulating rentals in which the owner does not remain present (Williams, 2019). An alternative package of bills introduced by Representative Jim Lilly, R-Park Township, in May 2019 would subject short-term rentals of over 14 days to the same taxation as hotels and motels (Williams, 2019). The hotel industry wants a fair playing field when it comes to lodging, said Justin Winslow, president of the Michigan Restaurant & Lodging Association (Williams, 2019).

On the other side, property owner Stephen Lovett, 43, of Royal Oak said he would gladly pay additional taxes (Williams, 2019). Under the current proposed ordinance, he would have to shut down his two short-term rentals in the city because both are non-owner occupied

(Williams, 2019). “There’s a lot of revenue that comes through this, and I think the city has every right to benefit from that as well,” he said. “We’re willing to do that.” Lovett said he purchased flats in two Cass Corridor area buildings and fixed them up solely to rent them out short-term two years ago (Williams, 2019). He also owns 15 long-term rentals in Detroit and four total short-term rentals in Royal and Berkley (Williams, 2019). He and his business partner saw the need for rentals outside of the central business district (Williams, 2019). “They were kind of ideal for short-term rentals,” he said. “The building that they’re in had been vacant for decades, and we were the first use of them in many decades. … We saw that based on kind of the numbers and the pricing, it really only worked well as a short-term rental based on what it costs to invest to get a property ready to go in some of these districts.” Lovett said guests from around the world have enjoyed the city in a way that’s different from staying in a hotel in the downtown area (Williams, 2019). “They’re actually involved in the neighborhood,” he said. “They’re integrating in the neighborhood. They’re patronizing the neighborhood-owned businesses. They’re able to stay longer because it’s more affordable than staying in a hotel” (Williams, 2019).

Traverse City, Michigan A popular vacation spot within Michigan, Traverse City has not been immune to the struggles of regulating AirBnB. As recent as the December 2019 City Council meeting, Traverse City officials are seeking to pass an ordinance to ban short-term rentals within the downtown area as the housing shortage continues to rise (Buti, 2019). A new study shows Grand Traverse County, home of Traverse City and small surrounding towns, needs at least 1,160 more rental units and 260 new ownership units in 2020 to keep up with local demand (Milligan, 2019). Based upon a 10 county study, the region hosts just three percent of the state’s population, but roughly a quarter of Michigan’s short-term rentals – or 6,235 of the 24,869 listings statewide – according to data compiled by Host Compliance, a company that scrapes data from vacation rental sites to track individual community listings (Milligan, 2019). While many city officials feel that regulating or banning short-term rentals is the only solution, the opposition provides data regarding the amount of business that is brought in by having these short-term rentals readily available. For example, City Planning Director Russ Soyring agreed that there are ways the city’s zoning code could be changed to allow for more long-term housing options without banning short-term rentals entirely (Milligan, 2019).

Primary Research Descriptions The Neighborhood Watch Team distributed a survey to approximately 180 Herron-Morton Place residents, 53 of who responded. The goal of the survey was to gauge attitudes of HMP residents about short-term rentals and to gain an understanding of the ways, if any, that they affect life in the neighborhood. See Appendix S for complete survey.

The survey was distributed by Neighborhood Watch Team member Saymah Kollison to all those on the Herron-Morton Place Neighborhood Association email list, provided by contact Kelly De Waal. The survey was open for three weeks, and one week after the original email was sent, a reminder email was sent to encourage recipients to take the survey if they had not already. These members were encouraged to share the survey with other neighbors, especially those who may operate a short term rental. It is important to note that the survey sample population is neither random nor exhaustive, and we cannot ensure accurate representation across all groups present in Herron-Morton Place.

Informed consent was obtained from all survey participants before they proceeded to the survey. The section read:

“The Neighborhood Watch Team is a research group made up of five IUPUI undergraduate students in the O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs. We are partnering with The Herron-Morton Place Association to learn about the opinions on short-term rentals within Herron-Morton Place.

Participation in this survey is completely voluntary and all results will be kept confidential. You may refuse to take part in the research or exit the survey at any time without penalty. This survey should take about five to seven minutes to complete. If you have questions at any time about the survey or the study. You may contact:

Andrew Turner - Student Representative- [email protected] Unai Miguel Andres – Instructor – [email protected]

By agreeing to take this survey, you are acknowledging that you live in Herron-Morton Place (neighborhood in Indianapolis, Indiana) and you are at least 18 years of age. Clicking on the “I agree” button indicates that: 1. You have read the above information 2. You voluntarily agree to participate 3. You are 18 years of age or older

4. You Live in Herron-Morton Place (neighborhood in Indianapolis, Indiana)”

Only after clicking “I agree” were respondents allowed to proceed to the survey.

The demographic information that was deemed relevant by the team was age, marital status, and employment status. Participants who identified themselves as under 18 were automatically directed to the end of the survey and thanked for their participation. Under marital status, separated, divorced, and widowed were given to explore the possibility that those formerly living with a partner would be more likely to lease a short-term rental as more space became available in their residence. Similarly, employment information was collected to observe trends in groups hosting short-term rentals. Additionally, all demographic indicators were included to observe how collective attitudes about short-term rentals varied across people groups.

Information regarding residency in Herron-Morton Place was collected next. Participants were asked about their occupancy status (homeowner versus renter), the amount of time they have lived in Herron-Morton Place, and the amount of time they plan to continue living in Herron- Morton Place. This information was collected to monitor for any groups that trended towards certain attitudes about short-term rentals. Participants were also asked about their membership in the Herron-Morton Place Association to explore any possible biases that members have regarding short-term rentals.

Next, participants provided information about their housing structures and household makeup. They selected from a list including single family, duplex, apartment, townhome, or condo, with an option to describe another option. Then, they provided information regarding those they share the space with - children, roommates, etc. Then, participants were asked if they operate a short-term rental. Those who selected no were directed to the final piece of the survey: a matrix that allowed participants to rank their attitudes on the various ways short-term rentals affect their neighborhood from “very destructive” to “very beneficial.” This segment allowed the Neighborhood Watch Team to explore the existing pervasive feelings about short-term rental properties and understand what perceptions residents currently have. Those who selected “yes” when asked if they operate a short-term rental were then asked a series of questions about the property, including length of average stay, cost of stay, size of accommodation (private room, entire home, etc.). Finally, this subgroup of participants were asked to complete the same matrix that others were directed to earlier.

To conclude the survey all participants were given a text box to share anything else they may have felt was relevant to the topic. The survey was given three weeks to circulate before results

were coded and interpreted by the Neighborhood Watch Team to provide insight for the final report.

In addition to the survey, Neighborhood Watch Team members attended two Herron-Morton Place Association meetings to familiarize residents with the project and engage with residents about any specific opinions regarding short-term rentals. One resident approached team members expressing frustration about living next to a property being rented through AirBnB. She cited loud noise and groups of people acting belligerent in the yard and on the balcony of the property. Over email this neighbor expressed willingness to be interviewed for the project, but eventually stopped returning emails from the team. Another neighbor told the team that a resident in her apartment building asked the board if they would allow their property to be rented out as a short-term rental. The board gave the resident permission to proceed but warned that should problems arise it would be within their power to prohibit the lease of the property for less than 6 months.

When conversing with residents, every effort was made to avoid leading questions and bias. Although the client had expressed their sentiment on short-term rentals beforehand, space to express a range of opinions was provided. Because the Neighborhood Watch Team anticipated that the neighborhood association members would take a negative stance on short-term rentals, a request was made at a neighborhood association meeting for an advocate to whom the same question set could be given, but no one identified themselves as in favor of short- term rentals. However, under the anonymity of the survey a participant submitted a paragraph outlining the benefits of short-term rentals and the positives they have observed. This input stands to balance and check the viewpoints expressed at neighborhood association meetings.

Analysis and Findings

Figure 1: Total Impact Selections

Aggregated Impact Responses N=49 120 102 100 81 80

60 41 40 27 27

20 8 7 0 Very Destructive Slightly No Impact Slightly Beneficial Very Beneficial Destructive Descrutive Beneficial

Figure 1 displays aggregate responses for all components of the matrix question. “No Impact” was the most selected response, but as a whole response skewed towards the “Slightly Destructive” end of the scale. This can help us picture what the majority of the residents think of the short-term rentals in regards to all of the categories that we asked questions about. From this graph we can determine that “Slightly Destructive” has 40 more responses (exactly half) than “Slightly Beneficial.” With those categories having a higher number of residents answering them, we can conclude that not many questions were answered strongly one way or the other (ex: “Very Destructive” or “Very Beneficial”).

Figure 2: Impact on Culture

Culture Impact Responses N=49 18 17 16 14 14 12 10 8 6 6 5 4 4 2 2 1 0 Very Destructive Slightly No Impact Slightly Beneficial Very Beneficial Destructive Descrutive Beneficial

Figure 2 displays residents’ impressions of short-term rentals’ impact on neighborhood culture. 17 respondents identified short-term rentals as being “Slightly Destructive” in this category, with 14 responding “No Impact.” When looking at this graph it is easy to tell that it is also skewed towards the “Slightly Destructive” end of the scale. With that being said, it is also important to not forget about the other end of the scale. 11 respondents fall on the “Slightly Beneficial” to “Very Beneficial” end of the scale when asked about the culture impact.

Figure 3: Impact on Public Safety

Public Safety Responses N=48 25 23

16 15

5 5 2 1 1 0 Very Destructive Slightly No Impact Slightly Beneficial Very Beneficial Destructive Descrutive Beneficial

Figure 3 displays residents’ perception of short-term rentals’ impact on public safety. The most common response was “No Impact.” The next most common response was “Slightly Destructive.” This shows that the respondents have an overall response that is skewed towards “Slightly Destructive” when it comes to public safety. Almost none of the respondents (only 3) believe short-term rentals are beneficial to public safety within Herron-Morton.

Figure 4: Impact on Parking Availability

Parking Availability Responses N=49 25 20 20 17

10 7

5 3 2

0 Very Destructive Slightly No Impact Slightly Beneficial Very Beneficial Destructive Descrutive Beneficial

Figure 4 displays residents’ perception of short-term rentals’ impact on parking availability. Although the most common response was “No Impact”. This question elicited the most negative of response selections of all matrix questions. Something that we can gather from this graph would be that parking availability is what the respondents feel the strongest about. Only 2 respondents answered on the “Beneficial” end of the scale making this something that Herron Morton should pay close attention to when making decisions with parking in the future.

Figure 5: Impact on Public Works (Sidewalks, Trash removal, Etc.)

Impact on Public Works Responses N=49 30

25 25

20 18

5 3 2 1 0 Very Destructive Slightly No Impact Slightly Beneficial Very Beneficial Destructive Descrutive Beneficial

Figure 5 displays residents’ impressions of the effect short-term rentals have on public works in their neighborhood. The most common response was “No Impact” (25) with all other responses except two leaning towards “Slightly Destructive.” This graph is very similar to Figure 4 in terms of how skewed it is towards the “Slightly Destructive” side of the scale juristically more than the “Beneficial” side. Since the impact of public works impacts the quality of the resident’s lives, this should be a chart that could help Herron-Morton improve the atmosphere of their neighborhood.

Figure 6: Impact on Small Business Responses

Impact on Small Business Responses N=49 30 26 25

15 9 10 8 4 5 2 0 Very Destructive Slightly No Impact Slightly Beneficial Very Beneficial Destructive Descrutive Beneficial

Figure 6 represents an analysis of selections by respondents with regards to the impact short- term rentals placed on Small Businesses in the area. The neighborhood Watch Team’s survey received the most positive responses given to any question on the survey. Twenty-six respondents selected “Slightly Beneficial.” That was followed by nine respondents selecting “Beneficial” and eight respondents selecting “No Impact.”

Figure 7: Impact on Housing/Rent Prices Responses

Impact on Housing/Rent Prices Responses 14 12 12 11 11

8 7 6 6

2 1 1

0 Very Destructive Slightly No Impact Slightly Beneficial Very Beneficial Destructive Descrutive Beneficial

Figure 7 is a visual representation of respondent selections to the question of the impact that short-term rentals had on housing and/or rent prices. Responses to this question were all across the board. Out of the 49 respondents, 22 respondents evenly selected “Slightly Destructive” and “Slightly Destructive”. The highest number of respondents, 12, selected the response of “No impact”. Six and Seven respondents selected “Beneficial” and “Destructive”, respectively. The lowest response categories were “Very Destructive” and “Very Beneficial” with one respondent each.

