17 ms·

Venice to introduce entry tickets and fees

164 points by lqet 4y ago

stefantalpalaru 4y ago
Ah yes, tickets for the world's most beautiful open-air sewer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gt2QnGckVog https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gt2QnGckVog "We found a variety of pollutants from several sources, with sewage-associated and faecal bacteria accounting for up to 5.98% of microbial communities. Sewage-associated pollutants were most abundant close to the city centre." - ["Partitioning and sources of microbial pollution in the Venice Lagoon" (2021)](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969721068315 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00489...)
- SoftTalker 4y ago
  Any river or inland water in a large city will have these issues.
  - rtpg 4y ago
    I wonder… I mean of course it’s easy to imagine rivers going through large cities being dirty. But my understanding is most large cities do not dump sewage into rivers except in cases of major flooding. And there’s also stuff like New York putting in all those clams to clean up a river or… something like that anyways.
  - imiric 4y ago
    It's certainly not the case with Amsterdam's canals. The water used to be flushed regularly, and dredging boats can frequently be seen pulling out bikes and other garbage. There's absolutely no foul odor coming from the water. It's not sterile, sure, but some areas are even safe to swim in.
    - jacquesm 4y ago
      I definitely would not advise you to swim in the Amsterdam canals. And if you do plan on doing something like that make very sure that you have a tetanus shot, don't have any open wounds and don't ingest any water.
      - imiric 4y ago
        Sure, it's not advisable, and a wetsuit is a necessity, but the fact that it's relatively safe proves that a modern canal city can have clean waters. After all, there was a royal publicity stunt a decade ago[1], part of what's now an annual event[2]. [1]: https://www.hellomagazine.com/royalty/201209109251/princess-maxima-swims-amsterdam-canal/ https://www.hellomagazine.com/royalty/201209109251/princess-... [2]: https://www.iamexpat.nl/lifestyle/expat-events-festivals/acs-amsterdam-city-swim https://www.iamexpat.nl/lifestyle/expat-events-festivals/acs...
- Smoosh 4y ago
  Meanwhile in the UK: https://www.sciencealert.com/a-wet-wipe-island-has-changed-the-course-of-the-thames-river-in-england https://www.sciencealert.com/a-wet-wipe-island-has-changed-t...
- grapeskin 4y ago
  Water flowing directly through a city might not be pure. That doesn’t mean a centuries-old city unlike any other on earth and full of beautiful architecture has no appeal.
- matwood 4y ago
  I went to Venice in 2015 IIRC. Took a ferry over from Croatia and stayed a couple of nights. Interesting city, definitely worth checking out, but I'll never go back. The bird/pigeon poop problem was so bad I threw away my roller luggage once I got home. I also recommend staying a few nights so hopefully you get a day without cruise ships. Completely different city then.
Spinosaurus 4y ago
On one hand, this may help reduce congestion in the city during peak tourism season. On the other hand, paying to visit an entire city (and literally having to book a visit ahead of time) seems incredibly odd; I certainly am not a fan of the idea. If raising money via tourism is the goal, a more widespread tourism tax on food and services would likely both raise funds and partially reduce tourism overload, without the burden of requiring visitors to go through the arcane process of booking a visit.
- speeder 4y ago
  The goal is probably discourage short term visitors. In the many, MAAAAANY past HN topics about this, complaints about them were constant. Basically Cruise Ships barge in (sometimes literally, hitting other boats or even buildings), then people climb out, make a mess, annoy everyone (including the tourists that are on hotels), then leave again, since they are sleeping on the ship anyway. Lots of stories here on HN of how the day tourists often don't even spend any money, they probably paid to eat on the cruise ship, so they just climb out, take photos, roam around, pollute, then go eat and sleep back on the ship and don't buy anything.
  - WillPostForFood 4y ago
    Seems like cruise ships would be a good target for additional taxes.
    - mixmastamyk 4y ago
      They do, a megaship pays about $100k per day to dock, less to anchor nearby.
  - Spinosaurus 4y ago
    Why not simply prohibit cruise ships in the nearby port? That seems like a far, far easier solution if that is in fact the root cause of the problem.
    - 4y ago
speeder 4y ago
That is an interesting solution attempt to their problems. I hope they succeed, including in fixing the pollution to the lagoon. When pandemic started a lot of people noticed animals not seen in years shown up on the lagoon again as soon the big cruise ships were gone.
- notatoad 4y ago
  while i'm sure there were some instances of animals returning to venice during the lockdowns, many of the viral photos claiming to tell that story were either photoshops or photos of entirely different cities.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
hartator 4y ago
> Some daytrippers are exempt from paying the entry fee, although they will still have to book. These include residents of the Veneto region, students, and those visiting family members in the city. This seems against basic human rights of free circulation.
- klipt 4y ago
  Is that a right? In the US you have to pay to visit most federal and state parks.
  - bombcar 4y ago
    Everything's a right these days.
  - Spivak 4y ago
    But if you tried to charge for or otherwise deny access into a city in the US you would be in extremely shaky ground legally.
    - HWR_14 4y ago
      > if you tried to charge for or otherwise deny access into a city in the US you would be in extremely shaky ground Try to get to Manhattan without paying the city a toll, for a helicopter permit, or a public transit ticket. I'll wait.
      - parkingrift 4y ago
        You can walk or bike across the George Washington bridge. Now you can stop waiting.
      - schoen 4y ago
