12 ms·

New York passes bill making it illegal to advertise entire apartments on Airbnb

76 points by pyrophane 10y ago

pyrophane 10y ago
"Entire apartment" short-term rentals have been illegal for some time under NY law, but it happens a lot anyway, especially in NYC, because it is difficult to enforce, since law enforcement has to prove that a violation occurred. There is a task force dedicated to that, but because of the effort involved in going after violators, they have pretty much only gone after the "big players," like entire buildings being converted to hotel operations. Since this bill makes the advertising of the apartment itself illegal, it should actually be able put a stop to the practice, at least in NYC. This feels like a big deal to me because I live in a pretty trendy Manhattan neighborhood, and in addition to the annoyance of being a neighbor to a full-time Airbnb operation, I also have to assume it is making it harder for me and my friends to find apartments.
- greenyoda 10y ago
  Berlin's court has just upheld the city's ban on short-term rentals. There, the penalty can be much higher: €100000 ($113000). https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11930098 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11930098
logicallee 10y ago
Listing #95459: "Half of connected apartment available,see listing #95462 if you'd like to see the other half instead!" Listing #95462: "Half of connected apartment available,see listing #95459 if you'd like to see the other half instead!"
- furyofantares 10y ago
  I'd guess a human judge would be able to do the math, no?
- thaumasiotes 10y ago
  That's pretty much what I thought when I saw the headline. The article doesn't give text of the law, but it does say the law doesn't apply to homeowners who rent out single rooms while they are themselves present. I suspect that if you're not present, you're not safe from prosecution. Renting two rooms while you are present seems safer.
- bdcravens 10y ago
  With fines starting out at $1,000, pretty sure it'd be worth it to have a full-time city employee to scan for violations. Heck, you could outsource it, letting the third-party keep a % of the fine. While we're at it, there could be a startup for this.. disrupting the disrupters!
  - justratsinacoat 10y ago
    >While we're at it, there could be a startup for this.. disrupting the disrupters This isn't as crazy as it sounds. "Hello, mid-size municipality! If you implement our easily-tailored boilerplate-legalese bylaw suite, our specially trained twentysomethings will provide same-day firing solutions to your bylaw officers for the likes of Uber, AirBnB, Lyft, wind turbines, factory farms, people who park in the bike lane, and much more!"
orbitingpluto 10y ago
Has anyone experienced poor usability if they search their own city? Load up the VPN and suddenly it works? I have a suspicion that airbnb likes to prevent airbnb strata-enforcers from searching the site.
- pyrophane 10y ago
  I haven't personally noticed that, but I attempted a VPN comparison like you did. On one hand, it would would make it harder for neighbors, regulators, and law enforcement to take action against Airbnb hosts, but on the other it would also make it more difficult for guests to hop rentals when they are visiting a city and choose to extend their stay. Of course, Airbnb has been accused of manipulating data before, when it was noticed that they removed a large number of listings just before handing a dump to the NY attorney general, so I wouldn't put it past them by any means.
  - BlueZeniX 10y ago
    If I'm a guest, visting NYC and looking for the next place to stay, I would be logged in and Airbnb would know very well I'm from out of town (payment details etc.)
kiba 10y ago
Laws that protect affordable housing? Shouldn't that be considered a band-aids to actually increasing the supply of housing? I admit the solution, 'building more apartments' is a political problems. Humans are making it far more difficult than it has to be.
- santaclaus 10y ago
  > Shouldn't that be considered a band-aids to actually increasing the supply of housing? Manhattan is a little tight on space for fill-in (I doubt this legislation was targeted at Staten Island...), although I'd be curious how much denser one could make Manhattan with modern building techniques.
  - ghaff 10y ago
    It's not so much the ability to erect buildings to increase density. It's being able to support that increased density with infrastructure such as public transportation.
  - travisp 10y ago
    Manhattan could be much denser. Most of Manhattan is not skyscrapers or high rises. Manhattan currently has a population of 1.6 million. In 1910, it has 2.3 million. In 1950, it had 2 million. The current density of Manhattan itself is just 12 people per 5,000 square feet. There's plenty of room to grow, plus, why just consider Manhattan? Many of us are happy to live in the nearby boroughs (which are also, unfortunately, very limited in what they're allowed to build).
    - greenyoda 10y ago
      "Manhattan could be much denser." One big problem with cramming more people into Manhattan is that putting up new buildings isn't sufficient. All those new residents will also need to get to work, further taxing a mass transit system whose aging infrastructure is already packed to capacity. Life would be much more pleasant for existing New Yorkers if the city upgraded its transit infrastructure before it allowed the building of massive numbers of new apartment buildings. There are also issues like having adequate electricity for all these new residents - on a hot summer day, NYC operates dangerously close to peak power capacity, and all those new residents are going to want to have air conditioning too. "Manhattan currently has a population of 1.6 million. In 1910, it has 2.3 million. In 1950, it had 2 million." In 1910, lots of people in NYC were living in tenements with multiple families packed into a couple of rooms. We really don't want to go back to those conditions. The number of single-person households has increased significantly since the 1950s, so my guess is that many of those 400K extra residents in 1950 were kids living with their parents, who didn't require apartments of their own and didn't commute to work by subway.
Rathor1 10y ago
