Air BnB [and other platforms] to be effectively outlawed in high demand areas

4ensic15

Graham wrote: »

I read the announcement, neither of those ideas were part of it.

Who said they were?

pwurple

Graham wrote: »

Subject to planning permission

Seriously though, you're going to have a hard time convincing much of the population that housing should be turned into tourist accommodation for the benefit of the tourist industry.

Don’t we already have tourist accommodation being used to house the homeless? Hotels I mean.

Garda stations too. Oh, and psychiatric hospitals. And regular hospitals. And jail.

And anywhere else we can shoehorn people rather than actual houses. amirite?

So yeah, why not in air b’n’bs. I mean, it pisses me off, because my family doesn’t fit in a double Hotel room. But feck me. I’m a stinky tourist coming up from the schticks.

Anyway, we all know those pesky tourists are stealing from the homeless. Just like those foreigners were stealing Irish peoples jobs.. Luckily, we can now kick out those dangerous 8 year olds and solve that problem.


Who’s next on the target list? Any more low hanging fruit to mess with? Wouldn’t want the accommodation market to stablise anytime soon by not changing the laws around it with the weather forecast, that would be no fun!

Graham

pwurple wrote: »

So yeah, why not in air b’n’bs. I mean, it pisses me off, because my family doesn’t fit in a double Hotel room. But feck me. I’m a stinky tourist coming up from the schticks.

You book 2 connecting hotel rooms, hundreds of residential properties return to the residential market.

There's no doubt there are issues to be addressed in the tourism market. Displacing a cities residents isn't the solution.

L1011

Every recently built hotel has family rooms, close to every hotel with more than about 10 rooms has the interlinked rooms Graham mentions. There were ways around this problem before ~5 years ago when AirBnB started to get full properties on it frequently; and they worked.

pwurple

Graham wrote: »

You book 2 connecting hotel rooms, hundreds of residential properties return to the residential market.

There's no doubt there are issues to be addressed in the tourism market. Displacing a cities residents isn't the solution.

Yeah... no. Toddlers have this great habit of wandering around in the night off down corridors to the bar, or locking the adjoining room out. Or if you leave the door open you are stuck in a dark silent room while they sleep at 8pm. Or, you can by a suite for 1000 euro a night and sleep on the floor or a couch.

Sorry lads, It doesn’t work for us.

The cities residents aren’t displaced by tourists. No more than brown people are taking your jobs.

It’s some smoke and mirrors , so when the masses cry “Won’t somebody DO something”, they can point at this.

Wait, now though, wait. I should suspend my skepticism. Come January, I will look forward to the news of dropped rents, and homelessness in Dublin solved from this genius notion.

Graham

pwurple wrote: »

The cities residents aren’t displaced by tourists

Somewhere between 3000 and 4000 full residential properties in Dublin available for short term rentals would suggest otherwise.

As was (or is) the case in many other cities around the world.

It's not a silver bullet to the housing crisis but it's a good, quick start.

robp

Amirani wrote: »

robp wrote: »

I don't really understand these proposals. Many students come to Dublin in summer months for 1-3 months as a working holiday. Will it be hard now to let to this category of renter outside the rent a room scheme?

Depends on how short term lets are defined really. If you have a place and rent it out for 9 months a year to Dublin college students and then 3 months to foreign students on a working holiday then I can't see this being a problem under proposed legislation.

I wonder how they will word the rules. For example will renting out a place for a month only with the other months be retricted?

pwurple

Graham wrote: »

Somewhere between 3000 and 4000 full residential properties in Dublin available for short term rentals would suggest otherwise.

Only if their alternative use is as long term rental. A host of disincentives precludes that conversion.

But sure. Let’s see what the latest meddling does.

handlemaster

Graham wrote: »

handlemaster wrote: »

Whos property are you talking about ? Do what you want with your own.

Subject to planning permission

Seriously though, you're going to have a hard time convincing much of the population that housing should be turned into tourist accommodation for the benefit of the tourist industry.

No one said it should be. Let's not exaggerate. There s 3000 properties in told on these letting platforms. Id guess more are family homes. People trying make a few quid to.pay the bills.

handlemaster

Graham wrote: »

handlemaster wrote: »

Whos property are you talking about ? Do what you want with your own.

Subject to planning permission

Seriously though, you're going to have a hard time convincing much of the population that housing should be turned into tourist accommodation for the benefit of the tourist industry.

No one said it should be. Let's not exaggerate. There s 3000 properties in told on these letting platforms. Id guess more are family homes. People trying make a few quid to.pay the bills.

Deleted User wrote: »

Graham wrote: »

Subject to planning permission

Seriously though, you're going to have a hard time convincing much of the population that housing should be turned into tourist accommodation for the benefit of the tourist industry.

