2021 Irish Property Market chat - *mod warnings post 1*

awec

cnocbui wrote: »

Ireland is the worst offender:

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/ireland-is-the-world-s-biggest-corporate-tax-haven-say-academics-1.3528401

If I were a dictator running the EU, I would have turfed Ireland out, not only for this, but for all it's other cute-hoor anti single market practices.

The British Virgin Islands are the biggest enabler of tax abuse. British territories are the 3 worst, and they have a 4th (Jersey) in the top 10. It's in the link I posted earlier.

This is one of Ireland's problems. Unlike the Brits, the french, the US etc, we don't have offshore territories / city-states to obfuscate our tax story.

Galwayhurl

jill_valentine wrote: »

In a major urban centre, I believe it should be possible for a single median earner to purchase a one bedroom or studio flat within reasonable commuting distance of employment.

Rurally, that's probably a lot more variable, but honestly I think bang for buck kinda manages itself out there because the distance from services etc are the flipside of living in something standalone, with more space.

I recognise that single earners and units of that size are not an economically appealing market for most commercial developers, but on a social level there's clearly an urgent need for them. Social good is the government's lookout, it should be an obvious ambition to engineer circumstances where those units get built, rather than just... I don't know what the Gov idea is, hoping everyone on the homelessness list marries each other?

To add to this, I think that there should be no 10% social housing quotas in the city centre developments. People who work in the cities should be able to live in them. Put the social housing in the outer suburbs/commuter towns.

It's madness that we have people living in social housing in the city centre and not working, while workers have to commute an hour or 2 each way from way out because that's all they can afford.

Yes I'm aware that many social housing tenants do work, but many don't.

HansKroenke

Hubertj wrote: »

https://www.irishexaminer.com/property/commercial/arid-40240229.html

Good news for commercial property but also the jobs front in the cork region. Further demonstrates apples commitment to Irish operations. Also strange they would continue to invest and expand Irish operations when a tax apocalypse is due to hit Ireland. Could it be they have already factored tax changes into their plans? Would large MNCs with dedicated tax teams have the forethought to factor this into their future plans? Amazing thought. I fear they haven’t checked board.ie and are making a terrible terrible mistake.

They haven't said what the purpose of the new office space is for, e.g. Indian staff to handle customer service for the Indian market. Is it for new employees to import into Ireland or is the plan to hoover up employees already base in the region? It would be nice to see an accompanying headline that an apartment development is also being funded as part of the job creation. While the announcement is good news for the commercial sector it is bad news for the residential sector.

HansKroenke

awec wrote: »

The British Virgin Islands are the biggest enabler of tax abuse. British territories are the 3 worst, and they have a 4th (Jersey) in the top 10. It's in the link I posted earlier.

This is one of Ireland's problems. Unlike the Brits, the french, the US etc, we don't have offshore territories / city-states to obfuscate our tax story.

The French and Germans use Luxembourg, Switzerland and Monaco for their dirty business, the UK use, as you have noted, their own hollow countries such as the BVI, Isle of Man for those untouchable family trusts etc. Cyprus for the non-EU Turks and Russians to gain EU access. Ireland cannot be touched without the larger nations also closing down their own little havens like those mentioned above, which of course they won't do.

timmyntc

HansKroenke wrote: »

The French and Germans use Luxembourg, Switzerland and Monaco for their dirty business, the UK use, as you have noted, their own hollow countries such as the BVI, Isle of Man for those untouchable family trusts etc. Cyprus for the non-EU Turks and Russians to gain EU access. Ireland cannot be touched without the larger nations also closing down their own little havens like those mentioned above, which of course they won't do.

Ireland should close the loopholes, but first declare the Aran Islands as an overseas territory.

PropQueries

HansKroenke wrote: »

They haven't said what the purpose of the new office space is for, e.g. Indian staff to handle customer service for the Indian market. Is it for new employees to import into Ireland or is the plan to hoover up employees already base in the region? It would be nice to see an accompanying headline that an apartment development is also being funded as part of the job creation. While the announcement is good news for the commercial sector it is bad news for the residential sector.

Hold on!

The article states:

"Apple is this month closing out a deal for enough space for 350 to 400 additional employees initially, at Horgan’s Quay, in the top three floors of building No 1. "

But the article also states:

"tech giant Apple, which already employs c 6,000 in the city at two other locations."

So, with post-covid fast approaching (define fast, some say well into next year), won't office spaces need to be reconfigured for more space between workers?

