Has it worked anywhere

Idbatterim

strandroad wrote: »

Because there is such a thing as appropriate amenities and the quality of life and all available evidence points to the medium height i.e. 6 to 8 floors giving the best balance of density vs amenities vs green space. Humans don't do so well piled high in 12 floor and up towers and you can't provide enough amenities for such numbers on one ground floor you then have.

in a typical irish one extreme or the other, they have allocated a huge amount of space to parks etc and 6 floors residential buildings? its a farce! 82 acres of parks, they are building 10 floors beside dundrum town centre, they have a huge amount of greenfield and its six floors? that right there folks, thats your answer as to why there isnt enough supply!

http://www.cherrywooddublin.com/parks-community/

Idbatterim

Yurt! wrote: »

Here's a rather excellent video that talks through some of.the misconceptions surrounding optimal density and height. Makes reference to the Dublin context also

so the developers in the uk for example, building higher buildings than say 8 floors, with way lower land value and rents than dublin, are losing money? :rolleyes:

the cost per unit per floor does go up the higher you go, but so does the return typically...

paddy0090

Bowie wrote: »

The OP presupposes the goal is to have all these things, a healthy economy, adequate housing, reasonably affordable health and education.
It's not.
It's about making as much money as fast as possible.
Social issues are an after thought.
Once their economy is going well for them that's it really.
Proof? We'd a crash. Wiped us out. We got a massive loan and continued as before.

Thats nonsense tbf. THere's a wide array of different opinions on how things should be done and competing interests who want to see things done there way. Half the battle is knowing what needs to be done, the rest is a grinding slog.

smurgen

So to answer the O.P's question Austin Texas is one example.it is comparable to Dublin, has many more tech companies (it has a district called silicon hills) it has a significantly higher salary than Dublin and rents are lower.

Oh and the same for Zurich in Switzerland too.

strandroad

smurgen wrote: »

So to answer the O.P's question Austin Texas is one example.it is comparable to Dublin, has many more tech companies (it has a district called silicon hills) it has a significantly higher salary than Dublin and rents are lower.

I have friends in Austin; they say that's it's going up and specifically their property taxes are crazy, pushing regular people out when they can no longer afford them. If you live in the US you have property tax to consider too.

smurgen

strandroad wrote: »

I have friends in Austin; they say that's it's going up and specifically their property taxes are crazy, pushing regular people out when they can no longer afford them. If you live in the US you have property tax to consider too.

I have friends in Austin they say the opposite.the data also points to my friends view.

Foxtrol

strandroad wrote: »

Because there is such a thing as appropriate amenities and the quality of life and all available evidence points to the medium height i.e. 6 to 8 floors giving the best balance of density vs amenities vs green space. Humans don't do so well piled high in 12 floor and up towers and you can't provide enough amenities for such numbers on one ground floor you then have.

Humans in many cities do perfectly well in high rise buildings. What amenities do you need on every ground floor?

The issue is more the Irish mindset of what many deem people 'should' live in, many making this call without ever experiencing long-term apartment or high rise living. To make matters worse, some of these uninformed individuals end up deciding or being in political position to oppose standards and as a result don't allow for a range of building for different needs/budgets, be it apartment size, building height, car parking, or sharing.

smurgen

Foxtrol wrote: »

Humans in many cities do perfectly well in high rise buildings. What amenities do you need on every ground floor?

The issue is more the Irish mindset of what many deem people 'should' live in, many making this call without ever experiencing long-term apartment or high rise living. To make matters worse, some of these uninformed individuals end up deciding or being in political position to oppose standards and as a result don't allow for a range of building for different needs/budgets, be it apartment size, building height, car parking, or sharing.

Isn't it funny how were told Irish consumers want tend to be the most expensive for Irish consumers or that the behaviour of Irish consumers leads to them paying more? It's almost what I would call victim blaming.

strandroad

Foxtrol wrote: »

Humans in many cities do perfectly well in high rise buildings. What amenities do you need on every ground floor?

What amenities do hundreds of residents of high rise tower need, or thousands for a cluster? Creches, shops, restaurants, cafes, laundries, culture, community centres etc. The higher you pile them the less ground space you have to provide them. Mid height streetscape provides enough amenity space for residential units above, high rise does not.

Foxtrol wrote: »

The issue is more the Irish mindset of what many deem people 'should' live in, many making this call without ever experiencing long-term apartment or high rise living.

It's not the Irish mindset. High rise is not popular on the continent either, outside of communist countries and banlieues none of which are held up as an example to follow, and for good reason. Mid height is why the likes of Vienna, Copenhagen or The Hague keep topping quality rankings.

strandroad

smurgen wrote: »

I have friends in Austin they say the opposite.the data also points to my friends view.

Perhaps if you're renting but not otherwise:

"To Austinites, the rapid pace of home appreciation over the past 10 years has been startling while dramatic hikes in property taxes presenting even more threats to home ownership.

