The Hotel Debate-Availability and Demand

Published August 1, 2012

New planning proposals for the heart of Reykjavík have sparked up a controversy. Many of us feel that the interests of the real estate developer who owns the property receive too much attention.
It comes as no surprise that as a businessman, he would mainly consider the maximum yield of his properties. But one could question whether it is the role of Reykjavík’s City Council to let those interests be a leading factor in the current debate about planning of one the capital’s most important sites.
We are talking about the heart of the city. Icelanders and foreign tourists (such as those that annually attend the Iceland Airwaves festival and other international events by the thousands) want a variety of cultural activities, gourmet experiences and entertainment. It has been argued that the increasing amount of large buildings, homogeneous activities and the traffic that goes with a hotel prevents this.
Public or private interests
In this matter, leading politicians and commentators have put forward arguments that disregard facts and public interest. They have mainly emphasised the increasing demand for hotel rooms in Reykjavík, stating that a hotel building in the Kvosin area would bring life to the city centre. Along with a small group of direct stakeholders, they are running a campaign for a hotel to be built at exactly this site. Criticism has been brushed off with bad jokes or statements that are not based on facts or public interest. However, close to 12,000 people have already signed a petition against these proposals. And there are many valid reasons behind it.
The fact is that there are new hotels and guesthouses opening every year in the city, reflecting the increasing number of tourists. These hotels are opening in the heart of Reykjavík and all around it. A 250–300 room luxury hotel building is rising next to the Harpa Concert Hall and Conference Centre. A hostel is in development at Laugavegur 77, and, according to plans, a 300–350 room hotel is expected to rise in one of three towers that are planned at Höfðatorg.  
An assessment of availability and demand?
According to Statistics Iceland, the greater Reykjavík area had 3,611 rooms in the hospitality industry in 2011. The vast majority of those rooms are in and around the city centre. Aside from the 159 rooms currently planned in the new Kvosin proposals, there will be an increase of hundreds of rooms over the next couple of years. There are licenses for hotels and hostels at Laugavegur, Höfðatorg and Lækjargata, to name a few, and other plans are in the pipeline. This means an up to 30% increase in the supply of hotel rooms in a very short time span, which is much more than the projected increase of tourists over the next few years.
A recent report from the Reykjavík City Council was published under the headline “Much Demand For (Tourist) Accommodation in Reykjavík,” which is misleading at best. The report shows a very high density of hotels and tourist accommodation in central Reykjavík. According to the report, the utilisation of tourist accommodation is approximately 65% during summer, and 35% in winter. If we leave out guesthouses and focus exclusively on hotel rooms, we can see the current utilization amounts to 80% during summer.
The question remains whether this fast-increasing supply of hotel rooms and tourist accommodation is in line with demand, and whether there is an overall plan for hotel development in Reykjavík.
Icelanders should have learnt over the last decade or so that “just because” arguments are not sustainable. The city council needs to listen to the public, which is protesting against their shortsighted plans and proposals by the thousand.



Mag
Opinion
<?php the_title(); ?>

Ungoo

by

[Continued from Ungoo: Part VI] The most recent attempt to create a common venue for cultural commentary and debate is Starafugl, a website started and edited by author Eiríkur Örn Norðdahl. It’s been around since last winter. As I have been involved in various ways, I am liable to be considered biased when I claim that Starafugl has had a convincing first few months. I claim it, all the same. Starafugl ran into trouble a few weeks back, when it received its first ever invoice. The invoice charged Starafugl for a photograph, that had been used to illustrate an article

Mag
Opinion
<?php the_title(); ?>

Ungoo

by

[Continued from Ungoo: Part V] Radio program Víðsjá, run by state broadcaster RÚV, is in fact a tower within Iceland’s cultural panopticon. Which might serve as a translation for the program’s name. It reports on events and publications, and leaves space for commentary, which at times has been among the best you’ll find: inspired and grounded, informed and enlightening, at times romantic, courageous when needed. Incidentally, if I’m not mistaken, radio host Eiríkur Guðmundsson, often credited for having made the program what it is, was also a student of the aforementioned Matthías Viðar. Notwithstanding repeated downsizing of RÚV programming, the

Mag
Opinion
<?php the_title(); ?>

Make Yourself at Home

by

Air-bnb has announced its future vision —and a new logo. Supposedly composed from a heart, a location marker and the letter A, the logo has already been the target of much ridicule, needless to repeat here. The logo is not the point. One of the its main virtues, according to the company’s announcement, is that it is easy to draw. This serves a function: people all over the world are offered to draw the logo on just about anything they are willing to share for a fee. As the company’s statement says, Air-bnb is not just about sharing spaces, but

Mag
Opinion
<?php the_title(); ?>

Democratic Principles —the Machiavellian B-sides

by

“The president will not discuss statements made in an election campaign, during his term in office.” So said the President’s spokesman in response to RÚV’s attempt to ask President Ólafur Ragnar Grímsson about his statements in 2012, that, if elected, he might seek to leave office before the end of his term. His fifth term, to be exact. The spokesman’s response has the structure of a reasonable, if not self-evident, principle, something any member of a functioning democracy would surely understand. Meanwhile, the content of the sentence may be considered somewhat less than democratic. In other times, the same content,

Mag
Opinion
<?php the_title(); ?>

Ungoo

by

[Continued from Ungoo IV] Granted, much of traditional paper-based publication is currently in crisis. Yet, most of Morgunblaðið, heavily decorated by ads from companies on friendly terms with the Independence Party, keeps going. (Buying ad-space in Morgunblaðið is not just a political act, but comes close to signing a manifesto.) Its sports pages persist. Without any empirical evidence, my hypothesis as to why they cancelled Lesbók, is that it was open to texts that Morgunblaðið‘s new masters simply would not understand. And what you don’t understand might be communism. Perhaps the old masters didn’t understand it all either, but that

Mag
Opinion
<?php the_title(); ?>

Ungoo

by

[Continued from Ungoo III] Until the advent of Iceland’s economic crisis, anno 2008, the conservative-liberal daily newspaper Morgunblaðið published a weekly supplement focused on culture, called Lesbók, literally translatable as Readbook. The Lesbók‘s history dates back to 1925. Around the turn of the millennium its main editor was Þröstur Helgason. As a scholar of literature interested in contemporary critical approaches he would at times be derided by the right for being post-modernist as in non-traditional, and scorned by the left for being post-modernist as in apolitical. Both groups read Lesbók for the sake of irritation, to feel forced to respond,

Show Me More!