        https://www1.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/infrastructure/bridges.shtml https://www1.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/infrastructure/bridges.sh... > NYC DOT owns, operates, and maintains 789 bridges and tunnels throughout New York, including the Brooklyn, Ed Koch Queensboro, Manhattan and Williamsburg Bridges, 24 movable bridges, and four tunnels. There are no tolls on bridges operated by NYC DOT. Some bridges in New York City are operated by other agencies. Also, you can walk across many of the bridges to Manhattan: https://foursquare.com/beelzebibi/list/bridges-to-walk-across--ny https://foursquare.com/beelzebibi/list/bridges-to-walk-acros... Also, if you could get to Staten Island (e.g. by walking over the Goethals Bridge), you could take the Staten Island Ferry to Manhattan for free! https://www.siferry.com/ https://www.siferry.com/
keiferski 4y ago
I think this is mostly a good idea. I’ve been to Venice a few times and the best trip was in the middle of February, when the rain and cold scared away summer crowds. However, I do wish that the city managed to retain some of its former glory as a commercial center. It must have been an incredible place in the 13th and 14th centuries, long before tourism economics turned it into a place to visit and not a place to live.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- pm90 4y ago
  > It must have been an incredible place in the 13th and 14th centuries, long before tourism economics turned it into a place to visit and not a place to live. Trade routes and power centers were so different then, a different world. It likely will never reach that level of prosperity through non-tourism based economy. In a way, it’s probably for the best. Italy doesn’t have a rapidly expanding population that needs more housing or denser urban centers. Freezing the cities as they are (and funding more research and archaeological digs) is probably the best outcome. I guess it must suck as a resident though.
- jhugo 4y ago
  I spent a few weeks one January staying with friends who live there, many years ago. Winter is definitely the best time to visit Venice. It's an unforgettable atmosphere walking around at night, with a bit of mist above the canals and hardly anyone around. There is still a decently-sized resident population, mostly not noticed by the tourists, and even in summer you don't have to go far from the most popular areas to find areas, bars and restaurants that are mostly missed by the cruise ship hordes. I do worry that selling tickets basically legitimises the cruise ship hordes (and their behaviour, which isn't always very sociable) while perhaps discouraging casual independent travelers.
- carlob 4y ago
  For anyone reading this and thinking of planning a trip to Venice in February, be aware that the Carnival often is in February and that's one of the busiest times...
higeorge13 4y ago
I don’t think any foreign tourist from cruise ships or already travelling from nearby italian cities will be discouraged to pay 10 eur to go to venice. I assume only italian people will get affected.
- steve_adams_86 4y ago
  Apparently locals (Veneto region) and anyone visiting family are exempt, so hopefully that alleviates most of the financial burden for Italian people. Hopefully it also boosts income for the city and benefits people actually living there in a meaningful way.
- yetanother-1 4y ago
  They are setting some limits as well.
  - amscanne 4y ago
    You may have missed this in the article: > The local council has emphasised that there will be no limit to visitor numbers, only an increase in the entry fee should a certain number of visitors be reached on a particular day.
    - t0mas88 4y ago
      "Oh no there is no limit, it's just that you're visitor number 100,001 so you'll have to pay € 500 to get in, but feel free to do so" ;-)
- kyriakos 4y ago
  Considering that when I visited I paid around 50 euro for parking alone, 10 euro fee won't deter anyone.
  - jacquesm 4y ago
    You were ripped off.
adrianN 4y ago
The fees would have to be very high to noticably reduce the number of tourists. I think it would work better if there were a quota system and a lottery.
- HWR_14 4y ago
  I mean, it's kinda like a quota system. The fees go up after limits are reached, which is similar to a soft quota. And first-come, first-serve seems as reasonable as a lottery since it affects tourists who will need to book rooms and travel far in advance.
russellbeattie 4y ago
I visited Venice in the 90s within a few years of a trip to Disney World in Florida and I was definitely struck by the similarities, so this doesn't surprise me at all. In both trips, I took a train to a dock and then boarded a small ferry with a bunch of other day-trip tourists and packaged tours, and we were all unloaded in a center area where we could spread out to all the attractions and rides / museums, churches and gondolas as the case may be, and the shops in both places were filled with the tackiest overpriced souvenirs possible. The €5 to €10 ticket price doesn't compare at all though.
- t0mas88 4y ago
  The € 10 ticket price is not nearly high enough considering that most visitors pay thousands for their cruise ship or flight + hotel to get there. It needs to be much higher to have any serious impact.
  - gambiting 4y ago
    Not everyone coming to Venice is a wealthy citizen of a western country. Sure for a Brit or a German, 10 euro is nothing, but I remember coming on a trip from Poland(by coach!) years ago and yeah, basically we couldn't afford anything in Venice already, 5 euro coffee was insane(compared to Polish wages). So we walked around for the whole day, ate what we brought with us, and left. 10 euro fee would mean not going.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
mmasu 4y ago
I think this is a good idea, as Venice has lots of issues caused by the excess of tourists (i.e.ground erosion), however they should also greatly limit cruise ships too (they say they want to do it from time to time, then do not follow through). At the same time, I am a bit perplexed. Tickets are enforced with random checks, and if you do not have your ticket you will need to pay a fine. I am not sure that you need to pay on the spot tho. If that is the case and you have 50 people from - say - the US or China, you can just avoid paying. Who will come looking for you anyway? Yes, they can kick you out, but again this won't work if they find loads of people without tickets.
- t0mas88 4y ago
  If it's anything like speeding tickets in most of Europe your place of residence determines whether you have to pay on the spot or not. For example Netherlands and Germany (and many others) have an agreement in place where your home country collects the fines so you don't have to pay on the spot. But if you're from a non-EU country you'll almost certainly have to pay on the spot because there would otherwise be no way to collect the money if you refused later.
