OPEN LETTER TO MAYOR DAVE AUGUSTYN IN RESPONSE TO HIS LETTER ON CHANGE.ORG
OPEN LETTER TO MAYOR DAVE AUGUSTYN IN RESPONSE TO HIS LETTER ON CHANGE.ORG
Hello Dave,
I would love to have 30 minutes or so to sit with you and briefly discuss the Short Term Rental Property concerns, which a large number of residents in the Lookout subdivision have asked me to be the lead on. If you are available Monday morning or afternoon I would enjoy a respectful conversation between us both over a coffee.
After reviewing your response to the residents petition, it appears you have been gravely misinformed. We have never demanded an outright ban for these establishments in Pelham. We have insisted the town NOT permit Short Term Rental Properties and Bed & Breakfast establishments in the Northwest Fonthill Secondary Plan (Lookout subdivision).
This is in keeping with the current R1 Residential zoning bylaw and with the official town plan which, under the "B1.6 Northwest Fonthill Secondary Plan" you created new land use classifications being 'Townhouse Residential'; 'Low Density Residential'; and, 'Low Density Residential – Special Policies'. These land use classifications do not permit "bed and breakfast establishments" (defined in B1.1.7 of the Official Plan). The Northwest Fonthill Secondary Plan area is separate from "B1.1.1 Urban" land use classification which does permit "Bed & Breakfast establishments". This is further enforced by the schedules which support these unique classifications in differentiating colours.
We remain committed that the “Urban” land use classification does not supersede the secondary plan and this is where we fundamentally disagree with staff. We believe staff has taken this position to justify permitting this usage in our subdivision. We purchased our homes based on the towns zoning by-laws and the policy stated in the official plan, specifically related to the Northwest Fonthill Secondary Plan. Others in our community determined they could do what they want because no one will stop them and we now have 4 investment properties with a property manager having no regard for the community while the residents feel ignored by the town. This was reinforced as town staff have advised residents they can operate these establishments.
We have repeatedly advised Daren and staff we are content with the Official plan which has many land use designations throughout Pelham which include Bed & Breakfast Establishments and can adopt Short Term Rental Properties. However, we made it clear to Darren and Staff that we do not represent those areas and can only speak for the Northwest Fonthill Secondary plan (lookout subdivision).
This concern touches every home in Pelham and each village and neighbourhood should have been represented in the report, as well as the commercial districts. Instead, town staff offset 20 Short Term Rental Properties they found online with 20 Lookout residents. Darren, as facilitator, steered the Lookout residents in attendance through a Town of Pelham problem solving session with the goal to list licensing items, while ignoring the outcry to enforce the bylaw or strengthen it with a clear definition of these establishments so it may be enforced. We spoke plainly and said if you won't enforce it now, how will you enforce those that don't get a license or that don't comply? We received no response other than Darren saying "we need to start with a licensing system”.
I can’t tell you how hard it is listening to families who are at their wits end in tears because they feel like prisoners in their homes surrounded by transient guests coming, going and disrupting the neighbourhood year round at all hours of the day. Families who are afraid to let their children play in their backyards or let their teenagers walk to the mailbox alone because of their experiences. They spent their life savings on their dream homes to provide the perfect life for their families which has been shattered.
Some guests walk straight into wrong homes, we have witnessed drug transactions, endured late night parties, residents afraid to be home alone and so many other significant interruptions. Real Estate agents are advising prospective buyers of these establishments and not recommending they purchase here. This is only a small glimpse into what is no longer one of the most prestigious neighbourhoods in Niagara!
The staff report on Short Term Rental Properties has done you and council a disservice, as it is more effectively a staff directive.
The staff report fails to mention they have previous practice of a zoning exemption for these establishments in R1 Residential zoning, with consultation from neighbors, and have, as recent as 6 years ago, given a cease and desist order to someone who was operating without one. We are ok with this practice. The residential property which received the exemption for a bed and breakfast establishment was over an acre in size and created little if any disruption to neighbours while provided more than ample parking.
Of an important note, the staff report also fails to include the zoning restrictions municipalities placed on these uses within their jurisdiction scan. They fail to identify that most do not permit Short Term Rental Properties in low density and residential zoning. Blue Mountain does NOT permit this use in R1, R2, R3 or low density zonings. Niagara Falls has restrictions on residential zoning areas and are only allowed in the tourist area. As for NOTL, we are not the tourist destination they are with anchor wineries, Shaw Festival and golfing. We are a bedroom community for surrounding municipalities, with the aura of prestige. This is what Pelham’s villages are seen as within Niagara. This new direction however, will alter this image permanently.