Figure 8: Aggregated Impact Responses, by Age

Aggregated Impact Responses, by Age N=49 35

25 25-30 years old

20 31- 35 years old 36-40 years old 15 41-50 years old 10 51-60 years old 5 61+ years old

0 Very Destructive Slightly No Impact Slightly Beneficial Very Destructive Descructive Beneficial Beneficial

Figure 8 provides a visual of aggregated responses to every matrix question of the impact of short-term rentals on the Herron-Morton Place Neighborhood based on the average age of the respondent.

Figure 9: Aggregated Impact Responses by length of residency in Herron-Morton Place

Aggregated Impact Responses by length of residency in Herron- N=49 Morton Place 60

40 1-3 years 11+ years 30 4-7 years 20 8-10 years Less than 1 year 10

0 Very Destructive Slightly No Impact Slightly Beneficial Very Destructive Descructive Beneficial Beneficial

Figure 9 provides a visual of aggregated responses to every matrix question of the impact of short-term rentals on the Herron-Morton Place Neighborhood based on the length of residency in Herron-Morton Place.

Figure 10: Aggregated Impact Responses by length of anticipated residency in Herron-Morton Place

Aggregated Impact Responses by length of anticipated residency N=49 in Herron-Morton Place 60

40 1-3 years 11+ years 30 4-7 years 20 8-10 years 10 Less than 1 year

0 Very Destructive Slightly No Impact Slightly Beneficial Very Destructive Descructive Beneficial Beneficial

Figure 10 provides a visual of aggregated responses to every matrix question of the impact of short-term rentals grouped by the anticipated length of stay in Herron-Morton Place.

Figure 11: Aggregated Impact Responses by number of individuals living in a household

Aggregated Impact Responses by number of individuals living in a N=49 household 60

40 1 2 30 3-5 20 6-7 10 8+ 0 Very Destructive Slightly No Impact Slightly Beneficial Very Beneficial Destructive Descructive Beneficial

Figure 11 provides a visual of aggregated responses to every matrix question of the impact of short-term rentals cross-referenced with household size. It was found that the majority of responses were in the “No Impact” category of the matrix. The next highest category was “Slightly Destructive” and followed by “Slightly Beneficial.”

Figure 12: Aggregated Impact Responses for those with or without children Aggregated Impact Responses for those with or without children N=49 70

40 No Children 30 Have Children

0 Very Destructive Slightly No Impact Slightly Beneficial Destructive Descructive Beneficial

Figure 12 provides a visual of aggregated responses to every matrix question of the impact of short-term rentals on the neighborhood grouped by whether or not the respondents have children or not. The largest number of responses went to the “No Impact” category. Next was “Slightly Destructive” followed by “Slightly Beneficial.” More respondents with children selected “No impact” to matrix questions than any other response selection.

Findings

Secondary Research Findings Based upon the economic cost/benefit analysis from both Boston, Massachusettes and Columbus, Ohio, The Neighborhood Watch Team can determine that the possible benefits from short-term rentals are greater than the costs. While renters may be displaced due to unpredicted rises in housing prices, it will not affect long-term residents within Herron-Morton Place. Long-term residents of Herron-Morton Place can bring in additional and supplementary discretional income which will help fuel small neighborhood businesses.

Our findings have shown that Herron-Morton Place is currently at a point of 3-6% of the households. This is based on information from AirDNA, the US Census, and SAVI. In the cities where short-term regulation was prevalent where there was a much larger percentage of operating short-term rentals.

From the Chicago Municipal Code, Columbus short-term rental application, and Cincinnati legislation, it can be concluded that legislation not banning short-term rentals, but rather regulating them is possible. By providing specifications on permitting, rules, and reporting methods, city governments are able not only monitor short-term rental prevalence, but also minimize any negative effects.

Through registration and legislation local governments are able to track who owns short-term rentals. These individuals can be educated about best practices. Things like including a where to go book for visitors that highlights small business to rules regarding parties are key to include.

Lastly, by having permits and regulation, cities are able to benefit from the additional revenue as well. License and permit application fees can be an additional revenue stream for governments as well as taxes placed upon the owner/operators

Primary Research Findings Depending on how the survey results are analyzed different trends emerge. Grouped into “destructive,” “no impact,” and “beneficial” categories, aggregate matrix scores show: - Destructive = 40% - No impact = 35% - Beneficial = 25%

However, if results are grouped into “destructive” and “not destructive (all ‘no impact’ responses combined with all ‘beneficial’ responses’),” the aggregate matrix scores show: - Destructive = 40% - Not destructive = 60%

In most categories “no impact” would emerge as the most common response if results were analyzed by the first method, but in the “neighborhood culture” category respondents chose “destructive” more than “no impact” or “beneficial” and in the “neighborhood culture” category respondents chose “beneficial” more than “no impact” or “destructive.” Older populations were more likely to see short-term rentals as destructive, and those with children did not answer significantly differently than those without.

While more respondents viewed the impact of short-term rentals as destructive than those who viewed the impact as beneficial, more respondents saw no destructive effect than those who did. See Appendix T for complete survey results.

Conclusion Through analysis of our primary and secondary research, the Neighborhood Watch Team has established the prevalence of short-term-rentals in Herron-Morton Place is not an issue to cause alarm. The percentage of short-term rentals in comparison to the number of households is between 3-6%. In other cities, specifically the larger metropolitans that have enforced strict rules and regulations, there is a higher percentage and sheer number of short-term rentals in general. Although the majority of survey respondents expressed there was not an impact on their normal day to day activities because of short-term rentals, the next most common response was “Slightly Destructive.” The definition of “destructive” was left for the survey respondents to determine, yet the Neighborhood Watch Team viewed the term as “an action having a negative impact on a person’s livelihood.”

Secondary Research was largely focused on literary reviews of case studies and empirical data outlining the impacts, effects, and solutions to address concerns brought on by short-term rentals in areas of similar population density and size to that of Indianapolis-metropolitan area. Chicago and Cincinnati are two midwestern cities experiencing a boom of short-term rentals and innovating solutions to tackling any concerns that may arise. The City of Chicago enacted an ordinance regulating licensing requirements regarding short-term rentals in which the renters would need to submit bi-monthly reports of rental activities and plans ensuring compliance with a quality-of-life standard. Although Chicago will see an additional $2 million of revenue generated annually from short-term rental transactions, there is still a desire to manage and regulate those properties. Similarly, Cincinnati recently passed legislation to recognize short- term rentals as a legitimate method of profit for residents because many people did not believe the legitimacy of short-term rentals.

Understandably, many of the case studies featured opinions of residents being uncomfortable with short-term or transient “neighbors”, but research has shown the issue has not reached a magnitude to cause concern. Additionally, based on research conducted, there was a trend of majority negative opinions being published than positive opinions.

Recommendations Based on research results with the majority claim of “no impact”, it is safe to recommend no legal action being taken to actively regulate short-term rentals. However, Neighborhood Watch Team believes there is still room for improvement when it comes to ensure minimal impact of short-term rentals. Monitor, Educate, and Survey is a method the Neighborhood Watch Team has concluded to the best course of action for Herron-Morton Place to take at this time.

Monitor According to AirDNA, there are currently between 20-30 short-term-rental properties in Herron-Morton Place. Neighborhood Watch Team recommends monitoring the properties that are currently up and running and ensure they are operating at a standard aligned with the culture of Herron-Morton Place. One suggestion is forming a coalition with other neighborhoods in the Indianapolis area in order to further monitor the expanding market of short-term rentals as it relates to historic neighborhoods such as Bates-Hendricks, Irvington, and Fountain Square.

Educate Informing the homeowners who are operating short-term rental of the legally-established requirements that they must follow in order to continue to be in operation. HEA-1035 provides specifics on registrations and restrictions regarding the operation of a short-term rental property. Ensuring the rental operating is educated on and understand what is legally acceptable determines much of how rentals are being treated especially in a neighborhood with historical attributes.

Survey While the short-term rental market is currently not large enough to cause concern, it develops quickly, and attitudes and perceptions are bound to change significantly over the course of a few years. Continual survey of the perception of short-term rentals in Herron-Morton Place by the neighborhoods will give the Neighborhood Association a more accurate and up-to-date understanding.

References

AirDNA MarketMinder. (2019, September 31). 46202 Overview. Retrieved September 31, 2019, from https://www.airdna.co/vacation-rental- data/app/us/indiana/indianapolis/46202/overview. Berkson, T. (2018, June 7). Our History. Retrieved October 30, 2019, from http://herron- morton.com/neighborhood/history/. Brede, A. (2019, October 21). Ann Arbor considers regulations for short-term rentals. Retrieved November 17, 2019, from https://www.michigandaily.com/section/business/ann-arbor- considering-regulations-short-term-rentals. Buti, B. (2019, December 4). Housing shortage may lead to AirBnB ban in downtown Traverse City. Retrieved November 4, 2019, from https://upnorthlive.com/news/local/housing- shortage-may-lead-to-AirBnB-ban-in-downtown-traverse-city. Chacon, L. (2017). City’s House-Sharing Registration System Goes Live [PDF File]. Retrieved from https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam/city/depts/bacp/Small%20Business%20Center/ 81117CityHouseSharingRegistrationSystemLive.pdf Chuang, A. (2018, March 25). Carmel thumbs nose at Indiana's new short-term rentals law. Retrieved October 31, 2019, from https://www.wthr.com/article/carmel-thumbs-nose- at-indianas-new-short-term-rentals-law. City Data. (2019). Herron-Morton neighborhood in Indianapolis, Indiana (IN), 46202 detailed profile. Retrieved December 4, 2019, from http://www.city- data.com/neighborhood/Herron-Morton-Indianapolis-IN.html. City of Carmel. (2018) Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals, Regular Meeting Minutes. Retrieved from http://www.carmel.in.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=10793 City of Columbus. (2019, March 1). Retrieved December 4, 2019, from https://www.columbus.gov/Templates/Detail.aspx?id=2147508963. Colombo, H. (2019, November 29). Ohio State football was good to Columbus area AirBnB hosts this year. Retrieved December 4, 2019, from https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2019/11/29/ohio-state-football-was- good-to-columbus-area.html. Darling, K. (2018, June 1). Carmel Still Fighting The Indiana General Assembly Over AirBnB. Retrieved October 31, 2019, from https://www.wibc.com/news/local-news/carmel-still- fighting-indiana-general-assembly-over-AirBnB. Downtown Indy. (n.d.). Herron-Morton Place. Retrieved October 30, 2019, from https://www.downtownindy.org/neighborhoods/herron-morton-place/. Einav, L., Farronato, C. & Levin, J. (2015). Peer-to-peer markets, NBER Working Paper No. 21496, http://www.nber.org/papers/w13704

