Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Exactly, and who is the agent of change when your neighborhood fills up with transient tenants? Why, it's AirBnB of course. Ergo, AirBnB should be regulated.

I've said it before: cities that care about their current residents should enact 2 limits: tourist zones where year-round full-unit, full-building rentals are allowed, taxed and regulated like hotels (yes, you run a business, you pay commercial property tax, in addition to sales and nightly tax). And then in the remaining residential zones, limit homestays to 40 or 60 days, regardless of whether they are owner occupied or not, with AirBnB collecting taxes and fees for the city and reporting all nightly counts to the city. There could also be complete homestay exclusion zones, but that can also be handled by condo/neighborhood association rules.

The regulation can be tailored to local desires and needs: number of days, requiring permits or just allowing anyone to operate, and requiring owner-occupancy during visitor stays or not.

Note that nothing prevents regular residences at resident-occupied tax rates in the "commercial" zone, just that buyers in that zone know they can convert if they want, but so can their neighbors.



I agree completely. We have different zoning laws, so why is San Francisco applying a single short term rental law across the entire city?

As I said in an earlier post, I would like to trade my right to run a hotel out of my house in exchange for a legally enforced expectation that my neighbors won't do this either.

However, I certainly don't see why the preferences of people who live in largely SFH zones in the outer mission or outer sunset should govern north beach or the inner mission. That's up to them.




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: