When it comes to vacation rentals in south Santa Barbara County, the concept of a “home away from home” is at war with the narrow availability of housing for residents and the concomitant problem of the growing cost of housing. In a study of vacation rentals before Goleta’s council on May 20, the report from Bay Area Economics also pulled back the curtain on short-term rental activity in Santa Barbara, Carpinteria, Montecito, and countywide.
Goleta has 51 active business licenses that allow a resident to let their home for less than 30 days, which represents a low 0.7 percent of the city’s total housing — 51 out of 12,584 total units in 2022. A second way to collect the information is through AirDNA, which collects advertised rentals from Airbnb and Vrbo, both permitted and unpermitted. The average number has varied over time, from 55 in 2021 to 101 in 2024.
The most common type of vacation rental in Goleta was a one-bedroom unit (44 percent) followed by three-bedroom (22 percent) and two-bedroom (20 percent). In 2024, 77 percent of the rentals were for the “entire place” (84 listings) and 23 percent were a private room in a larger unit (26 listings). Interestingly, just over half were available 90 nights or less per year, indicating a home that is more heavily used by the owners and their friends and relatives. About 33 percent were “full time,” or vacation rentals that were available more than 181 nights a year. The average daily rate was around $330, compared to $299 for a hotel in 2024.
Goleta commissioned the study out of a concern that vacation rentals made it less possible for existing residents and people who worked in the city to live there. Commenting on this aspect of Goleta’s desire to protect its housing was Mike Becchio, who managed vacation rentals in the city. He reminded the City Council that 0.7 percent was a very small number, but that each such rental employed cleaners and handmen, and that the visitors brought tourism dollars to restaurants, markets, and shops. “The city should focus on solutions that create more housing,” Becchio urged, “not regulations that would restrict the economy.”
The report also stated that each rental gave rise to about 1.5 jobs on the one hand, but increased the demand for 0.78 more units of housing for each worker. Goleta’s rental market is “highly constrained,” the study found, at a vacancy rate of about 2.2 percent from 2018-2022. Even if the 51 permitted and the 56 permit-pending vacation rentals were banned, that fraction would only rise to 3 percent, according to the study. Homes used seasonally, or second homes, are about 20 percent of the total, which “appears to be a slightly larger driver of housing vacancy than short-term renting.”
Among the city’s 12,584 units of housing — divided about equally between owner-occupied and rented to a tenant — other types of “vacancies” were homes for sale or rent, and homes being repaired or renovated. These totaled 553 units of housing, according to the American Community Survey. This census survey put Goleta’s “seasonal” stock — defined as a seasonal, recreational, or occasional-use units — at 93 units from 2018-2022.
The comparisons to other municipalities were as follows (information is for 2022):
| total units | seasonal | % of total | other vacant | |
| Goleta | 12,584 | 93 | 0.7 percent | 553 |
| City of Santa Barbara | 38,678 | 975 | 2.5 percent | 1,470 |
| Santa Barbara County | 158,807 | 3,722 | 2.3 percent | 7,053 |
| According to the 2020 Census: | ||||
| Carpinteria | 5,689 | 475 | 8.3 percent | 246 |
| Montecito | 4,162 | 684 | 16.4 percent | 321 |
As a percentage of total housing, seasonal units in Montecito and Carpinteria were higher than those types of units in Goleta, Santa Barbara, or the county as a whole. The study surmised that those owners “may choose not to rent out their seasonal homes to the wider public.”
An unscientific look at submarkets listed at the AirDNA website showed that the City of Santa Barbara and Montecito contained about 2,000 vacation rentals, while Goleta and Isla Vista had 125. Carpinteria and Summerland held about 500.
Given these interesting results, the Goleta council’s task on Tuesday was to let city staff know how much regulation was needed of the city’s vacation rentals. Among the possible new regulations would be a further definition of what a “short-term vacation rental” was in the municipal code. In accord with the city’s interest in keeping housing for Goletans, lighter regulation for “hosted” properties — or vacation rentals where the owner lives at the home — and a prohibition on the conversion of a home to a short-term vacation rental if “recently subjected to a no-fault eviction” would be considered The council was divided on whether a cap on the number of vacation rentals was needed, but all agreed more information would be useful. The next meeting on the topic has not yet been set.
An update to this story added AirDNA information.
You must be logged in to post a comment.