Footlite Musicals. (n.d.). About. Retrieved October 30, 2019, from http://footlite.org/about/. Fox59. (2019, May 23). Indianapolis AirBnB hosts to bring in $700K over race weekend. Retrieved October 31, 2019, from https://fox59.com/2019/05/23/indianapolis-AirBnB- hosts-to-bring-in-700k-over-race-weekend/. Giuliano, M. (2018, December 21). Short Term Rentals are Big Business for Small Communities: Blog by Pillow. Retrieved September 24, 2019, from https://blog.pillow.com/short-term- rentals-are-big-business-for-small-communities/. Higgins, W. (2017, September 12). Tech guru Scott Jones is selling all of his stuff. Retrieved October 31, 2019, from https://www.indystar.com/story/life/2017/09/11/why-multimillionaire-scott-jones-leaving-indiana/617560001/. Hocker & Associates LLC. (2018, August 14). New Law Regarding Short Term Home Rentals. Retrieved October 31, 2019, from https://www.hockerlawfirm.com/posts/short-term- home-rentals. Indiana Department of Natural Resources. (n.d.) Indiana Conservancy Districts, Indiana Code 14-33, Frequently Asked Questions [PDF File]. Retrieved from https://www.in.gov/dnr/water/files/wa-IndianaConservancyDistrictsFAQ.pdf King, B. (2018, May 24). Porch parties offer a way for strangers to become friends. Retrieved December 4, 2019, from http://www.indianapolisrecorder.com/recorder_headlines/article_b54d0aac-5f5c-11e8- 853f-2bd5b0bb5691.html. Lee, H. (2018, July 18). How much can you make from short-term rentals? Retrieved December 4, 2019, from https://blog.pillow.com/how-much-can-you-make-from-your-short-term- rental/. Marotti. (2018, December 13). AirBnB hosts scramble after Chicago sends 2,400 notices rejecting registrations for short-term rentals. Retrieved October 30, 2019, from https://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-chicago-rejects-AirBnB-hosts- 20180813-story.html. Merante, M. & Horn, K. (2016). Is Home sharing Driving Up Rents? Evidence from AirBnB in Boston. [Working Paper]. Department of Economics, University of Massachusetts Boston. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1051137717300876 Milligan, B. (2019, November 26). Local Experts Weigh In On Housing Crisis, Solutions. Retrieved December 4, 2019, from https://www.traverseticker.com/news/local-experts-weigh-in- on-housing-crisis-solutions/. Moran, D. (2019, December 3). AirBnB hosts, guests discuss options as city weighs more regulations. Retrieved December 4, 2019, from https://www.mlive.com/news/ann-

arbor/2019/12/AirBnB-hosts-guests-discuss-options-as-city-weighs-more- regulations.html. New York Communities for Change. (2015). AirBnB in NYC Housing Report, 2015. Real Affordability for All, Retrieved from, nycommunities.org Parton, M. (2019, July 3). City begins registration requirement for short-term rentals; online portal launches. Retrieved October 30, 2019, from https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2019/07/03/city-begins-registration- requirement-for-short.html. Sikich, C. (2018, January 11). Carmel slams door on AirBnB. Retrieved October 31, 2019, from https://www.indystar.com/story/news/local/hamilton-county/2018/01/11/carmel- opens-door-AirBnB-regulates-short-term-rentals/1021256001/. Sisson, P. (2019, September 25). Why is Indianapolis one of AirBnB's hottest cities? Retrieved October 31, 2019, from https://www.curbed.com/2019/9/25/20882549/AirBnB- indianapolis-tourism-growth. Simmons, A. (2019, October 16). Short-Term Rental Laws in Major U.S. Cities (Updated 10/16/2019). Retrieved October 17, 2019, from https://www.2ndaddress.com/research/short-term-rental-laws/. Smith-Randolph, W., & Wkrc. (2019, August 16). Controversy surrounds short-term rentals at local apartment complex. Retrieved October 30, 2019, from https://local12.com/news/investigates/controversy-surrounds-short-term-rentals-at- local-apartment-complex. Staff, E. G. (2018, February 1). Here's 12 Examples of Short Term Rental Regulations. Retrieved October 17, 2019, from https://efficientgov.com/blog/2018/02/01/12-examples-short- term-rental-regulations/ Statista. (2019). Vacation Rentals - United States: Statista Market Forecast. Retrieved October 17, 2019, from https://www.statista.com/outlook/268/109/vacation-rentals/united- states#market-revenue The Herron-Morton Place Association. (2018, May 21). Our Neighborhood. Retrieved October 30, 2019, from http://herron-morton.com/neighborhood/our/. United Stated Department of the Interior. (1983). National Register of Historic Places Inventory- Nomination Form. Retrieved October 30, 2019, from https://secure.in.gov/apps/dnr/shaard/r/1d76e/N/Herron_Morton_HD_Marion_CO_No m.pdf Williams, C. (2019, November 19). Safety, income concerns clash in Detroit plan to regulate short-term rentals. Retrieved December 4, 2019, from https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/detroit-city/2019/11/19/safety- income-concerns-clash-detroit-plan-regulate-short-term-rentals/4043870002/.

World Population Review. (2019). Retrieved October 17, 2019, from http://worldpopulationreview.com/us-citie

APPENDIX A: STATEMENT OF WORK

Statement of Work Fall 2019

Presented to: Herron Morton Neighborhood Association

Prepared by: Neighborhood Watch Team IUPUI O’Neill Capstone – V473 Table of Contents

Contacts……..…………………………………………………..………………page 3

Overview……………………………………………………..………………….page 4

Project Objectives……………………………………………………………page 5

Methodology……………………………………………..……………………page 6

Deliverables………………………………………………..………………..…page 7

Project Timeline…….………………………………………..……..……...page 8

Expectation of work.………………………………………..……………page 12

Agreement of Work……….……………………..………………..…….page 13

2 Contacts

Herron Morton Neighborhood Association Contact:

Kelly De Waal Email: [email protected] Phone Number: (317) 727-7567

Neighborhood Watch Team Contacts:

Saymah Kollison Megan Gasper Kelly Barbret Email: Email: Email: [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Phone Number: Phone Number: Phone Number: (317)918-5098 (812)592 -7076 (734)883-0970

Libby Bowling Andrew Turner Email: Email: [email protected] [email protected] Phone Number: Phone Number: (317)965-9417 (765)432-8962

Course Instructor Contacts

Teresa Bennett Email: [email protected] Phone Number: (317) 278-9173 Unai Miguel Andres Email: [email protected] Phone Number: (317) 274-2414

3 Overview

Kelly De Waal, along with fellow members of the Herron Morton Place (HMP) Neighborhood Association, have become increasingly concerned with how short-term rentals are impacting the dynamic of their neighborhood. Herron Morton Place is comprised of 25 blocks on the Near North Side of Indianapolis, situated in an area that is on the upswing from relative blight over the last several decades. In the 1920s the neighborhood experienced an influx of young families moving to the city and enjoying an economic upturn, but those with the means left the neighborhood in the 1960s when suburbanization and white flight claimed the population of inner-city areas nationwide (Our History, 2018). The entire neighborhood is designated a historic district by the Indianapolis Historic Preservation Commission, and historic homes are subject to regulations concerning appearance and upkeep to preserve historic elements (n.d.). Short-term rentals through platforms like Airbnb continue to be on the rise in cities globally and within the United States (Guttentag, 2015). Responses in neighborhoods where these short-term rentals are appearing are mixed, with neighborhood residents viewing them as everything from a nuisance to an opportunity. From a regulatory perspective viewpoint are equally mixed, with aspects of the industry presenting both economic stimulants and burdens (Coles, Egesdal, Ellen, Li, Sundararajan, 2017). Cities worldwide have taken different regulatory approaches to best address the challenges and harness the opportunities these short-term rentals pose, and there is no one-size-fits-all method (Coles, Egesdal, Ellen, Li, Sundararajan, 2017). Approaches include caps on number of rental properties in a city, limits on nights per year these properties can be rented out, additional taxes on properties being used as short- term rentals, and outright bans on short-term rentals as a practice (Simons, Bailey, Mahmoud, Johnson, Heather, 2010). Much of the existing research done on short-term rentals are focused on large European cities and are less applicable to HMP’s situation. Most cities have implemented limits on number of nights a property may function as a short-term rental annually, with some cities (including Barcelona) banning short-term rentals as a whole (Simons, Bailey, Mahmoud, Johnson, Heather, 2010). In the interest of historic preservation, resisting displacement, and general awareness, the HMP Neighborhood Association seeks to procure a body of work that will put them one step ahead of the rapid growth of the short-term rental market in their neighborhood. The Neighborhood Watch Team, comprised of five IUPUI O’Neil School undergraduate students, will conduct research and literature reviews to compile a breadth of knowledge that is comprehensive in scope and applicable to HMP’s unique position. The Neighborhood Watch Team aims to use surveys, interviews, and data analysis to provide a report that assesses the economic and social implications of the rise in short-term rentals and analyzes the various policy responses.

4 Project Objectives

The goal that is to be achieved from this project is to provide the Herron Morton Place Neighborhood Association with reliable data that they can use to make decisions in the future regarding short-term rentals and their status within the neighborhood. The Neighborhood Watch Team will be able to accomplish this main goal by using these four objectives:

1. Understanding the concerns that residents have about short-term rentals through research. 2. Research other areas that are also having the same issues with short-term rentals to provide the client with ideas. 3. Gather data from short-term rental sites and create an average of how many are listed and how much the average cost is in Herron Morton Place. 4. Develop a final report that the provides the client with ideas and statistics to help them make decisions in the near future.

5 Methodology

The Neighborhood Watch Team will be researching and gathering sources of information for the Herron Morton association regarding the policies and side-effects of short-term rentals on a small community in a metropolitan area.

Phase One: Secondary Research The Neighborhood Watch Team will be gathering information through research a few different aspects regarding short-term rentals. By conducting an academic literature utilizing economic studies and a meta-analysis of various newspaper and non-academic articles the Neighborhood Watch Team will summarize and provide clear sourcing of multiple resources regarding all sides of a general cost-benefit analysis of short-term rentals. The Neighborhood Watch Team will focus our efforts on four subcategories:

• Economic Costs and Benefits of the short-term rental economy as seen through possible taxation revenue gained by cities and states, increase in tourist economy as well as the costs of additional infrastructure and public work needs • Policies, Ordinances, and Acts that can be utilized to govern short-term rentals effectively such as permits, regulations, and bans • Similar Situations of short-term rentals in other cities and the effects it has had on the neighborhood culture and economy • Statistics regarding the short-term rental economy in Herron Morton including, but not limited to the number of rentals, occupancy rates, average prices, and stay lengths Phase Two: Primary Research The Neighborhood Watch Team will attend the October Herron Morton Association meeting for in-person information gathering regarding Herron Morton residents and their opinions on short-term rentals. In addition, utilizing the email list of all Herron Morton Association members, the Neighborhood Watch Team will survey the community on their opinions as well as allow for additional comments not based on the prompts given.

Survey Using Qualtrics, the Neighborhood Watch Team will distribute an online survey to members of the Herron Morton Community. The Neighborhood Watch Team will use the distribution email list for the Herron Morton Neighborhood Association to send out the initial survey. The Neighborhood Watch Team will also be sending a reminder email as well. In addition, the Neighborhood Watch Team will be posting physical flyers throughout the neighborhood to encourage individuals who are not in the Neighborhood Association to take the survey as well. Our survey will be aimed at residence of Herron Morton Place.

Key Informant Interviews The Neighborhood Watch Team will be interviewing members of the Neighborhood Association. These interviews will be qualitative in nature and just help us understand how the

6 residents feel. The Neighborhood Watch Team will have open-ended questions that will be asked to each participant.

Phase Three: Presentation of Information The Neighborhood Watch Team will give final report to the Herron Morton Association. This will be published on the Herron Morton website and act as a baseline of statistics and culture surrounding regarding short-term rentals in Herron Morton.

7 Deliverables

At the end of the semester, the Neighborhood Watch Team will present/would have presented you with the following:

1. Statement of Work: Our “Statement of work” outlining specific goals and methodology used to achieve said goals. 2. Final Report: Our final report, which will be posted on the Herron-Morton Neighborhood Place webpage will include all of the following: a. Map of the neighborhood featuring residences, businesses, commercial spaces, vacant spaces up for lease/sale, and areas or revitalization. b. Trend of STR over a period of 10 years. c. Identification of the utility and/or fallibility of STR for that specific neighborhood. d. Summary of HEA 1035 i. Its effectiveness in Herron-Morton Place and around the city of Indianapolis. ii. Plans and policies Herron-Morton Place Neighborhood could put into action regarding STR regulations. e. Executive Summary: A synopsis on the final report will be produced and available for the public. f. Structure of Herron-Morton Place: Neighborhood Watch Team will provide an outline of the neighborhood in depth. Listing residences, businesses, vacant lots, commercial units, etc., g. Resource Bibliography: The Neighborhood Watch Team will research and provide our client with relatable resources about STRs and their impact on other neighborhoods. h. Survey of Neighbors: Neighborhood Watch Team will provide survey responses from residents regarding their experiences and suggestion when it comes to dealing with short-term rentals. 3. Final Presentation: Neighborhood Watch Team will provide a presentation for The Herron- Morton Neighborhood Association.

