[Travel] Tourism Backlash

[GT49er]

Not in my view, no. Holidays are a Good Thing.

Then stay in a hotel. Provide more jobs to boost the economy - and build houses for the council to rent to low income families (with no right to buy - or Section 1 notices either).

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Not in my view, no. Holidays are a Good Thing.

Then stay in a hotel, guest house, tent, caravan, youth hostel or a licensed Airbnb. Plenty of options for all price ranges. No one want to stop you having your week away in Blackoool.

 

[GT49er]

Then stay in a hotel, guest house, tent, caravan, youth hostel or a licensed Airbnb. Plenty of options for all price ranges. No one want to stop you having your week away in Blackoool.

Not the AirB&Bs - they're often someone's second house, or somewhere that could be a perfectly good permanent home for someone - maybe a single person or a childless couple, but still a much needed home.

Perhaps we need a change of policy; don't set a target for building X thousand houses a year, make the target X thousand homes instead.

 

[heathgate]

What about cities where new housing cannot be built? I'll use my neighbourhood as an example, there is literally nowhere you can build now. We have plenty of hotels and guest houses in the area, but AirBnB really took off and took of in a bad way forcing rents and houseprices up as individuals sort property to let to visitors. There is also the issue of sheer volume of people, sometimes multiple people squeeze into an apartment only really habitable for 2 and the nuisance this causes. I'm also not totally convinced about your money argument, residents where I live spend money....you're just swopping one lot of people's money for another... unless they are multiple occupants as I mentioned before. It is also unfair on hotels and guest houses which have to comply to various rules and regulations whereas AirBnB do not...or did not until legislation came in.

I stated earlier I have nothing against AirBnB, just that it got out of control and some regulation is needed to provide some balance between hotels, guest houses, AirBnB and residents. You want to let your apartment out periodically fine, go ahead. You want to become a professional AirBnBer I feel it is only fair you have to comply to similar rules and regulations as other professionals in the sector do....and that does involve some control of how many AirBnB permits are given out.

I have seen the before and after of AirBnB legislation and know what I prefer.

No arguments at all about having a geographical limit on licences... blanket bans however, don't sit well with me.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

No arguments at all about having a geographical limit on licences... blanket bans however, don't sit well with me.

It was @dsr-burnley who, absurdly, said I wanted to completely ban AirBnBs. I never said this. All I want is some balance not just for residents but also for the small guest houses who have to comply with all manner of rules and regs which AirBnBs don’t.

All good.

 

[GT49er]

It was @dsr-burnley who, absurdly, said I wanted ban tourists. I never said this. All I want is some balance not just for residents but also for the small guest houses who have to comply with all manner of rules and regs which AirBnBs don’t.

All good.

AirB&B has done us all a disservice by pretty much eliminating ordinary B&B. You used to be able to get in your car (or even a bus or a train), go somewhere at random, and get to a town or village where you fancied spending the night. Look round for B&B signs, knock on the door, 'Any vacancies? How much?' and you were sorted. Now all spontaneity has gone - arrange the whole bloody lot on your smart phone before you set out, or face sleeping in a bus shelter (if you can find one without those slopy seats designed to stop anybody sleeping on them)!

There are some ways in which life has not got better in the last 40 or 50 years!

 

[dsr-burnley]

Cancelled quote.

 

[dsr-burnley]

It was @dsr-burnley who, absurdly, said I wanted to completely ban AirBnBs. I never said this. All I want is some balance not just for residents but also for the small guest houses who have to comply with all manner of rules and regs which AirBnBs don’t.

All good.

I don't remember saying that you wanted to ban Airbnbs. Can you link it please?

Be that as it may, you have a point re. the regulations guest houses face. But IMO it would make more sense to reduce their regulation, not increase others. Free market, not big government, for me.

 

[rogersix]

I don't remember saying that you wanted to ban Airbnbs. Can you link it please?

Be that as it may, you have a point re. the regulations guest houses face. But IMO it would make more sense to reduce their regulation, not increase others. Free market, not big government, for me.

you're not one for health and safety then?

 

[Brovion]

If there aren't enough houses for the uses people want to put them to, then "build more" is a better solution than "stop people using them for what they want".

No it isn't.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I don't remember saying that you wanted to ban Airbnbs. Can you link it please?

Be that as it may, you have a point re. the regulations guest houses face. But IMO it would make more sense to reduce their regulation, not increase others. Free market, not big government, for me.

