Pacifica has turned into a tale of two cities when it comes to short-term rentals. Inland neighborhoods are living under a strict new law that sharply curbs whole-house Airbnbs, while coastal blocks are still operating under the old rules as the city waits on state approval. The result: side-by-side streets where some homes are locked into tight hosting limits, and others can keep renting to visitors, a split that has slashed permits, dented city revenue, and stirred up tensions over noise, tourism, and who gets to make money off a house by the ocean.
How the two-zone ordinance works
According to the City of Pacifica’s Short-Term Rental Program page, the council approved a rewritten ordinance in 2025 that is already in effect for neighborhoods east of Highway 1, while coastal provisions are on hold pending state sign-off. The ordinance text itself - Ordinance No. 901 - lays out a host-residency requirement and caps unhosted, whole-house rentals at 60 nights per year. It also sets a citywide permit ceiling of 150. City officials frame those rules as a way to preserve neighborhood character and give staff clearer tools to crack down on problem rentals.
Permits plunged and city revenue took a hit
Before the latest round of renewals, Pacifica had 147 short-term rental permits on the books, just under the 150 cap. After the renewal cycle, nearly half of those permit-holders walked away: about 23 along the coast and 50 inland, according to the S.F. Chronicle reporting. City staff told the Chronicle they expect transient-occupancy-tax revenue to drop by roughly $1.3 million to $1.5 million over the next several years if the ordinance eventually covers the entire city. That kind of hit is already pushing officials to hunt for new revenue sources, even as residents argue over whether the financial pain is worth the quieter streets.
State review will decide the coast's fate
Coastal Commission staff recommended that the board approve Pacifica’s local coastal program amendment in a memo filed last week, describing parts of the rewrite as "some of the most severe in the coastal zone," according to the S.F. Chronicle. The California Coastal Commission's meeting calendar lists sessions in early February and a Central Coast meeting in mid‑April, and staff say the commission generally must act by early April unless it delays the issue, per the commission’s schedule. That decision will determine whether coastal neighborhoods such as Sharp Park and Pedro Point fall under the same strict limits or keep operating under the prior rules for now.
Neighbors and hosts are split
For some longtime residents, the retreat of short-term rentals feels like the neighborhood coming back to itself. Others who depended on hosting income say the new rules put them on the brink of selling. Caitlin Quinn, a Sharp Park neighbor who has pushed for tighter regulations, told Peninsula Press the block once felt "like a row of unregulated hotels" as more homes shifted to visitor use. On the other side, local hosts and small-business owners argue that the rentals bring in tourist dollars and help owners pay for costly repairs, a case made in coverage by The Standard and other outlets.
What comes next for Pacifica
City leaders are already wrestling with how to plug the expected revenue hole and enforce the new rules. Staff have emphasized that on-the-ground enforcement and getting rental platforms to comply will be crucial if the program is going to work. Council debates over the budget, and ways to raise money - from bonds to redevelopment ideas or new uses for city-owned land - are underway, as detailed in recent local coverage of council meetings. The Coastal Commission’s looming ruling will decide whether those policy fights become a citywide reality or stay, at least for a while, as an inland-only experiment.
