Ronan plans to sell €960,000 apartment to council for social housing

Johnny Jukebox

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

And where would you move them to?

This proposal from Holland has its merits...

https://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/amsterdam-scum-town-to-house-anti-social-neighbours-28943064.html

Johnny Jukebox

doublejobbing 2 wrote: »

a- Europeans who work in Google, Facebook etc. Many of these people are actually on very poor money, but they are odd fcukers and have no issue paying 900 per month for a room

b- Brazillians living 12 to a flat

a - is not true;

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/technology/facebook-ireland-staff-coin-it-as-average-pay-reaches-154-000-1.3714642

b - is true.

whippet

marieholmfan wrote: »

Blaming the apartments in Ballymun for the social problems lets the council off the hook for failure to provide facilities, it lets the lawmakers off the hook for failure to change the licensing laws, it lets the cops off the hook and it lets the citizens of Ballymun off the hook.


That said I agree with mixed social class development ; built by the state after the compulsory purchase of low density inner city.

Also what are your success criteria?

I wasn't letting anyone off the hook - we have a problem in the country in that throughout the history of the state we haven't been able to do this right.

We have been building estates all over the country in the last two decades with no facilities and then local community groups have to go begging for resources to get stuff.

We have learned nothing.

And then when people suggest including social housing in fancy new accomodation schemes there is an outcry from a significant number about how dare someone on social welfare live next to me or people like me.

As for success criteria - I don't have the answer as you can see nobody can agree on what that looks like.

Do we want to replicate the errors of the past
Do we want to integrate social housing with private housing
Who do we want to pay for this
Who sets the budget as to what is acceptable to spend on a social house

so .. what I asked is if anyone has any examples of how a major european city has managed to provide adequate social housing on a modest budget with none of the social issues that we have seen here historically.

If someone could point to an example of the ideal situation - well then we can discuss how achievable that is in an irish context

Thelonious Monk

Johnny Jukebox wrote: »

This proposal from Holland has its merits...

https://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/amsterdam-scum-town-to-house-anti-social-neighbours-28943064.html

Well that'll never happen in Ireland. I have a few undesirable neighbours I wish weren't there, but when people say they should be moved out if they act up, where do you put them? They'll just annoy other people no matter where you move them. Do you build them standalone houses in the countryside?
I don't know what the solution is but saying "move them out" isn't really constructive.

doublejobbing 2

Johnny Jukebox wrote: »

a - is not true;

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/technology/facebook-ireland-staff-coin-it-as-average-pay-reaches-154-000-1.3714642

b - is true.

That would be mean average earnings, and also direct employees. If you are an Italian working for an agency in some back office admin role in FB or PayPal or what have you they would have you on 26k. It is awful money. But these people are generally as tight as a nun's gash. They only shop in Penneys, they cycle everywhere rather than use public transport or run a car, they go out once a month and drink two pints, and a meal out for them is the McDonald's eurosaver six times a year. After rent some of these people wouldn't spend 30 quid a week.

Biker79

Johnny Jukebox wrote: »

a - is not true;

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/technology/facebook-ireland-staff-coin-it-as-average-pay-reaches-154-000-1.3714642

b - is true.

That statistic is very misleading. Most staff in the big tech companies are outsourced/ contractors/ managed service companies. Between 50 and 80 % of Salesforce/ Google/ Facebook /Microsoft/ Linkedin/ etc etc...

So when they say the average salary, they mean for the remaining 30 %, which is further skewed by stock options for senior management.

Either journalists are going to have to take some data analysis classes, or the news should come with a compulsory ' possible fake/misleading news ahead ' warning.

jimmycrackcorm

Thelonious Monk wrote:

And where would you move them to?

Leitrim is a nice county and they can't do much harm there.

Mike Murdock

Johnny Jukebox wrote: »

This proposal from Holland has its merits...

https://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/amsterdam-scum-town-to-house-anti-social-neighbours-28943064.html

That's a court case waiting to happen.

It'll be seen as being in breach of their "Human Rights".

Thelonious Monk

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Well that'll never happen in Ireland. I have a few undesirable neighbours I wish weren't there, but when people say they should be moved out if they act up, where do you put them? They'll just annoy other people no matter where you move them. Do you build them standalone houses in the countryside?
I don't know what the solution is but saying "move them out" isn't really constructive.

