Co-living..Shared kitchen for 42 ?

Topgear on Dave

Id probably do it again as well if I had to, and if the price was right.

I "co-lived" as its fancily called now in a big old house in the north circular road in Dubin for a while. As did many others.

There were about 12-15 in the house, it was fairly cheap and I was a student. Good times.


42 is far far too high a number though to share a kitchen/living area.

Mrs OBumble

CollyFlower wrote: »

Thats just depressing.... Without all the add-ons, it must be cheaper to live in a Hostel or a B&B.

In a hostel you shard a bedroom with other people who change daily. It's far more challenging than a co-living complex.

Graces7

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

Id probably do it again as well if I had to, and if the price was right.

I "co-lived" as its fancily called now in a big old house in the north circular road in Dubin for a while. As did many others.

There were about 12-15 in the house, it was fairly cheap and I was a student. Good times.


42 is far far too high a number though to share a kitchen/living area.

The kitchen is huge and well equipped as are the other areas, no comparison with a "big old house" House sharing and co-living are not the same animal in any way

You did not co-live!

The_Conductor

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

In a hostel you shard a bedroom with other people who change daily. It's far more challenging than a co-living complex.

Not necessarily- I had a single room in a hostel for 3 months as a student (here in Ireland)- while on an apprenticeship which I had to complete as part of my undergrad. It wasn't salubrious by any means- and it was a relief to get out of there- but it was the only option (other than camping- which I also did) open to me at the the time. 3 others in my class on the same placement- also had rooms in the hostel for the duration.

Hostels are challenging- but I'd argue that the co-living arrangements- other than on a temporary basis- also are too. They are a damn sight better than camping out- or living rough- and when viewed as such- are a welcome development- however- they are not something that I would willingly access- unless I had no other options.

The galling thing about the Dunlaoghaire development- is how the developer is happily telling everyone that they should be pleased- he has priced them so they compete with 1-bed apartments. 1,300 a month- is a scandalous price- and if someone could get a 1 bed apartment for this- that would in my opinion be the obvious choice they should make.

The other galling thing- is that this development- is actively displacing dozens of apartments who have planning permission for the site- reducing people's options- other than buying into this dystopian living arrangement.

If it wasn't displacing an apartment complex, was priced in a reasonable manner- and sold as strictly temporary in nature- it would be a different kettle of fish.

Guy:Incognito

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

But I thought this was all about "young professionals". Theres a good chance a lot of them will be working 9-5 so finishing around the same time, looking to make dinner, no?

Students would be coming and going at various times of the day and night between irregular class times, part time jobs, drinking etc.

There are very few 9-5 jobs nowadays. Many jobs are 8-8/12 ie 16 to 24 hour operating hours with some working 12 hour shifts like nurses.

Topgear on Dave

Graces7 wrote: »

The kitchen is huge and well equipped as are the other areas, no comparison with a "big old house" House sharing and co-living are not the same animal in any way

You did not co-live!

We had a large kitchen and large living room but the bedrooms were shared.

Id describe it as a type of co-living.

Graces7

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

We had a large kitchen and large living room but the bedrooms were shared.

Id describe it as a type of co-living.

With a gym and the other faciltiies?

Topgear on Dave

Graces7 wrote: »

With a gym and the other faciltiies?

Oh no. Definitely not.

Graces7

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

Oh no. Definitely not.

That is the difference between house sharing and co-living. The latter has all the faciltiies etc.. hence the cost partly although the Killarney version does it at a reasonable price, ie around E130 a week. Not just accommodation but a way of life. That is what appeals to young folk and foreign workers here for a few months. More welcoming than a simple rental.

Added.. it provides a safe total lifestyle without roaming a strange town seeking a gym etc.

the_syco

Graces7 wrote: »

That is the difference between house sharing and co-living. The latter has all the faciltiies etc.. hence the cost partly although the Killarney version does it at a reasonable price, ie around E130 a week. Not just accommodation but a way of life. That is what appeals to young folk and foreign workers here for a few months. More welcoming than a simple rental.

