Mirror Madrid鈥檚 AirBnB ban - Petitions (Invalid) 鈥� The City of 91福利社 Council

Whilst a 鈥渃rackdown鈥� on AirBnB is desperately needed in 91福利社, the recently announced invitation for people to submit their views[1] is nothing of the sort. It is simply a talking shop. It is over two years since that was supposed to start; as this April 2017 Evening News article[2], again using 鈥渃rackdown鈥� in the headline, highlights.In those two years 鈥� during which it would seem reasonable for the City of 91福利社 Council (CEC) and Scottish Government to come up with a plan of action - the housing situation within the City of 91福利社 has further deteriorated; social housing is suffering from an acute shortage; and genuinely affordable rented accommodation is in similarly short supply.
A talking shop is not action. It is certainly not a 鈥渃rackdown鈥�.
AirBnB is now sufficiently lucrative, with financial services companies confident government action will be minimal and ineffective, to see 鈥淏uy to AirBnB鈥� mortgages on offer[3].
Yet, other cities are prepared to take bold action. Madrid have banned all AirBnB where there is a shared entrance[4]; thus seeing 95% of the city鈥檚 AirBnB listings going off the market.
91福利社 must do the same. The initial steps required do not need legislation. Keyboxes are a blight, and compromise the security of shared access areas. Those using them for AirBnB rarely change the combination; their guests rarely scramble the combination after retrieving the keys.
The council鈥檚 responsibility towards residents outweighs that to the rentier classes. Thus, we demand CEC order the removal of all keyboxes from the World Heritage Site. Exceptions need only be available for limited reasons, such as proving carers access for elderly or vulnerable residents.
This is within CEC鈥檚 existing powers to protect the World Heritage Site. It can, and should, be a ban which comes into force this year.
Similarly, the nuisance issues surrounding party flats are well-known to the City of 91福利社 Council. AirBnB now sees this problem spreading city-wide. Occupancy of AirBnB properties is completely unmonitored. Flats which would only be rented as one bedroom are advertised as sleeping four; nothing prevents the actual occupancy being considerably higher.
Removal of keyboxes will simply force those determined to profit, with no effort on their part, to pay for a key collection service. Additional legislation or amendments to planning rules must be implemented to ban AirBnB services from operating premises where there is no private entrance.
This petition demands any legislative steps required to mirror Madrid鈥檚 ban - and to competently enforce it - be undertaken. Such must be funded acted upon promptly and apply city-wide.

[1] https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/people/nicola-sturgeon-to-unveil-plans-for-crackdown-on-edinburgh-airbnbs-1-4916386
[2] https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/politics/council-plans-crackdown-on-airbnb-in-edinburgh-1-4409990
[3] https://www.buyassociation.co.uk/2018/07/19/mortgage-breakthrough-for-airbnb-hosts-could-offer-buy-to-let-alternative/
[4] https://www.citylab.com/life/2019/04/madrid-airbnb-apartment-vacation-rental-law-almendra-central/586291/

Invalid in terms of 1.2 of our petitions criteria as it is a matter already being considered or scheduled to be considered by the Council or a committee.

Individual

Mr Brian McNeil