Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Developers now claim apartments cost more to construct than houses

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Idbatterim
    Registered Users Posts: 17,852 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    The car space is the biggest killer according to most developers. The headless chickens in DCC seem to think everyone living in gridlocked Dublin 1/2 want/need a car space, so pretty much a ton of new apartments are expected to have them. If they were optional and not compulsory, most people would not want them.

    I dont think its just the car parking. David Ehrlich head of IRES Reit has been saying just how costly and inefficient it is to build dual aspect in particular... I would love to know the actually cost of single aspect v the current regulations.

    I actually think this entire situation is beyond a joke, far beyond it! Is this not something that should have been looked into years ago, even with years of rising property prices, they still arent bloody viable unless they can be sold for a fortune, ruling out the vast majority of couples even on decent incomes!!!

    in terms of making apartments smaller, I am not sure. I found one of the big things about being happy in a property is space and light obviously, mostly light in the living area. its not that critical for bedroom or bathroom obviously. While im all for reducing the cost of apartments as it is essential, Id be wary of doing it in terms of size, if it reduces it too small for very meagre savings... maybe do so with the 2 and 3 bed units, where the living space is already generous, some are 800-120 sq.m , which to me seems very large. Another thing I always though would be useful, in say a 3 bed for families, would be another decent sized room away from the kitchen / living / dining room...

    I would also reduce the levies etc and fund it by hiking up the LPT...


  • Options
    #33
    Pete_Cavan
    Registered Users Posts: 6,874 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    Building apartments, particularly for rent, is unnecessarily expensive here. In much of continental Europe, the finish in for rent apartment blocks is much lower than here. Certainly in common circulation areas, walls are often painted blockwork and floors vinyl or similar sheet finish. Even in apartments themselves, ceilings can be painted underside of precast slabs and walls can be nap plaster rather than skimmed smooth, 3 inch bullnose skirtings and perhaps no architrave.

    In some countries the developer doesn't even install the kitchen, the tenant has to do that along with supplying all their own furniture. An apartment block generally has centralised heating system for the entire building rather than the Irish thing of every apartment having its own boiler. They build apartments for a lot less than we do.

    On the continent, most people rent and it is accepted that many will never be able to buy property. With this comes proper protection for tenants and many stay in the same apartment for years and can do so without fear of rent hikes. We really need to get away from our system of year to year leases which are not suitable for apartment living.

    Longer term tenancies gives more protection to renters and can also reduce the cost to landlords, finding a new tenant every year can potentially meaning missing out on a months rent and cost another month in letting fees. Hopefully with the rise of institutional landlords here, like Kennedy Wilson and the REITs, we will see a shift towards this model.


  • Options
    #34
    __..__
    Registered Users Posts: 452 ✭✭__..__


    matrim wrote: »
    People use cars for more than just going to work. They use them at weekends to go visit family / friends, for shopping, for day trips out of the city. And some people need to drive as part of their job. Getting rid of the parking spaces is just re-enforcing the idea that apartments are somewhere you live for a few years in your 20s while you wait to get your 3 bed semi in the burbs.

    In most of the apartment blocks I've lived in, the car park was generally at least 70% in use, and in a couple there were shortages of spaces that caused plenty of issues between residents

    You would think everyone worked on a bus/train route and travelled at bus/trian operating times wouldn't you. I would never live in an apartment without a parking space. Even if I didn't need a car at a particular time I could leave the space empty. But when I do need to own a car I need somewhere to put it.


  • Options
    #35
    Ray Palmer
    Registered Users Posts: 8,394 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    Building apartments, particularly for rent, is unnecessarily expensive here.

    This is so true and also applies to rental costs and the running of rentals. No central heating systems are allowed for blocks here nor laundry rooms. A tenant can stop paying rent with little or no recourse for a year.
    The protections and standards in place here actually put up rent. If they want rent to go down this needs to change.


  • Options
    #36
    thierry14
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,480 ✭✭✭thierry14


    CruelCoin wrote: »
    Also remove the 10% requirement for social housing and you're golden.

    Yeah screw the paye workers

    Hate this social housing crap

    Let them upskill and earn crust like the rest of us.

    Why should they get handouts?

    Define or be defined


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Zenify
    Registered Users Posts: 861 ✭✭✭Zenify


    Ray Palmer wrote: »
    This is so true and also applies to rental costs and the running of rentals. No central heating systems are allowed for blocks here nor laundry rooms. A tenant can stop paying rent with little or no recourse for a year.
    The protections and standards in place here actually put up rent. If they want rent to go down this needs to change.


    I have a central heating and hot water for my block. it gets billed depending on usage. it's a new A rated apt block and very cheap system. not sure why you think it's not allowed?


  • Options
    #38
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    I can't help feel this is an attempt to go back to building sub standard tiny apartments for max profit.


  • Options
    #39
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,301 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    Fliucharbith wrote: »
    So why was housing far more affordable in, say, 1990's?
    I'd say land prices. The fields behind my house in Ireland sold for 10 times their worth in the 00's what they were worth in the 90's.
    beauf wrote: »
    I can't help feel this is an attempt to go back to building sub standard tiny apartments for max profit.
    Agreed.


  • Options
    #40
    wordofwarning
    Closed Accounts Posts: 697 ✭✭✭wordofwarning


    beauf wrote: »
    I can't help feel this is an attempt to go back to building sub standard tiny apartments for max profit.

