Minimum Size For Apartments Reduced

cerastes

MarkAnthony wrote: »

Someone, and I'm not sure if it's you or not, always brings this up. Yes that's very nice but thats not the way building happens here. Setting unworkable minimum standards for apartments simply results in developers throwing tantrums and not building. Minimums should be exactly that. The market takes care of the rest. If people wanted or could afford 200Sqm two beds they'd be building them.

Also what are you lot storing for christ sake? I grew up in a c.75sqm 3 bed terraced in an old Army estate, me, my brother and my two parents + various dogs and we never had an issue with space. The min standards are fine, as pointed out in the article it's inline with other European countries.

I lived in a c. 40sqm apartment as stated above and had plenty of storage, granted we had to put some of it in ourselves but at the bottom end of the market how many modern art installations do you want in a 1 bed? I had everything I wanted in my flat including a Washer dryer, dishwasher, sofa to seat 4 (corner group) dining table, work area with desk as I'm a PC nerd I had a desktop with three monitors. Plenty of space for clothes for two people and a full sized double bed, not to mention a bathroom with a full sized bath.

You talking from one extreme to another, no one said 200 metre sq except you. A lot of people have said storage would make sense to them and it was mentioned as having come up on the radio so the idea is out there.
People have stuff, its not art installations (again ridiculous) and comparing to what people grew up in (as kids) to today (as adults) is no comparison.
Inline with European standards, from what Ive seen its not comparing like with like. Anything less that 72/75 Sq metres is tiny, I was astonished when I saw the inside of an apartment that size, any less is ridiculous and that had a small cupboard to put an ironing board/vac into.
The point is making something slightly smaller reduces the area quite a bit to the point it makes it less useable, for the want of a seperate storage space for something like a bicycle (or 2) as they tale up so much space, you probably didnt have that problem in your house growing up as you dont use them or consider it, but in all likelyhood as you grew up in a house you probably had a shed to bung them into (and likely a garden to play in)

If anything a bicycle is an excellent example of something that takes up space (unlike your suggestion of art installations), but which should be encouraged in built up areas, but which people simply cant fit in the corner of a tiny 40 sq metre apartments living room!

Simply not making accomodation to suit peoples needs today only serves to make the idea of apartment living less viable and attractive an option to family's, that along with all the other problems of apartment living that Ive come across, hence why people aim to get their own house.

The govt should be pushing a variety of sizes dependant on the likely uses but which maximises benefit for use/construction.
All thats available now are mostly shoeboxes where people then end up trapped and unable to change, there is also such a thing as quality of life, AND this has been raised by non Irish people, the quality of fit and finish is poor, design/layout for use bad.

What you suggest if we dont pander to developers they wont build, so let them build what they want, and not what is needed (or has been shown at a quality they determine i.e. insulation/fire standards).

caviardreams

cerastes wrote: »

I knew someone that had a 75 sq metre apartment and that was small, those apartments are tiny, almost prison cell like. They are ridiculous.
Not having storage is ridiculous also. I've seen some apartments on the continent and a seperate storage room/with water/power/drainage seems to be a normal expectation.
This also came along with actual secure parking, security, and practically manicured gardens (and facilities, one had a gym, another had grounds that looked like a park with playground). I'm not saying we could expect the latter, but building up would mean more available space and it would be sensible and reasonable to consider storage as a normal requirement.

On a seperate note and as a reply to someone else, I'd also consider natural ventilation not to be acceptable for spaces lived in, especially apartments.

To say 75m is prison cell like is a little extreme. Personally having experienced them, 68m plus works fine for a 2 bed if it is well laid out (i.e. if there isn't 12m wasted on a long corridor etc.)

I don't understand how people complain about apartment sizes constantly but never the same re houses? I know people who live in 2 bed terraces built in the last 20 or 30 years without so much as a hot press, who also have the "where do I put the hoover" problem.