So, when the article says "enough space for 350 to 400", couldn't it just as easily mean a reduction in the overall number of employees when the additional space for social distancing is implemented post-covid?

cnocbui

awec wrote: »

The British Virgin Islands are the biggest enabler of tax abuse. British territories are the 3 worst, and they have a 4th (Jersey) in the top 10. It's in the link I posted earlier.

This is one of Ireland's problems. Unlike the Brits, the french, the US etc, we don't have offshore territories / city-states to obfuscate our tax story.

I guess it depends on the exact criterian and exactly who is compiling the report:



https://www.consultancy.eu/news/1641/europe-home-to-6-of-the-globes-top-10-tax-havens-ireland-tops-list

awec

PropQueries wrote: »

Hold on!

The article states:

"Apple is this month closing out a deal for enough space for 350 to 400 additional employees initially, at Horgan’s Quay, in the top three floors of building No 1. "

But the article also states:

"tech giant Apple, which already employs c 6,000 in the city at two other locations."

So, with post-covid fast approaching (define fast, some say well into next year), won't office spaces need to be reconfigured for more space between workers?

So, when the article says "enough space for 350 to 400", couldn't it just as easily mean a reduction in the overall number of employees when the additional space for social distancing is implemented post-covid?

Why would it?

Social distancing will not be a thing anymore once people are vaccinated.

PropQueries

awec wrote: »

Why would it?

Social distancing will not be a thing anymore once people are vaccinated.

Whether the vaccine for covid works or not, social distancing in office environments will be a thing going forward. They've already alluded to it with the massive reduction in flu etc.

awec

PropQueries wrote: »

Whether the vaccine for covid works or not, social distancing in office environments will be a thing going forward. They've already alluded to it with the massive reduction in flu etc.

Nonsense. You think people will be sitting 2metres apart in offices from now on?

Can you post a link to a source that suggests offices are to remain socially distant even when the rest of society has returned to something pretty close to normal?

hometruths

fliball123 wrote: »

and Germany , U.K, France and the U.S are all in the top 25 . Whats your point?

My point is we're a tax haven, and I have no complaints about that. It has been a fantastically successful strategy by successive governments.

PropQueries

awec wrote: »

Nonsense. You think people will be sitting 2metres apart in offices from now on?

Can you post a link to a source that suggests offices are to remain socially distant even when the rest of society has returned to something pretty close to normal?

Dr. Tony Holohan said back in June:

"It's not maybe a uniquely Irish thing but the 'ah sure I'll be grand' and going to work with coughs and colds, that was a kind of socially acceptable thing to do.

We need to move to a situation where going to school, going out for the evening, going to work, with coughs and colds and sniffles and so on becomes a thing of the past, because of this disease and that will benefit a range of other respiratory diseases as well."

Basically if this is recommended post-covid, companies will want to minimise the chances of one of their employees giving everyone else in the office a cold or cough IMO

Link to article here: https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/dr-tony-holohan-says-one-22235866

awec

PropQueries wrote: »

Dr. Tony Holohan said back in June:

"It's not maybe a uniquely Irish thing but the 'ah sure I'll be grand' and going to work with coughs and colds, that was a kind of socially acceptable thing to do.

We need to move to a situation where going to school, going out for the evening, going to work, with coughs and colds and sniffles and so on becomes a thing of the past, because of this disease and that will benefit a range of other respiratory diseases as well."

Basically if this is recommended post-covid, companies will want to minimise the chances of one of their employees giving everyone else in the office a cold or cough IMO

Link to article here: https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/dr-tony-holohan-says-one-22235866

Yes, people will no longer go to work when they are sick.

This article does not mention anything to do with continued social distancing post vaccination.

PropQueries

awec wrote: »

Yes, people will no longer go to work when they are sick.

This article does not mention anything to do with continued social distancing post vaccination.

Actually, you're probably right

Graham

Mod Note

please take the COVID discussion to the appropriate forum.

Do not reply to this post.

Geuze

schmittel wrote: »

My point is we're a tax haven, and I have no complaints about that. It has been a fantastically successful strategy by successive governments.

We are not a tax haven.

What Makes a Country a Tax Haven?


https://igees.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/What-makes-a-country-a-tax-haven.pdf

Abstract: This paper explores the issue of tax havens and tax competition. The recent intensified debate on tax havens is summarised, as is the important work of the OECD, the EU and the G-20 in this area and the ongoing research on the economic effects of tax havens.

Ireland does not meet any of the OECD criteria for being a tax haven but because of its 12.5 per cent corporation tax rate and the open nature of the Irish economy, Ireland has on a few occasions been labelled a tax haven.