Added.. it provides a safe total lifestyle without roaming a strange town seeking a gym etc.

In the Killarney version that you keep bringing up, there is a living room and kitchen per apartment, as well as the communal bits and at below half the price of the topic at hand. So nothing like the topic at hand.

Muahahaha

Deleted User wrote: »

There are very few 9-5 jobs nowadays. Many jobs are 8-8/12 ie 16 to 24 hour operating hours with some working 12 hour shifts like nurses.

Very few 9-5 jobs :rolleyes: It is literally the most common working hours of all of them, always has been and always will.

If there are "very few 9-5 jobs nowadays" how do you explain the M50 being a car park every day before 9 and after 5?

Topgear on Dave

I work shifts. But 99% of the place I work in are in 9-5.

Nobody sane wants to work shift.

Eric Cartman

pinkyeye wrote: »

None of these units are going to go to anyone on a social housing list so don't know what you're talking about here.

no, but these protestors are looking for free social housing , and it seems that if any private company dares build anything before the government builds hundreds of thousands of free social 3 bed semi-d houses with gardens in south dublin , then it deserves a protest.

the_syco

pinkyeye wrote: »

None of these units are going to go to anyone on a social housing list so don't know what you're talking about here.

They're protesting housing that you must fully pay to live in; something that they never intend to do. Heck, they protest against something out in Dun Laoghaire that may take the strain off the market, because they're not getting their totally free inner city home.

Graces7

the_syco wrote: »

In the Killarney version that you keep bringing up, there is a living room and kitchen per apartment, as well as the communal bits and at below half the price of the topic at hand. So nothing like the topic at hand.

variations on a theme; the basic idea is identical. as I have said numerous times...

The_Conductor

Graces7 wrote: »

variations on a theme; the basic idea is identical. as I have said numerous times...

Its not though- the Killarney development are small self contained units.
These are not. Period.

the_syco

Graces7 wrote: »

variations on a theme; the basic idea is identical. as I have said numerous times...

Killarney; bedroom, living room and kitchen PLUS communal area. for about €500
Dublin: bedroom PLUS communal area for €1,300

lainey_d_123

pinkyeye wrote: »

None of these units are going to go to anyone on a social housing list so don't know what you're talking about here.

Of course not. These rabbit hutches are for professionals who have studied and worked hard all their lives and forced to pay 50%+ of their income out so they don't have to share with randomers at the age of 35. The 'underprivileged' people I went to school with are all sorted in nice 3-bed houses they pay about 10% of market rate for, and still complaining it's not enough.

The_Conductor

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

Of course not. These rabbit hutches are for professionals who have studied and worked hard all their lives and forced to pay 50%+ of their income out so they don't have to share with randomers at the age of 35. The 'underprivileged' people I went to school with are all sorted in nice 3-bed houses they pay about 10% of market rate for, and still complaining it's not enough.

The developer has said his proposal is to charge 40% of a person's income for one of these units, as people are happy to pay this.

On what planet?

lainey_d_123

The_Conductor wrote: »

The developer has said his proposal is to charge 40% of a person's income for one of these units, as people are happy to pay this.

On what planet?

What's the alternative? Market rate studios/one beds are hardly much more affordable. I have a friend in London who lives in a similar development and is paying around £1050 for an ensuite studio and kitchenette. People have called her stupid, but what's the alternative, really? A regular studio flat would be even more expensive once bills are taken into account (she gets some of her bills included at this place) and without handy things like the concierge and secure mailbox she has now.

lainey_d_123

The_Conductor wrote: »

Not necessarily- I had a single room in a hostel for 3 months as a student (here in Ireland)- while on an apprenticeship which I had to complete as part of my undergrad. It wasn't salubrious by any means- and it was a relief to get out of there- but it was the only option (other than camping- which I also did) open to me at the the time. 3 others in my class on the same placement- also had rooms in the hostel for the duration.