Ekaros 4y ago
It is bit weird, but then looking at numbers it makes somewhat more sense. 5,2km^"2 old town and 15k+ daily visitors... It is not exactly great combination. Specially for place that wasn't designed for masses of tourist.
guelo 4y ago
I think about this kind of thing with relation to airbnb in expensive cities, what is the ultimate free market end state? Anywhere where humans create unique culture and beauty will be hollowed out and given over to global tourists with money. That forces the locals far away from the interesting center core. Thinking about it over decades I envision it as almost like a Game of Life pattern where those pushed out eventually create a new interesting core while the old hollowed out core deteriorates into disney-fied caricature of itself. The cycle then repeats as the global tourist money chases the new hotness. Could it really be a cycle? I'm not sure. The tourist hotspots look mostly like negative-sum culture destruction to me.
- greedo 4y ago
  I grew up in a sleepy coastal town in California. Nothing special except beaches really. A racetrack where thoroughbreds races annually. Beautiful, but nice and sleepy. And then as California grew and any beach town became a tier 1 locale, my hometown became more and more expensive to live in. For people in service careers, it became impossible, so they moved inland and commuted. Now, unless you managed to buy a house very early, you're priced out. The amount of money in the town is crazy, and I would estimate that the amount of 1%ers is over 20% of the population. Compare this back to the early 70s and there wasn't nearly the same amount of variance in wealth. It makes me sad that my childhood home has changed so much, but I don't think there's a way to prevent this from happening.
simonebrunozzi 4y ago
After ~9 years in California, I moved from San Francisco to Venice, Italy (Venezia) in late 2020. (I am originally from Italy). Venice is an amazing city, and it's not as expensive as people think, if you plan to stay long term. When the Covid-19 situation got better in early 2022, TONS of tourists came back, and Venice is now more crowded than it was before the pandemic. Residents (of the historical city center, or the "main" Venice), down to a total of about 50,000 (from a peak of ~175,000 [0]), are really angry at the overcrowding and are looking for solutions. In certain weekends this year, the number of visitors reached 130,000 per day, which is about twice as much as the city can support without deterioration of city life and services. Entry tickets, if handled properly, could be a great way to fix the issue. The current solution has some flaws, and I don't believe that it will solve the issue properly. (overnight visitors don't pay; ferry rides are not integrated in the ticket; etc). I believe that the right structure should include a combination of: 1) expensive tickets (€50 per day per person) that allow you to come regardless of any other limitation. 2) advance purchase tickets (€5 per day per person) 3) progressive tickets (starting at €5 per day per person, but going as high as €25 when the number of visitors in a given day approaches 60,000). Also, the parking system (Tronchetto and Piazzale Roma), owned by private companies, should introduce a similar progressive ticket, but the extra income should go to the municipality, not to the private company. The extra money earned this way should go towards improving the logistics of the city, easing the pressure that tourism puts on the residents. My 0.02. [0]: https://allaboutvenice.com/venice-population/ https://allaboutvenice.com/venice-population/
- Jistern 4y ago
  >> Entry tickets, if handled properly, could be a great way to fix the issue. I disagree. This seems like a "great way" to damage the tourism industry in Venice. In other words, I think this is a terrible way to deal with tourists who are visiting Venice, yet aren't spending enough money in Venice. I think it would be better to require every adult tourist to buy, say, €10 worth of "Venice Money" which they could spend at any restaurant or shop in Venice during the day they are visiting. Too many tourists? Then increase it to, say, €15. Too few tourists? Then decrease it to, say, €5. Part of the goal is to require tourists to spend a minimum amount of money while visiting Venice. Charging an admission fee seems too heavy-handed. Sure, I realize that my suggestion is tantamount to an admission fee, but it's likely to be more palatable to tourists. The goal isn't merely to get tourists to spend a sufficient amount of money in Venice; part of the goal is to make tourists happy to do so. Tourists are notoriously fickle. Furthermore, they have myriad places in and around Italy, Europe, and, well, the world where they can spend their money. The current problem of too many tourists could very quickly turn into a problem of a dearth of tourists. "Killing the goose that lays the golden egg" would obviously be foolish. I presume the economy in Venice benefits immensely from tourism. This is precisely the sort of measure that people tend to look back at in hindsight and exclaim, "How could we have committed such a blunder! What were we thinking?!?" Having opined all of that, sure, I can see why denizens of Venice would welcome a measure that would decrease the number of tourists generally, and particularly the number of skinflint tourists who visit Venice, yet don't spend a single euro in Venice. Also, frankly, I think it would be perfectly reasonable for Venice to enforce dress codes and behavior codes. For example, nobody wants an endless "parade" of motley dressed drunkards wandering around their neighborhood. Personally I happily shop at Costco, but haven’t set foot in a Walmart in perhaps 20 years. I detest Walmart. Why? Part of the reason is this: Costco has a “greeter” standing at the enterance. Ostensibly the greeter’s job is to verify that people entering are members. In fact, that greeter is also eyeballing each person who enters and is empowered to deny enterance to people who don’t meet Costco’s minimum standards (which aren’t very high, but are still much, much higher than Walmart’s standards). Similarly, one of the "secrets" to the success of Las Vegas strip is this: although they allow a lot of rowdy behavior, frankly, they actually keep a tight lid on things: a very, very, tight lid, which I presume you would have noticed if you’ve ever actually been there and paid attention. It's a delicate balance which requires discretion bordering on sophisticated and subtle diplomacy. For example, when dealing with "drunk idiots" the Las Vegas police tend to use kid gloves as much as possible. Why? The powers that be in Las Vegas want "visitors" (tourists) to tell their family, friends, and associates they had a great time on the Las Vegas strip. They also want most of the tourists themselves to return over, and over, and over again. The same is true for a myriad of tourist destinations around the world.