You say this from a position of comfort though, no one wants to visit and stay in Burnley. Try living slightly somewhere desirable and you might have a different view. Or maybe read the many articles which about this topic.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

AirB&B has done us all a disservice by pretty much eliminating ordinary B&B. You used to be able to get in your car (or even a bus or a train), go somewhere at random, and get to a town or village where you fancied spending the night. Look round for B&B signs, knock on the door, 'Any vacancies? How much?' and you were sorted. Now all spontaneity has gone - arrange the whole bloody lot on your smart phone before you set out, or face sleeping in a bus shelter (if you can find one without those slopy seats designed to stop anybody sleeping on them)!

There are some ways in which life has not got better in the last 40 or 50 years!

Me and my football mates used to use BnBs and guest houses all the time in our younger days when we going to away games. I have a real fondness for them, their owners and the quirks of both. I remember staying in one and seeing Jeff Minton struggling down some stairs with an ironing board and an iron.

 

[Norman Potting]

Fortunately have wife's family living in a nice part of Devon. If we want to travel a little further West we know a lovely corner that seems to be forgotten and not swamped. Nice small beach, several pubs and good walking.

 

[dsr-burnley]

You say this from a position of comfort though, no one wants to visit and stay in Burnley. Try living slightly somewhere desirable and you might have a different view. Or maybe read the many articles which about this topic.

That's true. People (or some of them) who live in desirable holiday areas would be more than happy for Burnley people to stop at home for 52 weeks a year and never have the chance to see the sea. (Though I dare say you'd allow us Blackpool?)

 

[dsr-burnley]

you're not one for health and safety then?

Sometimes people have very simplistic views on this board. I am happy that simple health and safety rules should be in force. What I want is that health and safety rules should be proportionate to the danger. It's not just a matter of what we have now or none at all.

For example, relevant to housing in general albeit not holiday housing. I live in a 3-story terrace, and next door above is also a 3-stroey terrace. My house is owner occupied and the health and safety issue is my own responsibility. I have chosen to live on the top floor and fire safety officers do not see an issue with that.

Next door above has been empty for over two years. It is a council house, or the modern housing association equivalent, and they can't let it out because it has three floors and the fire safety rules won't let them.

If that particular "health and safety" rule was abolished, there would be another house available for low income rentals.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

That's true. People (or some of them) who live in desirable holiday areas would be more than happy for Burnley people to stop at home for 52 weeks a year and never have the chance to see the sea. (Though I dare say you'd allow us Blackpool?)

I wouldn’t have an issue. I live a 130 odd miles from the nearest, Baltic, coast BUT should I ever see you on a sun kissed Mediterranean terrace feel free to pull up a chair for a glass of rosé.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Sometimes people have very simplistic views on this board. I am happy that simple health and safety rules should be in force. What I want is that health and safety rules should be proportionate to the danger. It's not just a matter of what we have now or none at all.

For example, relevant to housing in general albeit not holiday housing. I live in a 3-story terrace, and next door above is also a 3-stroey terrace. My house is owner occupied and the health and safety issue is my own responsibility. I have chosen to live on the top floor and fire safety officers do not see an issue with that.

Next door above has been empty for over two years. It is a council house, or the modern housing association equivalent, and they can't let it out because it has three floors and the fire safety rules won't let them.

If that particular "health and safety" rule was abolished, there would be another house available for low income rentals.

The irony of your first and last sentences.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Hottest day of the year in Brighton town today. Tourists in groups of two or ten or thirty everywhere. You'd need a heart of stone to wish them any ill whatsoever. They'll go home and they'll keep a little bit of Brighton in their hearts forever. What's not to like?

 

[GT49er]

Hottest day of the year in Brighton town today. Tourists in groups of two or ten or thirty everywhere. You'd need a heart of stone to wish them any ill whatsoever. They'll go home and they'll keep a little bit of Brighton in their hearts forever. What's not to like?

Litter? A little vomit here and there perhaps?


But overall, I agree with the sentiments in your post.

 

[rogersix]

Sometimes people have very simplistic views on this board. I am happy that simple health and safety rules should be in force. What I want is that health and safety rules should be proportionate to the danger. It's not just a matter of what we have now or none at all.

For example, relevant to housing in general albeit not holiday housing. I live in a 3-story terrace, and next door above is also a 3-stroey terrace. My house is owner occupied and the health and safety issue is my own responsibility. I have chosen to live on the top floor and fire safety officers do not see an issue with that.

Next door above has been empty for over two years. It is a council house, or the modern housing association equivalent, and they can't let it out because it has three floors and the fire safety rules won't let them.

If that particular "health and safety" rule was abolished, there would be another house available for low income rentals.

just fit fire doors