Co-living..Shared kitchen for 42 ?

Mitch Connor

Caranica wrote: »

What's the obsession on this thread about the place in Killarney? It's palatial compared to what's proposed for Dun Laoghaire. The decision on planning permission for the application in Dun Laoghaire has the potential to shape development policy for the future. I so hope it's refused. The same developer has planning permission to build 48 apartments on that very site, the only problem being that an apartment will rent for about the same as they're looking for for each of these cells

They won't get planning permission.
They will then 'alter' the plan and look for permission for a hotel (a bunch of en-suite single rooms with spaces for ammenities??) and they will get that. the permission for a hotel they were originally denied on the same spot.

Want a hotel - Get a hotel, game played and won.

Muahahaha

Once lived in one of these co-living spaces for about 2 weeks in Finland. It was well run and pretty clean but still quite a grim place to live, 2 weeks was enough for me. That said most of the residents were 50+ years of age and definitely a good few alcos living there, it was basically like bedsits but with a communal kitchen. They do have a place in the market as there is lots of single older men who cant afford their own place but would prefer not share a house. But €1300 for 16sqm, someone is having a laugh.

Varik

RPZ has created a 2 tier rental market.

People might complain about €1300 for 16sqm, but you're not going to get anything near €1300 for a new rental anymore. This will either get stopped and then no place for anyone, it'll be a hotel, or it'll go from ~200 odd people to less than 50 possible owner occupiers.

conorhal

Anybody heard of the 'Mouse Utopia Experiment?

Calhoun’s experiment in high density living where all the wants and needs of the population were met ended on day 350 with total population extinction... every time..

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/how-mouse-utopias-1960s-led-grim-predictions-humans-180954423/
"At the peak population, most mice spent every living second in the company of hundreds of other mice. They gathered in the main squares, waiting to be fed and occasionally attacking each other. Few females carried pregnancies to term, and the ones that did seemed to simply forget about their babies. They'd move half their litter away from danger and forget the rest. Sometimes they'd drop and abandon a baby while they were carrying it.

The few secluded spaces housed a population Calhoun called, "the beautiful ones." Generally guarded by one male, the females—and few males—inside the space didn't breed or fight or do anything but eat and groom and sleep. When the population started declining the beautiful ones were spared from violence and death, but had completely lost touch with social behaviors, including having sex or caring for their young."

Yes, I know mice are not people, but you look at Japan with it's declining population and growing number of Hikikomori (adolescents or adults who withdraw from society and seek extreme degrees of isolation and confinement.) that seem to mirror the mouse utopia's 'beautiful ones' and the parallels are stark.
Human being are not built to live like this.

the_syco

Graces7 wrote: »

https://www.killarneytoday.com/killarneys-not-humble-abode/

So re the dublin manifestation? Concept good; overpriced in spades.

The above has

its own kitchen, dining area and living area.

along with

the shared kitchen or lounge area

for less than half what the Dublin setup will cost. The Dun Laoghaire bedrooms doesn't even have their own hob! Also, it has no parking.

Graces7 wrote: »

Will you stop with the "tiny box" exaggeration please..

They are but a bedroom. You're comparing one room with an apartment that has a living room and a kitchen.

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

I guess you're not familiar with the tiny-house movement.

The "tiny house" movement is about mobile houses. Any tiny apartment movement is by people who own the apartment, plan to live there long term, and have built space saving features because they need said features, but don't have the space.

Varik

conorhal wrote: »

Anybody heard of the 'Mouse Utopia Experiment?

Not many people put any weight behind that anymore. Not to mention it get's used to explain Feminism, homosexuality, mass killings, and the breakup of family.

Foweva Awone

I'd probably manage living there okay, if the price was right. I.e. much lower than €1,300! I'd prefer it to a houseshare anyways.

I'm in an apartment at the moment and a typical day's menu (if I'm eating my meals at home) would be cereal for breakfast, microwaved veg and rice for lunch, waffles done in the toaster for dinner. I have used the hob and oven only once or twice since I moved in here, and then only when I had visitors. Would easily do without so long as I'd have access to a kettle and microwave.

Have lived in hotels for long stints for work in the past, would definitely choose a setup like this over a hotel, if it were for several weeks/months.

whisky_galore

1300 a month for a glorified youth hostel?

**** that.

The_Conductor

whisky_galore wrote: »

1300 a month for a glorified youth hostel?

**** that.

Its a regular youth hostel- you get these facilities in many regular youth hostels.

voluntary

whisky_galore wrote: »

1300 a month for a glorified youth hostel?