Well, if all those AirBnB whole properties were returned for private use, the tourists could stay in hotels and BnBs. Or even in people’s spare bedrooms.

Or dont.forget tourist s have lots of other countries to holiday in. Dont bite the hand that feeds over 280k employees in ireland

handlemaster

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/news/homeowners-need-to-be-incentivised-to-put-homes-back-into-longterm-rental-sector-housing-charity-37462132.html

Shocker Threshold talking in the real world

handlemaster

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/news/homeowners-need-to-be-incentivised-to-put-homes-back-into-longterm-rental-sector-housing-charity-37462132.html

Shocker Threshold talking in the real world

Pkiernan

Graham wrote: »

Somewhere between 3000 and 4000 full residential properties in Dublin available for short term rentals would suggest otherwise.

As was (or is) the case in many other cities around the world.

It's not a silver bullet to the housing crisis but it's a good, quick start.

You mean like the 3600 empty council houses?

awec

pwurple wrote: »

Only if their alternative use is as long term rental. A host of disincentives precludes that conversion.

But sure. Let’s see what the latest meddling does.

As opposed to what? Are properties going to disappear into thin air?

Nobody buys this bluster that landlords will keep properties empty instead. It's straw grasping, dummy out of the pram type stuff. Either they'll be rented out or sold, either one is good.

awec

Pkiernan wrote: »

You mean like the 3600 empty council houses?

These should also be sorted.

Why do you think that it's relevant? Do you think because there are empty council houses that this action against AirBnB is somehow unwarranted?

Other things that should happen include:

1. Building more houses
2. Allowing for higher density property
3. Make eviction easier for poor tenants.

They are not mutually exclusive. Fixing this AirBnB problem is part of it too. I really don't get why some people here think until the government build houses that they should do absolutely nothing to solve all the other problems in the market. It is a nonsense proposition.

awec

pwurple wrote: »

Don’t we already have tourist accommodation being used to house the homeless? Hotels I mean.

Garda stations too. Oh, and psychiatric hospitals. And regular hospitals. And jail.

And anywhere else we can shoehorn people rather than actual houses. amirite?

So yeah, why not in air b’n’bs. I mean, it pisses me off, because my family doesn’t fit in a double Hotel room. But feck me. I’m a stinky tourist coming up from the schticks.

Anyway, we all know those pesky tourists are stealing from the homeless. Just like those foreigners were stealing Irish peoples jobs.. Luckily, we can now kick out those dangerous 8 year olds and solve that problem.


Who’s next on the target list? Any more low hanging fruit to mess with? Wouldn’t want the accommodation market to stablise anytime soon by not changing the laws around it with the weather forecast, that would be no fun!

:pac:
Yea, we should definitely prioritise all those people coming up from Cork for a weekend in the big smoke over people trying to find somewhere to live.

Good grief.

shenanagans

The restaurants, pubs, retailers etc in cities will lose out big time too.

The money people weren't spending on hotels was going elsewhere.

People getting cheap trips with airbnb could go out and socialise and shop more.

The tourists numbers have gone through the roof..... Over 600,000 used airbnb over the summer.

The landlords aren't the only ones being effected by these changes.


Hoteliers are big winners here.

shenanagans

awec wrote: »

These should also be sorted.

Why do you think that it's relevant? Do you think because there are empty council houses that this action against AirBnB is somehow unwarranted?

Other things that should happen include:

1. Building more houses
2. Allowing for higher density property
3. Make eviction easier for poor tenants.

They are not mutually exclusive. Fixing this AirBnB problem is part of it too. I really don't get why some people here think until the government build houses that they should do absolutely nothing to solve all the other problems in the market. It is a nonsense proposition.

Banning airbnb won't bring rents back to levels of a few years ago. It wont happen. Renting will still be out a reach for some and eat up huge proportions of others salaries.

We need affordable housing urgently. And strict enforcement of restrictions around it.... Who can buy them... How long they must hold on to them.... A permanent claw back for councils.... Etc

awec

shenanagans wrote: »

Banning airbnb won't bring rents back to levels of a few years ago. It wont happen. Renting will still be out a reach for some and eat up huge proportions of others salaries.

We need affordable housing urgently. And strict enforcement of restrictions around it.... Who can buy them... How long they must hold on to them.... A permanent claw back for councils.... Etc

It will however bring residential properties back to the residential market. Guaranteed. One way or the other.

It will make the situation better than it is today. Guaranteed.

It is a no brainer, it seems the only people surprised at this and who cannot see it are the landlords who've been using AirBnB.

Graham

Graham wrote: »

Seriously though, you're going to have a hard time convincing much of the population that housing should be turned into tourist accommodation for the benefit of the tourist industry.