More than half the buildings in Manhattan today violate the modern zoning laws and couldn't be built today. There was a NYtimes article about it recently.
- hkmurakami 10y ago
  Most of SF buildings built on steep slopes are in the danger boat
- tehabe 10y ago
  That is happening, when you change zoning to get more fitting buildings in the future. You can't change those rules for the past.
- JumpCrisscross 10y ago
  > More than half the buildings in Manhattan today violate the modern zoning Close. The number is 40% [1]. [1] http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/05/19/upshot/forty-percent-of-manhattans-buildings-could-not-be-built-today.html http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/05/19/upshot/forty-p...
pyrophane 10y ago
I'm a little disappointed by Tweets like this one from pg: https://twitter.com/paulg/status/743877723257331713 https://twitter.com/paulg/status/743877723257331713. He says: "You can't have it both ways, @NYSenate. You can't both be a startup hub and give incumbents laws banning startups." I disagree with this sentiment on so many levels. First, while Airbnb has been working hard to frame this as "the hotel industry vs the disruptive startup," there are plenty of regular New Yorkers who oppose "entire apartment" listings, either because they make bad neighbors, or because they further constrain the apartment supply in an already tight rental market. Second, we can argue over the semantics of what makes a company a "startup," but Airbnb is a large tech company worth billions of dollars that is impacting communities all over the world, for better or worse. It is unfair to take the position that to be a "startup hub" a city must support Airbnb's practices, even if is to the detriment of that city's residents. And lastly, this law doesn't "ban" Airbnb. Short term "entire apartment" rentals were already illegal in NY. This just makes it easier to go after violators. And you can still rent out an extra room on Airbnb, or rent an apartment with an extra bedroom and rent that out. Anyway, would love for PG or someone from YC who agrees with him to respond.
- hackaflocka 10y ago
  Agreed, plus: just because something's a startup doesn't mean it should get automatic protection. If the mafia re-incorporates as a startup in NYC, does it become incumbent on NYC to protect it because it wants to be a "startup hub"?
  - dsl 10y ago
    I call these "Uber Businesses." They only exist because they were able to raise capital and market share faster than the legal system could respond to them breaking laws.
    - seanp2k2 10y ago
      Exactly. I figure the same thing will happen with "we deliver gas to your vehicle" startups and others in the future.
mancerayder 10y ago
This article is misleading. It, if you read it at face value, suggests that they've just banned all full apartments on AirBNB. The truth is, they've banned advertising full apartments for stays of < 30 days[1]. Note that since 2010, it's already been illegal to rent out a full unit for less than 30 days [2]. It's just that now, advertising on AirBNB (or similar service) could subject you to fines. This is the 'answer' to AirBNB refusing to pull illegal listings themselves. caution: rant ahead The Gothamist has some of the worst proofreading of any rag out there that I've across. And if you comment and correct (nicely) the information presented, they'll ban you on the spot. It's a news source with a closed circle jerk of certain ideologies and perspectives. /rant 1 - http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20160617/BLOGS04/160619868/in-last-minute-move-albany-whacks-airbnb http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20160617/BLOGS04/160619... 2 - http://ny.curbed.com/2013/3/25/10260752/an-introduction-to-new-yorks-short-term-rental-laws http://ny.curbed.com/2013/3/25/10260752/an-introduction-to-n...
mancerayder 10y ago
Airbnb’s unchecked growth is depleting our affordable housing stock and driving up rent, while threatening good-paying middle class union hotel jobs in New York City and around the country," Peter Ward, president of the New York Hotel & Motel Trades Council, said in a statement. "This bill will go a long way toward better protecting tens of thousands of affordable housing units our members and their families rely on to remain in the neighborhoods they call home, and preserving the quality jobs and quality of life in our communities our members deserve. (Posted not from the weak Gothamist article but from Crain's) You have to love the hotel lobby, coming out in protection of 'communities' and affordability.
- crdoconnor 10y ago
  It's not like AirBnb is advocating for affordable housing either.
  - DorintheFlora 10y ago
    Not only that, but I think there is reason to believe that AirBnB further stresses the housing market and adds additional fuel to the existing divide between the Haves and Have Nots by putting more rent monies into the hands of the Haves and creating more scarcity of housing for those looking for a long-term rental, not an alternative to a hotel.
    - mancerayder 10y ago
      They are, and I'm not suggesting otherwise. However, that the Hotel Lobby makes a statement about affordability is a little much, it has such a rhetorical, trendy ring to it (these days a speech has to use the words community, affordable housing, 'your homes', etc.) Out of a housing stock of about 2.2M or so units, AirBNB takes something like 30K off the market, apparently, in this particular instance (short term rentals). People will always skirt the system, though. It's unclear what impact this will have.
      - DorintheFlora 10y ago
Shivetya 10y ago
As a libertarian I really dislike any restrictions placed on the use of property I paid for and worse pay taxes on. As long as it does not threaten the health or safety of others/environment the state should not be telling me how I can use my property. If its a residence then I should be able to decide who who can reside there and how long pursuant to that I do not cause them harm or harm others by hosting them. There is an apartment shortage specifically because regulation so restricts what you can build, where you can build, and worse at times what you can sell for; setting aside "affordable" units and such
- crdoconnor 10y ago
  As a Georgist I think the taxes you pay on land you derive immense value from but neither created or made valuable are far, far too low.