What about this built in 2007 - 73m and a lot more wasted space than an apartment of the same size due to the stairs etc.
http://www.daft.ie/dublin/houses-for-sale/swords/7-holywell-villas-swords-dublin-1144891/

or this at 64m: http://www.daft.ie/dublin/houses-for-sale/swords/78-the-oaks-ridgewood-swords-dublin-1143656/

or this at 59m: http://www.daft.ie/dublin/houses-for-sale/clondalkin/83-st-johns-crescent-clondalkin-dublin-1080076/

These don't seem to cause the same outrage as apartments which are often bigger and better laid out. You really don't need 90m for a 2 bed apartment - anything over 68 can work fine if well-designed. Having said that, a badly designed 68m apartment with lots of needless corridor space/turns/ funny shaped rooms etc. can be terrible, but the same goes for houses.

cerastes

caviardreams wrote: »

To say 75m is prison cell like is a little extreme. Personally having experienced them, 68m plus works fine for a 2 bed if it is well laid out (i.e. if there isn't 12m wasted on a long corridor etc.)

I don't understand how people complain about apartment sizes constantly but never the same re houses? I know people who live in 2 bed terraces built in the last 20 or 30 years without so much as a hot press, who also have the "where do I put the hoover" problem.

What about this built in 2007 - 73m and a lot more wasted space than an apartment of the same size due to the stairs etc.
http://www.daft.ie/dublin/houses-for-sale/swords/7-holywell-villas-swords-dublin-1144891/

or this at 64m: http://www.daft.ie/dublin/houses-for-sale/swords/78-the-oaks-ridgewood-swords-dublin-1143656/

or this at 59m: http://www.daft.ie/dublin/houses-for-sale/clondalkin/83-st-johns-crescent-clondalkin-dublin-1080076/

These don't seem to cause the same outrage as apartments which are often bigger and better laid out. You really don't need 90m for a 2 bed apartment - anything over 68 can work fine if well-designed. Having said that, a badly designed 68m apartment with lots of needless corridor space/turns/ funny shaped rooms etc. can be terrible, but the same goes for houses.

That first one looks very acceptable, tbh I was told the dimension I mentioned, by the owner and it was a one bed, so maybe they were overstating the dimensions of their apartment or just got it completely wrong, so it must have been smaller, but not as small as the one shown above at 44? or so metres squared.

That first example of yours (even with the stairs) looks much bigger than what I was told was 72-75m^2 as it was a one bed and didn't have an ensuite.
That said, your example has a garden with a shed, either weather proof garden furniture, or a weatherproof tub, plus there is a shed and still the garden to let children play in, all amounts to a bit of a difference between an equivalently sized apt.
Another thing is, the kitchen/dining is seperate from the living room, which I think is a reasonable thing.

meeeeh

Why would you want to keep a bicycle in the flat? Apartment buildings should definitely have communal storage for bikes and similar but having them in the flat is complete lunacy. It's waste of space and communal areas get a lot dirtier if everyone drags up bicycles.

Anyway I don't think 45sqm is that bad as a minimum. There are a lot of smart storage solutions that make it completely liveable as one bedroom apartment.

borderlinemeath

caviardreams wrote: »

I don't understand how people complain about apartment sizes constantly but never the same re houses? I know people who live in 2 bed terraces built in the last 20 or 30 years without so much as a hot press, who also have the "where do I put the hoover" problem.

Attic space;)

Plus the fact of having your own front door and back door/garden is invaluable when lots of apartments don't have balcony space. I lived in a 2 bed apartment in Dublin City Centre and the lack of outside space was claustrophobic, spent a summer in a far smaller one bed sharing and the balcony is practically an extra room.

Also what are you lot storing for christ sake? I grew up in a c.75sqm 3 bed terraced in an old Army estate, me, my brother and my two parents + various dogs and we never had an issue with space. The min standards are fine, as pointed out in the article it's inline with other European countries.

Growing up even 2 decades ago everybody had a lot less "stuff", everybody made do. Kitchen cupboards had food and plates, not kitchen gadgets. Stuff was piled on top of stuff, I grew up in a house with lots of siblings, and there was 4 of us to a bedroom, you piled your books under your bed and you had to share a chest of drawers for your clothes. If you have kids now, there's just no room for anything, bouncers, rockers, buggies, car seats - before you even start on their toys.

cerastes

meeeeh wrote: »

Why would you want to keep a bicycle in the flat? Apartment buildings should definitely have communal storage for bikes and similar but having them in the flat is complete lunacy. It's waste of space and communal areas get a lot dirtier if everyone drags up bicycles.