bradwood 4y ago
It's likely they will need a substantial revenue stream to prevent the city sinking further into the Adriatic given the problem with rising sea levels. Time to look to the Dutch to help out with some levees/dykes sooner rather than later, as they did in the UD after Katrina
- fbn79 4y ago
  Is already build and not paid directly by the city https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOSE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOSE
moritonal 4y ago
An interesting side-fact: Talking to a venetian during the pandemic they explained that their city is sat in a complicated political setup. The governening body (the Metropolitan City of Venice) actually consists of the city we know of Venice, but then also the surrounding islands and a decent chunk of the mainland. Our venetian friend explained they'd wanted to implement laws like this but have always been hostage to the surrounding lands which see it as essentially a cash-cow. It was the metropolitan for example (according to our friend) that outvoted Venice itself to allow cruiseboats back to Venice which is almost the sole cause of the over-population. Native venetians seem to dislike the cruise-boats given their tourists have a very different spending pattern compared to stay-over tourists. But the cruise-boats pay huge taxes straight into the municipal. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_City_of_Venice https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_City_of_Venice
- tass 4y ago
  Absolutely. Cruise goers eat and drink on the ship and have a few hours during the day to quickly hit all the sites - thousands all at the same time.
- egypturnash 4y ago
  Oh man this is a familiar pattern. Do the surrounding areas also see Venice as a loathesome den of iniquity, which they’d destroy if it wasn’t the main source of income for the whole area? That’s how it is with Louisiana and New Orleans.
jacquesm 4y ago
They should do this for Amsterdam. And make them 500 euros.
miki123211 4y ago
Could this be used by an EU country to effectively limit free movement? Imagine Berlin enforces an €1000000000 entry fee, except on people meeting certain criteria. All residents of Germany are exempt, everyone who gets what effectively amounts to a Visa is exempt, everybody else has to pay up, except the amount is so ridiculous that nobody will actually do so. As an EU citizen, I'm a bit concerned by this.
- Strom 4y ago
  The judges in courts are humans who look for intent. They're not machines who you can trick that easily. So no, no need to worry about a €1000000000 entry fee to Berlin. Venice is tiny, old, decaying. You can just think of it as a museum. EU free movement does not give free access to all EU museums.
ajsnigrutin 4y ago
Will this actually help lower the numbers of tourists or is it just a cash grab? I live in slovenia (neighbouring country), and venice, to me, is just one of those cities, lost to tourism... the number of locals is slowly going towards zero, and basically all of the cities infrastructure is going towards tourism. We have a few cities going that way too, eg Piran or Kranjska Gora, where it's impossible to live in (since housing prices are way too high due to airbnb investments), the restaurants are pretty much all the same, catering tourists, prices are expensive, and there are very few stores with stuff locals actually need. Charging people a few euros to enter would still mean cities overcrowded with tourism (but a bit more expensive now), and still unlivable for locals. Sadly, the same is happening to the city center of Ljubljana, where everything is slowly turning towards the tourists, and coming to ljubljana is pretty much the same as coming to Prague, Bratislava, etc... a few unique landmarks, and generic touristy restaurants, boat rides and expensive made-in-china souvenirs. ...and too expensive housing for locals, hard to find a general food store, noise pollution, etc.
- readerbaza 4y ago
  Just a cash grab Venice is absolute trash for common tourists. I've been there many times, never willingly
- dreen 4y ago
  I grew up in a historic EU city which is slowly selling out as well. I do not think there is a way to stop it. However, if handled correctly, the tickets could bring cash needed for public projects in the city.
- ProjectArcturis 4y ago
  Yup. Tourism in Venice has, ironically, destroyed most reason to visit it. Dubrovnik, recently famous as the set of King's Landing in Game of Thrones, was probably once a charming medieval town, but is now one enormous T-shirt shop.
  - dariusj18 4y ago
    Planning on going to Italy, steering clear of Venice. I've been a few decades ago and it was fine, but the current crush of people is insane. I'm not looking to stand cheek to cheek at Piazza San Marco.
napier 4y ago
Good. Should be priced 10x higher for cruise ships and their passengers.
throwaway787544 4y ago
> The local council has emphasised that there will be no limit to visitor numbers, only an increase in the entry fee should a certain number of visitors be reached on a particular day. So it's not about overcrowding, it's just about getting paid. If it were just about overcrowding they could just limit the number and keep a flat fee, the way park systems do. Or a lottery.
- yohannparis 4y ago
  This is a classic and efficient way to allow people to visit Venice. If you are early or come at a slow time the price is low, if the number of people increases, so do the price. So it's not a first come first serve, but an actual price of demand. Virginia did that on a highway used by commuters to get into D.C. where they want a minimum travel speed of 40 mph (might be lower) and the more people get into it, the more the price rise. From $1, up to $30 on a rare occasion.