But for outsiders moving in, especially from the Bay Area, home prices in Austin are a bargain. Therein lies the friction – if transplants continue to relocate, it’s inevitable that housing prices will continue to escalate. But to what degree remains uncertain."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/maryannazevedo/2019/05/28/austin-housing-market-braces-as-transplants-continue-to-move-in/

AllForIt

mariaalice wrote: »

Are there any booming cities in a well of western countries or even any country with almost full employment, very embedded high tec economies that does not have high housing costs and high rents.

Watched a documentary on the cage homes of Hongkong.

The problem is there a presumption that those that work in IT are highly paid. This is not the case certainly in Ireland. It is certainly not the case in China and the only place you can find highly paid IT developers is in the US. Even there I mean 'relatively' highly paid.

It is my theory that when a revolution in IT emerged, that the powers that be sought to keep salaries down to a minimum, so created the illusion that working in IT is so prestigious and financially rewarding. I can see why they did that because the sheer number of ppl required to run this high-techs is so high, to pay them substantial middle-class salaries would eat into their profits big time.

I'd liken it to a waiter working in a Conran restaurant in London, where the perception would be they are highly paid, because they are working in such salubrious surroundings, but in reality they are on less than livable salaries, and you'd make more as a waiter working in a non-highly acclaimed average restaurant as long as it was busy most days. Much more in fact.

So it's this idea that in view of where high-tech businesses are located that rent's adjacent should be high, commensurate with earnings. This is wrong, ppl in IT don't anywhere near the money it's perceived they do. But the landlords charge them as if their on upper middle class salaries.

IngazZagni

smurgen wrote: »

So to answer the O.P's question Austin Texas is one example.it is comparable to Dublin, has many more tech companies (it has a district called silicon hills) it has a significantly higher salary than Dublin and rents are lower.

Oh and the same for Zurich in Switzerland too.

Austin has literally unlimited space and much cheaper land as a result. Car is king.

Zurich is a good example. What’s the difference? Density. Density. Density. Zurich is mostly apartment blocks. The average sort of accommodation in Zurich would be a 2 bed apartment whereas in Dublin it would be a 3 storey terrace. (Very roughly). Interesting that the purchase price in Zurich is 50% higher than here but rents are similar. That highlights the broader issues in the banking sector.

paddy0090

FWIW, I was in Japan for the world cup. None of it's cities are anything like Dublin. The streetscape is completely different. They have bars restaurants etc stacked on top of each other in medium rise buildings and it's completely discombobulating. We're not like that and I'd rather we didn't go down that route. They've shopping centres bigger than Ilac or Jervis on pretty much any big train station.



One of the cheaper places I stayed was clearly an old apartment(studio) and their houses are generally quite small. We should defo get their jacks as standard mind. Also the Onsen are brilliant.



I'm sure you'll find a lot of things in other asian countries that simply wouldn't work here and you're probably right. But are we really talking about importing lock stock and barrel that kind of development? IMo Dublin is a predominantly low rise low density city, at least half of which is garden, so if you want higher density you're going to have to allow more high rise. And you're not going to change the fact it's mostly garden.

smurgen

Start looking at German cities also and you'll see almost all of them hammer Dublin.Salaries more of less the same as Dublin while rents are 50-90% cheaper e.g Hamburg.oh and don't look at the childcare cost comparison unless you want a heart attack.

https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/compare_cities.jsp?country1=Germany&city1=Hamburg&country2=Ireland&city2=Dublin

Yurt2

smurgen wrote: »

Start looking at German cities also and you'll see almost all of them hammer Dublin.Salaries more of less the same as Dublin while rents are 50-90% cheaper e.g Hamburg.oh and don't look at the childcare cost comparison unless you want a heart attack.

https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/compare_cities.jsp?country1=Germany&city1=Hamburg&country2=Ireland&city2=Dublin

You know that's not a valid comparison. Germans eat significantly more pork than Irish people which as we know leads to a BIG difference in property prices.

These are the facts.

Show me a link PROVING it's a valid comparison.

smurgen

IngazZagni wrote: »

Austin has literally unlimited space and much cheaper land as a result. Car is king.

Zurich is a good example. What’s the difference? Density. Density. Density. Zurich is mostly apartment blocks. The average sort of accommodation in Zurich would be a 2 bed apartment whereas in Dublin it would be a 3 storey terrace. (Very roughly). Interesting that the purchase price in Zurich is 50% higher than here but rents are similar. That highlights the broader issues in the banking sector.

I don't get ya at all.one city is less dense that's why it's cheaper and one city is more dense that's why it's cheaper? Both scenarios prove Dublin is a basket case.

IngazZagni

smurgen wrote: »

I don't get ya at all.one city is less dense that's why it's cheaper and one city is more dense that's why it's cheaper? Both scenarios prove Dublin is a basket case.

If Zurich had the same density as us its rental costs would be significantly higher.

Austin, Texas is a different thing altogerger. Hard to compare. However property prices have still increased nearly 70% since 2009.

As for Germany. Sure it has more affordable rent but the key difference is with home ownership levels which are more than 20% less than Ireland. If we want to go down that road then fine but we have to have the conversation that would mean home ownership will start to become a thing of the past for the majority of people. We still have the mindset that we need to own our homes here.

smurgen

IngazZagni wrote: »

If Zurich had the same density as us its rental costs would be significantly higher.