**** that.

The rental crisis is so severe that I'm pretty sure these will not stay unoccupied for long.

Old diesel

voluntary wrote: »

whisky_galore wrote: »

1300 a month for a glorified youth hostel?

**** that.

The rental crisis is so severe that I'm pretty sure these will not stay unoccupied for long.

The point is - you need a better solution then 1300 euros a month for a small room in a place you share with 42 others.

I'm at a loss as to why people would object to sharing with 3 others at less per month but then consider sharing with 40 others at higher rent.

Madness

voluntary

Old diesel wrote: »

The point is - you need a better solution then 1300 euros a month for a small room in a place you share with 42 others.

I'm at a loss as to why people would object to sharing with 3 others at less per month but then consider sharing with 40 others at higher rent.

Madness

Wouldn't that be a personal choice? Different people - different motivations and drivers. One prefers this another will chose that. We should try to avoid making decisions for others and forcing our own point of view on them.

Graham

+1

It won't suit some people.
It will suit some people short-term.
It will suit some people longer term.

Comments on thread so far suggest the same.

whisky_galore

The_Conductor wrote: »

Its a regular youth hostel- you get these facilities in many regular youth hostels.

Whoop dee doo.. All its short are bunk beds to fit more per room.

That's even happening already.

whisky_galore

voluntary wrote: »

The rental crisis is so severe that I'm pretty sure these will not stay unoccupied for long.

Desperation is a terrible thing.

Personally, I'd rather emigrate than consider this. It's almost former USSR style living.

voluntary

whisky_galore wrote: »

Desperation is a terrible thing.

Personally, I'd rather emigrate than consider this. It's almost former USSR style living.

Yes. Desperation is the right word. If there were better options available nobody would chose to pay such money for a shared accomodation, that's quite obvious.

At the other hand these could really suit lonely singles. It reminds me student accomodation in old days, it was really cool. I do miss it sometimes!

cgcsb

If it were €600 p/m sure. It's aimed at 20 somethings, their average take home pay would only be about €1,700 p/m so yeah, still not an affordable way too live. Better idea: we could elect a genuine left wing county council who will want to build a reasonable supply of social housing and stop selling units off.

voluntary

They'll drop the prices whenever the supply of rental accomodation kicks in.

cgcsb

voluntary wrote: »

They'll drop the prices whenever the supply of rental accomodation kicks.

Yeah I guess that they plan for that when making the initial investment. When student accommodation started popping up everywhere it was very pricey, over €1000 a month, with more and more units becoming available, rents for this september have dropped quite a bit.

Old diesel

voluntary wrote: »

They'll drop the prices whenever the supply of rental accomodation kicks.

Pity someone couldnt just start off with the proper cost effective rate from day 1 - and shake up the market.

Bit like O Leary with airline flights.

cgcsb

Old diesel wrote: »

Pity someone couldnt just start off with the proper cost effective rate from day 1 - and shake up the market.

Bit like O Leary with airline flights.

Imagine FG landlords sh!tting themselves if a large company operating thousands of units start offering rents for studios at €600 p/m. Their little HAP scam would be bust.

voluntary

Old diesel wrote: »

Pity someone couldnt just start off with the proper cost effective rate from day 1 - and shake up the market.

Bit like O Leary with airline flights.

A business oprotunity which is just screaming - fill me up!

cgcsb

cgcsb wrote: »

Imagine FG landlords sh!tting themselves if a large company operating thousands of units start offering rents for studios at €600 p/m. Their little HAP scam would be bust.

Havent we been over this here several times.

Many LLs dont want hap. They had to be legally forced to accept them. :P

cgcsb

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

Havent we been over this here several times.

Many LLs dont want hap. They had to be legally forced to accept them. :P

HAP artificially inflates the market though, thus benefiting all landlords.

There are actually 100’s of bedrooms available for rent in the Dublin area at a much smaller rent. Crisis? What crisis?

Ush1

cgcsb wrote: »

If it were €600 p/m sure. It's aimed at 20 somethings, their average take home pay would only be about €1,700 p/m so yeah, still not an affordable way too live. Better idea: we could elect a genuine left wing county council who will want to build a reasonable supply of social housing and stop selling units off.

Left wing? Which council are you talking about?

DCC is overwhelmingly Sinn Fein.

cgcsb

Ush1 wrote: »

Left wing? Which council are you talking about?

DCC is overwhelmingly Sinn Fein.

I meant genuinely left wing, not people like SF who vote against developing homes or against wealth taxes or for bank bailouts and what have you.