Anyway I don't think 45sqm is that bad as a minimum. There are a lot of smart storage solutions that make it completely liveable as one bedroom apartment.

Exactly!
Communal storage and access from my experience has either not been available or not secure.
Individual secure storage space would be perfect, prevent damage to communal areas and save space in a flat. If you had a nice expensive bike if you cycled a lot, Im sure your view would be different. Your option is either where anyone can damage your bike or work away at the lock at their convenience/leisure.

keane2097

If you have trailers worth of odds and ends accumulated you would either ditch it, get a storage unit or refuse to be forced to live in a small apartment that nobody will be trying to force you to live in.

cerastes

keane2097 wrote: »

If you have trailers worth of odds and ends accumulated you would either ditch it, get a storage unit or refuse to be forced to live in a small apartment that nobody will be trying to force you to live in.

Who said trailers worth, Im talking normal stuff, sometimes people have things they use occasionally, that doesnt mean they should just dump it, nor does being required to also organise and pay for seperate storage make any sense when there should be a reasonable amount of storage. Ive seen this in places on the continent, no one seemed to think this was out of the ordinary, except the surprised Irish people who had lived in shoe box apartments.

MarkAnthony

cerastes wrote: »

Who said trailers worth, Im talking normal stuff, sometimes people have things they use occasionally, that doesnt mean they should just dump it, nor does being required to also organise and pay for seperate storage make any sense when there should be a reasonable amount of storage. Ive seen this in places on the continent, no one seemed to think this was out of the ordinary, except the surprised Irish people who had lived in shoe box apartments.

I've seen tiny places on 'the continent' most notably in Paris. I do wish people would stop pushing 'The Continent' as some utopia where the government simultaneously force developers to build while insisting on huge floor space. There has also been more of an affinity with apartment living in some mainland European countries. While modern art installs might be ridiculous this constant referral to some nebulous 'On the continent' where apartments are in parks etc simply doesn't assist the discussion.

Let's get down to the nitty gritty here. You think 75Msq is too small but 200msq to be ridiculous, so where should the minimum standard be? How many people should we force out of the CC because you want to take the decision out of their hands for whatever reason. The majority of 3 bed terraces in Dublin would be under 100Sqm and those have to account for stairwells ect. So anyone in one of those is struggling too I take it?

As for as a variety of sizes okay that's sensible and what is being required in the new regs. If you need a room specifically for junk simply buy a three bed apartment rather than a two bed and store your bike in there.

q85dw7osi4lebg

I sold a 2 bed refurbed cottage of 37sqm earlier this year in Dublin 1. Queues out the door.

q85dw7osi4lebg

Likewise with a 39 sq.m 1 bed in Smithfield a few months back. <= 40 sq.m is small but people would be surprised just how much of the city's accommodation is already sub this size.

MarkAnthony

I think it's obvious that I'm getting wound up and I do apologise. The issue I have is that we keep making these kneejerk reactions and it's causing absolute chaos in Dublin. It's a laudable goal to improve the standard of living, but that is simply not done by forcing the issue. We've managed to prove that with developers saying they need 250K for one bed apartments which is simply silly. While I've no love for developers I've even less love for the idea of centralised building on any large scale. I just hope NAMA don't make a heames of things.

What is irking me is these decisions are being made by people with no experience of City living. There are people making suggestions that simply aren't in touch with the realities of the situation. I'm so fed up with people complaining that there isn't X,Y or Z in a complex and thinking building guidelines will resolve it. Unless there is a strong sense of community within the complex, which stems from a good and involved OMC having the strongest cages in the world isn't going to keep your bike safe and the kiddies play area will be taken over by people drinking cans. It doesn't matter how nice the surroundings are.

Your living space is what you make of it. Yes certain minimum standards have to apply. I don't dispute that. They need to be exactly that though, minimums with the market dictating larger apartments in the right areas. Is anyone seriously suggesting that the cost of bigger floor plans is not simply put back on to the buyers?