There are three primary reasons for this identified, each addressed in the paper: a failure to distinguish between legitimate and abusive transfer pricing; a misunderstanding of the role and regulation of IFSC; and a dated but influential academic paper from 1994 that incorrectly
included Ireland in a list of tax havens, based on a reason that has long since lost any validity.

hometruths

Geuze wrote: »

We are not a tax haven.

What Makes a Country a Tax Haven?


https://igees.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/What-makes-a-country-a-tax-haven.pdf

Abstract: This paper explores the issue of tax havens and tax competition. The recent intensified debate on tax havens is summarised, as is the important work of the OECD, the EU and the G-20 in this area and the ongoing research on the economic effects of tax havens.

Ireland does not meet any of the OECD criteria for being a tax haven but because of its 12.5 per cent corporation tax rate and the open nature of the Irish economy, Ireland has on a few occasions been labelled a tax haven.

There are three primary reasons for this identified, each addressed in the paper: a failure to distinguish between legitimate and abusive transfer pricing; a misunderstanding of the role and regulation of IFSC; and a dated but influential academic paper from 1994 that incorrectly
included Ireland in a list of tax havens, based on a reason that has long since lost any validity.

So you’re saying we are not a tax haven according to our own Dept of Finance and Revenue?!

Plenty of others think we are a tax haven:

Ireland has been labelled a tax haven, or a corporate tax haven (or Conduit OFC), by:

The main § Leaders in tax haven research:[38][39] James R. Hines Jr. (1994, 2007, 2010),[31][40][41] Dhammika Dharmapala (2008 and 2009),[42][43] and Gabriel Zucman (2013, 2014 and 2018);[4][32][34][44][45]
Other important § Leaders in tax haven research:[38][39] Joel Slemrod (2006),[46] and Mihir A. Desai (2006);[47]
Notable academic studies by the University of Amsterdam's CORPNET in 2017 (Conduit and Sink OFCs)[27][28] and by the International Monetary Fund journal in 2018;[48]
Various academic tax-policy centres in Germany,[49] the United Kingdom,[50] the United Nations,[51] and Ireland itself;[52]
The three main non-governmental tax organisations: Tax Justice Network,[33][53][54] the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy,[55][56] and Oxfam;[57][58]
The two U.S. Congressional investigations into global tax havens: 2008 by the Government Accountability Office,[59] and 2015 by the Congressional Research Service.[60]
The 2013 Levin–McCain U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigation ("PSI") into tax avoidance activities of U.S. multinationals by using "profit shifting" BEPS tools;[61][62][63]
The books on tax havens in the last decade, with at least 300 citations on Google Scholar: Tax Havens: How Globalization Really Works, by Ronen Palan and Richard Murphy from 2010,[36] Treasure Islands: Tax Havens and the Men Who Stole the World, by Nicholas Shaxson from 2011, and The Hidden Wealth of Nations: The Scourge of Tax Havens, by Gabriel Zucman from 2015;
The main financial media: New York Times,[64] Bloomberg News,[65] the Wall Street Journal,[66] Forbes,[67] the Financial Times,[68] The Economist,[69] the Washington Post,[70] and Fortune;[71]
Some leading economists;[72][73][74][75][76]
G20 economy, Brazil, who blacklisted Ireland in September 2016;[12][77] and potentially the U.S. State of Oregon whose State IRS recommended blacklisting Ireland in 2017.[78]
The European Parliament in March 2019 voted to accept a report by 505 votes in favour to 63 against, recommending Ireland, as one several "EU tax havens", be included on the official EU Commission list of tax havens.[o][80][81][82]
Ireland has also been labelled related terms to being a tax haven:

In Germany, the related term tax dumping has been used against Ireland by German political leaders;[83][84]
The Financial Stability Forum ("FSF") and the International Monetary Fund ("IMF") listed Ireland as an offshore financial centre in June 2000;[33][34][35][36]
Bloomberg, in an article on PwC Ireland's managing partner Feargal O'Rourke, used the term tax avoidance hub;[85]
The 2013 U.S Senate PSI Levin–McCain investigation into U.S. multinational tax activity, called Ireland the holy grail of tax avoidance;[86][87]
As the OECD has never listed any of its 35 members as tax havens, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Switzerland are called OECD tax havens;[88]
As the EU Commission has never formally listed any of its 28 members as tax havens, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Belgium are called EU tax havens.[89][90]
The term tax haven has been used by the Irish mainstream media and leading Irish commentators.[91][92][93][94][70][95] Irish elected TDs have asked the question: "Is Ireland a tax haven?".[96][97] A search of Dáil Éireann debates lists 871 references to the term.[98] Some established Irish political parties accuse the Irish State of tax haven activities.[99][100][101]

The international community at this point is concerned about the nature of tax havens, and Ireland in particular is viewed with a considerable amount of suspicion in the international community for doing what is considered - at the very least - on the boundaries of acceptable practices.

