Airbnb to fight council rules

Airbnb is taking its battle against regulation of Christchurch’s shortterm accommodation sector to the Environment Court.

The company says Christchurch City Council’s new rules are ‘‘complex, inefficient and ineffective’’, and it wants the court to force the council to adopt a much less restrictive regime.

But the city’s hospitality industry is disappointed at Airbnb’s stance, saying it is an example of a multinational company using its unlimited sums of money to influence local decisions.

‘‘It’s the big money syndrome,’’ Hospitality New Zealand Canterbury branch president Peter Morrison said.

In late March, after a lengthy process, the council decided people who rent out properties as unhosted visitor accommodation in residential areas must obtain a resource consent.

The consent would cost at least $1000 and, depending on the number of guests and nights rented out annually, the consent could be declined.

However, Airbnb said the new rules were ‘‘unduly prescriptive’’ and ‘‘imposed an inappropriately high burden’’ in light of the scale and significance of the issue the council sought to regulate.

‘‘Many aspects of these provisions are not appropriate, not enforceable, nor supported by evidence,’’ Airbnb said in its notice of appeal.

The council has already admitted the new rules would be difficult to enforce.

Under the rules, a consent would be needed if a property was rented out for more than 60 nights a year with up to 12 guests, but it would be classed as a ‘‘discretionary activity’’ and could be declined after the council considered impacts on neighbours.

This also applied to homes being rented out for less than 60 nights with between six and 12 guests.

Airbnb wanted the council to allow homes to be used as unhosted visitor accommodation for 180 nights per year for up to 12 guests.

The owners would be obliged to liaise with neighbours and have check-in procedures for guests checking in between 10pm and 6am, Airbnb said in its notice of appeal to the court.

Morrison said the association would not be taking the appeal lightly.

‘‘We will be making sure the council sticks with its plan.’’

He said the new rules provided a more level playing field and short-term accommodation providers were still a lot better off than commercial accommodation

operators, who had a myriad of other regulations they had to follow.

Airbnb was taking millions of dollars out of Christchurch’s economy each year, Morrison said.

But Christchurch Holiday Homes business director Sue Harrison questioned how much internationally-owned hotels had taken out of Christchurch. She said Airbnb brought people into the city, who spent money in the local economy – people who did not want to stay in motels or hotels.

Harrison supported a level playing field, but regulation needed to happen at a nationwide level and be lawful. ‘‘Airbnb are keeping them [the council] honest, so we appreciate them for that.’’

Harrison said the level of lawmaking required to regulate the industry was beyond the council’s resources and left the district plan open to litigation.

Council planning and consents head John Higgins said submitters have until June 8 to register as a party to the appeal and following that an Environment Court judge would consider whether the issue would go to mediation or a court hearing.