We have expressed concern over the volume of marijuana farms in Pelham with the fear of the provincial government allowing them to open farm boutiques similar to wineries. The current government has advised they are considering this, similar to the marijuana tourism industry occurring in British Columbia and Colorado. This is a real concern, especially given the proximity of Niagara Falls as a destination and Pelham which is recently been dubbed the “Pot Capital of Ontario". We do not want these tourists living within the Lookout subdivision and I am confident other areas of Pelham are likeminded. Darren’s reply to this was to laugh and comment that "it is a provincial issue". It will be our issue when they are hoteling next door.
We have paid over half a million dollars for the privilege to live here, while transient guests can book a room for $43 a night next door or a party house for $200 a night. What element are they bringing in? We know, and it is disruptive. Someone with a criminal background which requires Police to disclose their current address to neighbours, could feasibly rent a room for $43 a night while prowling the children’s park during the day. Would you feel safe with your children playing in a park that is surrounded by Short Term Rental Properties? You simply do not know who is in your neighbourhood or who your neighbours will be each night. Occurrences such as these may seem to be far fetched, however there are countless news reports of these and many more occurrences related to Short Term Rental Properties. Saying “it wouldn’t happen here” is great, until it happens here. I will not risk being the family it happens to!
As well, the information or letter in support of Airbnb’s, which is referenced several times in the staff report, is from 1 resident in the Hurricane Road area who appears to have influence over some council members and staff. The contents of this letter and 1 property owner do not justify opening up R1 Residential zoning to these establishments for eternity. As well, has anyone spoken to their neighbours to determine their experiences?
We have heard from neighbours and they are not as supportive as the operators are. But you would expect a bias from the operator as they are being enriched by the Short Term Rental Property they are running, while leveraging neighbors who work hard to build a beautiful community atmosphere. These operators use the peaceful family neighbourhood as a marketing tool, enabling them to better sell their rooms to guests.
The town has also failed to identify how they restrict the quantity of these establishments in the community. The fact is, if they permit it, anyone can operate one. Potentially an entire street could become a hotel district, similar to what has occurred on Philmori Boulevard and Joyce Crescent within the Lookout subdivision.
Also, who will enforce this if someone does not get a license. We have heard from town staff that they cannot proactively enforce all the current by-laws and don’t have the resources. Darren even stated that they do not drive around to enforce parking infractions in neighbourhoods as other neighbourhoods would complain they are not being fairly enforced, therefore it is a complaint driven system. The result however, is a lawless town where everyone parks as they wish and by the time the complaint is generated, the vehicle is long gone. Perhaps council should consider giving further resources and increasing the number of by-law officers to better support the By-law enforcement department. If they are burdened by the current volume of work they receive from residents regarding existing by-law infractions, perhaps increasing the burden with a new industry of Short Term Rental Properties and the property inspections which go along with licensing, is not the best first step in the process.
The staff report also includes a comment that residents were less concerned about properties where a resident was home. However, Residents Do not want Short Term Rental Properties in the Lookout subdivision, only if the town forced this upon us, would we want an owner who resides at the property year round as their primary residence to be able to get a license, not a tennant or resident who is not financially invested in the ownership of the property. The loop hole is, I can rent the house I own to a property manager for $1 a year, while offering them an incentive to manage the Short Term Rental Property.
The staff report also fails to identify if this will be a cost recovery model or paid for by current revenue streams. During the problem solving session, Darren advised us that the revenue from licensing will not cover the costs of permitting these establishments. Therefore, one can only conclude that the same residents who do not want Short Term Rental Properties and Bed Breakfast establishments in the Lookout subdivision would be subsidizing the existence of these establishments within their subdivision.
The fact is, the staff report is biased to support this use throughout the town and is incomplete. These are very real facts. This incomplete information places council in an uninformed state and ultimately at odds with the facts and the residents. I would expect more from staff, however based on this report, someone is filtering the information to suit an agenda. Who’s, that I don’t know, but the lack of factual and complete information puts you in a difficult position in an election cycle.
Please also take into significant consideration, this will effectively alter the foot print of this town forever. An election is underway and the current council does not have the public support to address this issue, especially given 2 ward seats will be vacated including your own Mayoral seat.
I would suggest you return the report to staff to fill in the gaps in their report, which I outlined above. Request staff conduct community meetings in each village and commercial districts to obtain adequate consultation and representation from the community. This will take into October and would fall on the new council to resolve. There is no burning fire requiring this issue to be rushed through the current council and should be conducted with respect to the resident's concerns while resulting in a meaningful long term and amicable solution.
I look forward to sitting down with you for coffee on Monday.
With Respect,
Corey
Corey Ziraldo