€30 million for 61 apartments

y0ssar1an22

Bowie wrote: »

I grew up in and around social housing. One estate near by was mixed private/social. Most went on to either buy their houses off the council or move on to ownership elsewhere. Every one of them worked. You can't buy your council house without a mortgage and you can't get one of them without a job(s).
It's handy to play ignorant on the one hand saying they don't pay rent, won't work and after a few years buy the house at a steal, handy but not genuine.
It's another argument on how we feel about tenants buying social housing.

we can't expect waiters, low level office workers, cleaning staff, anyone on a low income, who we all rely on to function, to commute a few hours a day because some feel city living should be for those more wealthy than others.
Traditionally we had social housing estates in varying sizes for people who couldn't afford to buy or rent privately. This worked. Then the state got greedy. Why rent to low/no income people, when you can sell to developers? Why, because it's your f***ing job to ensure the people are put first. Today we have a major problem being made worse. Luxury apartments in D4 is just a symptom. Selling off public land and looking to the private market has been biting us in the arse for years. Having to put people up in hotels should have set off alarm bells to 'change the way we do business'.

maybe a condition of getting social housing in an area with great public transport links right near the city center is that you are working?

thats prob not feasible now that i think about it. but at least be able to show a history of employment.

i dunno, maybe that is the case? rather than the next cab off the rank

y0ssar1an22

salmocab wrote: »

Both work full time, don’t know how much they earn but doubt either are on great money. They don’t live together by the way it’s two Separate apartments. Where I live lots of my neighbours are in council housing and they nearly all seem to work and I might add look after their homes extremely well. There seems to be a misconception that social housing is for the unemployed and wasters.

this is surely a troll? an apartment each?!

LuasSimon

It really must be like winning the lotto getting an apartment worth 500K for 30 euro a week .

Compare this to couples in modest employment moving 2 hours outside of Dublin getting up at 6AM every morning off their working lives ??
Better off not working with the tax payer paying your rent before you get your own place . Sure as hell beats working and paying a mortgage for 30 years .

salmocab

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

this is surely a troll? an apartment each?!

Maybe I wasn’t clear, they aren’t a couple I don’t even think they know each other. One is a single mother who shock horror has a full time job.

Jinglejangle69

To all the do gooder what about da homleses merchants keeping the con homeless job in the media every day for the last 4 years.

Congratulations, good job.

Thanks a bunch....

Snow Garden

Snow Garden wrote: »

Another shockingly poor deal by our wasteful government. I wonder who benefits.

It’s the councils deal. Not the governments.

Sweet.Science

Sounds like they'll turn it into an old folks centre

Gonna be a lot more needed in the next 20 years because people have rented all their lives

bodyguard1

A complete an utter waste of Tax payers money the only one to benefit from that deal is Cairn Homes whom someone on the board of Directors is either related to someone in Dublin City Council or has promised a free apartment to someones son or daughter to sweeten the deal, more corruption !

y0ssar1an22

LuasSimon wrote: »

It really must be like winning the lotto getting an apartment worth 500K for 30 euro a week .

Compare this to couples in modest employment moving 2 hours outside of Dublin getting up at 6AM every morning off their working lives ??
Better off not working with the tax payer paying your rent before you get your own place . Sure as hell beats working and paying a mortgage for 30 years .

i'm lucky to be living in dublin on the luas line, but some of my colleagues spend 3 hours a day commuting. that cant be good for your mental health - up at 6.30, shower, whatever, leave at 7. into work for 9. leave at 5.30 and be home at 7, nearly falling into bed.

is there any good reason why social housing needs to be in the city? bearing in mind, that a worker outside of the city also needs access to hospitals/schools and the like.

y0ssar1an22

i think everyone is a bit tired!

Muahahaha

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

there must be some sort of rational explanation for this surely?! aside from leo being able to say we built X number of houses?

I cant see anything rational about paying huge rents of up to 3k a month for 30 years in Dundrum and then at the end of it the State still doesnt own the units and inevitably it will end up in a further 30 year lease. These leases are like gold to investors as they're State backed and the rent will always be paid. Like just think about it, a single apartment generating a 3k rent per month will end up costing the taxpayer 1,080,000 euro over the 30 years. And then they go for another 30 years so it goes up to over 2 million in rent and still the State doesnt own it. Thats just a single apartment, that Dundrum development has 87 apartments leased to the council by a German pension fund who are now laughing all the way to the bank off the backs of Irish taxpayers.

Journalists should really be poking around that deal to see if anything shady went on. Its either that or the Dun Laoighires council staff had rings run around them by property developers. Corruption or incompetence, take your pick.

TallGlass2

bodyguard1 wrote: »

A complete an utter waste of Tax payers money the only one to benefit from that deal is Cairn Homes whom someone on the board of Directors is either related to someone in Dublin City Council or has promised a free apartment to someones son or daughter to sweeten the deal, more corruption !