— Ashoka Mody, Ex-IMF mission chief to Ireland, "Former IMF official warns Ireland to prepare for end to tax regime", 21 June 2018.[102]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ireland_as_a_tax_haven

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

MacronvFrugals

Geuze wrote: »

We are not a tax haven.

What Makes a Country a Tax Haven?


https://igees.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/What-makes-a-country-a-tax-haven.pdf

Abstract: This paper explores the issue of tax havens and tax competition. The recent intensified debate on tax havens is summarised, as is the important work of the OECD, the EU and the G-20 in this area and the ongoing research on the economic effects of tax havens.

Ireland does not meet any of the OECD criteria for being a tax haven but because of its 12.5 per cent corporation tax rate and the open nature of the Irish economy, Ireland has on a few occasions been labelled a tax haven.

There are three primary reasons for this identified, each addressed in the paper: a failure to distinguish between legitimate and abusive transfer pricing; a misunderstanding of the role and regulation of IFSC; and a dated but influential academic paper from 1994 that incorrectly
included Ireland in a list of tax havens, based on a reason that has long since lost any validity.

Why would the DOF and Revenue come out calling Ireland a tax haven?


The EU voted calling us a tax haven in January, also the UN's Special Rapporteur said 'Nobody believes Ireland is not a tax haven'

We're at peak green jersey talk even arguing this is not true and thats not negating the transformative effects these policies have had on Ireland.

hometruths

Hubertj wrote: »

https://www.irishexaminer.com/property/commercial/arid-40240229.html

Good news for commercial property but also the jobs front in the cork region. Further demonstrates apples commitment to Irish operations. Also strange they would continue to invest and expand Irish operations when a tax apocalypse is due to hit Ireland. Could it be they have already factored tax changes into their plans? Would large MNCs with dedicated tax teams have the forethought to factor this into their future plans? Amazing thought. I fear they haven’t checked board.ie and are making a terrible terrible mistake.

As i understand it if profits rise intemationally from IP that apple holds in Ireland they must increase their workforce in Ireland in proportion. Its part of the deal.

I think there is a decent chance that the dedicated tax teams are simply complying with the current tax laws than planning for the future.

Timing belt

schmittel wrote: »

As i understand it if profits rise intemationally from IP that apple holds in Ireland they must increase their workforce in Ireland in proportion. Its part of the deal.

I think there is a decent chance that the dedicated tax teams are simply complying with the current tax laws than planning for the future.

Apple has been manufacturing in Cork for 40 years and employees over 6000 people. They are all not employed just to avoid tax as you are suggesting with your post.

Hubertj

schmittel wrote: »

As i understand it if profits rise intemationally from IP that apple holds in Ireland they must increase their workforce in Ireland in proportion. Its part of the deal.

I think there is a decent chance that the dedicated tax teams are simply complying with the current tax laws than planning for the future.

I suppose you could think that way if you’re a conspiracy theorist. It could be that Apple is preparing to expand operations in Ireland. That is positive for commercial property in cork, which is relevant to the 2021 property market.

hold my beer

schmittel wrote: »

As i understand it if profits rise intemationally from IP that apple holds in Ireland they must increase their workforce in Ireland in proportion. Its part of the deal.

I think there is a decent chance that the dedicated tax teams are simply complying with the current tax laws than planning for the future.

Part of what deal.

ReturnOfThe

As I see it, the housing market is driven by a number of variables which tend to apply upward or downward pressure on prices.

Variables which pull house prices in the same direction.
Economic Outlook.
Population Growth.
Demand (Speculative in times of low interest, non-speculative in times of low supply).
Mortgage Approvals.

Variables which push house prices in the opposite direction.
Supply.
Interest Rates.

So if someone is looking for house prices to fall, they would have to be looking out for at least one of the below headlines in the papers..

Economic outlook deteriorating
Population growth being reversed
Demand falling
Mortgage approvals falling
Supply increasing and outpacing demand
Interest rates rising

I think most people will agree that none of the above look remotely like happening in the short to medium term except maybe for the last one and I'm beginning to think that maybe it would be a good thing at this stage as I think that low interest rates contributes (perversely) to rising house prices.