Hostels are challenging- but I'd argue that the co-living arrangements- other than on a temporary basis- also are too. They are a damn sight better than camping out- or living rough- and when viewed as such- are a welcome development- however- they are not something that I would willingly access- unless I had no other options.

The galling thing about the Dunlaoghaire development- is how the developer is happily telling everyone that they should be pleased- he has priced them so they compete with 1-bed apartments. 1,300 a month- is a scandalous price- and if someone could get a 1 bed apartment for this- that would in my opinion be the obvious choice they should make.

The other galling thing- is that this development- is actively displacing dozens of apartments who have planning permission for the site- reducing people's options- other than buying into this dystopian living arrangement.

If it wasn't displacing an apartment complex, was priced in a reasonable manner- and sold as strictly temporary in nature- it would be a different kettle of fish.

What's galling is that well-paid professionals are now forced to live like penniless students if they're single and don't want to share a flat/house. Massive difference between roughing it in a house with loads of others at 21 and doing it when you're 34.

Graces7

the_syco wrote: »

In the Killarney version that you keep bringing up, there is a living room and kitchen per apartment, as well as the communal bits and at below half the price of the topic at hand. So nothing like the topic at hand.

Please read what I wrote! Variations on a theme. I said way back the price is scandalous.

Graham

Mod Note

OK folks, I think we've gone far enough into the social welfare discussion here. It's not really on topic.

I will be clearing out some of the more off-topic posts.

Shelga

What planet are the people who think this is a great idea living on?

And saying it would be good for your social life?? How?! I think it looks like a desperately lonely existence. Also agree with those who say you would get a large number of council-funded junkies and alcoholics living in them- if you think every tenant is going to be a 20-something Facebook employee, dream on.

Eoghan Murphy said people "should be excited about paying less rent for less space"? Ok, yeah I'm mega excited about paying €1300 a month for 12 square metres, rather than €1800 for 60 square metres. That's more than 3 times as much per square metre. Is our Housing Minister living in cloud cuckoo land?

I have to agree with the sentiments of these people: https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/stick-your-co-living-up-your-ae-protesters-target-housing-minister-eoghan-murphy-at-dublin-count-centre-926840.html

Eoghan Murphy who went to a private school on Ailesbury Road, followed by a degree in Philosophy in UCD, telling the plebs they should be excited to live in this tiny, insanely overpriced tenement. Give me strength.

I agree that people can be too closed off to the idea of apartment living. I'd bloody love an apartment! Changing zoning laws and building many more high-rise apartment blocks is surely the way to go, not this nonsense.

The_Conductor

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

What's the alternative? Market rate studios/one beds are hardly much more affordable. I have a friend in London who lives in a similar development and is paying around £1050 for an ensuite studio and kitchenette. People have called her stupid, but what's the alternative, really? A regular studio flat would be even more expensive once bills are taken into account (she gets some of her bills included at this place) and without handy things like the concierge and secure mailbox she has now.

The developer has priced this to compete in the same category as 1 bed apartments. This alone is the biggest issue a lot of us have with the proposal- you can have this bedroom for 1,300 per month- or a 1 bed apartment (if you can find one). I know I'd much rather the 1 bed apartment- if it were going for the same money (which according to the developer- it is).

Added into the misery for this particular development- is the salient fact that the developer has planning permission for dozens of apartments on the site- but would rather run a money spinner like this instead.

Its greed, pure and simple- dickied up with a bow on it to try and make it sound nice to our workers (he says it would suit newly qualified public sector staff- nurses or teachers)- so they don't have a long daily commute. Thats from the developer himself.

The developer runs similar type developments in 8 or 9 other locations- this is the second most expensive one (the most expensive luxury one in Stockholm is in the media for breaching rent rules at the moment). He has form.

Old diesel

The_Conductor wrote: »

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

What's the alternative? Market rate studios/one beds are hardly much more affordable. I have a friend in London who lives in a similar development and is paying around £1050 for an ensuite studio and kitchenette. People have called her stupid, but what's the alternative, really? A regular studio flat would be even more expensive once bills are taken into account (she gets some of her bills included at this place) and without handy things like the concierge and secure mailbox she has now.