4068ac1elhodqr

voluntary wrote: »

A business oprotunity which is just screaming - fill me up!

There's a few operators such as EasyHotel, but likely only cater for short-term.

You could likely open a hugh cubicle hotel and see ROI within the year, so long as plenty of communical facilities are provided.

Maybe Ryanair could open 'ryanapartments' (standing room only, and charge for tap water).

Graces7

whisky_galore wrote: »

Desperation is a terrible thing.

Personally, I'd rather emigrate than consider this. It's almost former USSR style living.

Suits many, and their freedom to choose. People throw up their hands in horror at how others live far too much. They do it about any way that does not suit them personally .... USSR indeed! lol

My idea of //// would be most of the houses others live in.. being forced as an only option to live in a semi etc would be anathema but that is free choice as is mine to live as I do.

Good luck to them!

The_Conductor

Graces7 wrote: »

Suits many, and their freedom to choose. People throw up their hands in horror at how others live far too much. They do it about any way that does not suit them personally .... USSR indeed! lol

My idea of //// would be most of the houses others live in.. being forced as an only option to live in a semi etc would be anathema but that is free choice as is mine to live as I do.

Good luck to them!

Its not a freedom to choose though- if you have no other options.
The current proposal is this hostel- or 42 apartments.
They already have the planning for the apartments- but would rather go with the hostel option instead- as aside from any other reason- its an incredible income stream- and the residents do not have any protections whatsoever under the Residential Tenancies Act.

Its a no brainer for the developer- its all about the money.

Graces7

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/co-living-needs-to-be-part-of-solution-to-solve-housing-crisis-says-minister-924967.html

There ye go!

exactly what some of us are saying..

Graces7

The_Conductor wrote: »

Its not a freedom to choose though- if you have no other options.
The current proposal is this hostel- or 42 apartments.
They already have the planning for the apartments- but would rather go with the hostel option instead- as aside from any other reason- its an incredible income stream- and the residents do not have any protections whatsoever under the Residential Tenancies Act.

Its a no brainer for the developer- its all about the money.

Because it provides more accommodation faster. which is what is needed urgently now. Maybe as one who was within a hair's breadth of having to live in my car i see this differently from someone in secure accommodation.

This is an emergency situation . Most of us choose a roof and a bed, period,

The_Conductor

Graces7 wrote: »

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/co-living-needs-to-be-part-of-solution-to-solve-housing-crisis-says-minister-924967.html

There ye go!

exactly what some of us are saying..

No-one is arguing with this.

We are stating that the developer *has* planning permission for 42 apartments. He has come back and stated that, actually, he'd rather build the hostel. In this case there is a binary choice- build the 42 apartments that he has been granted planning permission for- or evaluate his new request for an alternate structure for a short term accommodation hostel.

Yes- we *need* some solutions such as the development that we're discussing in Dublin- however, not at the cost of displacing large numbers of apartments or other dwellings- for either the rental or ownership markets.

Simply pointing your fingers and suggesting its a good idea- is missing the point entirely- this is a binary either/or choice- with consequences for proper accommodation in the area concerned, one way or the other.

I'd also suggest that accommodation such as is being discussed- is best in a central location where the residents don't need to spend time traveling to and from where-ever it is they have to be on a daily basis- Dunlaoighaire isn't exactly the sticks- but its inevitable that a large proportion of the residents of a dwelling such as this- will be forced to commute elsewhere. That is wrong.

The whole point of this development- instead of the apartment block- is the developer makes more money and doesn't have to deal with pesky tenants who would have rights under the Residential Tenancies Act- the residents in this glorified hostel will have zero rights.

The_Conductor

Graces7 wrote: »

Because it provides more accommodation faster. which is what is needed urgently now. Maybe as one who was within a hair's breadth of having to live in my car i see this differently from someone in secure accommodation.

This is an emergency situation . Most of us choose a roof and a bed, period,

There is no indication that this accommodation would come on stream any faster than the apartments that he does have permission to build on the site- on the contrary- its possible it could take considerably longer to deliver this proposal (keeping in mind its Dunlaoghaire- and the history of planning appeals in DLR). The apartment complex- has already cleared all those hurdles.

As for your personal situation- and how you almost ended up living in a car- while I'm sorry you ended up in that situation- its not relevant to the current discussion.

We *need* short term accommodation *and* apartments urgently in Dublin. The site in question being discussed here- has planning permission for 42 apartments- of which 12 were to be 'affordable' (whatever that means in the context of Dunlaoghaire).