Idbatterim

The low hanging fruit is gone, so much of the remaining space in the docklands, work has commenced or will shortly. Moving the port (keep a cruise ferry terminal though). The land was estimated to be worth 600 Billion in the boom! Edit! The land was valued at €15 million an acre, so at that rate (I am not sure what it is now) the land would be worth 15 billion... (Again the value would depend on density permitted etc...)

expanding on this, the poolbeg incinerator should not be permitted in my opinion. Even the sewage treatment plant there should be moved eventually in my opinion (if it is feasible)... That port land and the Irish glass bottle site could provide a spectacular amount of residential and commercial development...

gaius c

Nonsense decision. Why don't they just build up?

accensi0n

Jensen Rotten Outfield wrote: »

I sold a 2 bed refurbed cottage of 37sqm earlier this year in Dublin 1. Queues out the door.

Because they couldn't fit inside?

riclad

OF COURSE there,s a queue, no of house,s for sale , are limited in the city centre .
i,d prefer to live in a 35 sq m house, than a 45 m apartment ,with someone living above, me, beside me, underneath me etc
And apartments =1000 euro plus service charges .
This decision is to reduce building cost ,
builders say they can,t make a profit building in most parts of dublin.
The height they can build is limited in most parts of dublin.

Marcusm

<MOD SNIP >

I hold no candkes for those who want to reduce sizes but that is simply sensationalist. The minimum size of a one bed is now set at 45sq m; 20 years ago, people buying 2 bed apartments in Bachelors Walk, Viking Harbour, Arran Quay were getting less than 45sq m and that's with an extra bedroom.

What will really impact is the increase in north facing apartments etc.

Ultimately, no one will be forced to buy them and, size wise, they will certainly be a marked increase on a lot of the stock of apartments in central Dublin particularly.

riclad

I see no problem with having windows on 1 side of an apartment ,if the windows are big
enough to provide light during day light hours,
if it reduces costs ,and encourages more builders to build more units .
45 m is enough for a single person to live in ,
the trend is more single people living alone .
We need a good mix of 2 ,3 and 1 bed apartments .
On the top floor builders can put in roof windows to provide extra light .
IF some family has 3 cars maybe they should consider buying a house .
i see apartment complexs outside the city centre ,
maybe 30 per cent of the parking space is used ,
maybe 30 per cent of the residents have cars .
Alot of people in dublin just use bus, luas or taxi,s

johnnyskeleton

Jensen Rotten Outfield wrote: »

Likewise with a 39 sq.m 1 bed in Smithfield a few months back. <= 40 sq.m is small but people would be surprised just how much of the city's accommodation is already sub this size.

Could i ask which development this was? I mean if it rents for 1k a month and was sold for 120k thats a 10% yield so i wouldnt be surprised if it sold.

markpb

riclad wrote: »

i see apartment complexs outside the city centre ,
maybe 30 per cent of the parking space is used ,
maybe 30 per cent of the residents have cars .
Alot of people in dublin just use bus, luas or taxi,s

I have to call BS on that. I've lived in several apartment complex across the city and none of the car parks were only 30% used. That includes one which was 400m from Balally Luas in Dundrum.

Of course, you could argue that the cars may not have been used or may only have been used at weekends but that's not my experience either.

Eric Cartman

markpb wrote: »

I have to call BS on that. I've lived in several apartment complex across the city and none of the car parks were only 30% used. That includes one which was 400m from Balally Luas in Dundrum.

Of course, you could argue that the cars may not have been used or may only have been used at weekends but that's not my experience either.

In my experience even, a lot of landlords buy apartments and rent the space out separately. I have never seen a D1/2/3/4/6/8/18 Apartment with a carpark that wasn't completely packed. Even those not so convenient apartments in park west are full. Apartments in dublin have a serious lack of parking anyway considering even most 3 beds only come with 1 space.

Calina

riclad wrote: »

45 m is enough for a single person to live in ,
the trend is more single people living alone .

I lived in a 45 sqm studio for two years. It is not a sustainable way of living. I suspect that a lot of people who say it's plenty for a single person a) are not single or b) assume that they will have a choice of not living in these places.

The last building boom resulted in a lot of substandard blocks being built. As in the standards which were in place weren't met in many cases. I see no reason to believe that things are any better now.