8 Project Timeline

Category Responsible Tasks Dates Party

Team Meeting Meeting All Team 9/9/2019

Client Information Form Due Assignment All Team/ 9/9/2019 Professors

Team Charter Due Assignment All Team/ 9/10/2019 Professors

Team meeting Meeting All Team 9/16/2019

Due Diligence due Assignment All Team/ 9/17/2019 Professors

Team meeting Meeting All Team 9/23/2019

Team meeting Meeting All Team 9/30/2019

Draft of Research Plan due Assignment All Team/ 10/1/2019 Professors

Draft of SOW Due Assignment All team/ 10/1/2019 Professors

Team Meeting Meeting All Team 10/7/2019

Herron Morton Neighborhood Meeting Meeting Libby & 10/7/2019 Saymah

Survey Question Draft in Qualtrics Primary Kelly 10/8/2019 Research

Final SOW Due Assignment All Team/ 10/11/2019 Professors

Survey Question Review in Qualtrics Primary Libby 10/13/2019 Research

Team Meeting Meeting All Team 10/14/2019

9 Neighborhood Visit Meeting All Team 10/14/2019

Survey Question Sign-Off by All Team Primary All Team 10/14/2019 Members Research

Primary Research Plan Due Assignment All Team/ 10/15/2019 Professors

Draft: Graphics for Cover Page/Back of Final Report Andrew 10/15/2019 Report/Binder Spine

Draft: Literature Review Final Report Kelly 10/15/2019

Peer Review: Graphics for Cover Final Report Saymah 10/21/2019 Page/Back of Report/Binder Spine

Peer Review: Literature Review Final Report Libby 10/21/2019

Final Primary Research Instruments Assignment All Team/ 10/25/2019 Approval Date Professors

Team Meeting Meeting All Team 10/28/2019

Distribution of Survey to HMA Primary Kelly De Waal 10/28/2019 Members by Email Research

Final: Graphics for Cover Page/Back of Final Report Andrew 10/28/2019 Report/Binder Spine

Final: Literature Review Final Report Kelly 10/28/2019

Draft: Primary Research Description Final Report Libby 10/28/2019

Distribution of Flyers to HM Homes Primary Saymah 10/28/2019- Research 11/4/2019

Team Meeting Meeting All Team 11/4/2019

Herron Morton Neighborhood Meeting Meeting All Available 11/4/2019 Team

Peer Review: Research Description Final Report Megan 11/4/2019

Mid- Term Peer Reviews Due Assignment All Team/ 11/5/2019 Professor

10 Team Meeting Meeting All Team 11/11/2019

Reminder Email Sent to HMA Members Primary Saymah 11/11/2019 Research

Final: Primary Research Description Final Report Libby 11/11/2019

Team Meeting Meeting All Team 11/18/2019

Closing of Survey (Automatically at Primary Andrew 11/18/2019 11:59PM) Research

Analysis of Survey Responses/ Data Primary Libby, Kelly, 11/18/2019- Clean-up Research Andrew 11/25/2019

Report Draft Due Assignment All Team/ 11/19/2019 Professors

Request Date/ Location for Final Client Assignment All Team/ 11/19/2019- Presentation Professors 11/23/2019

Team Meeting Meeting All Team 11/25/2019

Team Meeting Meeting All Team 12/2/1019

Draft: Survey Conclusions Final Report Megan 12/2/2019

Final Report for Instructor Review Assignment All Team/ 12/7/2019 Professors

Peer Review: Conclusion Final Report Andrew 12/7/2019

Draft: Final Recommendations Final Report Saymah 12/7/2019

Team Meeting Meeting All team 12/9/2019

Final: Survey Conclusions Final Report Megan 12/9/2019

Peer Review Recommendations Final Report Kelly 12/9/2019

Draft: Executive Summary Final Report Andrew 12/10/2019

Final: Recommendations Final Report Saymah 12/13/2019

Peer Review: Executive Summary Final Report Saymah 12/13/2019

11 Final: Executive Summary Final Report Andrew 12/16/2019

Final Peer Review Due Assignment All Team/ 12/20/2019 Professor

Final Submission: Report, Assignment All Team/ 12/20/2019 Presentations, Flyer, & Required Professor Material & Data

12 Expectation of Work

The Herron Morton Neighborhood Association and O’Neill Faculty can expect the following throughout the duration of the project:

• Clarity- Neighborhood Watch Team agrees to reach out for clarity with points the Neighborhood Watch Team is unsure of while also agreeing to provide a final product that is clear and easy to follow along with visuals for assistance • Timeliness- Neighborhood Watch Team agrees to submit all Deliverables on time (or early if possible) • Accurate Information- Neighborhood Watch Team Agrees to provide accurate and up to date information for Herron Morton Neighborhood Association • Maintain Appropriate Conduct- Neighborhood Watch Team agrees to conduct in a professional manner when interacting with Herron Morton Neighborhood Association, the Herron Morton Residences, and O’Neill Faculty

13 Agreement of Work

Client Contact:

Signature: ______Date: ______

Name: Kelly De Waal

Neighborhood Watch Team:

Signature: ______Date: ______

Name: Kelly Barbret

Signature: ______Date: ______

Name: Libby Bowling

Signature: ______Date: ______

Name: Megan Gasper

Signature: ______Date: ______

Name: Saymah Kollison

Signature: ______Date: ______

Name: Andrew Turner

14 References

Our History. (2018, June 7). Retrieved from https://herron-morton.com/neighborhood/history/.

(n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.indy.gov/activity/historic-district-the-old-northside.

Daniel Guttentag (2015) Airbnb: disruptive innovation and the rise of an informal tourism accommodation sector, Current Issues in Tourism, 18:12, 1192-1217, DOI: 10.1080/13683500.2013.827159

Coles, P., Egesdal, M., Ellen, I., Li, X., & Sundararajan, A. (2017). Airbnb Usage Across New York City Neighborhoods: Geographic Patterns and Regulatory Implications, Forthcoming, Cambridge Handbook on the Law of the Sharing Economy.

Simmons, A., Simmons, A. A., Simmons, A. A., Bailey, J., Mahmoud, Johnson, M., ... Heather. (2019, October 8). Short-Term Rental Laws in Major U.S. Cities (Updated 10/08/2019). Retrieved from https://www.2ndaddress.com/research/short-term-rental-laws/.

APPENDIX B: PROJECT PROPOSAL

Capstone in Public Affairs

Project Proposal Form: Capstone Course, School of Public & Environmental Affairs at IUPUI. About the Client Herron-Morton Place Neighborhood Association Organization: https://herron-morton.com/

Proposed by: Kelly de Waal Herron-Morton Place Neighborhood Association Board Member Herron-Morton Place Diversity Committee Chair (317) 727-7567 [email protected] Background on the Background client organization Herron-Morton Place (HMP) is a neighborhood encompassing an area of roughly 25 city including mission, blocks situated on the north side of Indianapolis. It is bounded by 16th Street on the South, needs/persons this 22nd Street on the North, Central Ave. on the East, and Pennsylvania Street on the West. org serves, and The area was developed as residential at the turn of the twentieth-century, pioneering types/characteristics some of the first and most prestigious apartment buildings in the city and garnering of communities and development of prestigious single-family homes. The district suffered blight during the first persons served: World War and the Great Depression. The area also suffered from the suburbanization trends known as “White Flight” during the era of post-World War II housing policy. A lot of historic architecture was lost to demolition in this period. As downtown revitalization began in the mid 1970s, HMP got on board. The HMP Neighborhood Association was formed in 1976. The district was placed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1983 and garnered the protections of the Indianapolis Historic Preservation Commission in 1986.

Mission The HMP Neighborhood Association has the following mission:

1. Preservation: Preserve the Neighborhood taking steps necessary to retain the area as residential. 2. Restoration: Strive to restore the Neighborhood as a historic area. Encourage property owners to restore their property to its original state. 3. Common Welfare: To promote the common good and general welfare of the residents of the Neighborhood; to bring about civic betterment and social improvements for the benefit of the Neighborhood; to provide educational, charitable and recreational programs and other needed community services for the benefit of the residents of the Neighborhood.

Needs/Persons Served The Neighborhood Association primarily serves the needs of the members, but the beneficiaries of the Neighborhood Association’s efforts extend well beyond the membership, and well beyond the neighborhood.

The Neighborhood Association

Coordinates Beautification Efforts: We work with Keep Indianapolis Beautiful, local schools, and surrounding neighborhoods to plant trees, clean storm drains, remove trash and litter, and develop and maintain public parks.

Reduces Crime and Promotes Safety: We partner with IMPD and the Mayor’s Action Center to reduce crime and increase safety. We educate residents on crime prevention, provide home surveillance footage for criminal investigations, and rehabilitate blighted areas.

Stimulates Arts and Culture in the City: We promote and support First Fridays, nearby Harrison Center for the Arts, Footlite Musicals, and Epilogue Theatre. We coordinate and host Talbot Street Art Fair—the largest juried art fair in the nation.

Contributes Significantly to Historic Preservation: We protect civic assets and historic architecture within the district, and provide input on new development to ensure compatible design. We participate in Historic Urban Neighborhoods of Indianapolis (HUNI).

Protects and Promotes Diversity: We work with local Community Development Corporations and Civic Agencies to minimize the displacement pressures of downtown revitalization (known as gentrification). We coordinate efforts to ensure affordable housing in the future, stipulating a portion of subsidized housing in new construction. We participate in citywide efforts towards inclusion and racial re-integration of our neighborhoods, such as Black History Month and the Kennedy-King Park Preservation efforts. We were the first neighborhood to register an entry in the Cadillac Barbie Pride Parade.

Stimulates Economic Development: We respond to agencies like MIBOR, offering selling points for downtown living, as they work to attract businesses to Indianapolis. Our Foundation purchases blighted properties and restores them, then sells these properties to small businesses that offer urban amenities.

Supports Civic Betterment: We support efforts like renewable energy, democratic processes, and stakeholder participation in major city projects (e.g., coordinating information sessions for important civic projects, like digital billboards, the public school taxation referendum, and the I65-Split Project).

Types/Characteristics of Persons Served The Neighborhood Association is a diverse demographic and is rather consistent with the demographics of other American cities who are working towards revitalization, while experiencing gentrification displacement simultaneously:

• A striking number of current HMP residents are foreign born. American-born residents grew up in diverse regions and communities within the United States. Locally born residents often have had long forays in other American cities or abroad. A dwindling number of residents have grown up in this district since birth, or have had multiple generations of family living here or nearby. This last residential component (our anchor residents) is something we’re working hard to preserve. • The age demographic has historically been quite mixed, but is trending toward a distribution of young families and younger residents who do not have children. • We have a high level of gender diversity in the district; we used to have a relatively high representation of LGBTQ residents (we were once home to Talbot Street Night Club), but that distribution is shifting towards a gender distribution more consistent with the general population. • With recent improvements in nearby public schools, we’ve seen a boom of young families in the district (careful if you drink the water). • The district has a good distribution of housing for both renters and homeowners (note, the Neighborhood Association is not a Homeowner’s Association; renters are welcome and encouraged). This comes with the correlative characterization of both transience and permanence, and, with proper leadership, provides a broad perspective, with both experience and fresh ideas. • The neighborhood demographic is trending from a low-to-middle-income distribution, to a stable middle-income distribution. The neighborhood is surrounded by districts that are the most economically diverse in the city. • The educational level of residents is steadily increasing. 2

Proposed Project Short-Term Rentals In Downtown Indianapolis Title: Project Description: This project will entail

• A statistical analysis of the growth rate of short-term rentals in the city of Indianapolis • A cost/benefit analysis of short-term rentals in residential districts • Primary and secondary research related to governance of short-term rentals in residential districts • The approaches taken by different municipalities (and, if feasible, the outcomes of those approaches), and • Recommendations to the client and fellow stakeholders on how they and the city might maximize the benefits and minimize the costs of STRs

Overarching need for Overarching Need for This Research this research, The sharing economy has introduced enormous opportunity and enormous challenges for including what both governments and residents where short-term rentals (STRs) are desirable. In the past, community, STRs were characterized by property owners who were on-site during a rental, such as organizational, or retirees with spare bedrooms to rent. Now, these accommodations are facilitated on digital neighborhood issue this project is platforms such as Airbnb, VRBO, and Tripping. The rentals made possible by such digital intended affect platforms also means there is a growing number of investors who purchase property specifically for the purposes of short-term rentals, but these property-owners and operators are rarely on site during a rental. This is an important distinction.

Many Western European cities with high levels of tourism have struggled to maintain an authentic, native, residential demographic (The Guardian ran a series on short-term rentals some time ago). In the United States, those trends have been slightly behind these Western European cities, but are rising steadily. The district of Treme, in New Orleans, for example, has suffered significantly from this economic phenomenon.1

Short-term rentals can bring a neighborhood or city a number of benefits. For example,

• A share of profits from the tourism industry goes directly to the local residents, rather than to shareholders in large corporations of the hotel/service industry. STRs thus have better odds of stimulating the local economy.

• Tourists enjoy the authenticity of staying in close proximity to local residents, which enables a district or city to present a cultural identity / brand to visitors and create repeat tourism.