Keep moving them around. If they’re not prepared to keep to the rules of their tenancy then it’s their own fault if they never get to stay somewhere longer than 12/18 months. The council will fulfill their duties by housing them but if the tenant wants to stay put, they abide by the rules in place.

jimmycrackcorm

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Leitrim is a nice county and they can't do much harm there.

Will you lot stop talking about Leitrim! Don’t be putting ideas into councillors heads.

Johnny Jukebox

Biker79 wrote: »

So when they say the average salary, they mean for the remaining 30 %, which is further skewed by stock options for senior management.

Either journalists are going to have to take some data analysis classes, or the news should come with a compulsory ' possible fake/misleading news ahead ' warning.

I work for a big tech company and that is not my experience. Do you have a link which backs up your assertion please ?

doublejobbing 2

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Well that'll never happen in Ireland. I have a few undesirable neighbours I wish weren't there.

Sorry for derailing the thread slightly, although it is on the topic of social housing, but I recall you before saying you live in Edenmore.

What is Edenmore like? The local shopping centre has to be one of the most run down in all Dublin which gives the area a bit of a vibe whenever I've found myself there. There always seems to be young lads in their EA and North Face mulling around.

But the houses are ridiculously expensive for ex local authority area (start around 290K last I looked). A good 40K dearer than the bulk of Coolock only up the road (and a good 100K dearer than the worst parts like Darndale and Priorswood). And only 10% of the Edenmore homes are still LA rented.

https://maps.pobal.ie/WebApps/DeprivationIndices/index.html

It also seems to have a very unusual elderly vs youth ratio for a Dublin estate (although I think there may be a nursing home somewhere there, which could skew it, and IIRC there is an elderly flat block along Tonlegee Rd)

https://www.citypopulation.de/en/ireland/dublin/02050__edenmore/

Just wondering whether somewhere with seemingly an old population, expensive houses and a low level of LA rentals would still have serious issues. Guess there could be a good few there on HAP etc.

Thelonious Monk

Poor old Leitrim, first conifer plantations and now Dublin scumbag plantations.

Thelonious Monk

doublejobbing 2 wrote: »

What is Edenmore like? The local shopping centre has to be one of the most run down in all Dublin which gives the area a bit of a vibe whenever I've found myself there. There always seems to be young lads in their EA and North Face mulling around.

It's really quiet these days. Yes the "shopping centre" is horrible, and when I give out about neighbours I just mean some leave rubbish lying around and bits of cars lying around their gardens and outside. There hasn't been a shooting since New Year's Eve 2018 either!
On the bright side it's 12 mins walk from Dart station and 15 to St Anne's park, and a few more minutes to the seafront. So it has a lot more going for it than Coolock in my opinion, and a lot quieter.
So I can't complain, I feel blessed I could afford anywhere to live on my own at all, considering what people are up against these days. I bought in 2016 just before everything went totally insane again.

amacca

Mike Murdock wrote: »

That's a court case waiting to happen.

It'll be seen as being in breach of their "Human Rights".

Agreed

its an awful pity weve let it get to the stage where some of the arguably worst humans seemingly have more rights than decent ones willing to work hard to provide for their families....including the right not to pay for housing like everybody else

must be some sickener servicing a mortgage of 500k + for a place to live and some antisocial scumbag gets to move in next door for peanuts.

Either no social wlefare unless you have a disability or very generous but time limited based on work contributions up to that point and tailing off towards subsistence the longer you are on it...and fines in the form of witholding some payment if partaking in anti social behaviour + no luxury appartments ...you earn that or takes what you get if you dont


Then start going after the other end of the scum spectrum the croneys and the white collar parasites

Biker79

Johnny Jukebox wrote: »

I work for a big tech company and that is not my experience. Do you have a link which backs up your assertion please ?

20 years of contracting experience in said companies and other organizations

kildare lad

doublejobbing 2 wrote: »

A co op firm in Ballymun built terraced housing on state owned land for affordable purchase, looking to make only something like 5% profit.