I would say the opposite I think the vast majority of property owners would be very much in favor of having the power to use their property as they want.

shenanagans

awec wrote: »

It will however bring residential properties back to the residential market. Guaranteed. One way or the other.

It will make the situation better than it is today. Guaranteed.

It is a no brainer, it seems the only people surprised at this and who cannot see it are the landlords who've been using AirBnB.

I'm not a landlord. I'm just saying I think we need affordable housing to help people get long term accommodation.

I agree with you more that more property will come back to the market but at extortionate rent rates..... You wait and see. Property out of the rental markets over 2 years can return next June at whatever prices the landlord wants...... How does this help people long term. Irish workers want a home. They don't deserve to be ripped of long term.... Meaning they'll never be able to save to buy.


Affordable housing as a matter of urgency. People should get out on the streets and demand it. Its the only means to a good standard of living for people.

Graham

Carlos Slow Traitor wrote: »

I would say the opposite I think the vast majority of property owners would be very much in favor of having the power to use their property as they want.

Hmmmm, the complete abolition of planning laws.

Fortunately that's not on the agenda, quite the opposite in fact.

Calina

Carlos Slow Traitor wrote: »

I would say the opposite I think the vast majority of property owners would be very much in favor of having the power to use their property as they want.

The vast majority of property owners do not want to deal with the reality that for property to be affordable nominal rents and nominal sales values have to drop.

We live in a community and sometimes the greater good matters.

Lastly, in Ireland, we spell favour with a u. If you live here, grand. But if you are American, in America, maybe consider that we have different social values and priorities.

Bob24

Carlos Slow Traitor wrote: »

I would say the opposite I think the vast majority of property owners would be very much in favor of having the power to use their property as they want.

The post you quoted was about “much of the population” so when you talk about “the vast majority of property owners” it is an entirely different group compared to the post you are replying to.

Having said that, what you are suggesting is the abolishion of planning permission and property zoning. And even amongst property owners, I doubt you would find that vast majority to agree with your proposal. Firstly because for many of them it would mean potential nuisance in their residential area or apartment block (exemple amongst others: does anyone what the house next door in a housing estate to be turned into a pub?). And secondly because for many owners the abolishion of zoning would reduce the value of their property. And that is just to address your comment on potential support (or not) for your proposal from owners based on their selfish interest, I’m not even going into opposition related to public interest.

awec

Carlos Slow Traitor wrote: »

I would say the opposite I think the vast majority of property owners would be very much in favor of having the power to use their property as they want.

I think you’re talking bollocks, and the majority of property owners are delighted that the concept of planning permission exists.

Pkiernan

awec wrote: »

These should also be sorted.

Why do you think that it's relevant? Do you think because there are empty council houses that this action against AirBnB is somehow unwarranted?

Other things that should happen include:

1. Building more houses
2. Allowing for higher density property
3. Make eviction easier for poor tenants.

They are not mutually exclusive. Fixing this AirBnB problem is part of it too. I really don't get why some people here think until the government build houses that they should do absolutely nothing to solve all the other problems in the market. It is a nonsense proposition.

3600 homes lie empty due to governmental negligence, but a landlord who got burned by tenants and moved to air bnb caused the homeless crisis?

I'm confused you can't see the real issue.

But hey, never let the facts get in the way of your opinion buddy!

awec

Pkiernan wrote: »

3600 homes lie empty due to governmental negligence, but a landlord who got burned by tenants and moved to air bnb caused the homeless crisis?

I'm confused you can't see the real issue.

But hey, never let the facts get in the way of your opinion buddy!

Bizarre.

Who said landlords moving to airbnb CAUSED the crisis?

The contributed to it. Properly enforcing planning laws is PART of the solution. It is not going to solve the problem, but nobody has ever suggested it will. It’ll improve things for sure though.

I guess we’ll all just have to live with the fact that tourists have to spend a wee bit more for their weekend in Dublin. Somehow I reckon we’ll all get over it.

Odyssey 2005

What's to stop a couple with one or maybe 2 apartments from putting the wife/husband and a relative/adult child "living" in the rentals and air b&d ing them out ?

Bob24

Odyssey 2005 wrote: »

What's to stop a couple with one or maybe 2 apartments from putting the wife/husband and a relative/adult child "living" in the rentals and air b&d ing them out ?

If the property is declared as being a principal resistance, Airbnb income will have to be collected by the person who is meant to be residant there, and renting out the full property will be restricted to a few weeks per year. Most of the time it will have to be advertised as one (or more) individual bedroom(s).

robp

awec wrote: »

:pac:
Yea, we should definitely prioritise all those people coming up from Cork for a weekend in the big smoke over people trying to find somewhere to live.

Good grief.

The problem is picking who is the most in need doesn't work out in the long run because a central authority isn't a great or efficient judge