• For a city like Indianapolis, in which tourism ebbs and flows with events (such as the Indy 500, the FFA Convention, athletic events, and Gen Con), STRs provide overflow for accommodation, which is preferable to building large hotels with questionable economic viability in our downtown landscape.

• For neighborhoods, we might have the opportunity to work with owners and operators of STRs to direct tourists to our theatres, coffee shops, arts districts, and locally owned businesses and restaurants.

1 https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/mar/13/new-orleans-airbnb-treme-short-term-rentals

The drawbacks, however, are significant. Digital platforms that facilitate the economic exchange have created a segment of the STR market that is owned and operated by LLCs. This comes with challenges. For example,

• As the profitability of STRs has scaled, it has led to displacement of local residents. Some of HMP’s historic apartment-building owners are receiving unsolicited offers to buy these buildings from third-party investors. Similar purchases in other cities portend the following: These investors could raise the rents drastically and suddenly; current tenants could be forced to move; and the property could then be listed as a short-term rental (which is a form of displacement characteristic of revitalization). We suspect this has recently happened in one of our historic buildings, and we’re currently doing our recon to see if that is so.

• There is an obvious and problematic conflict of zoning: When a structure listed as a STR is not owner-occupied, but rather, is owned by an LLC, then the property owner is rarely, if ever, on-site while the property is being rented. These LLCs are operating as if the property were zoned for commercial use. But the property is not zoned for commercial use, but rather, is zoned as residential and is directly situated in a residential district. This has numerous problems, such as the availability of parking, the flow of traffic, and litter and waste disposal. Occasionally, these properties are the venue for loud, raucous parties without proper oversight. (For example, hotels have security, and bars have bouncers, but when an LLC rents a residentially zoned property to a patron or group who means to throw a party, this is quite incompatible. Our Neighborhood Association has heard grievances that the following is happening in LLC-owned properties that offer STR: domestic violence, dangerous traffic violations, renters falling from third-story windows, occupancy well above what the space allows, dangerous celebratory gunfire, public intoxication, public fighting, trash and litter, neglect of and damage to historic structures, inter alia. This often leads to residents having to enlist the services of IMPD, which is an enormous waste of city resources. The LLC should incur the costs of such operation.)

These drawbacks are in clear conflict with the purposes and mission of our Neighborhood Association, which is to promote the area as residential, to protect historic structures, and to promote the common welfare of residents.

Policy

In the state of Indiana, some municipalities/cities have had relatively high levels of short- term rentals long before the sharing economy scaled this product/service. For example— South Bend, where Notre Dame Football draws seasonal crowds; Bloomington, where summers often entail subletting; and lake communities, where seasonal tourism abounds—these are all municipalities that were well positioned for oversight of short-term rentals. In Indianapolis, the trend is only beginning, and this is an opportune time to analyze and implement policies and best practices. The city’s long-term economic plan centers around the life sciences industry, the technology industry, and the tourism industry. It’s not surprising, then, that Indianapolis is among the fastest growing cities for

short-term rentals in the nation. Airbnb reported that “Indianapolis’s 256% growth made it the fourth fastest-growing Airbnb city in the world (Forbes, 2018).”2

The State recently introduced House Enrolled Act No. 1035, which has a twofold design: it protects responsible owners and operators of short-term rentals, and it provides a mechanism for municipalities to regulate LLC-owned short-term rentals. HEA 1035 sets specific boundaries. This bill has strengths and weaknesses. But the bill only sets the parameters for what municipalities can and cannot do: each municipality must enact an ordinance to implement HEA 1035, and the City-County Council of Indianapolis does not intend to enact that ordinance. The HMP Board speculates that the city does not intend to implement an ordinance consistent with HEA 1035 because the bill does not permit fines sufficient to offset the operational costs of oversight. But we would love to have a better understanding of the city’s rationale related to HEA 1035.

Community Issues This Project Affects As stated above, our mission is historic preservation, restoration, and common welfare. In some instances, that mission is furthered by responsible ownership and operation of STRs. In some instances, this mission is impeded by STRs. Policy and governance relate directly to our capability to maximize the potential benefits and minimize the potential costs. We want to participate in this growth, and we would appreciate a well-informed perspective on how to go about that. List the Primary Goals 1. A statistical analysis of the growth rate of STRs in HMP and downtown Indianapolis of the proposed project (please be as 2. A policy analysis of HEA 1035, its efficacy in other Indiana municipalities, and its specific as possible): potential utility / fallibility in governance of STRs in Indianapolis

3. A cost-benefit analysis of having STRs (both privately owned, with owner on-site,

and LLC-owned, without owner on-site)

4. Primary and secondary research with local officials and residents on the impacts of

STRs

5. Recommendations for how the Neighborhood Association might leverage the

benefits and minimize the costs

List the expected 1. A written report summarizing the findings and recommendations, to be shared deliverables of the proposed project with HMP residents and surrounding neighborhoods, and to be published on our (please be as specific as possible): Neighborhood Association web site

2. A public presentation at a Neighborhood Association Meeting summarizing the

findings and recommendations

2 Dillon DuBois, “10 Interesting Airbnb Statistics,” April 4, 2019, https://www.alltherooms.com/analytics/2019/04/02/airbnb-statistics/ (accessed July 23, 2019).

Describe data (both To whatever extent is possible … existing and new) that you believe will Generally speaking, the following data might help us hone in on economic signals that be needed to understand and warrant our attention or governance: conduct this project: • Rates of tourism as it relates to the growth rates of short-term rentals

• Increases in property assessment value, as that relates to STR viability

• Rates of displacement as third-party investors purchase properties for STR

Specifically, the following data will help us directly manage STRs in our neighborhoods, as

well as participate in policy-making decisions of our municipal governance:

• The number of STRs currently listed in HMP and surrounding neighborhoods

• Recent changes and/or projections in the number of STRs listed in HMP and

surrounding neighborhoods

• The number of properties listed as STRs that are privately owned (which tend to

bring more benefits than problems), compared to the number of STRs that are

owned and listed by an LLC (which tend to bring more challenges and less benefits)

Of the data listed • The data pertaining to general analysis is an act of sleuthing and critical analysis. If above, what data can you provide or help this project goes forward, I’ll share what I discover as I do my own research, but the students access?: deem it mostly to be something akin to a literature survey.

• Specifically, as it relates to HMP and STRs, I might be able to procure MIBOR data,

to examine the purchase/sale of properties and to examine climbing assessment

values.

• HMP can promote surveys with local residents, and help in the distribution of

those surveys to surrounding neighborhoods.

Preferred Capstone __Spring ~January – April (proposals due Dec 15) semester: __Fall ~August – November (proposals due July 15) Either is fine! We would be privileged to have the work of SPEA students, any time deemed fit.

APPENDIX C: HERRON-MORTON MAP

https://i2.wp.com/herron-morton.com/wp- content/uploads/2014/05/hmp_map_lg.jpg

APPENDIX D: HERRON-MORTON HISTORIC TIMELINE

APPENDIX E: HERRON-MORTON HISTROIC PLACE APP

APPENDIX F: SAVI DEMOGRAPHICS

http://www.savi.org Page 1 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 2 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 3 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 4 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 5 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 6 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 7 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 8 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 9 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 10 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 11 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 12 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 13 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 14 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 15 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 16 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 17 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 18 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 19 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 20 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 21 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 22 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 23 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 24 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 25 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 26 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 27 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 28 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 29 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 30 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 31 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 32 of 33 http://www.savi.org Page 33 of 33

APPENDIX G: AIRDNA MAP

APPENDIX H: AIRDNA CHART

Urban Short-Term Rental Markets by AirDNA City Revenue October '19 Y/Y% Active Rentals Denver, CO $3,577 16.6% 5,354 Dallas, TX $2,759 6.2% 4,203 Nashville, TN $5,681 4% 8,178 Phoenix, AZ $2,693 4% 4,003 Washington, DC $3,646 3% 6,785 Houston, TX $2,045 2.9% 8,181 Los Angeles, CA $3,465 2.3% 1,8178 Austin, TX $4,528 0.6% 10,384 Fort Worth, TX $2,553 -2.1% 1,218 Detroit, MI $2,329 -2.4% 898 Seattle, WA $2,686 -2.8% 8,574 New York, NY $4,565 -2.9% 34,307 San Antonio, TX $2,243 -4.6% 3,536 San Diego, CA $3,854 -5.4% 10,957 Philadelphia, PA $2,589 -5.5% 5,626 San Francisco, CA $5,146 -5.8% 6,538 Chicago, IL $3,419 -5.8% 9,170 Portland, OR $2,310 -6.3% 5,379 Atlanta, GA $2,277 -8.2% 10,519 Indianapolis, IN $2,253 -10.9% 2,120 Jacksonville, FL $1,673 -11.3% 1,123 San Jose, CA $3,061 -13.4% 2,636 Columbus, OH $2,385 -13.8% 1,417 Boston, MA $5,203 -15.9% 2,757 Charlotte, NC $2,137 -16% 2,683

APPENDIX I: CHART ON GLOBAL SHORT-TERM RENTAL RESTRICTIONS

APPENDIX J: CHART ON SHORT- TERM RENTAL RESTRICTIONS IN THE UNITED STATES

https://www.2ndaddress.com/research/short-term-rental-laws/

APPENDIX K: INFOGRAPHIC ON SHORT-TERM RENTALS IN AUSTIN, TX

APPENDIX L: INFOGRAPHIC ON SHORT-TERM RENTALS IN CHICAGO, IL

APPENDIX M: INFOGRAPHIC ON SHORT-TERM RENTALS IN SAN FRANCISCO, CA

APPENDIX N: INFOGRAPHIC ON SHORT-TERM RENTALS AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

APPENDIX O: HOUSE ENROLLED ACT 1035 (HEA 1035/ HB 1035)

Second Regular Session of the 120th General Assembly (2018)

PRINTING CODE. Amendments: Whenever an existing statute (or a section of the Indiana Constitution) is being amended, the text of the existing provision will appear in this style type, additions will appear in this style type, and deletions will appear in this style type. Additions: Whenever a new statutory provision is being enacted (or a new constitutional provision adopted), the text of the new provision will appear in this style type. Also, the word NEW will appear in that style type in the introductory clause of each SECTION that adds a new provision to the Indiana Code or the Indiana Constitution. Conflict reconciliation: Text in a statute in this style type or this style type reconciles conflicts between statutes enacted by the 2017 Regular Session of the General Assembly.

HOUSE ENROLLED ACT No. 1035

AN ACT to amend the Indiana Code concerning property.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Indiana:

SECTION 1. IC 36-1-24 IS ADDED TO THE INDIANA CODE AS A NEW CHAPTER TO READ AS FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2018]: Chapter 24. Short Term Rentals Sec. 1. (a) This chapter does not apply to a unit that has adopted a zoning ordinance or any other ordinance before January 1, 2018, that prohibits, regulates, or restricts short term rentals in any manner. (b) Any reference in this chapter (except for this section) to a zoning ordinance or other ordinance does not apply to a zoning ordinance or other ordinance of a unit described in subsection (a). (c) A unit may amend or delete any provision of an ordinance described in subsection (a) after December 31, 2017, without complying with or becoming subject to this chapter. (d) A unit may repeal an ordinance described in subsection (a). However, in repealing the ordinance, the unit concurrently becomes subject to this chapter. Sec. 2. As used in this chapter, "owner" means a person that has an interest in title or a present possessory interest in property that is offered to the public as a short term rental. Sec. 3. As used in this chapter, "owner occupied short term rental property" means property that is the owner's primary

HEA 1035 — Concur 2 residence and is offered to the public as a short term rental. Sec. 4. As used in this chapter, "permit" means a short term rental permit issued by a unit. Sec. 5. As used in this chapter, "permitted property" means a property that is subject to a valid, unexpired, unrevoked permit under this chapter. A permitted property may contain one (1) or more dwelling units offered as short term rentals. Sec. 6. As used in this chapter, "short term rental" means the rental of: (1) a single family home; (2) a dwelling unit in a single family home; (3) a dwelling unit in a two-family or multifamily dwelling; or (4) a dwelling unit in a condominium, cooperative, or time share; for terms of less than thirty (30) days at a time through a short term rental platform. The term includes a detached accessory structure, including a guest house, or other living quarters that are intended for human habitation, if the entire property is designated for a single family residential use. The term does not include property that is used for any nonresidential use. Sec. 7. As used in this chapter, "short term rental platform" means an entity that: (1) provides a platform through which unaffiliated parties offer to rent a short term rental to an occupant; and (2) collects consideration for the rental from the occupant. Sec. 8. A short term rental of owner occupied short term rental property is a permitted residential use under any applicable zoning ordinance of a unit and may not be disallowed by any zoning ordinance (as defined in IC 36-7-1-22) in a zoning district or classification of a unit that permits residential use. Sec. 9. (a) This section applies only to a short term rental property that is not an owner occupied short term rental property. (b) A unit may require a special exception, special use, or zoning variance for the short term rental property that is in a residential zoning district or classification of a unit. However, the unit may not interpret and enforce the unit's zoning regulations for a special exception, special use, or zoning variance in a manner that is intended or has the effect of prohibiting or unreasonably restricting short term rentals of property to which this section applies. Denial of a special exception, special use, or zoning variance for the short term rental property may be appealed in accordance with IC 36-7-4.

