Birmingham is moving closer to regulating short-term rentals, such as Airbnb or Vrbo, but city leaders still have questions about where those properties should be allowed and how repeat violations would be handled.
The City Council’s Committee of the Whole voted 4-1 Wednesday to advance a proposed short-term rental ordinance to the full council, which is scheduled to take up the measure on Oct. 27. The council has been working on the proposal for roughly two years.
What the ordinance would require
The proposal would create a permitting system for short-term rentals operating in Birmingham.
Operators would need a city business license and a short-term rental permit. They would also have to provide proof of liability insurance and certify that the property complies with applicable homeowners association rules.
The city would inspect properties and require operators to follow occupancy and safety rules.
The proposal would also require a local “responsible party” to be able to respond to the property within 30 minutes when requested by police, code enforcement or other city officials.
That information would be entered into the city’s computer-aided dispatch system, giving police a way to determine whether a short-term rental is properly permitted when officers respond to an address.
Birmingham police told councilors they have responded to hundreds of calls this year involving properties identified as short-term rentals.
According to police, the department recorded 231 calls from such properties between Jan. 1 and Sept. 27. Most were lower-priority calls involving issues such as noise, parking, welfare checks and general disturbances.
Deputy Chief Bo Hackel said the lack of a clear point of contact can create problems during emergencies.
He described a recent gas leak evacuation at a Birmingham building with multiple short-term rentals. Officers had difficulty reaching people connected to some of the units, making it harder to determine who was responsible for the properties.
Council still has enforcement questions
Councilors want city staff to develop clearer guidelines for when a short-term rental permit could be suspended or revoked.
The proposal gives the city authority to take action for violations of city regulations, criminal activity, false information on a permit application and other circumstances that could make a property a public nuisance.
But councilors want a more specific violation matrix that spells out what happens when complaints or violations pile up.
One example discussed Wednesday was whether three noise complaints within a 12-month period could trigger action. That threshold has not been finalized.
More serious incidents could lead to faster action, but councilors and city staff still have to work out the details.
Zoning remains unresolved
The biggest remaining issue is where short-term rentals should be allowed.
Councilor Josh Vasa argued the city should address short-term rentals through zoning, potentially limiting them to certain areas or using other tools to prevent large concentrations of rentals in particular neighborhoods.
City staff said zoning changes would be a separate process that could take several months.
The mayor's office wants to move forward with the licensing and enforcement portion of the ordinance first, then address zoning later.
That approach drew concern from Vasa, who said the city needs to be careful about approving an operating framework before deciding where short-term rentals belong.
Changes for homeowners and larger operators
The council also made several changes to the proposal Wednesday.
Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) — small, independent living spaces on the same property of a primary home — were removed from a list of structures that would be prohibited from use as short-term rentals.
City staff said feedback from previous town halls showed interest in allowing homeowners to use ADUs for short-term rentals. Vasa questioned that feedback and asked staff to provide the underlying information from those meetings.
Councilors also discussed how the ordinance would apply to operators with large numbers of properties.
One example raised during the meeting involved an entity with roughly 125 short-term rental units. Councilors questioned whether an operator would have to obtain a separate permit for every unit or whether the city could create an enterprise license for larger operators.
Staff agreed to continue working on that language.