- hiou 10y ago
  You do as least recognize that under our current system land ownership is a long way away from being a free market path? The government subsidizes and insures a large portion of lending for home ownership. Also large tax breaks are typically given for new large scale construction. On top of that transportation to and from that land is provided by the government as well as government supplied protection for that property. Not to mention government supplied utilities for that property to access resources such as water and electricity. I definitely not trying to get into a base line discussion about libertarian property rights ideas. But at least to help you understand what we have right now is a long long way from individual free and clear property ownership of land. Maybe before we start letting people do whatever they want with what you feel like is solely their land we need to address the massive amount of government supplied resources that land owner is currently enjoying.
  - cstejerean 10y ago
    And the property tax is there to pay for that infrastructure, as are the utility bills. The city isn't providing that infrastructure for free. If they want to raise property taxes for those using their property for commercial purposes then they should do that instead. Prohibiting someone from renting out property they have bought and are paying property tax on doesn't seem like the right answer.
davidf18 10y ago
I have lived in Manhattan for a long time and it is very important to limit Airbnb for a number of reasons. First, people who live in apartment buildings do not want transients living there for personal safety and other reasons. We have doormen for a reason, part of which is to keep strangers out. Airbnb decreases the supply of housing and makes it more expensive for residents. How are either of these helpful? Airbnb and its investors have no respect for New Yorkers who don't want these transients in our buildings. The know that New Yorkers don't want transients living in their buildings and they know we have a housing shortage yet they make things worse. In cities like NYC what Airbnb needs to do is to pivot and build their own hotels under the Airbnb brand and rent them out at much lower costs than the outrageous rates of "name brand" hotels. Airbnb has a huge valuation and can afford to build these hotels and make a profit, while not impinging on the local housing supply and safety of New Yorkers. Startups like Uber are welcomed because they help New Yorkers and visitors by making the supply of taxis and taxi-like vehicles * more available and safe . Airbnb makes the housing market less available and less safe *.
- travisp 10y ago
  >First, people who live in apartment buildings do not want transients living there for personal safety and other reasons. This doesn't need to be a legal issue. It's simply a rule of the building. People violating it are violating their contract with their building just like when they violate any other rule. > Airbnb decreases the supply of housing and makes it more expensive for residents. Long term it should not decrease the supply of housing. Visitors are either going to stay in airbnbs, with friends, or at hotels. If visitors stay in Airbnbs, then there is less demand for hotels space and more space for residential properties. Demand for hotels also decreases residential supply. Ultimately the issue of Airbnb on housing supply is a small one. Instead, question why so many neighborhoods have height restrictions and restrictions on building anything new. Most people supporting these laws are landowners and will admit that they are trying to protect the value of their property (i.e. keep housing prices high).
  - comicjk 10y ago
    > Long term it should not decrease the supply of housing. Visitors are either going to stay in airbnbs, with friends, or at hotels. This is a slices-of-pie argument, neglecting changes in the size of the pie. By being a better value than hotels, airbnbs make traveling more attractive, meaning there will be somewhat more visitors and that they will stay longer. I think this is on balance a good thing for NYC (tourism is an industry, after all) but it does put a little more stress on an already-tight housing market.
orthoganol 10y ago
AirBnB could solve these problems in 1 second by limiting it to 1 rental per account. The problem isn't someone renting out their full apartment, it's the professional operation of apartments on AirBnB by firms, sometimes very large firms, and enterprising individuals. They rent a bunch of units full time, taking significant real estate from would-be renters.
- mancerayder 10y ago
  I think that's a very sensible compromise. I own a duplex in a multi-family, and thought about renting out one floor (which might come across as a separate apartment in photos) on an occasional basis for extra money. That's very different from a vast enterprise that's doing it at scale. Unfortunately, New York laws have a tendency to affect the small and the large equally, despite the fact that the latter have a lot more financial buffers as protection and the former is more exposed to risk. That said we can still rent it out for 30+ days at a time, legally.
  - fencepost 10y ago
    Be careful about that as well - I'm pretty sure that in a lot of cases 30 days is the trigger point for a lot of tenant's rights issues such as having to go to court to try to evict someone who stops paying rent.
    - URSpider94 10y ago
      Yup, after 30 days they are a tenant. You then need to give them 30 days' notice to terminate their lease, have to go to housing court for evictions, etc.
    - mancerayder 10y ago
      Doesn't AirBNB make it easier to screen people who do this sort of stuff? I wonder why I was downvoted. Because I said I'd rent my place out legally?
cddotdotslash 10y ago
Having lived in a Manhattan building where other tenants were basically subleasing their apartments on a daily and weekly basis to obnoxious guests, this is an excellent step forward. I'm disappointed to see so many tweets from tech leaders (lots of them investors in AirBnb, so taken with a grain of salt) about how this will kill startups in NY, since that is very hyperbolic.
- GoToRO 10y ago
  this is not an "excellent step forward". This is a quick fix, later to be known as technical debt. An excellent step forward would have been if you could call Police for any neighbour that misbehave, no matter how he got inside that apartment.
