Nothing like the prospect of visitors to get the house back in shape but I can only imagine for strangers what it might be like… we’re talking’ atomic levels of spotlessness right?
Haha. Yes, it’s great! It feels like living in an art gallery for a few days.
On IT website two days ago
irishtimes.com/life-and-styl … -1.2816031
IMO shows the serious effects of this Airbnb stuff on the rental market, and this is just one crowd involved in it, there’s probably loads more at it too. Snippet:
I get why Part V wouldn’t apply because it’s ‘commercial’ in nature, but still, if you’re building a block of apartments, where the apartments have bedrooms, kitchens, living rooms, etc. and have people staying a minimum of 20 nights generally, should these not be viewed as residential units and subject to Part V, and just allow them to use them on a commercial basis if they so wish? Seems like we’re incentivising people to build apartments that cannot be occupied by local Dublin renters as it’s cheaper (no Part V) to build apartments for tourists and probably gives them higher rents too. There’s something not quite right about that.
Also, who says they’ll always be short-stay? What if they magically convert to long-term rental after a month? Or sell them?
I really don’t see how you can logically draw a line between short-stay and long-stay lettings.
You couldn’t sell them individually - the purchasers solicitor would raise objection
The “logical line” is denoted by the presence or absence of a lease and all that goes with it. Airbnb is akin to a hotel use. You could stay in the shelbourne for a year without a lease just as you could Airbnb it
Who says there will not be a lease? The builder might give a long lease to someone who AirBnBs them. Planning is about USE and not who does it.
With regards to selling, of corse they can be sold (there’s a constitutional right there also). Do you think the builder will own the block until it crumbles to dust?
Exactly. I don’t know if they’ll get round the Part V regs on these grounds. It just shows that when regulations are onerous people will spend a lot of time and money getting around them rather than just building dwellings.
They cannot be presented for sale INDIViDUALLY as residential units. They have planning as a block. The solicitor of any purchaser of the block would remind the purchaser of what shows up in the planning search - that without a change in planning he will not be able to sell on to individual purchasers hoping to live in or rent out individually, because any such individual purchasers would immediately be in breach of planning by putting it to such a use
In your scenario the lease would not be a residential letting or lease . It is a commercial lease between the building’s owner and the operator of a short term letting business of the entire building
Can the coucil legally stop you from selling a property in smaller units? Surely there’s a constitutional issue here. The coucil has no reason to stop them being sold individually.
Realistically as the planning permission is for commercial use, the owner would need to re-apply for planning for residential use. There could then be issues with planning regs as the current units might not be compliant in terms of the required minimum sizes for each room and overall size of apartment, etc.
Right so the owner can sell it as a single commercial unit to, say, me. I can’t live there myself but I can buy it through a company that then short-term lets it to me for 365 consecutive nights a year.
Basically there’s no way I can see that the council can differentiate between a short-term let; a log-term let; and residential use without stepping on constitutional rights to property. They can make it awkward, but intimately they can’t stop someone buying, selling or living there. How would they even enforce planning against me as an owner living there? Is a court really going to tell me I have to set up a corporate structure to continue to live in my apartment?
Sorry, I didn’t to imply that you wouldn’t be allowed to live there. I’m sure if you bought the block that you absolutely could live there, especially in a set-up like this, where you could occupy an apartment/apartments under the rouse of a live in caretaker/concierge and rent out the other apartments. I’m saying you would have difficulty selling individual units within the building as single and separate residential apartments. The council can and does differentiate between private apartment developments and these type of short term apartments and they do not impose Part V on developers of the latter.
Temple Bar flat owners need planning for Airbnb use
“The ruling could have implications for thousands of properties in Dublin and other areas which are currently run as short-term rentals.”
Might be worth monitoring the number of apartments / houses advertised on AirBnB over the coming months.
Applications for changes of use will be in the public domain too, won’t they?
Yes, they’re all public on the various councils’ websites.
What an asinine comment from Airbnb. They know that either absolutely none or almost none of their units being fully let out (ie not just a room) have planning for this use.
Isn’t AirBnB a sign to the market to build more Hotels which isn’t being serviced in Dublin because of planning restrictions.
In most of Europe and U.S. this demand would be serviced by cheap hotels like Formel1. In around 2009 it was being serviced by D4 Hotel group.
Wasn’t there a calculator that estimated/showed how many residential units had been taken out of commission in the Dublin area.
A friend of mine who moved to Dublin is in AirBnB accommodation which is as expensive as a mid priced hotel at the moment.
Apartments are on leasehold. The Owners’ Management Company would object, as change of usage to Commercial would have implications for Insurance etc, and also I doubt they’ll be looking for change of use for the common areas.
I’d assume that changing nearly any apartment to commercial use is basically impossible. If this is enforced (which is a big if) it will more or less wipe out AirBNB and similar schemes in the city centre. Which would be no bad thing, IMO. Current number of AirBNBs in Dublin is something like 6,000. Current number of rentals available in D1, D2 and D8 (which I suspect is where the AirBNBs are concentrated) is about 300, and a lot of those are short lets. Killing off AirBNB won’t solve the housing crisis or anything, but it’ll help.
It’ll put more pressure on hotels, but presumably they can build more of those.