PropQueries

New data (released today), shows that more than 80,000 households are in state-supported private rented accommodation and that the Hap scheme payments to landlords will rise from €436 million last year to in excess of €1 billion by the end of 2021 (this year).

So, it's HAP alone is going to rise from €436m last year to over €1billion this year, and that's from the department of housing very own figures.

So, is the state expecting the number of households receiving HAP to double from 80,000 households to 160,000 households this year or are they expecting rents to double or something in between?

Link to article in Sunday Business Post here:https://www.businesspost.ie/houses/more-than-80000-households-are-in-state-supported-private-rented-accommodation-af10bd9b

Timing belt

ReturnOfThe wrote: »

As I see it, the housing market is driven by a number of variables which tend to apply upward or downward pressure on prices.

Variables which pull house prices in the same direction.
Economic Outlook.
Population Growth.
Demand (Speculative in times of low interest, non-speculative in times of low supply).
Mortgage Approvals.

Variables which push house prices in the opposite direction.
Supply.
Interest Rates.

So if someone is looking for house prices to fall, they would have to be looking out for at least one of the below headlines in the papers..

Economic outlook deteriorating
Population growth being reversed
Demand falling
Mortgage approvals falling
Supply increasing and outpacing demand
Interest rates rising

I think most people will agree that none of the above look remotely like happening in the short to medium term except maybe for the last one and I'm beginning to think that maybe it would be a good thing at this stage as I think that low interest rates contributes (perversely) to rising house prices.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that the economic outlook won't deteriorate.

There are also lots of other considerations that you need to included such as rent, Institutional investors appetite, Government intervention etc...

PropQueries

ReturnOfThe wrote: »

So if someone is looking for house prices to fall, they would have to be looking out for at least one of the below headlines in the papers..

Economic outlook deteriorating
Population growth being reversed
Demand falling
Mortgage approvals falling
Supply increasing and outpacing demand
Interest rates rising

I'm calling it

Every single one of those boxes will be ticked by August 2021.

thefridge2006

PropQueries wrote: »

Also in other news. According to the Irish Times today:

"EU poised to affirm tax on tech giants if global agreement fails. Leaders are working towards consensus, but EU ready to take unilateral action if needed.

European Union leaders are poised to affirm their commitment to a unilateral tax on tech giants if they fail to agree on a global framework with partners, including Joe Biden’s US administration, by the middle of this year."

There's so many fires we have to fight this year, it will take a significant luck of the Irish to come out the other side with a quick return to an economy that looks anything like 2019 IMO

There may also be a quick reversal of any approved or soon to be approved housing measures (which appear to be primarily on the demand side of the equation) if the government finances do take an abrupt turn IMO

Link to Irish Times article here: https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/eu-poised-to-affirm-tax-on-tech-giants-if-global-agreement-fails-1.4505268

100% it's ridiculous looking on from the side lines

HansKroenke

PropQueries wrote: »

New data (released today), shows that more than 80,000 households are in state-supported private rented accommodation and that the Hap scheme payments to landlords will rise from €436 million last year to in excess of €1 billion by the end of 2021 (this year).

So, it's HAP alone is going to rise from €436m last year to over €1billion this year, and that's from the department of housing very own figures.

So, is the state expecting the number of households receiving HAP to double from 80,000 households to 160,000 households this year or are they expecting rents to double or something in between?

Link to article in Sunday Business Post here:https://www.businesspost.ie/houses/more-than-80000-households-are-in-state-supported-private-rented-accommodation-af10bd9b

Increased property taxes will help pay for HAP, it will be grand.

PropQueries

HansKroenke wrote: »

Increased property taxes will help pay for HAP, it will be grand.

I’m surprised that the share price of Ires REIT didn’t quadruple this afternoon on that news

enricoh

PropQueries wrote: »

New data (released today), shows that more than 80,000 households are in state-supported private rented accommodation and that the Hap scheme payments to landlords will rise from €436 million last year to in excess of €1 billion by the end of 2021 (this year).

So, it's HAP alone is going to rise from €436m last year to over €1billion this year, and that's from the department of housing very own figures.

So, is the state expecting the number of households receiving HAP to double from 80,000 households to 160,000 households this year or are they expecting rents to double or something in between?

Link to article in Sunday Business Post here:https://www.businesspost.ie/houses/more-than-80000-households-are-in-state-supported-private-rented-accommodation-af10bd9b

There's a lot of people in hospitality etc that are getting a taste of our welfare state for the first time. I reckon employers will struggle to get minimum wage workers to go back to work, especially now with rents rising in the cheaper counties.

combat14

HansKroenke wrote: »

Increased property taxes will help pay for HAP, it will be grand.

