A bus as an air-bnb?

There is a rather extraordinary story in this morning's paper about a young couple who decided to do something rather different. They bought a bus and turned it into short stay accommodation on their leafy property in the hills behind me.

The bus can no longer be moved. It just sits there. The couple have done most of the renovation work themselves. From the photographs it looks as if they have done a good job of it too. If I was the sort of person who wanted a couple of nights in a quiet location surrounded by bushland to "recharge my batteries" then it would be ideal. 

The bus has actually been used for this purpose. It was starting to prove quite popular. And then? Yes, someone else put in a complaint. It was an anonymous complaint of course. Such complaints often are anonymous.

The bus can no longer be used. The local council moved in and have seemingly found a raft of reasons as to why the bus cannot be used as accommodation. They have also said there is no way the objections to the bus can be overcome. They have cited the "fire danger" and more. (I am not sure how there is an increased fire danger from a dwelling that was once a bus if it meets all other requirements.)

Now yes, it could be said that the young couple were rather foolish in that they did not investigate all the requirements before they spent the money on the bus and the renovations. It would have been wise. If they had found out what they know now they would not have done all that work. They would not be out of pocket. 

It could also be said that other people are now missing out on the opportunity to "get away for a couple of days". The location apparently does not overlook anything else. There have been no complaints about noise. It was bringing in a little business to the surrounding community.

The council's actions are the sort of thing which stop people from trying to show some initiative, from doing something different and from offering others something they have made for everyone's pleasure. Yes, there is a need for rules and regulations about safety but these need to be applied sensibly. The number of rules and regulations surrounding something like this it seems are ever increasing. 

A late friend who was a potter was told she could not put a sink with a tap inside her work shed in the garden. It was a council regulation "to stop people from living in sheds in the back garden". That a potter might need a steady supply of water was apparently not a consideration. It was a "council regulation under the building code" and could not be changed.  

It was just one complaint that led to all this. I am wondering if the complaint was made out of envy. Perhaps those who wrote the scripts for "Yes Minister" could do a series on local government?