Co-living..Shared kitchen for 42 ?

whisky_galore

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

I think the idea of communal living has many positives, if done properly. An apartment block with its own gym, clothes washing/drying area, broadband etc has many advantages.

Sharing a kitchen is a little trickier. I'd say its probably fine for someone who eats take aways and ready meals and only cooks rarely, but it would be a bit annoying to have 42 people (or more, for couples, guests etc) all moving around each other trying to cook their meals in or around the same time. Then who cleans it etc?

Similar with the living room. The most common complaint I hear from people who share a 3/4 bed gaff is hogging the sitting room. Theres usually one guy watching every single football match all day saturday (and, to a certain extent, why shouldnt he?). Or if people want to have a chat while watching a movie but others like to listen intetly. Again, who cleans up? Even if there is a contract cleaner, if some people are up all night drinking, the cleaner wont be around on sunday morning to clean up for the early riser who wants to read their book in the common area. I guess people can have a tv in their room or read a book there, but its not good to be in one room all the time.

So it seems to me that this only works if you have people, as said by many othet posters, who dont really cook or spend much time at home.

Now, as regards the political point being made, Ive no problem with a private company spending money on wahtever whacky business venture they want, within reason. If there is a market for this, fair play to them. It in no way adversely affects the existing housing stock and while some people would like them to build family homes etc, it isnt a question of them being asked to build something different - its a question of are they allowed build this, yes or no. If no, the land may be left empty or turned into a non residential development, and so the housing crisis continues.

In a group of 42, chances are there's going to be at least one or two arseholes that make life difficult for the rest.
I'd be surprised if it ran smoothly here as people have an aversion to rules and being dictated to. Who cleans up, who can have people over, parties? Couples having domestics etc.
The chances all 42 will sing off the same hymn sheet are slim indeed unless they're hand picked or something.

Varik

whisky_galore wrote: »

In a group of 42, chances are there's going to be at least one or two arseholes that make life difficult for the rest.
I'd be surprised if it ran smoothly here as people have an aversion to rules and being dictated to. Who cleans up, who can have people over, parties? Couples having domestics etc.
The chances all 42 will sing off the same hymn sheet are slim indeed unless they're hand picked or something.

They've less rights, anyone causes trouble they'd be kick out.

the_syco

Varik wrote: »

They've less rights, anyone causes trouble they'd be kick out.

If they're licensees, they'll have no rights.

Varik

Varik wrote: »

They've less rights, anyone causes trouble they'd be kick out.

Rightly so.

paulieeye

as mentioned many times, this is all good as another option for people but the price should be no more than 400 a month

4068ac1elhodqr

paulieeye wrote: »

as mentioned many times, this is all good as another option for people but the price should be no more than 400 a month

Economics 101: Supply vs Demand = Price


If indeed it is calculated to be overpriced, then a competitor will enter and undercut (and still profit).



Or they will adjust their own price to reflect demand (if it actually drops due to being seen as too expensive).

the_syco

Jake Orange Southerner wrote: »

Or they will adjust their own price to reflect demand (if it actually drops due to being seen as too expensive).

Or keep at HAP level + 20%.

4068ac1elhodqr

the_syco wrote: »

Or keep at HAP level + 20%.

Any change to the original product offering, will further diminish the initial price (unless it's viewed as an enhancement).

voluntary

Jake Orange Southerner wrote: »

Economics 101: Supply vs Demand = Price


If indeed it is calculated to be overpriced, then a competitor will enter and undercut (and still profit).



Or they will adjust their own price to reflect demand (if it actually drops due to being seen as too expensive).

Yeah, but the game is rigged by artificially restricting the land supply. I mean, there's tons of hectars of land, just 'not availale' for build. Release the land and building restrictions and see the supply sky rocket and pricess fall. The whole property market is a setup.

4068ac1elhodqr

voluntary wrote: »

Yeah, but the game is rigged by artificially restricting the land supply. I mean, there's tons of hectars of land, just 'not availale' for build. Release the land and building restrictions and see the supply sky rocket and pricess fall. The whole property market is a setup.

Anyone can build and run a city centre hotel.

Anyone can build and run an urban hostel-type 'easy-hotel', or even something like a capsule type complex (potentially), pending minimum dimensions and re-class from commercial hotel to 'long-stay rental apartments or hostelery').

