Correspondence: Email Re: Short Term Rentals
Email from Diane Fownes regarding the impact of short-term rental regulations on individual homeowners.
From: Diane Fownes
Date: April 26, 2026 at 6:54:09 AM PDT
To: mayorandcouncil@viewroyal.ca
Subject: To Mayor Tobias
Hello Mayor Tobias,
I’m writing to follow up on the recent discussion regarding short-term rentals.
I was surprised to see that you did not support the motion to review the bylaw. When we spoke previously, you indicated that you agreed with the provincial framework, so I’m trying to understand how that position aligns with not supporting a review.
As I raised at the meeting, the current situation in View Royal places residents in a difficult position. The Town has introduced an amnesty period during the FIFA World Cup, which suggests that rentals under 90 days are acceptable during that time. At the same time, without municipal alignment, residents are unable to obtain the required provincial registration. This leaves people unable to operate legally, even when they are trying to comply.
Given that, a review of the bylaw seems like a reasonable and necessary step to ensure alignment and avoid placing residents at risk. I would also appreciate clarification on whether it is your position to consider a revision to the bylaw, or if you intend not to support changes at all.
More broadly, there is a common assumption that short-term rentals directly reduce long-term housing supply, but the research does not support a simple or uniform conclusion. While provincial data suggests that high concentrations of short-term rentals—particularly those operated as full-time, commercial investments—can contribute to increased rental prices and reduced availability, it also makes an important distinction. The impact is largely driven by investor-owned, non–principal residence listings, not by individuals renting out their own homes.
When looking at communities such as Langford, there is no clear evidence that short-term rentals are a primary driver of housing challenges. Langford has historically had fewer restrictions, yet it has not been identified as an example where short-term rentals are driving housing shortages. In Langford’s case, significant housing development and population growth appear to have offset demand pressures, making it difficult to attribute housing challenges to short-term rentals alone.
This points to a broader issue in the current policy approach. The impact of short-term rentals depends on scale and type, not simply on whether they are allowed. Small-scale, owner-occupied rentals serve very different purposes than commercial operations managing multiple units full-time. They support a range of needs, including temporary housing for workers, families attending significant events, and individuals relocating to a community. Blanket restrictions do not reflect this distinction.
A more balanced approach would focus on regulating higher-risk, commercial uses while allowing limited, responsible participation by homeowners. Provincial legislation has already moved in this direction through registration requirements and principal residence rules. When municipalities impose blanket bans or overly restrictive bylaws, they undermine that framework and create inconsistency across communities.
The result is a patchwork system where residents face very different rules and opportunities depending on where they live. This creates confusion, limits fair access, and places some residents at a disadvantage despite being subject to the same provincial legislation.
I would appreciate your perspective on how the Town intends to address this gap moving forward considering your lack of support for a review.
Yours Truly,
Diane Fownes