  - cddotdotslash 10y ago
    So you're going to call the police five times a month and say what? "My neighbor is renting his apartment illegally and his guests are loud and left trash in the hallway?" The police have better things to do. The building managers are a better place to start but this kind of abuse is quite widespread and not easily stopped. There are some people who have purchased or rented multiple units and then AirBnb them out like hotels. It's unsafe for the other residents, it's annoying for those who are paying rent and living in those apartments, and, it's illegal. This law now makes it easier to actually enforce since perviously it was very difficult to catch violators. Now, someone can just browse the site and find them without having to set up some form of sting operation.
    - GoToRO 10y ago
      I was thinking about big fines for noise and the like. If not paid by guest make the owner pay. But this needs time to be implemented (in law and in practice) and nobody has an financial interest to do it. So instead of that, what you have is all kinds of groups that request what sounds to me to be very absurd laws.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
dplgk 10y ago
Why nkt let the building owners decide? If you own a condo apt or coop, amend the operating agreement to not allow short term rentals without board approval... Assuming the rest of your building agrees.
jsegal1 10y ago
I live in the Lower East Side, which is the most concentrated neighborhood in NYC for illegal airbnb's. There is literally no inventory here and the apartments that are available have skyrocketed in price in the last 4 years since I moved here. Thanks airbnb.
- travisp 10y ago
  The Lower East Side is plagued with height limits, zoning restrictions, heavy parking requirements, etc. Thankfully, DeBlasio has been fighting these rules in order to allow more building, but for the most part, the Lower East Side's problem is simply that new housing has not really been built there and lots of people want to live there.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
jsegal1 10y ago
I live in the Lower East Side, which is the most concentrated neighborhood in NYC for illegal airbnb's. There is literally no inventory here and the apartments that are available have skyrocketed in price in the last 4 years since I moved here. Thanks airbnb.
spriggan3 10y ago
The problem is enforcing the law. I'm pretty sure there are enough laws against subletting in N.Y already, they are just hard to enforce.
- mason55 10y ago
  The new law is against advertising the apartment. So NYC can go after people just for putting the apartment online instead of having to rely on AirBnB taking it down.
greggman 10y ago
On the general issue of if something like AirBnB should be allowed I'm mixed but on the specific of AirBnB they're an evil company in my experience. They aren't even trying not to be evil. They are trying to take ZERO responsibility for anything. They don't care how much their hosts lie and take zero efforts to hold hosts accountable for their lies. I've rented places that claimed to be 1 bed room but were actually a studio. I've rented places that claimed to have "parking on premises" but didn't. I've rented places that claimed to include internet but didn't. The latest is I rented a place the claimed to be at a certain location but was actually several blocks away. When I complained the AirBnB rep told me it was company policy to allowed hosts to lie about their locations because putting actual locations on the internet would be dangerous. When I pointed out Redfin, Craigslist, VRBO, etc don't have such a BS policy he claimed it was one reason AirBnB is more successful. In other words, because they allow lying they are more successful. If they ever start taking some responsibility, say fining lying hosts or banning them from the site or marking their ratings down maybe I'll start rooting for them but until then I hope they get banned.
- dwaltrip 10y ago
  I've used airbnb 10 times in the past 5 months, for stays ranging from a few days to 6 weeks. Every stay has been great so far. Airbnb has some problems they need to fix, but they are an immensely valuable service for travelers. I am not sure how I would have done this trip without it. Craigslist is a massive pain in the ass compared to airbnb (for anything but long term rentals). And hotels are far too expensive for my budget. For the longer stays, even hostels cost more. I've been spending $15 to $25 a day for the longer stays.
  - greggman 10y ago
    I've stayed in 22 places of which about 1 out of 4 has lied about their accommodations. One place claimed internet included, turned out they were stealing it from a neighbor and it only worked if you sat the the side of the sofa closest to the window. One place claimed 1 bedroom but was actually a studio with a wardrobe used as a separator. The difference between a 1 bedroom and a studio is whether or not there is a door to shut out the noise of the refrigerator. 2 places advertised parking on premises but didn't have it. I paid for those places so I wouldn't have to deal with searching for parking. Several places have claimed to have internet but when I show up it turns out they only have a MiFi and a notice saying "Please don't use the internet much or it will run out because it has a 5Gig limit for the entire month". And of course I've rented the place for 4-6 weeks as a place TO LIVE not to be a tourist. The last place lied about its location. Since then I've gotten better about spotting the lies before hand but AirBnB won't do anything about it when you try to report them. Places I've messaged to verify the listed amenities actually exist (like parking), get told they don't actually exist, I then flag the listing, report the issue, check back a few weeks later, no change to the listing. AirBnB is an evil company because they purposely let people lie about their listings. I don't disagree with you they could be a useful service but as long as their official policy is that false advertising is ok they are clearly not a company with any sense of ethics.
pix64 10y ago
Now if only I could get a hotel of the same quality at the same price. Wish hotel rooms came with a kitchen.

