Ïce Condominiums at York Centre | 234m | 67s | Lanterra | architectsAlliance

TheKingEast

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
5,348
Reaction score
2,582
I agree that it needs to be regulated, but this all leads to a bigger issue. People are cash strapped and need ways to make money. Incomes are not enough, cost of living is soaring through the roof. People will always try and find a way to make money and save money as well (AirBnB vs Hotel).

That said, short term rentals should be allowed, but the building(board) should be allowed to make money from this as well, Security should also be beefed up and everyone on the premises should have to provide identification. It should all be on file for building security. These are just a few things that should change among other things. I'm not sure how things work now, but the owner should be on the hook for any camages or inconveniences casued by the short term renters.
 

AHK

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
1,014
Reaction score
1,501
A short note on allowability of short term rentals in a condominium building.

If short term rentals (typically less than six months) are prohibited in the Declaration, they are not legal, and it is up to the Board, through the Property Management company, to enforce the Declaration. After that, it is strictly a matter of diligence and competence. If the requirements of the Declaration are not being enforced, it is up to the Board to address the issue with the property management company, changing it if necessary, or failing that, for the owners to change the composition of the Board either at the AGM's or via a Requisition Meeting.

If short term rentals are explicitly allowed in the Declaration (I am not aware of any Declarations which make an explicit statement that short term rentals are allowed in a building on an unrestricted basis, or that there is to be no prohibition on short term rentals), then there is little that can be done. The Declaration is a higher order document than the Rules, Passing a Rule that contravenes a stipulation in the Declaration would have no effect - the rule cannot be enforced without getting the corresponding change made to the Declaration - requiring a minimum 80% approval of ALL owners (not just those voting on the change).

If the Declaration is silent on the issue of short term rentals, then the Board may propose revised Rules which could include a stipulation prohibiting short term rentals, and it would not be in contravention with the Declaration, as it it silent on the issue. Typically, the proposed revised rules would be approved by the Board, published to all owners, with a notice that should owners object, they should organize a Requisition Meeting, to put the issue to a vote. If the revised Rules are generally acceptable, it is probably unlikely that a Requisition meeting will be organized - it requires 15% of all owners to sign the Requisition calling for the meeting.

With respect to Airbnb (or other short term agency) visitors to our building - constant vigilance is required new tenants, and sometimes new owners, do not take our communications and signage seriously, so it comes up periodically. Our experience has been that international visitors are not generally a disturbance, but it is the 905's who want a place to party for the night, without disturbing their parents, who are by far the greatest problem.

As soon as an individual entering the building is identified as being provided with a fob and key, who is not on the list of registered residents (or whose access has not been specifically arranged, in advance with the Property Management office), enforcement procedures start - the security staff is authorized, is instructed to act - to implement access restrictions and gather the appropriate documentation - without needing further direction.
 

TheKingEast

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
5,348
Reaction score
2,582
A short note on allowability of short term rentals in a condominium building.

If short term rentals (typically less than six months) are prohibited in the Declaration, they are not legal, and it is up to the Board, through the Property Management company, to enforce the Declaration. After that, it is strictly a matter of diligence and competence. If the requirements of the Declaration are not being enforced, it is up to the Board to address the issue with the property management company, changing it if necessary, or failing that, for the owners to change the composition of the Board either at the AGM's or via a Requisition Meeting.

If short term rentals are explicitly allowed in the Declaration (I am not aware of any Declarations which make an explicit statement that short term rentals are allowed in a building on an unrestricted basis, or that there is to be no prohibition on short term rentals), then there is little that can be done. The Declaration is a higher order document than the Rules, Passing a Rule that contravenes a stipulation in the Declaration would have no effect - the rule cannot be enforced without getting the corresponding change made to the Declaration - requiring a minimum 80% approval of ALL owners (not just those voting on the change).

If the Declaration is silent on the issue of short term rentals, then the Board may propose revised Rules which could include a stipulation prohibiting short term rentals, and it would not be in contravention with the Declaration, as it it silent on the issue. Typically, the proposed revised rules would be approved by the Board, published to all owners, with a notice that should owners object, they should organize a Requisition Meeting, to put the issue to a vote. If the revised Rules are generally acceptable, it is probably unlikely that a Requisition meeting will be organized - it requires 15% of all owners to sign the Requisition calling for the meeting.

With respect to Airbnb (or other short term agency) visitors to our building - constant vigilance is required new tenants, and sometimes new owners, do not take our communications and signage seriously, so it comes up periodically. Our experience has been that international visitors are not generally a disturbance, but it is the 905's who want a place to party for the night, without disturbing their parents, who are by far the greatest problem.

As soon as an individual entering the building is identified as being provided with a fob and key, who is not on the list of registered residents (or whose access has not been specifically arranged, in advance with the Property Management office), enforcement procedures start - the security staff is authorized, is instructed to act - to implement access restrictions and gather the appropriate documentation - without needing further direction.
Bingo
 

Miscreant

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 9, 2011
Messages
3,579
Reaction score
1,740
Location
Where it's urban. And dense.
I simply look at Airbnb like this, it should not be allowed in any situation where a group of people owns shares in a common investment.

Buying into a condo, townhouse, or any other property with common elements is about buying into a shared investment. No minority party to that investment should be permitted to increase their individual short term gains at the expense of all of the other investors’ long term stability and returns.
Nail: meet hammer. Exactly.
 

Christopher Brown

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 14, 2016
Messages
268
Reaction score
356
Location
Downtown
When is the city of Toronto going to start regulating Airbnb? Will this help to solve the problem?
They did take all steps to solve it but the predatory crowd making a killing off short term rentals ain't going to roll over. The City's new rules, if upheld, along with a strong management team, will put an end to the madness that rules in Ice and others, and the offending Declaration will be rendered moot.