If there is an emergency situation in Dunlaoghaire- the fastest way to get units built and occupied- is to build the apartments. The most profitable outcome for the builder- is to build the hostel (which doesn't necessitate any 'affordable' units for anyone).

They are good to go- to build an apartment block- and have satisfied all the planning objections etc. This rabbit being pulled from the hat- would be wildly profitable for the developer- but there would be no security of tenure for the residents nor any other rights under the RTA- and the planning objections from locals could potentially scupper it or change it beyond any recognition.

Supply is key- and supply in different sectors- however, going back to the starting blocks with this project- when they already have full planning for 42 units- is going to delay any new accommodation on site- possibly for years.

Mrs OBumble

The_Conductor wrote: »

Its not a freedom to choose though- if you have no other options.
The current proposal is this hostel- or 42 apartments.
They already have the planning for the apartments- but would rather go with the hostel option instead- as aside from any other reason- its an incredible income stream- and the residents do not have any protections whatsoever under the Residential Tenancies Act.

Its a no brainer for the developer- its all about the money.

I'm not very familiar with DL.

But am guessing that right now there already lots of apartments (not enough, of course, but still lots), and zero co-living complexes.

The_Conductor

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

I'm not very familiar with DL.

But am guessing that right now there already lots of apartments (not enough, of course, but still lots), and zero co-living complexes.

Its a mature seaside town south of Dublin- with mostly Georgian accommodation- very limited in supply of new accommodation, period. It needs more units- but the residents, who tend to be of an older demographic than in most urban areas, are quite voiciferous in their appeals against any new planning or developments in the area. The local authority itself- is reknowned for being one of the stickiest to deal with- to the extent that a lot of people avoid the place altogether- as its a nightmare to even get around as a pedestrian. It is on the DART line, however, and they are doing up some of the old facilities (such as the baths- which closed down at some stage in the 1980s).

It looks a bit like an old British seaside town- that was caught in some sort of a time loop.........

It is doing its best to try and reinvent itself to attract day tourists- and has some nice shops and restaurants- but its heritage as a ferry port/seaside town- is hard to shake (despite the ferries no longer docking there).

It has a very snobby yacht club- and is wildly popular with the sort of people who like their yachts...........

Get the idea?

LotharIngum

Co-Living. What a joke.
A good portion of these places are going to end up rented by councils and housing charities on behalf of junkies, alchos, ex-prisoners etc.

You and maybe 10 others on the floor will be normal people paying €1300 per month for your little cubbyhole, the other 30 will be total undesirables and you will be afraid to go to your kitchen because at least 30 of the 42 you are sharing it with will stink, be out of it all the time or they will want to rob you or beat you up.

This is Ireland. You can 100% guarantee it will go this way.

These type of places are not good enough for people already living in hubs. But they want others to pay €1300 a month to live in an even worse hub?
Think about it. Its a government sponsored race to the bottom.

Graces7

LotharIngum wrote: »

Co-Living. What a joke.
A good portion of these places are going to end up rented by councils and housing charities on behalf of junkies, alchos, ex-prisoners etc.

You and maybe 10 others on the floor will be normal people paying €1300 per month for your little cubbyhole, the other 30 will be total undesirables and you will be afraid to go to your kitchen because at least 30 of the 42 you are sharing it with will stink, be out of it all the time or they will want to rob you or beat you up.

This is Ireland. You can 100% guarantee it will go this way.

These type of places are not good enough for people already living in hubs. But they want others to pay €1300 a month to live in an even worse hub?
Think about it.

:rolleyes:

Graces7

The_Conductor wrote: »

There is no indication that this accommodation would come on stream any faster than the apartments that he does have permission to build on the site- on the contrary- its possible it could take considerably longer to deliver this proposal (keeping in mind its Dunlaoghaire- and the history of planning appeals in DLR). The apartment complex- has already cleared all those hurdles.

As for your personal situation- and how you almost ended up living in a car- while I'm sorry you ended up in that situation- its not relevant to the current discussion.

We *need* short term accommodation *and* apartments urgently in Dublin. The site in question being discussed here- has planning permission for 42 apartments- of which 12 were to be 'affordable' (whatever that means in the context of Dunlaoghaire).

If there is an emergency situation in Dunlaoghaire- the fastest way to get units built and occupied- is to build the apartments. The most profitable outcome for the builder- is to build the hostel (which doesn't necessitate any 'affordable' units for anyone).

They are good to go- to build an apartment block- and have satisfied all the planning objections etc. This rabbit being pulled from the hat- would be wildly profitable for the developer- but there would be no security of tenure for the residents nor any other rights under the RTA- and the planning objections from locals could potentially scupper it or change it beyond any recognition.