Not defending Cairn Homes. Some law that states 10% of all developments must be handed over for social housing. So in this case it equates to an entire block.

I did hear however that the developers could 'shift' it around so you could have them give 20/30% social housing at a 'less valuable' site.

y0ssar1an22

Muahahaha wrote: »

I cant see anything rational about paying huge rents of up to 3k a month for 30 years in Dundrum and then at the end of it the State still doesnt own the units and inevitably it will end up in a further 30 year lease. These leases are like gold to investors as they're State backed and the rent will always be paid. Like just think about it, a single apartment generating a 3k rent per month will end up costing the taxpayer 1,080,000 euro over the 30 years. And then they go for another 30 years so it goes up to over 2 million in rent and still the State doesnt own it. Thats just a single apartment, that Dundrum development has 87 apartments leased to the council by a German pension fund who are now laughing all the way to the bank off the backs of Irish taxpayers.

Journalists should really be poking around that deal to see if anything shady went on. Its either that or the Dun Laoighires council staff had rings run around them by property developers. Corruption or incompetence, take your pick.

thats what i mean, why would the government/councils do something like this?! aside from the optics.

that was my 1st thought. someone with influence is making money out of this. cynical as it may be, someone offer up something rational to explain a decision that is objectively bad!

Idbatterim

surrender monkey wrote: »

That's the long term leasing initiative. Where private funds purchase property and lease them back to the council for 80% of the market rate. These companies are going around hoovering up houses all over dublin especially in areas that all ready have a large social housing mix. To add insult to injury these companies don't pay any tax and the council is responsible for the maintenance and repair of the property. These 61 apartments are being purchased under cairn homes Part V obligations they will be owned by the council and will be eligible to be purchased by the tenants at up to 60% discount depending on household income after only 1 year of tenancy. The system is bat sh1t crazy !

Is this actually true? Do u have link or more info?!

surrender monkey

Idbatterim wrote: »

Is this actually true? Do u have link or more info?!

All true. Which part do you want more info on I'll pm the info.

Cyrus

listermint wrote: »

The usual to and fro crap talk from the usual suspects

Meanwhile mixing socially provided housing with normal units is common in the continent where a lawyer living next door to a plumber in say Vienna would be fine.

But here in the Cosmopolitan Dublin the snobby gits look down on working people and claim they get everything for quite literally free.

It's boring now lads. Absolutely boring.

I'd have no problem if part of the arrangement was that you must be in gainful employment or of they were reserved for guards nurses or fire fighters, if they goto people who don't and who never worked that would annoy me personally

salmocab

Cyrus wrote: »

I'd have no problem if part of the arrangement was that you must be in gainful employment or of they were reserved for guards nurses or fire fighters, if they goto people who don't and who never worked that would annoy me personally

I said this earlier I live in an ex council house, I know some of my neighbours are council tenants and some aren’t. Most I don’t have a clue it’s only really the ones that have moved in recently enough as the house would have been done up by the council at the time.
I live in a small cul de sac and the only house that ever had any hassle was one of our next door neighbours who owned the house, Other side of us are/were council tenants and are great neighbours they both work as do as far as I can see nearly all our neighbours barring a couple of retired people or at least one works anyway.
The scheme talked about here is bad value and assuming the numbers are right then the money could be better spent, most social housing goes to people who at the time couldn’t afford housing in the areas they are from, plenty are wasters who have no interest in doing their part in society but most are working people who just don’t have the qualifications or even the luck to afford to live where they’re from.
The system has plenty of issues but we shouldn’t blame the people in social housing on the failings of the system. Most are decent people.

piplip87

If DCC had any sense they would.

1) Look at some of their other social housing estates.

2) Identify good Tennant's who maybe have a three bedroom house but their families have moved out.

3) Offer these Tennant's the chance to move into these apartments.

4) Move families into the homes that are now Vacent.

Mixed developments can work but you need to make sure the people you are moving in have a good track record or respecting property.

I'd even suggest moving in some retired people who are in social housing.

Edgware

piplip87 wrote: »

If DCC had any sense they would.

1) Look at some of their other social housing estates.

2) Identify good Tennant's who maybe have a three bedroom house but their families have moved out.

3) Offer these Tennant's the chance to move into these apartments.

4) Move families into the homes that are now Vacent.

Mixed developments can work but you need to make sure the people you are moving in have a good track record or respecting property.

I'd even suggest moving in some retired people who are in social housing.

Thats too sensible an approach for DCC to follow

tobefrank321

Cyrus wrote: »

I'd have no problem if part of the arrangement was that you must be in gainful employment or of they were reserved for guards nurses or fire fighters, if they goto people who don't and who never worked that would annoy me personally

I'm sure nurses and gardai would prefer a 3 or 4 bed house for the same price a little further out, than a 1 bed apartment.

You'd buy a pretty decent sized 4 bed in most areas of Dublin these days for 472k and even more so for 520k rather than overpriced shoebox apartments that appear to be dumped on DCC at the very top of the market.