Buffalo Common Council approves restrictions on short-term rentals
The changes include restrictions on where people can operate short-term rentals, such as Airbnbs, in the future if they do not reside on that property.
The new changes state that any non-owner-occupied rentals are banned from residential zones. The owners of those properties are also required to reside in Buffalo or designate an agent or managing company.
In October of last year, city leaders proposed the temporary ban on new applications for short-term rental spaces as they looked for ways to balance the preservation of neighborhoods with an increase in Airbnbs.
At the time, Buffalo Common Council Member Mitch Nowakowski said there were countless complaints from residents saying the neighborhoods were becoming 'less residential.' He also said areas that have seen an increase in short-term rentals have also seen a rise in 311 and 911 calls.
The amendment said that the changes do not apply to existing short-term rentals currently operating with a legal license.
Click here to see Buffalo's zoning map.
See all of the new changes in the ordinance amendment below.
Ordinance-Amendment-for-Chapter-380-Short-Term-Rental-HousingDownload
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Epoch Times
18 hours ago
- Epoch Times
Gov. Hochul Tours Downtown Middletown
ORANGE COUNTY, N.Y.—Gov. Kathy Hochul took a walking tour of Middletown's Downtown Revitalization Initiative (DRI) area on Aug. 11, accompanied by Mayor Joseph DeStefano and Common Council President J. Miguel Rodrigues. On North Street, the governor visited several shops and eateries, including Dayes Coffee Roasters, The Taco Factory, and Mister Croissant Bakery & Cafe.
Yahoo
01-08-2025
- Yahoo
Common Council approves affordable apartment community after delay. It will be near Northridge
A large affordable apartment community on Milwaukee's far northwest side has been approved by the Common Council after opposition from the district's alderwoman and a two-week delay on the vote. The council voted 10-1 with three abstentions on July 31 to approve Cudahy Farms Healthy Living Campus. Construction could begin before the end of the year. Alderwoman Laressa Taylor, whose district includes the development, abstained from voting. Taylor said she's continuing to speak with the developers about what's best for her constituents. The apartments would be near Milwaukee's demolished Northridge Mall. It would include a healthy living campus on a former YMCA property east of North Swan Road and south of West Fairy Chasm Road. The $56.9 million first phase of 212 apartments would be listed at below-market rents ranging from $600 to $2,300 monthly. Those would be for households earning from 30% to 80% of the local median income, with 100 apartments reserved for seniors and families. Taylor raised concerns from constituents at a July 15 council meeting when she delayed the vote to allow further discussions with developer Royal Capital Group Ltd. Neighbors are concerned the apartments could end up like the nearby Woodlands lower-income housing community. Milwaukee Police consider the Woodlands a crime "hot spot." Royal Capital plans to secure the development with entrances only accessible for emergency vehicles. Other opponents cited a loss of woodlands on the site, and questioned whether the recreational facilities would be available to community members who aren't Cudahy Farms residents. A tax incremental financing district would use property tax revenue from the development to make annual payments to Royal Capital totaling $3.7 million. The financing district also would pay $2.1 million of interest costs. Taylor abstained from the financing district vote, which was approved separately. Two years after the original proposal, Royal Capital hopes to begin construction this year and have the project completed by the end of 2026. CEO Kevin Newell said after the votes the firm was pleased with the city's leadership. "We are committed to improving the quality of living for our beloved city," Newell said, "and this investment by my firm will be another step forward in that effort."This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Affordable apartments approved for site near former Northridge Mall
Forbes
21-07-2025
- Forbes
Stanford Analyzes Worker Preferences For AI
workers with AI getty Many of us have internalized this notion that we're soon going to be working side-by-side with robots, or at least AI agents and entities. So as humans, what do we want these digital colleagues of ours to do? How does delegation work? A Stanford study recently went into this where authors surveyed 15,000 workers in over 100 types of jobs, to see what they really thought about AI adoption. I thought this comment by one of the authors sums up the purpose of the report well: 'As AI systems become increasingly capable, decisions about how to deploy them in the workplace are often driven by what is technically feasible,' writes project leader Yijia Shao, a Ph.D. student in the Stanford computer science department, 'yet workers are the ones most affected by these changes and the ones the economy ultimately relies on.' In other words, it's the front-line workers who are going to be most affected by these changes, so we might as well hear what they have to say (in addition to doing all kinds of market research.) There's a reason why the suggestion box is a time-tested element of business intelligence. Technology has to be a good fit – it's not something you just implement carelessly, throwing darts at a wall, and then expecting all of the people involved to sign on and go along for the ride. Some Results In terms of actual study findings, the Stanford people found that a lot of it, as Billy Joel famously sung, comes down to trust: 45% of respondents had doubts about reliability, and a reported 23% were worried about job loss. As for the types of tasks that workers favored automating, the study provides a helpful visual that shows off various must-haves against certain danger zones of adoption. Specifically, Stanford researchers split this into a 'green light zone' and a 'red light zone', as well as a 'low priority zone', and an 'opportunities zone' featuring uses that workers might want, but that are not yet technically viable. Uses in the green light zone include scheduling tasks for tax preparers, quality control reporting, and the interpretation of engineering reports. Red light uses that workers are wary of include the preparation of meeting agendas for municipal clerks, as well as the task of contacting potential vendors in logistics analysis. There's also the task of researching hardware or software products, where surveyed computer network support specialists seem to prefer to do this type of work themselves. I thought it was funny that one item in the low priority zone was 'tracing lost, delayed or misdirected baggage,' a job typically done by ticket agents. It explains a lot for those legions of hapless travelers entering their faraway AirBnBs without so much as a toothbrush. As for opportunities, it seems that technical writers would like AI to arrange for distribution of material, computer scientists will largely sign off on technology working on operational budgets, and video game designers would like production schedules automated. Why Automate? I also came across a section of the study where researchers looked at reasons for automation desire on the part of survey respondents. It seems that over 2500 survey workers want to automate a task because it will free up time for other kinds of work. About 1500 cited 'repetitive or tedious' tasks that can be automated, and about the same number suggested that automating a particular task would improve the quality of work done. A lower number suggested automating stressful or mentally draining tasks, or those that are complicated or difficult. The study also broke down tasks and processes into three control areas, including 'AI agent drives task completion', 'human drives task completion' or 'equal partnership' (and two other gradations). You can see the entire thing here , or listen to one of my favorite podcasts on the subject here . One of the headline items is a prediction of diminishing needs for analysis or information processing skills. That connects with more of a focus on managerial, interpersonal or coordination job roles. However, how this will shake out is concerning to many workers, and I would suggest that 23% of respondents worrying about job displacement is a wildly low number. Almost anybody anywhere should be worried about job displacement. Regardless of what happens in the long term, many experts are predicting extremely high unemployment in the years to come, as we work out the kinks in the biggest technological transformation of our time. Anyway, this study brings a lot of useful information to the question – what do we want AI to do for us in enterprise?