164 points by lqet 4y ago

Ah yes, tickets for the world's most beautiful open-air sewer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gt2QnGckVog https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gt2QnGckVog "We found a variety of pollutants from several sources, with sewage-associated and faecal bacteria accounting for up to 5.98% of microbial communities. Sewage-associated pollutants were most abundant close to the city centre." - ["Partitioning and sources of microbial pollution in the Venice Lagoon" (2021)](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969721068315 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00489...)

SoftTalker 4y ago
Any river or inland water in a large city will have these issues.
- rtpg 4y ago
  I wonder… I mean of course it’s easy to imagine rivers going through large cities being dirty. But my understanding is most large cities do not dump sewage into rivers except in cases of major flooding. And there’s also stuff like New York putting in all those clams to clean up a river or… something like that anyways.
- imiric 4y ago
  It's certainly not the case with Amsterdam's canals. The water used to be flushed regularly, and dredging boats can frequently be seen pulling out bikes and other garbage. There's absolutely no foul odor coming from the water. It's not sterile, sure, but some areas are even safe to swim in.
  - jacquesm 4y ago
    I definitely would not advise you to swim in the Amsterdam canals. And if you do plan on doing something like that make very sure that you have a tetanus shot, don't have any open wounds and don't ingest any water.
    - imiric 4y ago
      Sure, it's not advisable, and a wetsuit is a necessity, but the fact that it's relatively safe proves that a modern canal city can have clean waters. After all, there was a royal publicity stunt a decade ago[1], part of what's now an annual event[2]. [1]: https://www.hellomagazine.com/royalty/201209109251/princess-maxima-swims-amsterdam-canal/ https://www.hellomagazine.com/royalty/201209109251/princess-... [2]: https://www.iamexpat.nl/lifestyle/expat-events-festivals/acs-amsterdam-city-swim https://www.iamexpat.nl/lifestyle/expat-events-festivals/acs...
Smoosh 4y ago
Meanwhile in the UK: https://www.sciencealert.com/a-wet-wipe-island-has-changed-the-course-of-the-thames-river-in-england https://www.sciencealert.com/a-wet-wipe-island-has-changed-t...
grapeskin 4y ago
Water flowing directly through a city might not be pure. That doesn’t mean a centuries-old city unlike any other on earth and full of beautiful architecture has no appeal.
matwood 4y ago
I went to Venice in 2015 IIRC. Took a ferry over from Croatia and stayed a couple of nights. Interesting city, definitely worth checking out, but I'll never go back. The bird/pigeon poop problem was so bad I threw away my roller luggage once I got home. I also recommend staying a few nights so hopefully you get a day without cruise ships. Completely different city then.

Spinosaurus 4y ago

On one hand, this may help reduce congestion in the city during peak tourism season. On the other hand, paying to visit an entire city (and literally having to book a visit ahead of time) seems incredibly odd; I certainly am not a fan of the idea. If raising money via tourism is the goal, a more widespread tourism tax on food and services would likely both raise funds and partially reduce tourism overload, without the burden of requiring visitors to go through the arcane process of booking a visit.

speeder 4y ago
The goal is probably discourage short term visitors. In the many, MAAAAANY past HN topics about this, complaints about them were constant. Basically Cruise Ships barge in (sometimes literally, hitting other boats or even buildings), then people climb out, make a mess, annoy everyone (including the tourists that are on hotels), then leave again, since they are sleeping on the ship anyway. Lots of stories here on HN of how the day tourists often don't even spend any money, they probably paid to eat on the cruise ship, so they just climb out, take photos, roam around, pollute, then go eat and sleep back on the ship and don't buy anything.
- WillPostForFood 4y ago
  Seems like cruise ships would be a good target for additional taxes.
  - mixmastamyk 4y ago
    They do, a megaship pays about $100k per day to dock, less to anchor nearby.
- Spinosaurus 4y ago
  Why not simply prohibit cruise ships in the nearby port? That seems like a far, far easier solution if that is in fact the root cause of the problem.
  - 4y ago

speeder 4y ago

That is an interesting solution attempt to their problems. I hope they succeed, including in fixing the pollution to the lagoon. When pandemic started a lot of people noticed animals not seen in years shown up on the lagoon again as soon the big cruise ships were gone.

notatoad 4y ago
while i'm sure there were some instances of animals returning to venice during the lockdowns, many of the viral photos claiming to tell that story were either photoshops or photos of entirely different cities.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

hartator 4y ago

> Some daytrippers are exempt from paying the entry fee, although they will still have to book. These include residents of the Veneto region, students, and those visiting family members in the city. This seems against basic human rights of free circulation.