76 points by pyrophane 10y ago

"Entire apartment" short-term rentals have been illegal for some time under NY law, but it happens a lot anyway, especially in NYC, because it is difficult to enforce, since law enforcement has to prove that a violation occurred. There is a task force dedicated to that, but because of the effort involved in going after violators, they have pretty much only gone after the "big players," like entire buildings being converted to hotel operations. Since this bill makes the advertising of the apartment itself illegal, it should actually be able put a stop to the practice, at least in NYC. This feels like a big deal to me because I live in a pretty trendy Manhattan neighborhood, and in addition to the annoyance of being a neighbor to a full-time Airbnb operation, I also have to assume it is making it harder for me and my friends to find apartments.

greenyoda 10y ago
Berlin's court has just upheld the city's ban on short-term rentals. There, the penalty can be much higher: €100000 ($113000). https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11930098 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11930098

logicallee 10y ago

Listing #95459: "Half of connected apartment available,see listing #95462 if you'd like to see the other half instead!" Listing #95462: "Half of connected apartment available,see listing #95459 if you'd like to see the other half instead!"

furyofantares 10y ago
I'd guess a human judge would be able to do the math, no?
thaumasiotes 10y ago
That's pretty much what I thought when I saw the headline. The article doesn't give text of the law, but it does say the law doesn't apply to homeowners who rent out single rooms while they are themselves present. I suspect that if you're not present, you're not safe from prosecution. Renting two rooms while you are present seems safer.
bdcravens 10y ago
With fines starting out at $1,000, pretty sure it'd be worth it to have a full-time city employee to scan for violations. Heck, you could outsource it, letting the third-party keep a % of the fine. While we're at it, there could be a startup for this.. disrupting the disrupters!
- justratsinacoat 10y ago
  >While we're at it, there could be a startup for this.. disrupting the disrupters This isn't as crazy as it sounds. "Hello, mid-size municipality! If you implement our easily-tailored boilerplate-legalese bylaw suite, our specially trained twentysomethings will provide same-day firing solutions to your bylaw officers for the likes of Uber, AirBnB, Lyft, wind turbines, factory farms, people who park in the bike lane, and much more!"

orbitingpluto 10y ago

Has anyone experienced poor usability if they search their own city? Load up the VPN and suddenly it works? I have a suspicion that airbnb likes to prevent airbnb strata-enforcers from searching the site.

pyrophane 10y ago
I haven't personally noticed that, but I attempted a VPN comparison like you did. On one hand, it would would make it harder for neighbors, regulators, and law enforcement to take action against Airbnb hosts, but on the other it would also make it more difficult for guests to hop rentals when they are visiting a city and choose to extend their stay. Of course, Airbnb has been accused of manipulating data before, when it was noticed that they removed a large number of listings just before handing a dump to the NY attorney general, so I wouldn't put it past them by any means.
- BlueZeniX 10y ago
  If I'm a guest, visting NYC and looking for the next place to stay, I would be logged in and Airbnb would know very well I'm from out of town (payment details etc.)

kiba 10y ago

Laws that protect affordable housing? Shouldn't that be considered a band-aids to actually increasing the supply of housing? I admit the solution, 'building more apartments' is a political problems. Humans are making it far more difficult than it has to be.

santaclaus 10y ago
> Shouldn't that be considered a band-aids to actually increasing the supply of housing? Manhattan is a little tight on space for fill-in (I doubt this legislation was targeted at Staten Island...), although I'd be curious how much denser one could make Manhattan with modern building techniques.
- ghaff 10y ago
  It's not so much the ability to erect buildings to increase density. It's being able to support that increased density with infrastructure such as public transportation.
- travisp 10y ago
  Manhattan could be much denser. Most of Manhattan is not skyscrapers or high rises. Manhattan currently has a population of 1.6 million. In 1910, it has 2.3 million. In 1950, it had 2 million. The current density of Manhattan itself is just 12 people per 5,000 square feet. There's plenty of room to grow, plus, why just consider Manhattan? Many of us are happy to live in the nearby boroughs (which are also, unfortunately, very limited in what they're allowed to build).
  - greenyoda 10y ago
    "Manhattan could be much denser." One big problem with cramming more people into Manhattan is that putting up new buildings isn't sufficient. All those new residents will also need to get to work, further taxing a mass transit system whose aging infrastructure is already packed to capacity. Life would be much more pleasant for existing New Yorkers if the city upgraded its transit infrastructure before it allowed the building of massive numbers of new apartment buildings. There are also issues like having adequate electricity for all these new residents - on a hot summer day, NYC operates dangerously close to peak power capacity, and all those new residents are going to want to have air conditioning too. "Manhattan currently has a population of 1.6 million. In 1910, it has 2.3 million. In 1950, it had 2 million." In 1910, lots of people in NYC were living in tenements with multiple families packed into a couple of rooms. We really don't want to go back to those conditions. The number of single-person households has increased significantly since the 1950s, so my guess is that many of those 400K extra residents in 1950 were kids living with their parents, who didn't require apartments of their own and didn't commute to work by subway.