HEA 1035 — Concur 3

Sec. 10. A unit may enact or enforce a law or plan that regulates, prohibits, or limits short term rentals only for the following primary purposes: (1) Protection of the public's health and safety related to: (A) fire and building safety; (B) sanitation; (C) transportation; (D) traffic control; and (E) pollution control; if enforcement is performed in the same manner as enforcement that applies to similar properties that are not short term rentals. (2) Residential use and zoning related to: (A) noise; (B) protection of welfare; (C) property maintenance; and (D) nuisance issues; if enforcement is performed in the same manner as enforcement that applies to similar properties that are not short term rentals. (3) To limit or prohibit use of short term rentals for the following purposes: (A) To house sex offenders. (B) To operate a structured sober living home. (C) To manufacture, exhibit, distribute, or sell illegal drugs, liquor, pornography, or obscenity. (D) To operate an adult entertainment establishment (as defined in IC 12-7-2-1.8). (4) To limit or prohibit short term rentals located within the boundaries of a conservancy district established under IC 14-33. (5) To provide the unit with an emergency contact for a short term rental. Sec. 11. (a) A unit may require an owner to obtain a permit for each property by adopting an ordinance that sets forth only the requirements of this chapter for obtaining a permit. A unit may require only one (1) permit for each single family home, two-family or multifamily dwelling, condominium, cooperative, or time share that an owner rents in whole or in part under this chapter. A permit covers all: (1) dwelling units; and (2) detached accessory structures;

HEA 1035 — Concur 4 located on the permitted property that the owner offers to the public as a short term rental. (b) An owner must submit a permit application for each property for which a permit is sought. The permit application may require the owner to provide only the following information for each property: (1) The owner's name, street address, mailing address, electronic mail address (if applicable), and telephone number. If the owner is a corporation or partnership, the application must require the owner's: (A) state of incorporation or organization; and (B) names, residence addresses, and telephone numbers of the owner's principal officers or partners. (2) If a property manager is used, the property manager's name, street address, mailing address, electronic mail address (if applicable), and telephone number. (3) A short description of how each of the owner's short term rentals on the property are marketed or advertised, including the following: (A) The advertised occupancy limits of each short term rental. (B) Whether the short term rental is: (i) a single family home; (ii) a dwelling unit in a single family home; (iii) a dwelling unit in a two-family or multifamily dwelling; or (iv) a dwelling unit in a condominium, cooperative, or time share. (c) A permit application must be made by an owner. If the owner is a corporation, partnership, or other legal entity, the permit application must be made by an officer or agent of the owner. (d) Subject to section 16 of this chapter, if an owner submits a permit application under this section that meets the requirements set forth in the ordinance adopted by the unit, the unit shall issue a permit to the owner within thirty (30) days of receipt of the application. Sec. 12. If any information provided by an owner to a unit in the permit application changes, the owner shall provide updated information to the unit in writing within thirty (30) business days. Sec. 13. (a) A permit expires one (1) year after the date the permit is issued.

HEA 1035 — Concur 5

(b) Except as provided in subsection (c), a unit may charge a permit fee, not to exceed one hundred fifty dollars ($150), for each of the following: (1) An initial permit issued to an owner for the permitted property. (2) The issuance of a subsequent permit to an owner for the permitted property after the owner's previous permit has been revoked. (c) A unit may not charge a permit fee for renewing a permit, including renewal of a permit that has expired. Sec. 14. If three (3) or more citations for ordinance violations are issued to an owner for a permitted property within a calendar year, the unit may revoke the permit for that permitted property for a period of not more than one (1) year after the date the permit is revoked. The unit shall provide notice and a hearing for revocation in accordance with the unit's ordinance. Sec. 15. If a unit revokes a permit under this chapter, revocation of the permit shall be conducted under the notice and hearing procedures of the unit for revocation of other permits issued by the unit. Sec. 16. An owner may apply for a permit for a short term rental for which a previous permit of the owner was revoked by the unit. However, a new permit may not be issued until any outstanding fines are paid for ordinance violation citations issued to the owner with regard to use of the short term rental. Sec. 17. If an owner sells all or part of a permitted property, the permit may not be transferred to the new owner. The new owner must submit an application for a new permit. Sec. 18. (a) An owner that rents a short term rental without obtaining a valid permit from a unit that adopts an ordinance under this chapter commits a Class C infraction. (b) Each short term rental transaction that the short term rental provider completes without a short term rental permit constitutes a separate violation of this section. Sec. 19. This chapter does not affect, prohibit, preempt, or render unenforceable any property or use restrictions contained in properly enacted rules or regulations of a: (1) homeowners association; (2) condominium association; (3) lake owners association; or (4) similar property owners association or cooperative.

HEA 1035 — Concur Speaker of the House of Representatives

President of the Senate

President Pro Tempore

Governor of the State of Indiana

Date: Time:

HEA 1035 — Concur

APPENDIX P: CHICAGO MUNICIPAL CODE ON SHORT-TERM RENTALS

APPENDIX Q: SHORT-TERM RENTAL APPLICATION FOR COLUMBUS, OH

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY LICENSE SECTION

SHORT-TERM RENTAL INFORMATION SHEET

REQUIREMENTS

• Short-Term Rental Application (Attached) • Proof of Identity (i.e., State Issued Driver’s License/I.D. Card, Passport, Military I.D., Government Issued I.D.) • One of the Following Documents (If Short-Term Rental is primary residence): . Motor Vehicle Registration . Tax Documents . Lease Copy . Utility Bill • Proof of General Liability Insurance . Minimum of $300,000 . City of Columbus-License Section listed as Certification Holder with a 10-day notice of cancellation • Letter of Good Standing from the City Tax Division • Copy of the agreement if the owner of the property has executed a land contract, lease agreement, management agreement, or any other agreement separating the owner from control over the property and/or the short-term rental. • Names and addresses of any other hotel/motel/short-term rental located in the City of Columbus that the applicant or property owner has any interest in, including but not limited to ownership, licensure or management. • Affidavit including confirmation that the host and short-term rental are in compliance with all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations. (Covered on page 3 of the application) • BCI Background Check (If conducted at another authorized WebCheck agency, results must be directly mailed to the License Section)

PRICING • Application fee - $20.00 • BCI Background Check fee - $32.00 • Primary Residence Permit fee - $75.00 • Non-Primary Residence Permit fee - $150.00

OFFICE LOCATION & HOURS 4252 Groves Road Columbus, OH 43232 Monday - Friday 8:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.

Page 1 of 3 Rev 1/3/2019

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK OFFICE USE ONLY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY LICENSE SECTION License # ______

Issue Date ______SHORT-TERM RENTAL Expiration Date ______APPLICATION

NEW RENEWAL

OWNER OCCUPIED NON-OWNER OCCUPIED

RESIDENTIAL OWNER INFORMATION

Full Name: Date of Birth:

Mailing Address:

City: State: Zip:

Phone: Email: BUSINESS OWNER INFORMATION

Business Name (as filed with SOS):

Business Mailing Address (where incorporated):

Entity/Corporation #:

AUTHORIZED AGENT INFORMATION

Full Name:

Mailing Address:

City: State: Zip:

Phone: Email:

APPLICANT BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Have you ever been convicted of a felony? Yes No

If yes, list all felony convictions that occurred in the United States within the past seven (7) years:

Are you on felony probation or parole? Yes No If yes, date began:

Have you ever been required to register as a sexual offender? Yes No If yes, date registered:

Have you had a City of Columbus license and/or permit revoked, refused, or suspended within the past three (3) years? Yes No SHORT-TERM PROPERTY INFORMATION

Street Address:

City: State: Zip:

Page 2 of 3 Rev 1/3/2019 Number of Guestrooms Available:

List All Affiliated Online Hosting Platforms:

24-HOUR POINT OF CONTACT INFORMATION

Full Name:

Residential Address:

City: State: Zip:

Phone: Email:

If the owner of the property has executed a land contract, lease agreement, management agreement, or any other agreement separating the owner from control over the property, applicant shall include a copy of the agreement along with the application. I have read, understood, and meet all provisions set forth by the Columbus City Code including all Fire, Health, Safety and Zoning requirements. (C.C.C. 501 & 598) Yes No Please be advised this section is voluntarily optional and exists for the convenience of the applicant: The applicant expressly authorizes the Licensing Division of the City of Columbus, Department of Public Safety to contact the Income Tax Division of the City of Columbus - City Auditor and in turn expressly authorizes the Income Tax Division of the City of Columbus - City Auditor to provide access to the Licensing Division of the City of Columbus, Department of Public Safety current municipal tax information related to the applicant listed above in relation to the Short-Term Rental Permit for which application is being made. Any information provided to the Licensing Division will be held in strict confidence at all times and shall not be disclosed to any other department or division of the City of Columbus, nor used for any other purpose other than as stated. Yes No

PER REGULATIONS SET IN COLUMBUS CITY CODE 501.05(E), THE LICENSE SECTION HAS THE POWER TO MAKE RULES REGARDING THE “QUALIFICATIONS OF THE APPLICANTS AND THE CONDITIONS PRECEDENT THE APPLICANTS MUST MEET PRIOR TO THE ACQUISITION OF LICENSES.” FOLLOWING THIS DIRECTION, ALL APPLICANTS MUST BE ABLE TO READ, SPEAK, AND COMPREHEND THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE IN ORDER TO OBTAIN A VALID LICENSE. BY INITIALING ON THE LINE BELOW YOU AGREE THAT YOU ARE ABLE TO FULFILL THIS REQUIREMENT.

______INITIALS

ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS APPLICATION IS SUBJECT TO DISCLOSURE AS A MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD. ANY FALSE STATEMENT MADE OR GIVEN IN THIS APPLICATION SHALL RESULT IN DENIAL, OR FUTURE REVOCATION OF THIS LICENSE, AS WELL AS CRIMINAL PROSECUTION UNDER CHAPTER 2321.13 (A-3), (A-5), AND CHAPTERS 501 AND 540 IN THE COLUMBUS CITY CODE. State of Ohio, County of Franklin

______, being duly sworn, deposes and says he or she is the individual (Print Applicant’s Name) making the foregoing application; that he or she is knowledgeable with respect to that which is to be licensed; and that the answers to the foregoing questions and other statements contained herein are true of his or her own knowledge and belief.

______(Applicant’s Signature)

Sworn to before me and subscribed in my presence this _____ day of ______, 20_____.

______Notary or Agent of Director of Public Safety Must be SIGNED, DATED, and NOTARIZED.

Page 3 of 3 Rev 1/3/2019

APPENDIX R: CITY OF CARMEL CODE ON SHORT-TERM RENTALS

MEMORANDUM

TO: Carmel City Council FROM: Adrienne Keeling Department of Community Services SUBJECT: Z-629-17 DATE: December 28, 2017

Please find information on the following item forwarded by the Plan Commission. This item will appear on your January 8th agenda.

Forwarded with a favorable recommendation: Ordinance Z-629-17 (Docket No. 17100033 OA): Short Term Residential Rentals The applicant seeks to amend the Unified Development Ordinance in order to add review and approval procedures, definitions and fees for the establishment of Short Term Residential Rentals. Filed by the Department of Community Services on behalf of the Carmel Plan Commission.

Current Ordinance Interpretation: Since short term rentals, such as those advertised on AirBnb and similar websites, are not a specified use in the Zoning Ordinance, the current interpretation is that they are commercial in nature, and therefore, NOT permitted uses in our residential districts. Those who wish to rent out their homes for less than 30 days would be required to obtain a Use Variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals.