klipt 4y ago
Is that a right? In the US you have to pay to visit most federal and state parks.
- bombcar 4y ago
  Everything's a right these days.
- Spivak 4y ago
  But if you tried to charge for or otherwise deny access into a city in the US you would be in extremely shaky ground legally.
  - HWR_14 4y ago
    > if you tried to charge for or otherwise deny access into a city in the US you would be in extremely shaky ground Try to get to Manhattan without paying the city a toll, for a helicopter permit, or a public transit ticket. I'll wait.
    - parkingrift 4y ago
      You can walk or bike across the George Washington bridge. Now you can stop waiting.
    - schoen 4y ago
      https://www1.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/infrastructure/bridges.shtml https://www1.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/infrastructure/bridges.sh... > NYC DOT owns, operates, and maintains 789 bridges and tunnels throughout New York, including the Brooklyn, Ed Koch Queensboro, Manhattan and Williamsburg Bridges, 24 movable bridges, and four tunnels. There are no tolls on bridges operated by NYC DOT. Some bridges in New York City are operated by other agencies. Also, you can walk across many of the bridges to Manhattan: https://foursquare.com/beelzebibi/list/bridges-to-walk-across--ny https://foursquare.com/beelzebibi/list/bridges-to-walk-acros... Also, if you could get to Staten Island (e.g. by walking over the Goethals Bridge), you could take the Staten Island Ferry to Manhattan for free! https://www.siferry.com/ https://www.siferry.com/

keiferski 4y ago

I think this is mostly a good idea. I’ve been to Venice a few times and the best trip was in the middle of February, when the rain and cold scared away summer crowds. However, I do wish that the city managed to retain some of its former glory as a commercial center. It must have been an incredible place in the 13th and 14th centuries, long before tourism economics turned it into a place to visit and not a place to live.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
pm90 4y ago
> It must have been an incredible place in the 13th and 14th centuries, long before tourism economics turned it into a place to visit and not a place to live. Trade routes and power centers were so different then, a different world. It likely will never reach that level of prosperity through non-tourism based economy. In a way, it’s probably for the best. Italy doesn’t have a rapidly expanding population that needs more housing or denser urban centers. Freezing the cities as they are (and funding more research and archaeological digs) is probably the best outcome. I guess it must suck as a resident though.
jhugo 4y ago
I spent a few weeks one January staying with friends who live there, many years ago. Winter is definitely the best time to visit Venice. It's an unforgettable atmosphere walking around at night, with a bit of mist above the canals and hardly anyone around. There is still a decently-sized resident population, mostly not noticed by the tourists, and even in summer you don't have to go far from the most popular areas to find areas, bars and restaurants that are mostly missed by the cruise ship hordes. I do worry that selling tickets basically legitimises the cruise ship hordes (and their behaviour, which isn't always very sociable) while perhaps discouraging casual independent travelers.
carlob 4y ago
For anyone reading this and thinking of planning a trip to Venice in February, be aware that the Carnival often is in February and that's one of the busiest times...

higeorge13 4y ago

I don’t think any foreign tourist from cruise ships or already travelling from nearby italian cities will be discouraged to pay 10 eur to go to venice. I assume only italian people will get affected.

steve_adams_86 4y ago
Apparently locals (Veneto region) and anyone visiting family are exempt, so hopefully that alleviates most of the financial burden for Italian people. Hopefully it also boosts income for the city and benefits people actually living there in a meaningful way.
yetanother-1 4y ago
They are setting some limits as well.
- amscanne 4y ago
  You may have missed this in the article: > The local council has emphasised that there will be no limit to visitor numbers, only an increase in the entry fee should a certain number of visitors be reached on a particular day.
  - t0mas88 4y ago
    "Oh no there is no limit, it's just that you're visitor number 100,001 so you'll have to pay € 500 to get in, but feel free to do so" ;-)
kyriakos 4y ago
Considering that when I visited I paid around 50 euro for parking alone, 10 euro fee won't deter anyone.
- jacquesm 4y ago
  You were ripped off.

adrianN 4y ago

The fees would have to be very high to noticably reduce the number of tourists. I think it would work better if there were a quota system and a lottery.

HWR_14 4y ago
I mean, it's kinda like a quota system. The fees go up after limits are reached, which is similar to a soft quota. And first-come, first-serve seems as reasonable as a lottery since it affects tourists who will need to book rooms and travel far in advance.

russellbeattie 4y ago

I visited Venice in the 90s within a few years of a trip to Disney World in Florida and I was definitely struck by the similarities, so this doesn't surprise me at all. In both trips, I took a train to a dock and then boarded a small ferry with a bunch of other day-trip tourists and packaged tours, and we were all unloaded in a center area where we could spread out to all the attractions and rides / museums, churches and gondolas as the case may be, and the shops in both places were filled with the tackiest overpriced souvenirs possible. The €5 to €10 ticket price doesn't compare at all though.

t0mas88 4y ago
The € 10 ticket price is not nearly high enough considering that most visitors pay thousands for their cruise ship or flight + hotel to get there. It needs to be much higher to have any serious impact.
- gambiting 4y ago
  Not everyone coming to Venice is a wealthy citizen of a western country. Sure for a Brit or a German, 10 euro is nothing, but I remember coming on a trip from Poland(by coach!) years ago and yeah, basically we couldn't afford anything in Venice already, 5 euro coffee was insane(compared to Polish wages). So we walked around for the whole day, ate what we brought with us, and left. 10 euro fee would mean not going.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]

mmasu 4y ago

I think this is a good idea, as Venice has lots of issues caused by the excess of tourists (i.e.ground erosion), however they should also greatly limit cruise ships too (they say they want to do it from time to time, then do not follow through). At the same time, I am a bit perplexed. Tickets are enforced with random checks, and if you do not have your ticket you will need to pay a fine. I am not sure that you need to pay on the spot tho. If that is the case and you have 50 people from - say - the US or China, you can just avoid paying. Who will come looking for you anyway? Yes, they can kick you out, but again this won't work if they find loads of people without tickets.

t0mas88 4y ago
If it's anything like speeding tickets in most of Europe your place of residence determines whether you have to pay on the spot or not. For example Netherlands and Germany (and many others) have an agreement in place where your home country collects the fines so you don't have to pay on the spot. But if you're from a non-EU country you'll almost certainly have to pay on the spot because there would otherwise be no way to collect the money if you refused later.