Anyone can build and run a fairly urban, hig-ish-rise, communial living complex (hopefully not with 42 bedrooms per kitchen) such as Bartra Capital Property (if approved, lkely so).

In summary if they can do it and churn up huge profits, someone else can do it, but better and cheaper, and still get a very good return on investment.

Lofidelity

The developer was writing in the Independent today about this.

Personally, if i was in my twenties again i would consider living there. All the basics taken care of and a great social life. One of the best things about travel when you're young is staying in hostels and meeting interesting people.

This is not designed to be long term living, its for a few months until you get a house share, or move elsewhere once your contract is up. The hysteria in the media about "the next tenements" etc is missing the point. In cities like San Francisco and London this is becoming popular so its no surprise to see it arrive here. Its just another accommodation option and reflects modern lifestyles of nomadic young professionals.

Graham

I think this is the article you're referring to Lofidelity:

'Middle-aged white men wouldn't get the idea of co-living'

One of the developers of the proposed co-living development in Dún Laoghaire is quoted:

"It was meant to be for a particular cohort but it's not appropriate for some to be lecturing them on what they should want, when they have a particular view on life that in my opinion is unconsciously biased"

The_Conductor

I laughed when I read him saying 'its priced to compare comparably with a 1-bed apartment' (when asked about the EUR1,300 per month charge)
At least in a 1 bed apartment- you are a tenant with the rights afforded to a tenant- not to mention the privacy of your own home.
The price is so far out of kilter with what someone who is staying in a glorified hostel should be paying.
Sigh- the developer really doesn't 'get' why anyone might disagree with the concept (not least of which is the fact that building this means we loose the apartments that have planning permission for the site).

Anyhow- no need to regurgitate what I've already said...........

I think the price is absolutely out and out greed on the part of those with an interest in this property. It’s a total scandal. I am landlord of a single property which is an attractive three (proper sized) bedroom duplex house close to transport, shopping centre etc, and I charge my excellent long-term tenants under €1400. Imagine if they had to swap this home with full sized kitchen, two reception rooms, storage space etc, for a hostel costing almost same price. It is absolutely crazy stuff altogether.

The_Conductor

The_Conductor wrote: »

I laughed when I read him saying 'its priced to compare comparably with a 1-bed apartment' (when asked about the EUR1,300 per month charge)
At least in a 1 bed apartment- you are a tenant with the rights afforded to a tenant- not to mention the privacy of your own home.
The price is so far out of kilter with what someone who is staying in a glorified hostel should be paying.
Sigh- the developer really doesn't 'get' why anyone might disagree with the concept (not least of which is the fact that building this means we loose the apartments that have planning permission for the site).

Anyhow- no need to regurgitate what I've already said...........

You’re obviously a middle aged white man.

Graham

Some posters are assuming every single-person is looking for a long term tenancy, house share or a 1 bed apartment to lock themselves away in.

DoozerT6

Just on a practical level, can you imagine how messy the kitchen and living areas would be? Is there going to be a cleaner employed to come in every single evening and wash the dishes/clean the counters and floors, cupboards and fridges/tidy up the inevitable mess left behind from so many people sharing the same facilities? Think of the mess three or four people sharing the same kitchen in a shared house can make if each person is not rigorous about cleaning up their own mess - and multiply that mess by 10. Will they confront each other about cleanliness? Report others to the manager? Start fights about dirty pots? And if they DO have 'kitchen porters' to clean up, what is that teaching the residents about personal responsibility?

I'm assuming they have provisions made for this.

DoozerT6

DoozerT6 wrote: »

Just on a practical level, can you imagine how messy the kitchen and living areas would be? Is there going to be a cleaner employed to come in every single evening and wash the dishes/clean the counters and floors, cupboards and fridges/tidy up the inevitable mess left behind from so many people sharing the same facilities? Think of the mess three or four people sharing the same kitchen in a shared house can make if each person is not rigorous about cleaning up their own mess - and multiply that mess by 10. Will they confront each other about cleanliness? Report others to the manager? Start fights about dirty pots? And if they DO have 'kitchen porters' to clean up, what is that teaching the residents about personal responsibility?

I'm assuming they have provisions made for this.