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:5IUIHbbVidkJ:https://dublininquirer.com/2017/06/07/how-did-a-co-op-build-affordable-homes-in-ballymun-and-can-it-be-done-elsewhere+&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ie

Contrary to what FG would tell you it does not cost 220- 380K to build a social/ affordable home. It only costs this because they want their developer pals to make a killing. Part V should not be about buying homes off the developer- it should be about the developer providing new build homes on council owned land for free. If there's 100 homes in a development, and 10 are to be sold to the council for 350K, instead have the council pay them 3.5 million to build TWENTY homes on council owned land. Then promote a "social mix" by offering half of them for affordable cost price purchase. This in turn brings down prices in the wider market.

Pretty much every council housing estate in the wider Dublin area (including Fingal, South Dublin) has an excessive amount of green space which the council owns, which should be used to infill more social and affordable homes, built for around the 170K mark by a state run not for profit company.

I totally agree with you. And a lot of these big developers now are backed by vulture funds from America . So they pay little tax aswell as well as riding the state coffers. Town houses cost very little to build compared to semi detached houses. I used to build them . They are essentially a big long house with dividing walls separating each unit , they've a sitting room and kitchen down stairs , toilet under the stairs and 3 bedrooms with a toilet and shower upstairs . Small back garden with a fence around it and no front garden . Theyd cost no more than 100,000 to build per unit if you've the land there already. That's why it boils my blood to see the amount of money the government overpay for everything, look at the 5 house they built for travellers, costing 2.3 million and they refused to move into them cos they'd no room for horses .Sure they spend over 100 million on the homeless in Dublin every year . Could you imagine who many houses you'd build for that. Except there landlord , hoteliers buddies would lose out. It's an inept system, rife with cronyism we have here

kildare lad

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Having Ghettos is better than the oblivion facing people in their 30s-40s who will never access property ownership or social housing and will have to retire at 70 (or never at all) whilst still attempting to pay whatever rent will be in 30 years time. Homeless OAPs will be the future.

At least ghettos are solvable with crime enforcement.

The reality is, the housing crisis is beneficial to all politicians right now. The FG/FF are the parties of developers. The opposition need the crisis to rumble on to try and get elected. Which is why they are objecting to proposals left right and centre.

Council's and Garda just need to get tougher with scum families . If there's anti social behavior throw them and let them live in hostels in town . If they can't live normally in society let them live on the street There's a council estate near me and it was relatively quiet till they moved in two families of travellers . They caused murder in the estate for about 2 years till they left probably go cause murder somewhere else. How about a more stringent vetting procedure where they'll only give house to people with at least one or both parents working. A lot of problems caused in the estates are too many young kids and teens with parents/ parent who couldn't be arsed to discipline them .

kildare lad

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

Already plenty of houses outside of Dublin. Fact is the homeless people won't move to them. You will find loads of cases when houses are offered but because they are not in XYZ area they are rejected.
People know if they hold out for long enough they will get a house for life, rent free in the exact area they want. While everyone else is crying about "da poor homeless".
The biggest change that should be made is taking rent from source, millions of rent is not collected every year because the social housing tenants refuse to pay it.

The " forever home " brigade. The same clowns who were holding Margaret Cash as a modern day martyr.

doublejobbing 2

Can anyone explain how it is apparently more expensive now to build apartments than it is houses?

Plenty of articles on it but none explain the reason.

If brick and block costs, and costs of the trades building it, is the reason, perhaps it's time to consider these for social housing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panelh%C3%A1z


Throw a few of these up on the large swathes of empty wasteland in Ballymun. If your argument is that they are ugly and depressing, they are actually an improvement on the souless dump the re built centre of Ballymun looks like. All those silver and grey buildings, glass fronts everywhere, it looks more like an industrial estate than a community. The local architecture is already horrible, it can't get any worse.

Pete_Cavan

kildare lad wrote: »

Town houses cost very little to build compared to semi detached houses. I used to build them . They are essentially a big long house with dividing walls separating each unit , they've a sitting room and kitchen down stairs , toilet under the stairs and 3 bedrooms with a toilet and shower upstairs . Small back garden with a fence around it and no front garden . Theyd cost no more than 100,000 to build per unit if you've the land there already.

Nonsense. Look at the SCSI House Rebuild Calculator, they have the cost for rebuilding a 3 bed terraced house in Dublin as close to €200k without Built-In Wardrobes or Fences/Walls;

https://scsi.ie/consumer/build/house-rebuild-calculator/

That's based on already owning the land, no design/planning costs, etc. Posting completely unfounded nonsense distracts from the realities.