Ekaros 4y ago

It is bit weird, but then looking at numbers it makes somewhat more sense. 5,2km^"2 old town and 15k+ daily visitors... It is not exactly great combination. Specially for place that wasn't designed for masses of tourist.

guelo 4y ago

I think about this kind of thing with relation to airbnb in expensive cities, what is the ultimate free market end state? Anywhere where humans create unique culture and beauty will be hollowed out and given over to global tourists with money. That forces the locals far away from the interesting center core. Thinking about it over decades I envision it as almost like a Game of Life pattern where those pushed out eventually create a new interesting core while the old hollowed out core deteriorates into disney-fied caricature of itself. The cycle then repeats as the global tourist money chases the new hotness. Could it really be a cycle? I'm not sure. The tourist hotspots look mostly like negative-sum culture destruction to me.

greedo 4y ago
I grew up in a sleepy coastal town in California. Nothing special except beaches really. A racetrack where thoroughbreds races annually. Beautiful, but nice and sleepy. And then as California grew and any beach town became a tier 1 locale, my hometown became more and more expensive to live in. For people in service careers, it became impossible, so they moved inland and commuted. Now, unless you managed to buy a house very early, you're priced out. The amount of money in the town is crazy, and I would estimate that the amount of 1%ers is over 20% of the population. Compare this back to the early 70s and there wasn't nearly the same amount of variance in wealth. It makes me sad that my childhood home has changed so much, but I don't think there's a way to prevent this from happening.

simonebrunozzi 4y ago

After ~9 years in California, I moved from San Francisco to Venice, Italy (Venezia) in late 2020. (I am originally from Italy). Venice is an amazing city, and it's not as expensive as people think, if you plan to stay long term. When the Covid-19 situation got better in early 2022, TONS of tourists came back, and Venice is now more crowded than it was before the pandemic. Residents (of the historical city center, or the "main" Venice), down to a total of about 50,000 (from a peak of ~175,000 [0]), are really angry at the overcrowding and are looking for solutions. In certain weekends this year, the number of visitors reached 130,000 per day, which is about twice as much as the city can support without deterioration of city life and services. Entry tickets, if handled properly, could be a great way to fix the issue. The current solution has some flaws, and I don't believe that it will solve the issue properly. (overnight visitors don't pay; ferry rides are not integrated in the ticket; etc). I believe that the right structure should include a combination of: 1) expensive tickets (€50 per day per person) that allow you to come regardless of any other limitation. 2) advance purchase tickets (€5 per day per person) 3) progressive tickets (starting at €5 per day per person, but going as high as €25 when the number of visitors in a given day approaches 60,000). Also, the parking system (Tronchetto and Piazzale Roma), owned by private companies, should introduce a similar progressive ticket, but the extra income should go to the municipality, not to the private company. The extra money earned this way should go towards improving the logistics of the city, easing the pressure that tourism puts on the residents. My 0.02. [0]: https://allaboutvenice.com/venice-population/ https://allaboutvenice.com/venice-population/

Jistern 4y ago
>> Entry tickets, if handled properly, could be a great way to fix the issue. I disagree. This seems like a "great way" to damage the tourism industry in Venice. In other words, I think this is a terrible way to deal with tourists who are visiting Venice, yet aren't spending enough money in Venice. I think it would be better to require every adult tourist to buy, say, €10 worth of "Venice Money" which they could spend at any restaurant or shop in Venice during the day they are visiting. Too many tourists? Then increase it to, say, €15. Too few tourists? Then decrease it to, say, €5. Part of the goal is to require tourists to spend a minimum amount of money while visiting Venice. Charging an admission fee seems too heavy-handed. Sure, I realize that my suggestion is tantamount to an admission fee, but it's likely to be more palatable to tourists. The goal isn't merely to get tourists to spend a sufficient amount of money in Venice; part of the goal is to make tourists happy to do so. Tourists are notoriously fickle. Furthermore, they have myriad places in and around Italy, Europe, and, well, the world where they can spend their money. The current problem of too many tourists could very quickly turn into a problem of a dearth of tourists. "Killing the goose that lays the golden egg" would obviously be foolish. I presume the economy in Venice benefits immensely from tourism. This is precisely the sort of measure that people tend to look back at in hindsight and exclaim, "How could we have committed such a blunder! What were we thinking?!?" Having opined all of that, sure, I can see why denizens of Venice would welcome a measure that would decrease the number of tourists generally, and particularly the number of skinflint tourists who visit Venice, yet don't spend a single euro in Venice. Also, frankly, I think it would be perfectly reasonable for Venice to enforce dress codes and behavior codes. For example, nobody wants an endless "parade" of motley dressed drunkards wandering around their neighborhood. Personally I happily shop at Costco, but haven’t set foot in a Walmart in perhaps 20 years. I detest Walmart. Why? Part of the reason is this: Costco has a “greeter” standing at the enterance. Ostensibly the greeter’s job is to verify that people entering are members. In fact, that greeter is also eyeballing each person who enters and is empowered to deny enterance to people who don’t meet Costco’s minimum standards (which aren’t very high, but are still much, much higher than Walmart’s standards). Similarly, one of the "secrets" to the success of Las Vegas strip is this: although they allow a lot of rowdy behavior, frankly, they actually keep a tight lid on things: a very, very, tight lid, which I presume you would have noticed if you’ve ever actually been there and paid attention. It's a delicate balance which requires discretion bordering on sophisticated and subtle diplomacy. For example, when dealing with "drunk idiots" the Las Vegas police tend to use kid gloves as much as possible. Why? The powers that be in Las Vegas want "visitors" (tourists) to tell their family, friends, and associates they had a great time on the Las Vegas strip. They also want most of the tourists themselves to return over, and over, and over again. The same is true for a myriad of tourist destinations around the world.