Rathor1 10y ago

More than half the buildings in Manhattan today violate the modern zoning laws and couldn't be built today. There was a NYtimes article about it recently.

hkmurakami 10y ago
Most of SF buildings built on steep slopes are in the danger boat
tehabe 10y ago
That is happening, when you change zoning to get more fitting buildings in the future. You can't change those rules for the past.
JumpCrisscross 10y ago
> More than half the buildings in Manhattan today violate the modern zoning Close. The number is 40% [1]. [1] http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/05/19/upshot/forty-percent-of-manhattans-buildings-could-not-be-built-today.html http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/05/19/upshot/forty-p...

pyrophane 10y ago

I'm a little disappointed by Tweets like this one from pg: https://twitter.com/paulg/status/743877723257331713 https://twitter.com/paulg/status/743877723257331713. He says: "You can't have it both ways, @NYSenate. You can't both be a startup hub and give incumbents laws banning startups." I disagree with this sentiment on so many levels. First, while Airbnb has been working hard to frame this as "the hotel industry vs the disruptive startup," there are plenty of regular New Yorkers who oppose "entire apartment" listings, either because they make bad neighbors, or because they further constrain the apartment supply in an already tight rental market. Second, we can argue over the semantics of what makes a company a "startup," but Airbnb is a large tech company worth billions of dollars that is impacting communities all over the world, for better or worse. It is unfair to take the position that to be a "startup hub" a city must support Airbnb's practices, even if is to the detriment of that city's residents. And lastly, this law doesn't "ban" Airbnb. Short term "entire apartment" rentals were already illegal in NY. This just makes it easier to go after violators. And you can still rent out an extra room on Airbnb, or rent an apartment with an extra bedroom and rent that out. Anyway, would love for PG or someone from YC who agrees with him to respond.

hackaflocka 10y ago
Agreed, plus: just because something's a startup doesn't mean it should get automatic protection. If the mafia re-incorporates as a startup in NYC, does it become incumbent on NYC to protect it because it wants to be a "startup hub"?
- dsl 10y ago
  I call these "Uber Businesses." They only exist because they were able to raise capital and market share faster than the legal system could respond to them breaking laws.
  - seanp2k2 10y ago
    Exactly. I figure the same thing will happen with "we deliver gas to your vehicle" startups and others in the future.

mancerayder 10y ago

This article is misleading. It, if you read it at face value, suggests that they've just banned all full apartments on AirBNB. The truth is, they've banned advertising full apartments for stays of < 30 days[1]. Note that since 2010, it's already been illegal to rent out a full unit for less than 30 days [2]. It's just that now, advertising on AirBNB (or similar service) could subject you to fines. This is the 'answer' to AirBNB refusing to pull illegal listings themselves. caution: rant ahead The Gothamist has some of the worst proofreading of any rag out there that I've across. And if you comment and correct (nicely) the information presented, they'll ban you on the spot. It's a news source with a closed circle jerk of certain ideologies and perspectives. /rant 1 - http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20160617/BLOGS04/160619868/in-last-minute-move-albany-whacks-airbnb http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20160617/BLOGS04/160619... 2 - http://ny.curbed.com/2013/3/25/10260752/an-introduction-to-new-yorks-short-term-rental-laws http://ny.curbed.com/2013/3/25/10260752/an-introduction-to-n...

mancerayder 10y ago

Airbnb’s unchecked growth is depleting our affordable housing stock and driving up rent, while threatening good-paying middle class union hotel jobs in New York City and around the country," Peter Ward, president of the New York Hotel & Motel Trades Council, said in a statement. "This bill will go a long way toward better protecting tens of thousands of affordable housing units our members and their families rely on to remain in the neighborhoods they call home, and preserving the quality jobs and quality of life in our communities our members deserve. (Posted not from the weak Gothamist article but from Crain's) You have to love the hotel lobby, coming out in protection of 'communities' and affordability.

crdoconnor 10y ago
It's not like AirBnb is advocating for affordable housing either.
- DorintheFlora 10y ago
  Not only that, but I think there is reason to believe that AirBnB further stresses the housing market and adds additional fuel to the existing divide between the Haves and Have Nots by putting more rent monies into the hands of the Haves and creating more scarcity of housing for those looking for a long-term rental, not an alternative to a hotel.
  - mancerayder 10y ago
    They are, and I'm not suggesting otherwise. However, that the Hotel Lobby makes a statement about affordability is a little much, it has such a rhetorical, trendy ring to it (these days a speech has to use the words community, affordable housing, 'your homes', etc.) Out of a housing stock of about 2.2M or so units, AirBNB takes something like 30K off the market, apparently, in this particular instance (short term rentals). People will always skirt the system, though. It's unclear what impact this will have.
    - DorintheFlora 10y ago