Everything you need to know about past and present is summarized here in this Sept. '18 article.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thestar.com/amp/news/gta/2018/09/05/appeal-stalls-torontos-short-term-rental-rules-for-at-least-at-year.html
 

sikandar

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
248
Reaction score
1,353
They did take all steps to solve it but the predatory crowd making a killing off short term rentals ain't going to roll over. The City's new rules, if upheld, along with a strong management team, will put an end to the madness that rules in Ice and others, and the offending Declaration will be rendered moot.

Everything you need to know about past and present is summarized here in this Sept. '18 article.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thestar.com/amp/news/gta/2018/09/05/appeal-stalls-torontos-short-term-rental-rules-for-at-least-at-year.html
This is a good example of beauracracy overriding common sense. When a delay of ONE YEAR would clearly be a win in itself for one side and impacts the security and housing needs of thousands of people, exceptions must be made to rule on an appeal quickly.
 

DSC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
10,367
Reaction score
5,111
Location
St Lawrence Market Area
This is a good example of beauracracy overriding common sense. When a delay of ONE YEAR would clearly be a win in itself for one side and impacts the security and housing needs of thousands of people, exceptions must be made to rule on an appeal quickly.
While it will help to have the City rules approved, the basis of living in a Condo is that the Board has a legal responsibility to enforce the Declaration and the authority to make Rules that help it to do so. I have no first-hand knowledge of Ice but it appears that the Board (and their employee, the PM Company) are not making enough efforts to control short-term rentals; the Declaration apparently says they are allowed but Rules can be made and enforced to be sure that the Corporation gets advance notice of rentals, that the renters need to check in (and out) and maybe that the owners have to pay a fee to cover the administrative costs of monitoring all if this.
 

WillTo

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
744
Reaction score
1,206
The board represents the owners, who are not necessarily residents.

If a significant chunk of owners just own AirBnbs or rentals, they indifferent or opposed to the status quo.

I'm a hypocrite-I love Airbnb when travelling but don't want it in my building.
 

Panontario

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 23, 2011
Messages
197
Reaction score
256
While it will help to have the City rules approved, the basis of living in a Condo is that the Board has a legal responsibility to enforce the Declaration and the authority to make Rules that help it to do so. I have no first-hand knowledge of Ice but it appears that the Board (and their employee, the PM Company) are not making enough efforts to control short-term rentals; the Declaration apparently says they are allowed but Rules can be made and enforced to be sure that the Corporation gets advance notice of rentals, that the renters need to check in (and out) and maybe that the owners have to pay a fee to cover the administrative costs of monitoring all if this.
This common perception is exactly what's wrong with some people living in condos. As a condo board member, I get blamed for nearly everything in the building (AirBnB, cigarette on a balcony, tresspassing, loud noises, garbage chute clogging, elevator repairs taking forever etc). People need to start taking responsibility for their actions. They need to stop behaving like kids and behave responsibly. Boards are completely volunteer-based. We have full-time jobs and volunteer on the board for the betterment of the building. We are not your full time baby-sitters. Guess what? You can lock down entire building, and will still have noise complains, trespassers and other violators. People still act like they still live at their parents' home or student residence hoping that their parents will pick up their trash after them and their rowdy guests.

Condo boards have very few tools to enforce rules (such as AirBnB, noise complains etc). It's nearly as difficult as evicting a deadbeat tenant in Ontario. Takes countless notices and costly litigation. My building is fighting AirBnB in our building, and we are faced with several litigious individuals who feel that the rest of the condo should be subsidizing their business model by allowing them to run a hotel in our building. Guess what, AirBnB is a form of stealing. You are stealing from your neighbors their peaceful enjoyment of their property. AirBnB leads to security incidents, increased wear and tear of common elements, increased traffic and use elevators and shared facilities. You are asking your neighbors to subsidize your business.

The province and the city need to give boards more tools to enforce the declaration and the rules. Instead, we are stuck between absentee landlords, AirBnBers and renters. Building with a higher proportion of owner-occupied units have fewer problems like this.
 
Last edited:

TheKingEast

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
5,348
Reaction score
2,582
If a landlord has to jump through hoops to kick out a tenant who hasn't paid in months, they will do the same for the board trying to enforce the rules. It's absolute nonsense.
 

mcornett

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 20, 2007
Messages
198
Reaction score
561
This is a good example of beauracracy overriding common sense. When a delay of ONE YEAR would clearly be a win in itself for one side and impacts the security and housing needs of thousands of people, exceptions must be made to rule on an appeal quickly.
To bring some clarity to the City's involvement:

In 2017, it passed a short-term rental licensing and registration by-law as well as a zoning by-law that would permit short-term rentals in certain residential zones.

The STR by-law does not end STRs in any building, but restricts them to a person's principal residence, in theory eliminating commercial and multiple-unit rentals. I anticipate many individuals will not obey the by-law -- the primary enforcement mechanism is the City's power to demand STR companies (e.g. AirBnB) delist unregistered STRs, thereby depriving them of business.

Portions of City's STR zoning by-law were appealed to the OMB and are therefore not in force. The appeal was scheduled to be heard at the end of 2018, but certain appellants requested an adjournment and the Board provided its first availability for hearing in August, 2019, almost a year later. The City had no control over the dates given by the Board, which is overwhelmed.

While the appeal is pending, the City cannot realistically enact the STR registration by-law, so we are faced with the status quo.
 

Top