HAP needs to be scrapped to bring down rent price bubble

Hubertj

https://voxeu.org/article/worldwide-building-height-gaps-their-determinants-and-their-implications#.YEd29DdPkGc.mailto

I found this very interesting. An analysis of not building up and impact it can have on cities as well as prices and affordability. Ireland top of list for not building up. It really needs to be done, and done properly, in the right places in our cities. Would be interesting to understand the cost base for different height buildings and at what height cost benefit can factor into more affordable units.

Worth a read as a lot more interesting than scrolling through pages of conspiracy theory, made up facts and misrepresented articles.

Pelezico

Interesting Central Bank questioning at Oirechtas hearing today.


Circa 17000 people not paying mortgage due to covid. Seems like a lot of defaulters. How can they kickstart their microeconomies?

MacronvFrugals

Hubertj wrote: »

https://voxeu.org/article/worldwide-building-height-gaps-their-determinants-and-their-implications#.YEd29DdPkGc.mailto

I found this very interesting. An analysis of not building up and impact it can have on cities as well as prices and affordability. Ireland top of list for not building up. It really needs to be done, and done properly, in the right places in our cities. Would be interesting to understand the cost base for different height buildings and at what height cost benefit can factor into more affordable units.

Worth a read as a lot more interesting than scrolling through pages of conspiracy theory, made up facts and misrepresented articles.

As mentioned recently by Lorcan Sirr from TUD

The EU average for apartment stock in urban areas is 40% Dublin is currently 35.8% he reckons it’s completely a developer myth talking about height.

Cyrus

schmittel wrote: »

As i understand it if profits rise intemationally from IP that apple holds in Ireland they must increase their workforce in Ireland in proportion. Its part of the deal.

I think there is a decent chance that the dedicated tax teams are simply complying with the current tax laws than planning for the future.

As I understand it Apple holds its IP in the US. And anyone that was holding IP here has also moved it back.

PropQueries

MacronvFrugals wrote: »

As mentioned recently by Lorcan Sirr from TUD

The EU average for apartment stock in urban areas is 40% Dublin is currently 35.8% he reckons it’s completely a developer myth talking about height.

So we’re not far off the EU average? And the primary reason for apartments in many EU countries was a little thing that happened between 1939 and 1945 and afterwards they were required to house a lot of people quickly.

Subutai

MacronvFrugals wrote: »

As mentioned recently by Lorcan Sirr from TUD

The EU average for apartment stock in urban areas is 40% Dublin is currently 35.8% he reckons it’s completely a developer myth talking about height.

Apartment stock here and in other European capitals are very different. A lot of the "Dublin is very dense actually" and "there are loads of apartments" arguments depend on people being piled in to little more than alum accommodation in the likes of Mountjoy square.

The arguments are usually made by ivory Tower academics like Orla Hegarty and Lorcan Sirr who are also, ironically, against co-living. Co-living is modern tenements you see, and we don't currently have modern tenements packed to the gills with precarious workers all over the city.

Hubertj

MacronvFrugals wrote: »

As mentioned recently by Lorcan Sirr from TUD

The EU average for apartment stock in urban areas is 40% Dublin is currently 35.8% he reckons it’s completely a developer myth talking about height.

Sorry I don’t follow what you mean. Is Lorcan sirr saying building up isn’t the answer - is there a paper on it or anything as I’d be interested to read differing viewpoints on it. What about other factors such as urban sprawl vs more dense hosing supported by appropriate infrastructure?

PropQueries

MacronvFrugals wrote: »

As mentioned recently by Lorcan Sirr from TUD

The EU average for apartment stock in urban areas is 40% Dublin is currently 35.8% he reckons it’s completely a developer myth talking about height.

Actually a very interesting comment. Haven’t really questioned that narrative that has been put out about how we have a low level of apartments compared to continental Europe. Always assumed it was true.

But looking at some sources online and checked the Netherlands given that it’s one of the most densely populated countries in Europe and the housing type statistics are eye opening, to me anyway:

18% detached
58% semi-detached
20% flats

That’s amazing to me as the Netherlands is only about half the size of ireland and has 17 million people.

Link here: https://www.statista.com/statistics/536536/distribution-of-the-population-in-the-netherlands-by-dwelling-type/

Subutai

PropQueries wrote: »

Actually a very interesting comment. Haven’t really questioned that narrative that has been put out about how we have a low level of apartments compared to continental Europe. Always assumed it was true.