Apartments are not just for Christmas. They are for years. It'd be nice if we considered doing the best we can do rather than the least we can get away with.

Calina

Calina wrote: »

Apartments are not just for Christmas. They are for years. .

<MOD SNIP >

Dublin planners still seem to have the attitude that apartment living is only for students and transients and that having Dublin as a flat city is a 'good thing'.

They're wrong on both counts.

riclad

I,M talking about about apartments not in the city centre ,dublin 15 etc .
i visit my sister , the parking space is maybe 40-30 per cent full
all the time .
most of the residents do not own cars .

i think 45 sq m is in line with standards in the uk or germany .
ok lets build 80sq apartments ,great,
but many people wont be able to afford to buy any a 1 bed unit .
as the price will rise .As building cost rise,s .
But allocating a parking space for every resident is pointless and drives up building
cost for no good reason for everyone .
Maybe we just need to realise we need higher buildings ,
if we want low cost apartments .

athtrasna

riclad wrote: »

I,M talking about about apartments not in the city centre ,dublin 15 etc .
i visit my sister , the parking space is maybe 40-30 per cent full
all the time .
most of the residents do not own cars .

i think 45 sq m is in line with standards in the uk or germany .
ok lets build 80sq apartments ,great,
but many people wont be able to afford to buy any a 1 bed unit .
as the price will rise .As building cost rise,s .
But allocating a parking space for every resident is pointless and drives up building
cost for no good reason for everyone .
Maybe we just need to realise we need higher buildings ,
if we want low cost apartments .

I live in an apartment development in D15 and we have 1.5 spaces per unit (one each and a share in visitor parking) and it's not enough. In an area with hospital, IT, numerous business parks including huge employers like PayPal and eBay most three bedroom apartments have at least three cars, two bedroom often have four if it's two couples sharing so experience tells me your point is not representative of the reality. I've never seen more than a handful of empty spaces in any carpark in the area.

markpb

riclad wrote: »

I,M talking about about apartments not in the city centre ,dublin 15 etc .
i visit my sister , the parking space is maybe 40-30 per cent full
all the time .
most of the residents do not own cars .

Again, not in my experience. I've lived in apartments in D9, 16, 17 and 18 and I've never seen a car park anything other than full. I find it really hard to believe it's different in west Dublin with its relatively poor(-er) public transport. Maybe you're only looking during the day when people have driven their cars to work?

I sort-of agree with the rest of your post but there are several problems at play here, each with different affected groups and different solutions. Current property prices are too high which will affect competitiveness and drive people out of the city. Most apartments built recently are unsuitable for families which drives up demand (and prices) for houses and drives people further from the city. Public transport is poor which makes suburban and outer suburban homes less attractive (but are possibly all most people can afford).

antoinolachtnai

Sure but it is even more complicated than that. For example, a lot of family accommodation in the inner suburbs is occupied by single people sharing. The standard of single person accommodation is quite poor, which is a big problem for students and recent graduates.

The biggest problem we have at the moment is capacity plain and simple. We don't have anywhere near enough. Increasing the units available is really the main thing and Will solve the really acute problem, i.e. homelessness.

If you already own a home or are in secure accommodation then your personal viewpoint is going to be quite different.

riclad

2 couple,s living in a 2 bed apartment ,
sounds like a nightmare ,
unless its a very large apartment .
maybe they could rent a 3 bed house for the same cost .

i see apartments near ballymun, near ikea , on the road past ballymun as you head towards, ikea.
there,s plenty of empty parking spaces there .

athtrasna

riclad wrote: »

2 couple,s living in a 2 bed apartment ,
sounds like a nightmare ,
unless its a very large apartment .
maybe they could rent a 3 bed house for the same cost .

i see apartments near ballymun, near ikea , on the road past ballymun as you head towards, ikea.
there,s plenty of empty parking spaces there .

They can't, that's the whole thing. As for the apartments you mention. Think about why there might be empty spaces there.

q85dw7osi4lebg

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Could i ask which development this was? I mean if it rents for 1k a month and was sold for 120k thats a 10% yield so i wouldnt be surprised if it sold.

Smithfield Village, off Bow Lane.

Sold in the region of 185k, will easily achieve €1200 pm.