The developer has priced this to compete in the same category as 1 bed apartments. This alone is the biggest issue a lot of us have with the proposal- you can have this bedroom for 1,300 per month- or a 1 bed apartment (if you can find one). I know I'd much rather the 1 bed apartment- if it were going for the same money (which according to the developer- it is).

Added into the misery for this particular development- is the salient fact that the developer has planning permission for dozens of apartments on the site- but would rather run a money spinner like this instead.

Its greed, pure and simple- dickied up with a bow on it to try and make it sound nice to our workers (he says it would suit newly qualified public sector staff- nurses or teachers)- so they don't have a long daily commute. Thats from the developer himself.

The developer runs similar type developments in 8 or 9 other locations- this is the second most expensive one (the most expensive luxury one in Stockholm is in the media for breaching rent rules at the moment). He has form.

A newly qualified nurse or teacher would be paying 50 percent and maybe a bit more of PRE tax salary on this.

Completely unsustainable beyond a short term stay.

The_Conductor

Old diesel wrote: »

A newly qualified nurse or teacher would be paying 50 percent and maybe a bit more of PRE tax salary on this.

Completely unsustainable beyond a short term stay.

Precisely- and yet the example of a newly minted teacher or nurse is being bandied about by the developer as an example of people who might choose to live in one of these rooms.

Just because a 1 bed apartment goes for 1,300 in Dunlaoghaire- does not mean there are hundreds of newly minted teachers/nurses (and others) who have 1,300 a month to spend on one.

Further qualifying his justification for the price- with a claim that its 40% of the net pay for workers in the area- doesn't cut it either- nor should it be a target- which is defacto what he is using it as.

We need accommodation like this- as *part* of the solution to our housing shortage- not as *the* solution to the housing- as one element of the solution. This particular proposal- is actually displacing high density apartments- which have planning approval for the site- because there is more money in it for the developer to run this hostel.

Its all about money- and trying to dicky it up as anything else- is taking us all for fools.

As said before, this is an option that is worthy of consideration. Rule nothing out. It wouldn’t suit the 60odd year old me, but would have been ok for the 20 something me. Horses for courses, as the saying goes.

The_Conductor

Deleted User wrote: »

As said before, this is an option that is worthy of consideration. Rule nothing out. It wouldn’t suit the 60odd year old me, but would have been ok for the 20 something me. Horses for courses, as the saying goes.

Would the 20-something you have had 1,300 to spend on a room though? I had a good job in my 20s- that I was very happy with- however, 1,300 would have been over 60% of my net pay. At the moment there is a valid argument to be made that accommodation of this type should form a component of the housing solution (particularly in Dublin)- as a belated replacement for the historical bedsits.

The galling aspect of this particular development- aside from the fact that the developer has decided not to proceed with the high density apartments he has had permission for for nearly 4 years- is the price- its so far outside the realms of normality for someone starting out- who he claims is the audience he is targetting this at.

Someone starting out- does not need an onsite gym, an onsite cinema, a doorman and other trappings of ersatz wealth. They need accommodation, period. This proposal is dressing up a completely over the top development purely to justify an astounding price from prospect residents.

No-one is arguing that developments like this do not have a very welcome role to play in helping alleviate the accommodation shortage- we are arguing that the price being demanded is ridiculous- and is being justified on purely spurious grounds- akin to a shakedown of people who will have to pay- not because they want to- but because they don't have an alternate..........?

I'm not sure what sort of pay the developer imagines new nurses and teachers or civil servants are on- but he is dreaming if he imagines that 1,300 per month comes in at under 40% of their net salary (as stated by the developer in the interview).

@Shelga

No one expects these to be foreva homes. They would be perfect for a temporary base or a first time away from home person.

@Shelga; I don’t see what Eoghan Murphys background or education has to do with it other than smelling of sour grapes.