I guess I was just curious how other investors thought patterns worked on it.

So it is a pattern.....

If that were the fact pattern and the prior owner had maintained a rental license, you would have been required to obtain a rental license  upon your purchase but the city would issue the license.

It sounds like you have set a pattern of simply doing what she wants.

Again, you should be able to put this into motion as long as you start a paper trail now, if you haven't done so already; you want accounts from different Tenants covering different instances in writing to show a pattern. 

Are there similar patterns in your neighborhood/will tenants/other prospective buyers care about this also?

Even where there’s a favorable fact pattern as you appear to have, unless there’s insurance involved it’s rarely worth the pursuit.

That seems like it should carry some weight, along with knowing the the traffic patterns of the booking cycle etc. 

However, based on your fact pattern, there will be a period of nonqualified use that will reduce the amount of the exclusion allowed.

However, if you consider the migration patterns from CA/NY whose to say it doesn't start to transition there in the next 7-12 years?