Current Short Term Rental Activity: Since the city started tracking AirBnb and similar websites, the number of short term rentals has fluctuated from 26 – 80 active listings. At last check we have 37 active properties, with fewer than 12 in single family homes. While some of the fluctuation is likely contributed to seasonal popularity, we believe that code enforcement efforts have resulted in an overall reduction. Central Carmel has the most activity with 17, but many are located in multi-family and townhome units. West Carmel is also fairly active with 12; this area fluctuates the most.

Discussion by the Legislature: Meanwhile, in their 2017 session, the State Legislature proposed a bill which would have effectively banned municipalities from regulating short term rentals. The bill failed, but the topic was assigned to an Interim Study Committee for discussion prior to the 2018 General Assembly. The Study Committee met throughout the month of October and heard testimony in favor of and opposed to local restrictions on short term rentals. Ultimately, the Study Committee’s recommendation was that the policy of the state should be to prevent any undue restrictions on the use of a person’s primary residence as a short term rental.

This Proposed Ordinance: Knowing that the Legislature is likely to discuss this topic again in 2018, the proposed ordinance is an effort to bring forth standards and review for short term residential rentals in RESIDENTIAL zoning districts. To summarize, the ordinance proposes the following: 1. Definitions: The existing definitions for Bed & Breakfast, Dwelling and Tourist Home are revised. New definitions are added for Permanent Resident and Short Term Residential Rental Unit. 2. Special Exception Approval in Residential Zoning Districts: This draft creates a new “Special Exception” category in our UDO, which would require review and approval by a BZA Hearing Officer. The fee required for an initial Special Exception application would be set at $100; renewal applications would be set at $50.

2018-0108; Z-629-17; Council Report.docx 3. Short Term Rental Standards would be inserted into the UDO as Section 5.72, to provide standards for Short Term Residential Rental Units (those rented out for less than 30 consecutive calendar days). These would be allowed by right in some Business districts, but only by Special Exception in Residential districts. (The amendment does not address whether they would be allowed in PUDs.) 4. Eligibility to apply for a Special Exception would be limited to “Permanent Residents”, that is, only homeowners or actual tenants of Dwelling units in Residential districts. This is intended to inhibit the sale of houses in established neighborhoods to investors – who never reside in the unit – and the subsequent conversion of those houses to “Tourist Homes”. 5. Suspension: The Mayor would have authority to suspend operation of these provisions for up to 30 dates a year (for example, during the Indy 500, an NCAA Final Four, a PGA or LPGA golf tournament, or a major convention in the community). No Special Exception would be needed during these dates. 6. Administrative provisions relating to Special Exceptions would be inserted into a new Section 9.08 of the UDO. These were drafted to be very similar to Special Uses. The term of a Special Exception approval would be for one year only, subject to renewal. All Special Exception applications (including renewals) would go to a BZA Hearing Officer. Decisions of a Hearing Officer would remain subject to appeal to the full BZA. 7. Favorable Consideration: As opposed to Special Uses, which are generally to be considered “favorably” by the BZA, Special Exceptions would not initially be “entitled to favorable consideration.” However, renewal applications would be entitled to favorable consideration unless they are opposed by DOCS. 8. Criteria to be Considered: The criteria for approval of a Special Exception would be similar (but not identical) to those for a Development Standards Variance. If a subdivision’s covenants and restrictions prohibited short term rentals, that would be a basis for denial.

Plan Commission Summary: The Plan Commission and its Commercial Committee discussed the ordinance and worked to keep the language as succinct as possible by removing unnecessary or duplicative text. Much of the discussion revolved around the differences between the definitions of Bed & Breakfast Inn, Tourist Home and Short Term Residential Rental Unit. Also discussed was whether or not to require that the owner of a proposed Short Term Rental Unit carry a specific amount of liability insurance coverage. The Plan Commission ultimately recommended, while important, that it not be a specific zoning requirement. However, the Plan Commission did add a requirement to list primary and secondary emergency contact information on the application. The Plan Commission also agreed that further discussion should occur as to how this ordinance could apply to PUDs (or portions thereof) developed as single-family neighborhoods.

The information in this packet is arranged in the following order: 1. Proposed Ordinance Z-629-17 2. Certification (expires March 21, 2018).

2018-0108; Z-629-17; Council Report.docx

1 Sponsor: Councilor Kimball 2

3 ORDINANCE Z-629-17 4 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE 5 CITY OF CARMEL, INDIANA 6 ______7 An Ordinance adding standards for Short Term Residential Rental Units 8 in the Unified Development Ordinance. 9 10 Synopsis: 11 This ordinance adds review and approval procedures, definitions and fees for the establishment of Short Term 12 Residential Rentals in the Unified Development Ordinance. 13 14 WHEREAS, the people of the City of Carmel desire to uphold the property rights of citizens of the 15 City who own real property located in Residential Districts; 16 WHEREAS, a result of the unplanned conversion of Dwellings to business uses within Residential 17 Districts and neighborhoods in the City, the quality of life of residents and neighborhood integrity may be 18 negatively affected; 19 WHEREAS, the conversion of Dwellings to Tourist Homes or other transient uses impacts especially 20 on property values in long established residential neighborhoods; and 21 WHEREAS, it is in the public interest that the conversion of Dwellings be reasonably regulated and 22 that due process be provided to all affected property owners, in order to protect the rights of owners of 23 buildings or subdivisions where conversions are proposed as well as to conserve property values in 24 Residential Districts. 25 WHEREAS, pursuant to the Advisory Planning Law of the State of Indiana (contained in IC 36-7-4), 26 each unit of local government that wishes to adopt land use and zoning ordinances must first approve by 27 resolution a comprehensive plan for the geographic area over which it has jurisdiction; and 28 WHEREAS, pursuant to Indiana Code 36-7-4-602 the Common Council is authorized to amend the 29 text of the unified development ordinance; and 30 WHEREAS, pursuant to Indiana Code 36-7-4-610 and City of Carmel Ordinance D-2391-17, the 31 Carmel Unified Development Ordinance is incorporated by reference into the Carmel City Code; 32 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Common Council of the City of Carmel, Indiana, 33 that, pursuant to IC 36-7-4-600 et seq. and after Docket No. 17100033 OA having received a favorable 34 recommendation from the Carmel Advisory Plan Commission on Tuesday, December 19, 2017, it hereby 35 adopts this Ordinance to amend the Carmel Unified Development Ordinance (Ordinance Z-625-17, as 36 amended), to read as follows: 37 38 Section I: Amend Article 11 by adding or amending the following definitions: 39 40 Bed and Breakfast Inn: A private, owner-occupied business with two (2) to ten (10) guest rooms 41 where overnight accommodations and a morning meal are provided to transients for compensation and 42 where the Bed and Breakfast Inn is operated primarily as a business. A Dwelling that is occupied by a 43 Permanent Resident where only one (1) guest room or group of rooms is made available to transients 44 for compensation shall not be considered a Bed and Breakfast Inn. 45

01/08/2018 Ordinance Z-629-17 1

46 Dwelling: A Building, or portion thereof, used primarily as a place of abode for one or more human 47 beings Permanent Residents of the Dwelling, but not including Hotels or Motels, lodging or Boarding 48 Houses, Bed and Breakfast Inns, or Tourist Homes. 49 50 Home, Tourist: A Building, not occupied by a Permanent Resident, in which one (1) but not more 51 than five (5) guest rooms are used to provide or offer overnight accommodations to transient guests for 52 compensation. 53 54 Resident, Permanent: A natural person who occupies a Dwelling for at least sixty (60) consecutive 55 days with intent to establish the Dwelling as his or her primary residence. A Permanent Resident may 56 be an owner or a lessee. 57 58 Short Term Residential Rental Unit: A Dwelling, or portion thereof, that is rented or leased to 59 transient guests by a Permanent Resident of the Dwelling for a period of less than thirty (30) 60 consecutive calendar days. 61 62 63 Section II: Amend Section 1.29 by adding filing fees for the BZA Hearing Officer as follows: 64  Special Exception $100.00 65  Renewal of Special Exception $50.00 66 67 68 Section III: Amend Article 2 by adding Short Term Residential Rental as a Special Exception for the 69 following Residential Districts: 70 71 2.03 S1 District Intent, Permitted Uses, Special Uses and Special Exceptions 72 Residential Special Exception – Short Term Residential Rental 73 74 2.05 S2 District Intent, Permitted Uses, Special Uses and Special Exceptions 75 Residential Special Exception – Short Term Residential Rental 76 77 2.07 R1 District Intent, Permitted Uses, Special Uses and Special Exceptions 78 Residential Special Exception – Short Term Residential Rental 79 80 2.09 R2 District Intent, Permitted Uses, Special Uses and Special Exceptions 81 Residential Special Exception – Short Term Residential Rental 82 83 2.11 R3 District Intent, Permitted Uses, Special Uses and Special Exceptions 84 Residential Special Exception – Short Term Residential Rental 85 86 2.13 R4 District Intent, Permitted Uses, Special Uses and Special Exceptions 87 Residential Special Exception – Short Term Residential Rental 88 89 2.15 R5 District Intent, Permitted Uses, Special Uses and Special Exceptions 90 Residential Special Exception – Short Term Residential Rental 91 92 2.17 UR District Intent, Permitted Uses, Special Uses and Special Exceptions 93 Residential Special Exception – Short Term Residential Rental 94 95 96 01/08/2018 Ordinance Z-629-17 2

97 Section IV: Amend Article 2 by adding Short Term Residential Rental as a Permitted Use for the following 98 Non-Residential Districts: 99 100 2.23 B3 District Intent, Permitted Uses, Special Uses 101 Residential Permitted Use – Short Term Residential Rental 102 103 2.25 B5 District Intent, Permitted Uses, Special Uses 104 Residential Permitted Use – Short Term Residential Rental 105 106 2.27 B6 District Intent, Permitted Uses, Special Uses 107 Residential Permitted Use – Short Term Residential Rental 108 109 2.29 B7 District Intent, Permitted Uses, Special Uses 110 Residential Permitted Use – Short Term Residential Rental 111 112 2.33 C1 District Intent, Permitted Uses, Special Uses 113 Residential Permitted Use – Short Term Residential Rental 114 115 2.35 C2 District Intent, Permitted Uses, Special Uses 116 Residential Permitted Use – Short Term Residential Rental 117 118 2.37 UC District Intent, Permitted Uses, Special Uses 119 Residential Permitted Use – Short Term Residential Rental (upper floors only) 120 121 2.39 MC District Intent, Permitted Uses, Special Uses 122 Residential Permitted Use – Short Term Residential Rental (2nd or higher floor only) 123 124 125 126 Section V: Amend Article 5 by adding a new Section 5.72: Short Term Residential Use – Specific Standards: 127 128 5.72 US-26: Short Term Residential Rental Use-Specific Standards 129 These Use-Specific Standards for Short Term Residential Rentals apply to the following districts: 130 [INSERT ICONS FOR S1, S2, R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, UR] 131 A. Purpose: It is the purpose of this Section to benefit the general public by minimizing adverse impacts 132 on established residential neighborhoods in the City and the owners and residents of properties in these 133 neighborhoods resulting from the conversion of residential properties to tourist and transient use. 134 135 B. Special Exception Eligibility: A Permanent Resident of a Dwelling located in a Residential District 136 may use the Dwelling as a Short Term Residential Rental Unit if: 137 1. The Permanent Resident applies for and is granted a Special Exception, pursuant to Section 9.08 138 hereof. 139 2. The Permanent Resident maintains a valid Registered Retail Merchant Certificate; 140 3. The Permanent Resident posts a clearly printed sign inside his or her Dwelling on the inside of the 141 front door that provides information regarding the location of any fire extinguishers in the unit and 142 building, gas shut off valves, fire exits, or pull fire alarms; 143 144