Austin, Texas is a different thing altogerger. Hard to compare. However property prices have still increased nearly 70% since 2009.

As for Germany. Sure it has more affordable rent but the key difference is with home ownership levels which are more than 20% less than Ireland. If we want to go down that road then fine but we have to have the conversation that would mean home ownership will start to become a thing of the past for the majority of people. We still have the mindset that we need to own our homes here.

But our home ownership levels are dropping without the fall in rent German have. Is it a case that we're just being gouged of our wages by opportunistic companies maybe? What's the point of us having high wages if it all goes on housing?

Foxtrol

strandroad wrote: »

What amenities do hundreds of residents of high rise tower need, or thousands for a cluster? Creches, shops, restaurants, cafes, laundries, culture, community centres etc. The higher you pile them the less ground space you have to provide them. Mid height streetscape provides enough amenity space for residential units above, high rise does not.

You simply don't need those amenities on the ground floor of every building. Would you expect those for every single housing estate? Again, these expectations lead directly into why we have such a mess with apartment living.

It's not the Irish mindset. High rise is not popular on the continent either, outside of communist countries and banlieues none of which are held up as an example to follow, and for good reason. Mid height is why the likes of Vienna, Copenhagen or The Hague keep topping quality rankings.

If you didn't selectively quote me it would be clear that the Irish mindset I spoke of was not related specifically to height. Most, if not all, of those markets you highlighted as examples have a varied offering of apartment types, rather than the Irish history of unnecessary requirements for size, car parking, lifts, storage space, etc. Many of the recent loosening of these requirements were and continue to be met with howls of idiotic outrage from some quarters.

Even if you want to look at just our mindset on height, and follow your lead of inexplicably excluding the rest of the worldwide English speaking nations, you see that practically every nation utilizes high rise buildings, including many of your specific examples. No one is saying that every building needs to a highrise, or that it should be the starting point, but the mindset of demanding that it is completely excluded from the mix and that 'we're better than that' is quite unique to Ireland.

Yurt2

The monthly rent is €1,550 for a one-bed, €1,990 for a two-bed and €2,499 for a three-bed. Most of the tenants are from abroad, the Irish ones are on HAP.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/0218/1116105-vesta-apartments-twinlite/

Find this part difficult to believe:

'He said the current sales price for suburban property does not cover the construction costs for builders.' I'd translate that as 'we can make a killing on build to rent in this market here lads.'

If this is part of FG's success story of loads of new units coming on stream, count me out of the celebration party.

Yurt2

Evreything is normal and is exactly how it should be. What's more, there is nothing to be done even if one wanted to change it.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/ireland-ranked-second-worst-in-the-developed-world-for-property-affordability-38967606.html

smurgen

It's great to see Goldman Sachs getting value from our property market.and their managing director is married to a fine Gael TD.


https://twitter.com/Astraea1974/status/1229888036969861120?s=19

Yurt2

smurgen wrote: »

It's great to see Goldman Sachs getting value from our property market.and their managing director is a fine Gael TD.


https://twitter.com/Astraea1974/status/1229888036969861120?s=19

Not only that, he (Jennifer Carroll McNeil's husband Hugo MacNeil of Goldman Sachs) is running for the Seanad on the Trinity panel.

At the risk of going all illuminati about things, Hugo was a protégé of none other than Peter Sutherland.

Sweet.Science

Everywhere i look at the moment there are new developments being built. Is there a way to build more than we are doing at the moment ?

smurgen

Sweet.Science wrote: »

Everywhere i look at the moment there are new developments being built. Is there a way to build more than we are doing at the moment ?

Yes rezone land on a grand scale.

is_that_so

smurgen wrote: »

Yes rezone land on a grand scale.

Like Monaghan CC plan back in 2007, which zoned for a population increase of 182%?! Environment minister call.

smurgen

We're in the same category as booming economies like Romania and Lithuania for adults living at home with parents. Completely normal!

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/jump-in-young-irish-adults-living-with-parents-among-highest-in-eu-1.4177848?mode=amp

Idbatterim

Sweet.Science wrote: »

Everywhere i look at the moment there are new developments being built. Is there a way to build more than we are doing at the moment ?

Yes. Force higher densities, many of the developments being built are still to small. When the land is built on as residential, it’s staying there for decades. That’s it ! Make far better use of well located land , currently zoned residential. That’s the first and easy part !

Sweet.Science

Idbatterim wrote: »

Yes. Force higher densities, many of the developments being built are still to small. When the land is built on as residential, it’s staying there for decades. That’s it ! Make far better use of well located land , currently zoned residential. That’s the first and easy part !

Sorry i meant is there enough builders out there . I dont think so .

GreeBo

These high rise/density houses that people are advocating here...where do we think they are going to be built?

Do we want high rises in Stepaside and Cherrywood?

Stepaside has no public transport, Cherrywood is going to be a disaster once all those apartments come online, and its also going to negatively impact Sandyford, Dundrum and everyone along the way.

High Density needs to be in the city centre, to avoid people having to travel anywhere to work imo.