San Francisco · Member since 2025 · 21 posts · 14 votes
In some Arizona neighborhoods, 1 in 10 homes is currently a short-term rental. State lawmakers are discussing giving cities the option to:
• Limit the number of STR licenses issued
• Increase enforcement on repeat nuisance properties
Some hosts are concerned about restrictions affecting property use and tourism income. Others believe limits could help reduce neighborhood tension and improve housing availability.
How are hosts here thinking about this? Would license caps have a noticeable impact where you operate?
STR owners need to reach out to Airbnb for legislative help/advice.
Thanks Mike, that's a helpful point. I know Airbnb has been active in policy discussions in some cities, especially around compliance and tax collection, but have they been responsive when local hosts ad STR owners try to reach out for legislative help or advice?
A bit off topic, but I could never, in good conscience, set up a STR in an area zoned for residential. There is one just down the street from me, and the neighbors don't like it at all. People coming and going all the time, day and night. Large dogs unleashed in the front yard, an occasional hoot and shout party, and so on. Of course, houses like these are prime spots for human and drug trafficking, prostitution, sex parties, and so on. Does that sound like something you'd like to have as a next door neighbor?
Seems everyone is all about freedom to set up an STR wherever, until it's next door.
A bit off topic, but I could never, in good conscience, set up a STR in an area zoned for residential. There is one just down the street from me, and the neighbors don't like it at all. People coming and going all the time, day and night. Large dogs unleashed in the front yard, an occasional hoot and shout party, and so on. Of course, houses like these are prime spots for human and drug trafficking, prostitution, sex parties, and so on. Does that sound like something you'd like to have as a next door neighbor?
Seems everyone is all about freedom to set up an STR wherever, until it's next door.
I appreciate the perspective, Collin. Some neighborhood have seen issues where STRs are concentrated and not well-managed, while others have a smoother coexistence when clear rules and active enforcement are in place. The challenge seems to be figuring out how to protect residential quality of life while also allowing responsible operators to continue hosting. Some neighborhoods handles permitting, compliance, and enforcement strongly while most neighborhood enforcement are just reactive.
A bit off topic, but I could never, in good conscience, set up a STR in an area zoned for residential. There is one just down the street from me, and the neighbors don't like it at all. People coming and going all the time, day and night. Large dogs unleashed in the front yard, an occasional hoot and shout party, and so on. Of course, houses like these are prime spots for human and drug trafficking, prostitution, sex parties, and so on. Does that sound like something you'd like to have as a next door neighbor?
Seems everyone is all about freedom to set up an STR wherever, until it's next door.
I appreciate the perspective, Collin. Some neighborhood have seen issues where STRs are concentrated and not well-managed, while others have a smoother coexistence when clear rules and active enforcement are in place. The challenge seems to be figuring out how to protect residential quality of life while also allowing responsible operators to continue hosting. Some neighborhoods handles permitting, compliance, and enforcement strongly while most neighborhood enforcement are just reactive.
A bit off topic, but I could never, in good conscience, set up a STR in an area zoned for residential. There is one just down the street from me, and the neighbors don't like it at all. People coming and going all the time, day and night. Large dogs unleashed in the front yard, an occasional hoot and shout party, and so on. Of course, houses like these are prime spots for human and drug trafficking, prostitution, sex parties, and so on. Does that sound like something you'd like to have as a next door neighbor?
Seems everyone is all about freedom to set up an STR wherever, until it's next door.
I appreciate the perspective, Collin. Some neighborhood have seen issues where STRs are concentrated and not well-managed, while others have a smoother coexistence when clear rules and active enforcement are in place. The challenge seems to be figuring out how to protect residential quality of life while also allowing responsible operators to continue hosting. Some neighborhoods handles permitting, compliance, and enforcement strongly while most neighborhood enforcement are just reactive.
You missed my point.
I think your point is that in a quiet residential street, even a single STR that's poorly operated can feel disruptive and change the tone of the neighborhood. And that's where the real issue tends to show up, and not just the existence of STRs, but the lack of consistent standards and enforcement around them.
Where cities require a responsible local contact, clear occupancy and noise rules, and real consequences for repeat violations. The problem properties usually get addressed quickly, and the question ends up being less "STR or no STR" and more how the city manages and enforces what's allowed. I hope I got the point this time.
I completely agree that enforcement is a major factor. A lot of cities technically already have noise, parking, and occupancy rules but enforcement varies widely. Some places issue fines consistently, others only react when neighbors complain. Do you think cities should prioritize enforcing existing rules first before introducing license caps, or do you see caps as part of the enforcement structure?
Double edged sword. I think enforcing the existing laws should always be the first step. Caps are actually positive from a revenue protection standpoint, keeps market from saturating.