01/08/2018 Ordinance Z-629-17 3

145 C. Required Information for Application: Both the initial application and any renewal application for a 146 Special Exception permit shall contain the following: 147 1. Information sufficient to show that the applicant is the Permanent Resident of the Short Term 148 Residential Rental Unit, and that the applicant has a Registered Retail Merchant Certificate. 149 Permanent residency shall be established by showing that the Unit is listed as the applicant's 150 residence on at least two (2) of the following: motor vehicle registration; driver's license; voter 151 registration; tax documents showing the unit as the applicant’s primary residence for a standard 152 homestead credit; or utility bill. A renewal application shall contain sufficient information to show 153 that the applicant is a Permanent Resident and has occupied the unit for at least two hundred 154 seventy-five (275) days of the preceding calendar year. 155 2. Primary and secondary emergency contact information, including mailing address, phone number 156 or email address. Upon approval of a Special Exception, emergency contact information shall be 157 shared with the Carmel Police Department. 158 159 D. Limitations: The term of a Special Exception permit granted to a Permanent Resident shall be one (1) 160 year. The grant of a Special Exception permit provides an exception only to the other requirements of 161 this Ordinance. It does not confer a right to lease, sublease, or otherwise use a Dwelling as a Short 162 Term Residential Rental Unit where such use is not otherwise allowed by law, a homeowners 163 association agreement or requirements, any applicable covenant, condition, and restriction, a rental 164 agreement, or any other restriction, requirement, or enforceable agreement. Nothing in this Section 165 shall relieve any person or facilitator of the obligations imposed by any and all applicable provisions 166 of state law and the Carmel City Code, including but not limited to those obligations imposed by 167 Indiana tax laws and rules. Further, nothing in this Section shall be construed to limit any remedies 168 available under any and all applicable provisions of state law and the Carmel City Code. 169 170 E. Suspension of Section: The Mayor may, subject to approval by resolution of the Council, suspend 171 operation of this Section for not more than thirty (30) days per calendar year, during periods of time 172 when major sporting activities or other special events, including, but not limited to the Indianapolis 173 500, PGA Tournament, NCAA Tournament, or a large convention, are scheduled in the Central 174 Indiana community. During these periods, a Permanent Resident may use his or her Dwelling as a 175 Short Term Residential Rental Unit without obtaining a Special Exception permit. 176 177 178 Section VI: Amend Article 9 by adding a new Section 9.08: Special Exception: 179 180 9.08 Special Exception 181 182 A. General Information: Special Exception approval by a Hearing Officer of the Board of Zoning 183 Appeals shall be necessary prior to the establishment of a Special Exception, so cited by the district 184 regulations herein, or the issuance of an Improvement Location Permit for said Special Exception. A 185 Special Exception shall be considered as an exception to the uses allowed under the Unified 186 Development Ordinance, and thus the original application for a Special Exception shall not generally 187 be entitled to favorable consideration; however, an application for the renewal of a Special Exception 188 shall generally be entitled to favorable consideration, so long as it is not opposed by the Director of 189 Community Services. A Hearing Officer shall have discretion whether to approve or deny each Special 190 Exception application, with his or her decision to be based on the special and unique conditions 191 pertinent to the site, determined as a result of the review procedure established herein. 192 193 194 01/08/2018 Ordinance Z-629-17 4

195 B. Procedure: 196 1. Procedure Generally: Whenever an application for a Special Exception within the planning 197 jurisdiction is made, it shall follow the procedure set forth herein and shall conform to the 198 regulations and requirements of the Unified Development Ordinance. 199 2. Consultation with the Director of Community Services and Application: Applicants shall meet with 200 the Director of Community Services to review the zoning classification of their site, review copies 201 of the regulatory ordinances and materials, review the Special Exception procedures, and examine 202 the proposed exception and development of the property. The Director of Community Services 203 shall aid and advise the applicant in preparing the application and supporting documents as 204 necessary. The applicant shall then submit two (2) copies of the written application form and all 205 necessary supporting documents and materials. 206 3. Initial Review by the Director of Community Services: Docketing on Hearing Officer Agenda: 207 Following the receipt of the written application and necessary supporting documents and materials 208 by the Director of Community Services, the Director shall then review the materials solely for the 209 purpose of determining whether the application is complete and in technical compliance with all 210 applicable ordinances, laws, and regulations, and therefore entitled to be forwarded to the Board of 211 Zoning Appeals. If the materials submitted by the applicant are not complete or do not comply 212 with the necessary legal requirements, the Director of Community Services shall inform the 213 applicant of the deficiencies in said materials. Unless and until the Director of Community 214 Services formally accepts the Special Exception application as complete and in legal compliance, 215 it shall not be considered as formally filed for the purpose of proceeding to succeeding steps 216 toward Special Exception approval as hereinafter set forth. Within thirty (30) days of the formal 217 acceptance of the application by the Director of Community Services, the Director shall formally 218 file the application by placing it upon the agenda of a Board of Zoning Appeals Hearing Officer, 219 according to the Rules of Procedure of the Board of Zoning Appeals. 220 4. Public Hearing: Once the Director of Community Services has accepted and filed the application 221 with a Hearing Officer, a docket number shall be assigned and a date and time set for a public 222 hearing by the Hearing Officer, according to the Rules of Procedure of the Board of Zoning 223 Appeals. The applicant shall be responsible for the cost and publication of any required published 224 legal notification of the public hearing. The applicant shall also notify all interested parties and 225 property owners as required by the Rules of Procedure of the Board of Zoning Appeals; however, 226 notice by publication shall not be required for the renewal of a Special Exception. The conduct of 227 the public hearing shall be in accordance with the Board of Zoning Appeals Rules of Procedure. 228 5. Approval or Denial of the Special Exception Application: Upon approval of a Special Exception, 229 the Hearing Officer shall inform the applicant that the applicant may apply to the Director of 230 Community Services for Improvement Location Permits (if necessary) or may commence the 231 Special Exception if no permits are required. Failure of the Hearing Officer to inform the applicant 232 of the time limits set forth in Section 5.72(D) shall not relieve the applicant of complying with said 233 Section. 234 6. Appeal of Hearing Officer Decision: A decision of a Hearing Officer shall not be a basis for 235 judicial review, but it may be appealed to the Board of Zoning Appeals. The Board of Zoning 236 Appeals shall conduct a new hearing on the matter and shall not be bound by any Findings of Fact 237 made by the Hearing Officer. A person who wishes to appeal a decision of the Hearing Officer 238 must file the appeal with the Board of Zoning Appeals within five (5) days after the decision is 239 made, as provided in I.C. 36-7-4-924. 240 7. Time Limit for Re-Application: A Special Exception application that is denied by a Hearing Officer 241 or the Board of Zoning Appeals is ineligible to be placed again on an agenda for consideration 242 until the legality of the decision is finally determined by a court, pursuant to judicial review 01/08/2018 Ordinance Z-629-17 5

243 according to the Advisory Planning Law, or for a period of twelve (12) months following the date 244 of the denial, whichever is later. In addition, whenever a Special Exception application is denied, 245 the property involved in the application shall not be the subject of a different Special Exception 246 application, or any use variance or rezone proposal, for a period of six (6) months following the 247 date of the denial. 248 249 C. Basis of Review: A Hearing Officer, in reviewing a Special Exception application, shall give 250 consideration to the particular needs and circumstances of each application and shall examine the 251 following items as they relate to the proposed Special Exception: 252 1. Surrounding zoning and land use; 253 2. Access to public streets; 254 3. Driveway and curb cut locations in relation to other sites; 255 4. Parking location and arrangement; 256 5. Trash and material storage; 257 6. Necessary exterior lighting; and 258 7. Protective restrictions and/or covenants. 259 260 D. Basis of Approval or Rejection: A Hearing Officer, in approving or rejecting a Special Exception 261 application, shall base his or her decision upon the following factors as they relate to the above listed 262 items (Section 9.08 (C) concerning the proposed Special Exception: 263 1. The economic factors related to the proposed Special Exception, such as cost/benefit to the 264 community and its anticipated effect on surrounding property values; 265 2. The social/neighborhood factors related to the proposed Special Exception, such as compatibility 266 with existing uses in the vicinity of the premises under consideration and how the proposed Special 267 Exception will affect neighborhood integrity; and 268 3. The effects of the proposed Special Exception on vehicular and pedestrian traffic in and around the 269 premises upon which the Special Exception is proposed. 270 271 E. Special Exception Decisions; Commitment: Pursuant to IC 36-7-4-1015, a Hearing Officer may, as a 272 condition to any approval of an application for a Special Exception, require or allow the owner to make 273 any or all of the following commitments concerning the use of the property: 274 1. That the Special Exception will fully comply with Section 5.72 Short Term Residential Rental 275 Standards. 276 2. That the Special Exception will be limited to thirty (30), sixty (60), or ninety (90) days during a 277 calendar year, at the discretion of the Hearing Officer. 278 3. If the Hearing Officer determines that a homeowners association or similar entity has established 279 limitations or prohibitions that apply to the property, that the owner’s implementation of the Special 280 Exception will not result in the violation of any such limitations or prohibitions. 281 282 283 Section VII: All prior Ordinances or parts thereof inconsistent with any provision of this Ordinance are 284 hereby repealed. 285 286 Section VIII: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and signing by the 287 Mayor. 288

01/08/2018 Ordinance Z-629-17 6

289 ADOPTED by the Common Council of the City of Carmel, Indiana this ______day of 290 ______2018, by a vote of ______ayes and ______nays. 291 292 293 COMMON COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF CARMEL 294 295 296 ______297 Kevin D. Rider, President Sue Finkam 298 299 ______300 Jeff Worrell, Vice-President Anthony Green 301 302 ______303 Laura D. Campbell H. Bruce Kimball 304 305 ______306 Ronald E. Carter 307 308 309 ATTEST: 310 311 312 ______313 Christine S. Pauley, Clerk-Treasurer 314 315 316 317 Presented by me to the Mayor of the City of Carmel, Indiana this ____ day of 318 ______2018, at ______.M. 319 320 321 ______322 Christine S. Pauley, Clerk-Treasurer 323 324 325 Approved by me, Mayor of the City of Carmel, Indiana, this _____ day of 326 ______2018, at ______.M. 327 328 329 ______330 James Brainard, Mayor 331 332 ATTEST: 333 334 335 ______336 Christine S. Pauley, Clerk-Treasurer 337 338 339 Prepared by: 340 Adrienne Keeling, Planning Administrator, One Civic Square, Carmel, IN 46032 01/08/2018 Ordinance Z-629-17 7

APPENDIX S: SURVEY

Herron Morton Association Survey

Start of Block: Acknowledgement Statement

ACK1 I acknowledge that I am 18 years of age.

o Yes, I am 18 years of age. (1) o No, I am not 18 years of age. (2)

Skip To: End of Survey If I acknowledge that I am 18 years of age. = No, I am not 18 years of age. End of Block: Acknowledgement Statement

Start of Block: Demographics

DEMO1 What age range do you fall into?

o 18-24 years old (1) o 25-30 years old (2) o 31- 35 years old (3) o 36-40 years old (4) o 41-50 years old (5) o 51-60 years old (6) o 61+ years old (7) o Prefer not to answer (8)

Page 1 of 9

DEMO2 What is your employment status?

o Full Time Employment (1) o Part Time Employment (2) o Self Employment (3) o Student (secondary education) (4) o Unemployed (5) o Prefer not to answer (6) o Other (7) ______

DEMO3 What is your marital status?

o Married (1) o Widowed (2) o Divorced (3) o Separated (4) o Never married (5) o Prefer not to answer (6) o Other (7) ______

End of Block: Demographics

Start of Block: Herron Morton Life

Page 2 of 9

HM1 Are you a renter or an owner of your Herron Morton residence?

o Renter (1) o Owner (2)

HM2 How long have you lived in Herron Morton?

o Less than 1 year (1) o 1-3 years (2) o 4-7 years (3) o 8-10 years (4) o 11+ years (5)

HM3 How long do you plan to continue living in Herron Morton?

o Less than 1 year (1) o 1-3 years (2) o 4-7 years (3) o 8-10 years (4) o 11+ years (5)

Page 3 of 9

HM4 How long have you been a member of the Herron Morton Neighborhood Association?

o Less than 1 year (1) o 1-3 years (2) o 4-7 years (3) o 8-10 years (4) o 11+ years (5) o Prior, but not current member (6) o Not a member (7)

End of Block: Herron Morton Life

Start of Block: Residence Information

RES1 What type of home do you live in?

o Single Family Home (1) o Multi-Family Home (Duplex) (2) o Apartment (3) o Condo (4) o Townhome (5) o Other (6) ______

Page 4 of 9

RES2 How many individuals reside permanently in your residence, including yourself?

o 1 (1) o 2 (2) o 3-5 (3) o 6-7 (4) o 8+ (5)

RES3

Are there any children (individuals under the age of 18) living in your residence? If yes, how many?

o Yes (1) ______o No (2)

Page 5 of 9

RES4 Do you operate a short term rental (rental under the length of one year) on your property?

o Yes (1) o No (2)