bradwood 4y ago

It's likely they will need a substantial revenue stream to prevent the city sinking further into the Adriatic given the problem with rising sea levels. Time to look to the Dutch to help out with some levees/dykes sooner rather than later, as they did in the UD after Katrina

fbn79 4y ago
Is already build and not paid directly by the city https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOSE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOSE

moritonal 4y ago

An interesting side-fact: Talking to a venetian during the pandemic they explained that their city is sat in a complicated political setup. The governening body (the Metropolitan City of Venice) actually consists of the city we know of Venice, but then also the surrounding islands and a decent chunk of the mainland. Our venetian friend explained they'd wanted to implement laws like this but have always been hostage to the surrounding lands which see it as essentially a cash-cow. It was the metropolitan for example (according to our friend) that outvoted Venice itself to allow cruiseboats back to Venice which is almost the sole cause of the over-population. Native venetians seem to dislike the cruise-boats given their tourists have a very different spending pattern compared to stay-over tourists. But the cruise-boats pay huge taxes straight into the municipal. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_City_of_Venice https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_City_of_Venice

tass 4y ago
Absolutely. Cruise goers eat and drink on the ship and have a few hours during the day to quickly hit all the sites - thousands all at the same time.
egypturnash 4y ago
Oh man this is a familiar pattern. Do the surrounding areas also see Venice as a loathesome den of iniquity, which they’d destroy if it wasn’t the main source of income for the whole area? That’s how it is with Louisiana and New Orleans.

jacquesm 4y ago

They should do this for Amsterdam. And make them 500 euros.

miki123211 4y ago

Could this be used by an EU country to effectively limit free movement? Imagine Berlin enforces an €1000000000 entry fee, except on people meeting certain criteria. All residents of Germany are exempt, everyone who gets what effectively amounts to a Visa is exempt, everybody else has to pay up, except the amount is so ridiculous that nobody will actually do so. As an EU citizen, I'm a bit concerned by this.

Strom 4y ago
The judges in courts are humans who look for intent. They're not machines who you can trick that easily. So no, no need to worry about a €1000000000 entry fee to Berlin. Venice is tiny, old, decaying. You can just think of it as a museum. EU free movement does not give free access to all EU museums.

ajsnigrutin 4y ago

Will this actually help lower the numbers of tourists or is it just a cash grab? I live in slovenia (neighbouring country), and venice, to me, is just one of those cities, lost to tourism... the number of locals is slowly going towards zero, and basically all of the cities infrastructure is going towards tourism. We have a few cities going that way too, eg Piran or Kranjska Gora, where it's impossible to live in (since housing prices are way too high due to airbnb investments), the restaurants are pretty much all the same, catering tourists, prices are expensive, and there are very few stores with stuff locals actually need. Charging people a few euros to enter would still mean cities overcrowded with tourism (but a bit more expensive now), and still unlivable for locals. Sadly, the same is happening to the city center of Ljubljana, where everything is slowly turning towards the tourists, and coming to ljubljana is pretty much the same as coming to Prague, Bratislava, etc... a few unique landmarks, and generic touristy restaurants, boat rides and expensive made-in-china souvenirs. ...and too expensive housing for locals, hard to find a general food store, noise pollution, etc.

readerbaza 4y ago
Just a cash grab Venice is absolute trash for common tourists. I've been there many times, never willingly
dreen 4y ago
I grew up in a historic EU city which is slowly selling out as well. I do not think there is a way to stop it. However, if handled correctly, the tickets could bring cash needed for public projects in the city.
ProjectArcturis 4y ago
Yup. Tourism in Venice has, ironically, destroyed most reason to visit it. Dubrovnik, recently famous as the set of King's Landing in Game of Thrones, was probably once a charming medieval town, but is now one enormous T-shirt shop.
- dariusj18 4y ago
  Planning on going to Italy, steering clear of Venice. I've been a few decades ago and it was fine, but the current crush of people is insane. I'm not looking to stand cheek to cheek at Piazza San Marco.

napier 4y ago

Good. Should be priced 10x higher for cruise ships and their passengers.

throwaway787544 4y ago

> The local council has emphasised that there will be no limit to visitor numbers, only an increase in the entry fee should a certain number of visitors be reached on a particular day. So it's not about overcrowding, it's just about getting paid. If it were just about overcrowding they could just limit the number and keep a flat fee, the way park systems do. Or a lottery.

yohannparis 4y ago
This is a classic and efficient way to allow people to visit Venice. If you are early or come at a slow time the price is low, if the number of people increases, so do the price. So it's not a first come first serve, but an actual price of demand. Virginia did that on a highway used by commuters to get into D.C. where they want a minimum travel speed of 40 mph (might be lower) and the more people get into it, the more the price rise. From $1, up to $30 on a rare occasion.