Shivetya 10y ago

As a libertarian I really dislike any restrictions placed on the use of property I paid for and worse pay taxes on. As long as it does not threaten the health or safety of others/environment the state should not be telling me how I can use my property. If its a residence then I should be able to decide who who can reside there and how long pursuant to that I do not cause them harm or harm others by hosting them. There is an apartment shortage specifically because regulation so restricts what you can build, where you can build, and worse at times what you can sell for; setting aside "affordable" units and such

crdoconnor 10y ago
As a Georgist I think the taxes you pay on land you derive immense value from but neither created or made valuable are far, far too low.
hiou 10y ago
You do as least recognize that under our current system land ownership is a long way away from being a free market path? The government subsidizes and insures a large portion of lending for home ownership. Also large tax breaks are typically given for new large scale construction. On top of that transportation to and from that land is provided by the government as well as government supplied protection for that property. Not to mention government supplied utilities for that property to access resources such as water and electricity. I definitely not trying to get into a base line discussion about libertarian property rights ideas. But at least to help you understand what we have right now is a long long way from individual free and clear property ownership of land. Maybe before we start letting people do whatever they want with what you feel like is solely their land we need to address the massive amount of government supplied resources that land owner is currently enjoying.
- cstejerean 10y ago
  And the property tax is there to pay for that infrastructure, as are the utility bills. The city isn't providing that infrastructure for free. If they want to raise property taxes for those using their property for commercial purposes then they should do that instead. Prohibiting someone from renting out property they have bought and are paying property tax on doesn't seem like the right answer.

davidf18 10y ago

I have lived in Manhattan for a long time and it is very important to limit Airbnb for a number of reasons. First, people who live in apartment buildings do not want transients living there for personal safety and other reasons. We have doormen for a reason, part of which is to keep strangers out. Airbnb decreases the supply of housing and makes it more expensive for residents. How are either of these helpful? Airbnb and its investors have no respect for New Yorkers who don't want these transients in our buildings. The know that New Yorkers don't want transients living in their buildings and they know we have a housing shortage yet they make things worse. In cities like NYC what Airbnb needs to do is to pivot and build their own hotels under the Airbnb brand and rent them out at much lower costs than the outrageous rates of "name brand" hotels. Airbnb has a huge valuation and can afford to build these hotels and make a profit, while not impinging on the local housing supply and safety of New Yorkers. Startups like Uber are welcomed because they help New Yorkers and visitors by making the supply of taxis and taxi-like vehicles * more available and safe . Airbnb makes the housing market less available and less safe *.

travisp 10y ago
>First, people who live in apartment buildings do not want transients living there for personal safety and other reasons. This doesn't need to be a legal issue. It's simply a rule of the building. People violating it are violating their contract with their building just like when they violate any other rule. > Airbnb decreases the supply of housing and makes it more expensive for residents. Long term it should not decrease the supply of housing. Visitors are either going to stay in airbnbs, with friends, or at hotels. If visitors stay in Airbnbs, then there is less demand for hotels space and more space for residential properties. Demand for hotels also decreases residential supply. Ultimately the issue of Airbnb on housing supply is a small one. Instead, question why so many neighborhoods have height restrictions and restrictions on building anything new. Most people supporting these laws are landowners and will admit that they are trying to protect the value of their property (i.e. keep housing prices high).
- comicjk 10y ago
  > Long term it should not decrease the supply of housing. Visitors are either going to stay in airbnbs, with friends, or at hotels. This is a slices-of-pie argument, neglecting changes in the size of the pie. By being a better value than hotels, airbnbs make traveling more attractive, meaning there will be somewhat more visitors and that they will stay longer. I think this is on balance a good thing for NYC (tourism is an industry, after all) but it does put a little more stress on an already-tight housing market.

orthoganol 10y ago

AirBnB could solve these problems in 1 second by limiting it to 1 rental per account. The problem isn't someone renting out their full apartment, it's the professional operation of apartments on AirBnB by firms, sometimes very large firms, and enterprising individuals. They rent a bunch of units full time, taking significant real estate from would-be renters.

mancerayder 10y ago
I think that's a very sensible compromise. I own a duplex in a multi-family, and thought about renting out one floor (which might come across as a separate apartment in photos) on an occasional basis for extra money. That's very different from a vast enterprise that's doing it at scale. Unfortunately, New York laws have a tendency to affect the small and the large equally, despite the fact that the latter have a lot more financial buffers as protection and the former is more exposed to risk. That said we can still rent it out for 30+ days at a time, legally.
- fencepost 10y ago
  Be careful about that as well - I'm pretty sure that in a lot of cases 30 days is the trigger point for a lot of tenant's rights issues such as having to go to court to try to evict someone who stops paying rent.
  - URSpider94 10y ago
    Yup, after 30 days they are a tenant. You then need to give them 30 days' notice to terminate their lease, have to go to housing court for evictions, etc.
  - mancerayder 10y ago
    Doesn't AirBNB make it easier to screen people who do this sort of stuff? I wonder why I was downvoted. Because I said I'd rent my place out legally?

cddotdotslash 10y ago

Having lived in a Manhattan building where other tenants were basically subleasing their apartments on a daily and weekly basis to obnoxious guests, this is an excellent step forward. I'm disappointed to see so many tweets from tech leaders (lots of them investors in AirBnb, so taken with a grain of salt) about how this will kill startups in NY, since that is very hyperbolic.