    There is nothing wrong with tiny apartments, if they are built right. NYC, London etc are all building incredible micro-apartments.

    The fact is people want small affordable apartments here. This notion that the only apartments, that should be built here are all massive and ultra high spec is pricing a majority of people out of the market. A new build apartment is basically just for the top 10-20% of society now. It is bizarre that people would rather developers build no one bedroom apartments or build a 55sq m one with a car space, dual aspect, etc etc.

    I personally would love the option of an affordable micro-apartment with a single aspect, no car space etc. Than the alternative option of nothing, as I will likely will not be able to afford a newly built one bedroom apartment


  • Options
    #41
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,301 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    wordofwarning wrote: »
    There is nothing wrong with tiny apartments, if they are built right. NYC, London etc are all building incredible micro-apartments.
    Two questions; are they only building micro-apartments in the above listed cities, and do they house families in them?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    wordofwarning wrote: »
    There is nothing wrong with tiny apartments, if they are built right. NYC, London etc are all building incredible micro-apartments.

    The fact is people want small affordable apartments here. ...

    Dublin is not NYC or London.

    We have basically no standards as they are not checked or enforced.

    What happened before was tiny apartments of a very low standard were built. Which were ended up housing families as no one could afford to trade up.

    People bought only thinking of the short term. Which also created a load of accidental landlords.

    Is creating a load of single tenant properties really the way forward in the worse housing crisis in the history of the state.

    Nothing against micro apartments. But they seem very limited in the long term.


  • Options
    #43
    __..__
    Registered Users Posts: 452 ✭✭__..__


    It won't be too long before you have an abundance of people living in tiny apartments and then complaining that they are to small. Again.

    This Situation happens all the time. people scream for something and then when they get it they complain, except with small apartments you have to live in them.

    Apartments should be decent sizes.


  • Options
    #44
    Idbatterim
    Registered Users Posts: 17,852 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    There is nothing wrong with tiny apartments, if they are built right. NYC, London etc are all building incredible micro-apartments.

    The fact is people want small affordable apartments here. This notion that the only apartments, that should be built here are all massive and ultra high spec is pricing a majority of people out of the market. A new build apartment is basically just for the top 10-20% of society now. It is bizarre that people would rather developers build no one bedroom apartments or build a 55sq m one with a car space, dual aspect, etc etc.

    I personally would love the option of an affordable micro-apartment with a single aspect, no car space etc. Than the alternative option of nothing, as I will likely will not be able to afford a newly built one bedroom apartment

    I absolutely agree and was saying this years ago! Personally ditching dual aspect and high car parking space ratio for me would be the no brainers. Actually height is the biggest no brainer. There is no loss there, I dont care whether I am on the 3rd or 30th floor. Space, well I agree personally, very very few can actually afford the apartments being built at present! What use is that to anyone, I am the same as you on a reasonable income. Getting an average apartment in an average are of Dublin is a pipe dream even if you are on 50k a year! The regulations like you say are beyond a joke, far beyond it!


  • Options
    #45
    wordofwarning
    Closed Accounts Posts: 697 ✭✭✭wordofwarning


    the_syco wrote: »
    Two questions; are they only building micro-apartments in the above listed cities, and do they house families in them?

    No and no.

    Neither am I advocating for just micro-apartments. The point I am making is not everyone wants an unaffordable 55sq m dual aspect apartment with a car space, that they can't afford. Give the alternative of micro-apartments for someone working in the likes of Google, who works massive hours and travels heavily. Or a student, who literally barely sleeps in the apartment.

    Give people alternative choices of apartments versus the current choice, which is really no choice.


  • Options
    #46
    wordofwarning
    Closed Accounts Posts: 697 ✭✭✭wordofwarning


    beauf wrote: »

    We have basically no standards as they are not checked or enforced.

    Uh? Do you realise what you just wrote? It makes no sense. The fact we have no small apartments being built, means there is standards and they are in fact being enforced...

    In NYC, a one bedroom apartment has to be a minimum of 400 sq foot. It is about 550 sq foot here. We have such strict standards for apartments, little are being built.
    beauf wrote: »
    What happened before was tiny apartments of a very low standard were built. Which were ended up housing families as no one could afford to trade up.

    So in 2017, we need to build massive apartments that are really expensive increase people overstretch themselves and can't afford to trade up? That is only repeating the problem again. If someone could buy a micro-apartment for 80k, they wont be in massive negative equity, versus a 1 bedroom apartment at 250k.

    Here is a better idea, we limit the mortgages that people take out on property to prevent that again. Wait a minute, we already did that
    beauf wrote: »
    People bought only thinking of the short term. Which also created a load of accidental landlords.

    Again, this not really relevant to this discussion. Only allow micro-apartments to be owned by REITS, housing assocations etc if you think people can't be trusted
    beauf wrote: »
    Is creating a load of single tenant properties really the way forward in the worse housing crisis in the history of the state.

    So saying if you can't afford a 55sq m one bedroom apartment, live in a car, a hostel, a modern tenement, etc is that is a better alternative?

    I am not saying only build micro-apartments, I am saying at least permit them in developments. There are tons of infill sites in Dublin perfect for micro-apartments and not regular apartments
    beauf wrote: »
    Nothing against micro apartments. But they seem very limited in the long term.

    For someone who has nothing against them, you didn't have a single positive thing to say about them...

    None of your issues with micro-apartments, are in fact exclusive to micro-apartments


Advertisement