Idbatterim

amacca wrote: »

Agreed

its an awful pity weve let it get to the stage where some of the arguably worst humans seemingly have more rights than decent ones willing to work hard to provide for their families....including the right not to pay for housing like everybody else

must be some sickener servicing a mortgage of 500k + for a place to live and some antisocial scumbag gets to move in next door for peanuts.

Either no social wlefare unless you have a disability or very generous but time limited based on work contributions up to that point and tailing off towards subsistence the longer you are on it...and fines in the form of witholding some payment if partaking in anti social behaviour + no luxury appartments ...you earn that or takes what you get if you dont


Then start going after the other end of the scum spectrum the croneys and the white collar parasites

You mean a proper systemic they have in Germany? It wouldn't be " faor", it's only " fair" to abuse working people...

Fred Cryton

whippet wrote: »

because we developed ghettos of unemployment, crime and drug usage with this policy in the 70s & 80's

So you want to spread those people out among the rest of us at enormous expense? That makes so much sense.

kildare lad

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Nonsense. Look at the SCSI House Rebuild Calculator, they have the cost for rebuilding a 3 bed terraced house in Dublin as close to €200k without Built-In Wardrobes or Fences/Walls;

https://scsi.ie/consumer/build/house-rebuild-calculator/

That's based on already owning the land, no design/planning costs, etc. Posting completely unfounded nonsense distracts from the realities.

I've worked for a small builder for 20 years mainly doing one off houses or small estates, extension's etc. For the materials and labour you would get them built for that price. Anything to do with the government or council contracts adds extras zeros on to any project due to all the regulations and paperwork . Look at the children's hospital for example. If you had a plot of land you'd get a huge house built for 200,000.

Pete_Cavan

kildare lad wrote: »

I've worked for a small builder for 20 years mainly doing one off houses or small estates, extension's etc. For the materials and labour you would get them built for that price. Anything to do with the government or council contracts adds extras zeros on to any project due to all the regulations and paperwork . Look at the children's hospital for example. If you had a plot of land you'd get a huge house built for 200,000.

I also work in the industry and know that building airtight, A rated, low energy houses will absolutely be closer to €200k than €100k per unit. There is quite a bit in professional fees now due to BCAR, energy calculations and airtightness tests mean you can't cut corners in construction.

All residential units have to comply with the Building Regulations, BCAR, etc, there are no additional regulations for council houses. Any internal administration that might happen within the council is done by their staff

Keyzer

I highly doubt the option will be taken to actually purchase this unit as social housing

kildare lad

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

I also work in the industry and know that building airtight, A rated, low energy houses will absolutely be closer to €200k than €100k per unit. There is quite a bit in professional fees now due to BCAR, energy calculations and airtightness tests mean you can't cut corners in construction.

All residential units have to comply with the Building Regulations, BCAR, etc, there are no additional regulations for council houses. Any internal administration that might happen within the council is done by their staff

Jesus , We we're building 3 bed semis in 2002 and they were selling for 150,000. And we were on good money aswell . That's some money now for a building a town house, when you take the amount of material that go into them . Still a lot cheaper than 700,000 for a two bed apartment.

con___manx1

they should just put a cap on a social house of 300000. anyone that needs one in Dublin to bad. move them down the country.

IngazZagni

IngazZagni wrote: »

I don't believe the council has bought anything, yet. This development is still in the early stages of planning and is due to be a high end residential building and as part of the rules the developer must offer around 10% of the units for social housing. This doesn't need to be actually bought by the council though and what will probably happen is that 101 units will be provided in other mid range developments.

Mixing social housing with private is a good idea in general but it's not a good deal for taxpayers to have social housing in luxury developments such as this.

The Council doesn't have a choice, they have to buy them.
They used to have the option of taking cash from the developer, but the government got rid of this several years ago

CrazyFather1

twowheelsonly wrote: »

I love how these threads always turn in to tenant bashing as the default.

No mention of how the Politicians and their wealthy developer buddies have created this situation.

The cessation of direct building by Councils and the emergence of Public/Private Partnerships are what has directly led us to this situation. But sure, let's all complain about the tenant.

Tenant pays rent then I have no issue with them at all but it is fairly clear the tenants are not paying rent

That has nothing to do with a builder