But looking at some sources online and checked the Netherlands given that it’s one of the most densely populated countries in Europe and the housing type statistics are eye opening, to me anyway:

18% detached
58% semi-detached
20% flats

That’s amazing to me as the Netherlands is only about half the size of ireland and has 17 million people.

Link here: https://www.statista.com/statistics/536536/distribution-of-the-population-in-the-netherlands-by-dwelling-type/

The settlement pattern in the Netherlands is very different, and so is the density pattern. They do not, unlike Ireland, have a primate city. They have a lot of large urban areas none of which are overwhelmingly dominant.

They have 25 cities more populous than Limerick (Ireland's third largest city) but no city as populous as Dublin.

If you've a lot of people living in small and mid sized cities then the kind of suburban settlement pattern characterised by mid-rise and semi Ds is sustainable and doesn't lead to sprawl. If you have really only one large city, overwhelmingly dominant economically, then that same settlement pattern will lead to major sprawl and serious transport problems.

PropQueries

Subutai wrote: »

The settlement pattern in the Netherlands is very different, and so is the density pattern. They do not, unlike Ireland, have a primate city. They have a lot of large urban areas none of which are overwhelmingly dominant.

They have 25 cities more populous than Limerick (Ireland's third largest city) but no city as populous as Dublin.

If you've a lot of people living in small and mid sized cities then the kind of suburban settlement pattern characterised by mid-rise and semi Ds is sustainable and doesn't lead to sprawl. If you have really only one large city, overwhelmingly dominant economically, then that same settlement pattern will lead to major sprawl and serious transport problems.

Thanks.

Came across this analysis on eurostat, which gives a nice breakdown summary by EU country:

“In 2018, 46.0 % of people in the EU-27 lived in flats, close to one fifth (18.6 %) in semi-detached houses and over one third (34.7 %) in detached houses.

Among the EU Member States, the proportion of people living in flats in 2018 was at least 60.0 % in Latvia (66.2 %), Spain (64.9 %), Estonia (61.5 %) and Greece (60.6 %), and just below this level in Lithuania (59.5 %); a similarly high proportion of people also lived in flats in Switzerland (62.5 %). The share of people living in detached houses was highest among the EU Member States in Croatia (69.7 %), Slovenia (66.2 %), Romania (65.2 %) and Hungary (64.6 %); Denmark and Poland were the only other Member States where a majority of the population lived in a detached house. North Macedonia (74.6 %), Serbia (63.6 %) and Norway (57.5 %) also reported that high proportions of their populations lived in detached houses. The highest proportions of people living in semi-detached houses in EU Member States were reported in the Netherlands (58.0 %), Ireland (52.1 %), Malta (41.5 %) and Belgium (40.6 %). These were the only Member States where two fifths or more of the population lived in semi-detached houses. In the United Kingdom this share was even higher, reaching 60.8 %.”

First time I’ve looked into this and genuinely surprised that the narrative around our low level of apartments compared to the EU is near enough nonsense and does appear like a developer led narrative at this stage.

But your reasoning on Holland makes sense.

But in relation to some eastern EU, I would assume their higher apartment living is more due to cold war Soviet housing policy.

Edit: I take my last paragraph about Soviet policy back. Even that’s wrong.

We really don’t need any more apartments from looking at the above from eurostat. It’s insane how many of us (mainly me?) actually fell for this nonsense.

I’m genuinely shocked.

awec

I think the narrative about needing more apartments has been from the angle that apartments make more efficient use of expensive city land and let you house a great number of people due to higher densities.

It ignores the fact that people here have little to no interest of living in an apartment once they have a family.

Subutai

Talk to someone who's lived in apartments in somewhere like Germany and here. My European colleagues have frequently been shocked at what we call apartments.

I've no doubt there are lots of people living in apartments - Dublin is full of old buildings sub divided into apartments and packed as high as possible. That's not a sustainable way to live for small households, which is what the drive for more apartments is meant to accommodate.

awec

Subutai wrote: »

Talk to someone who's lived in apartments in somewhere like Germany and here. My European colleagues have frequently been shocked at what we call apartments.

I've no doubt there are lots of people living in apartments - Dublin is full of old buildings sub divided into apartments and packed as high as possible. That's not a sustainable way to live for small households, which is what the drive for more apartments is meant to accommodate.

Apartments here are not designed for families. Even purpose built apartment buildings are not designed for families.