GoToRO 10y ago
this is not an "excellent step forward". This is a quick fix, later to be known as technical debt. An excellent step forward would have been if you could call Police for any neighbour that misbehave, no matter how he got inside that apartment.
- cddotdotslash 10y ago
  So you're going to call the police five times a month and say what? "My neighbor is renting his apartment illegally and his guests are loud and left trash in the hallway?" The police have better things to do. The building managers are a better place to start but this kind of abuse is quite widespread and not easily stopped. There are some people who have purchased or rented multiple units and then AirBnb them out like hotels. It's unsafe for the other residents, it's annoying for those who are paying rent and living in those apartments, and, it's illegal. This law now makes it easier to actually enforce since perviously it was very difficult to catch violators. Now, someone can just browse the site and find them without having to set up some form of sting operation.
  - GoToRO 10y ago
    I was thinking about big fines for noise and the like. If not paid by guest make the owner pay. But this needs time to be implemented (in law and in practice) and nobody has an financial interest to do it. So instead of that, what you have is all kinds of groups that request what sounds to me to be very absurd laws.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

dplgk 10y ago

Why nkt let the building owners decide? If you own a condo apt or coop, amend the operating agreement to not allow short term rentals without board approval... Assuming the rest of your building agrees.

jsegal1 10y ago

I live in the Lower East Side, which is the most concentrated neighborhood in NYC for illegal airbnb's. There is literally no inventory here and the apartments that are available have skyrocketed in price in the last 4 years since I moved here. Thanks airbnb.

travisp 10y ago
The Lower East Side is plagued with height limits, zoning restrictions, heavy parking requirements, etc. Thankfully, DeBlasio has been fighting these rules in order to allow more building, but for the most part, the Lower East Side's problem is simply that new housing has not really been built there and lots of people want to live there.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

jsegal1 10y ago

spriggan3 10y ago

The problem is enforcing the law. I'm pretty sure there are enough laws against subletting in N.Y already, they are just hard to enforce.

mason55 10y ago
The new law is against advertising the apartment. So NYC can go after people just for putting the apartment online instead of having to rely on AirBnB taking it down.

greggman 10y ago

On the general issue of if something like AirBnB should be allowed I'm mixed but on the specific of AirBnB they're an evil company in my experience. They aren't even trying not to be evil. They are trying to take ZERO responsibility for anything. They don't care how much their hosts lie and take zero efforts to hold hosts accountable for their lies. I've rented places that claimed to be 1 bed room but were actually a studio. I've rented places that claimed to have "parking on premises" but didn't. I've rented places that claimed to include internet but didn't. The latest is I rented a place the claimed to be at a certain location but was actually several blocks away. When I complained the AirBnB rep told me it was company policy to allowed hosts to lie about their locations because putting actual locations on the internet would be dangerous. When I pointed out Redfin, Craigslist, VRBO, etc don't have such a BS policy he claimed it was one reason AirBnB is more successful. In other words, because they allow lying they are more successful. If they ever start taking some responsibility, say fining lying hosts or banning them from the site or marking their ratings down maybe I'll start rooting for them but until then I hope they get banned.

dwaltrip 10y ago
I've used airbnb 10 times in the past 5 months, for stays ranging from a few days to 6 weeks. Every stay has been great so far. Airbnb has some problems they need to fix, but they are an immensely valuable service for travelers. I am not sure how I would have done this trip without it. Craigslist is a massive pain in the ass compared to airbnb (for anything but long term rentals). And hotels are far too expensive for my budget. For the longer stays, even hostels cost more. I've been spending $15 to $25 a day for the longer stays.
- greggman 10y ago
  I've stayed in 22 places of which about 1 out of 4 has lied about their accommodations. One place claimed internet included, turned out they were stealing it from a neighbor and it only worked if you sat the the side of the sofa closest to the window. One place claimed 1 bedroom but was actually a studio with a wardrobe used as a separator. The difference between a 1 bedroom and a studio is whether or not there is a door to shut out the noise of the refrigerator. 2 places advertised parking on premises but didn't have it. I paid for those places so I wouldn't have to deal with searching for parking. Several places have claimed to have internet but when I show up it turns out they only have a MiFi and a notice saying "Please don't use the internet much or it will run out because it has a 5Gig limit for the entire month". And of course I've rented the place for 4-6 weeks as a place TO LIVE not to be a tourist. The last place lied about its location. Since then I've gotten better about spotting the lies before hand but AirBnB won't do anything about it when you try to report them. Places I've messaged to verify the listed amenities actually exist (like parking), get told they don't actually exist, I then flag the listing, report the issue, check back a few weeks later, no change to the listing. AirBnB is an evil company because they purposely let people lie about their listings. I don't disagree with you they could be a useful service but as long as their official policy is that false advertising is ok they are clearly not a company with any sense of ethics.

pix64 10y ago

Now if only I could get a hotel of the same quality at the same price. Wish hotel rooms came with a kitchen.