Supply is key- and supply in different sectors- however, going back to the starting blocks with this project- when they already have full planning for 42 units- is going to delay any new accommodation on site- possibly for years.

You have a fixed idea that I do not have. That co-living is somehow inferior? That everyone needs/desires a certain kind of housing?
Maryanne and I have tried to get this across on several occasions to no avail?
The wider the range of accommodation the better and with young professionals in co-living more flats etc will be there for others.

The co-living place is adding to available accommodation. which surely is what is needed?

But we are at different places on this. and the point I am making is that we have different perceptions of what is good accommodation. What I have bolded is very relevant indeed as what matters to most of us is a safe roof. Not some perfect flat or semi.

LotharIngum

LotharIngum wrote: »

Co-Living. What a joke.
A good portion of these places are going to end up rented by councils and housing charities on behalf of junkies, alchos, ex-prisoners etc.

You and maybe 10 others on the floor will be normal people paying €1300 per month for your little cubbyhole, the other 30 will be total undesirables and you will be afraid to go to your kitchen because at least 30 of the 42 you are sharing it with will stink, be out of it all the time or they will want to rob you or beat you up.

This is Ireland. You can 100% guarantee it will go this way.

These type of places are not good enough for people already living in hubs. But they want others to pay €1300 a month to live in an even worse hub?
Think about it.

Aren’t hubs for families? These are single occupancy rooms

LotharIngum

Deleted User wrote: »

Aren’t hubs for families? These are single occupancy rooms

Id say that's the only difference between them. Oh, and €1300 per person per month

LotharIngum

LotharIngum wrote: »

Id say that's the only difference between them. Oh, and €1300 per person per month

Do you know what? I despair of ever seeing the end of this so called crisis. People need to think outside the box. Accept alternatives. Lower expectations and make the most of what they’ve got, just like we used do in the good old days. And stop expecting others to look after them. There’s great satisfaction to be gotten from reaching your goals by your own efforts.

B0jangles

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you know what? I despair of ever seeing the end of this so called crisis. People need to think outside the box. Accept alternatives. Lower expectations and make the most of what they’ve got, just like we used do in the good old days. And stop expecting others to look after them. There’s great satisfaction to be gotten from reaching your goals by your own efforts.

When you were making the best of things, toughing it out back in the good old days, approximately what % of a typical fulltime salary was your rent?

Graces7

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you know what? I despair of ever seeing the end of this so called crisis. People need to think outside the box. Accept alternatives. Lower expectations and make the most of what they’ve got, just like we used do in the good old days. And stop expecting others to look after them. There’s great satisfaction to be gotten from reaching your goals by your own efforts.

amen to that.

When I was seeking any safe roof rather than my car, I went round local shops and agents, knocked on doors, sought actively, and found my current home .
A place long empty. Not what I had thought of but sound enough. Safe.

I have family in Canada and they are amazed and appalled that here the govt are expected to house everyone. Not the case there or in many other countries.

The Yorkshire term for what is needed is "grit and gumption".

Graces7

B0jangles wrote: »

When you were making the best of things, toughing it out back in the good old days, approximately what % of a typical fulltime salary was your rent?

Not sure what your point is?
NB it was not "toughing it out"; it was accepting what we had; we never lacked for what we needed.

B0jangles

B0jangles wrote: »

When you were making the best of things, toughing it out back in the good old days, approximately what % of a typical fulltime salary was your rent?

Only rented during the 70’s. Bedsit, flat and house all took around 50%. Women weren’t paid same as men back then. Don’t remember toughing it out. We all did the same. Life was good. As it is now.

Graces7

Deleted User wrote: »

There are actually 100’s of bedrooms available for rent in the Dublin area at a much smaller rent. Crisis? What crisis?

Is that true? :eek:

B0jangles

Not your salary - I'm asking what proportion of 'a typical fulltime salary' of the period your rent was. No need to give any personal information of course.

B0jangles

Graces7 wrote: »

Not sure what your point is?
NB it was not "toughing it out"; it was accepting what we had; we never lacked for what we needed.

Because Grace, getting paid a pound a week sounds terrible but if your rent is tuppence it's probably not really so bad.

Similarly, getting paid 10,000 a week sounds great unless you have to pay 9,950 a week to live in a literal shoebox.

Rents are rising much faster than salaries - that is pretty much my entire point.

Graces7

Graces7 wrote: »

Is that true? :eek:

According to this, over 450 single rooms in Dublin alone. https://www.rent.ie/rooms-to-rent/renting_dublin/room-type_single/