There is generally no storage whatsoever. If you are really lucky you get a cupboard to store a few small items. But there is nowhere to keep the christmas decorations when not being used, suitcases, the child's pram, bicycles, golf clubs etc.

I guess you could say that people don't live in apartments here because apartments aren't designed for family life. Or you could say that apartments aren't designed for family life because families just don't want to live in apartments here. Who knows.

PropQueries

awec wrote: »

I think the narrative about needing more apartments has been from the angle that apartments make more efficient use of expensive city land and let you house a great number of people due to higher densities.

It ignores the fact that people here have little to no interest of living in an apartment once they have a family.

But, then we’re back to the nonsense that land is expensive in Dublin because it’s a “city” and there’s not much of it. We’re not London or Tokyo. There’s nothing but land in and around the city. Actually, there’s plenty of land around london. Not sure about Tokyo, but probably plenty of land there as well though.

That makes the “efficient land use” narrative also developer led IMO

awec

PropQueries wrote: »

But, then we’re back to the nonsense that land is expensive in Dublin because it’s a “city” and there’s not much of it. We’re not London or Tokyo. There’s nothing but land in and around the city. Actually, there’s plenty of land around london. Not sure about Tokyo, but probably plenty of land there as well though.

That makes the “efficient land use” narrative also developer led IMO

Land is expensive in Dublin because it's the most sought after land in the country. Not all land is equal. Even in Dublin, or around it, not all land is equal.

It's the Midleton Very Rare of land.

If you have land in Dublin zoned for housing you'd have no bother getting rid of it. I have no source to back this up so please forgive me, but I believe a significant chunk of the land around Dublin is not zoned for housing but rather is agricultural.

PropQueries

awec wrote: »

Land is expensive in Dublin because it's the most sought after land in the country. Not all land is equal. Even in Dublin, or around it, not all land is equal.

It's the Midleton Very Rare of land.

If you have land in Dublin zoned for housing you'd have no bother getting rid of it. I have no source to back this up so please forgive me, but I believe a significant chunk of the land around Dublin is not zoned for housing but rather is agricultural.

That’s a good point and gets to the crux of the issue.

They don’t appear to zone land based on local demand, which such be the primary and probably only reason for re-zoning land.

They have no problem re-zoning farm land all over Co. Kildare and Co. Meath but appear to have no interest in re-zoning land nearer the city even though the people who will live in all those new built houses in Co. Kildare, Co. Meath etc. will most likely be working in and commuting to Dublin.

Timing belt

awec wrote: »

Land is expensive in Dublin because it's the most sought after land in the country. Not all land is equal. Even in Dublin, or around it, not all land is equal.

It's the Midleton Very Rare of land.

If you have land in Dublin zoned for housing you'd have no bother getting rid of it. I have no source to back this up so please forgive me, but I believe a significant chunk of the land around Dublin is not zoned for housing but rather is agricultural.

Every 5/6 years the city planners rezone extra land for residential to meet the housing needs for that period in their Development Plan.



Source https://www.corkcity.ie/en/media-folder/cork-city-development-plan/process-overview.pdf

South Dublin County next Development Plan is for the period 2022-2028 and Hibernia Reit (and the IRFU as they will get a bonus if the land is developed within 10 years after selling it to the REIT) are hoping that they rezone a chunk of land by newlands cross that is already serviced for residential purposes so they can build 3,500 homes on it.

https://www.echo.ie/news/article/new...-hibernia-site

Timing belt

PropQueries wrote: »

That’s a good point and gets to the crux of the issue.

They don’t appear to zone land based on local demand, which such be the primary and probably only reason for re-zoning land.

They have no problem re-zoning farm land all over Co. Kildare and Co. Meath but appear to have no interest in re-zoning land nearer the city even though the people who will live in all those new built houses in Co. Kildare, Co. Meath etc. will most likely be working in and commuting to Dublin.

Different Councils/Corporations have different priorities and the system is so rigid it can take 8+ years to rezone. If it is not in a city development plan it won't happen for the next 6+ years.

The last plan for Dublin would have been written 2014/2015 when housing would not have been as hot a topic as now and it would appear that the city planners under estimated the housing needs.

PropQueries

Timing belt wrote: »

Different Councils/Corporations have different priorities and the system is so rigid it can take 8+ years to rezone. If it is not in a city development plan it won't happen for the next 6+ years.

The last plan for Dublin would have been written 2014/2015 when housing would not have been as hot a topic as now and it would appear that the city planners under estimated the housing needs.

So it’s a good (probably primary) argument for establishing the LDA?