Do you need someone to clean up after you in your home? Most people have the ability and cop on to clean up their own mess.

colm_mcm

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you need someone to clean up after you in your home? Most people have the ability and cop on to clean up their own mess.

Have to disagree. There are people who can’t even clear their table in Mc Donald’s.

colm_mcm

colm_mcm wrote: »

Have to disagree. There are people who can’t even clear their table in Mc Donald’s.

Do McDonalds not have staff to clear tables?

DoozerT6

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you need someone to clean up after you in your home? Most people have the ability and cop on to clean up their own mess.

Have you ever lived in a shared house Maryanne?

colm_mcm

Deleted User wrote: »

Do McDonalds not have staff to clear tables?

I would venture to say people of that mindset wouldn’t bother tidying up after themselves in a shared kitchen.
I think you’re overestimating people.

the_syco

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you need someone to clean up after you in your home? Most people have the ability and cop on to clean up their own mess.

I do clean up after myself, but have lived with a load of people who'll only clean up the odd time.

You'll have to bring your own cutlery, wash it when you're done, and bring it back to your room. Likewise with pots & pans; have seen people destroy frying pans with knives as it's not theirs. Said people never have their own pots & pans.

Guy:Incognito

Graham wrote: »

Some posters are assuming every single-person is looking for a long term tenancy, house share or a 1 bed apartment to lock themselves away in.

This IS just a house share. Only with a **** load of bedrooms for a much higher price.

Guy:Incognito

Deleted User wrote: »

Do McDonalds not have staff to clear tables?

Thats like throwing your rubbish on the ground when you finish your coffee or packet of crisps and saying "do the council not have road cleaners"

They have to have staff to clear up because some people are animals.

Muahahaha

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you need someone to clean up after you in your home? Most people have the ability and cop on to clean up their own mess.

You must never have stayed in a hostel or shared house. 42 people in a kitchen will be carnage and it only takes a few people not to clean up to make a mess. Suddenly everyone starts doing it and you've quickly got a health hazard. Any hostel Ive ever been in literally has homemade signs plastered up everywhere telling people what not to do, folks are literally that stupid that they need instructions (not that they'll listen anyway).

Watched that video with the CEO of Bartra Capital, my god for a PR push back effort that was really poor and he couldnt even get a full sentence out. This guy is just a slumlord with a suit on. Highlight of the video was when he said that young people want to live in accomodation like this, what a complete and utter lie, easily proven by a poll of over 10,000 of these young people only last week on the Journal. When asked 'Would you live in co-living accomodation?' the responses were

No, Never- 7,958(63.7%)
Yes, if nothing else was available 3,783 (30.3%)
Yes, it would be my first choice 407 >3%
DK 340 >3%

So a tiny fraction of young people would choose to live like this and others would only do so if their hand was forced, it says it all really. Yet he is trying to tell us that young people 'want' to live in places like this. Eh, no, clearly over 95% of them do not.

Also Im not sure what the CEO is going on about "middle aged men don't get this". Apart from being a middle aged man himself these type of co-living spaces on the continent tend to be dominated by single middle aged men, divorcees, alcoholics and general down and outs but not homeless sorts of types. They're depressing places to be in because most of the residents are depressed from my own experience of a short stay inside one.

Varik

That tiny fraction seems big enough to fill a building or 2.

Slumlords really?

Well that's progress, our slums have gyms now.

Graham

Some of the comments here actually are making me lol.

This type of co-living setup has worked quite well under the title 'student accommodation' for some time now without issue.

It is another option that will suit/appeal to a certain cohort.

Did the Indo finally get something spot-on?

overkill602

if there is nothing else it has to work current govt policy allows for this standard the minister in charge "praised it" while opp groups who propose no evictions & free homes to all "criticized it"

Many posters here wanted LLs out so they have got what they wanted, practically no places to rent in dublin see daft (5 under €1000 places to rent includes 2 only for students in the whole of dublin) and nothing even close to affordable on the way.
This ill advised populist governance continues to trash and burn with high taxes, regs and rpgs that only accelerated the mass exit or zero expansion to meet the demand take ur pick

riemann

Graham wrote: »

This type of co-living setup has worked quite well under the title 'student accommodation' for some time now without issue.

Student accommodation has 4-8 ppl max per kitchen.

8 is less than 42, considerably so.