The social housing list in Dublin

ThunbergsAreGo

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

No they aren't, this is completely wrong. It's what social housing now seems to be.

It should be for those working lower paid jobs, and carers, those with disabilities etc.

those are people who cannot house themselves?

tom1ie

maccored wrote: »

be careful then who you vote for. Its not the person taking advantage of whats on offer to them thats the issue. its the governments who - for example - increase the dole, set PUP payments at a high level etc that are creating the issues.

you cant blame people who find they are better off on the dole refusing work (though how they arent bored to death I'll never understand). You should though blame the parties who set the system up that way

Which party will address this? There isn’t one.

Gloomtastic!

20/20 wrote: »

Here is another example of luxury social housing. These are on the Howth Road in Raheny with stunning views over Dublin Bay when the sun is out. This promo video on a foggy day does not show the area at its best. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_CscqEYFwA . Two family's are interviewed about their new homes. You can decide where they are from.

There are 40 Apts in the scheme http://assigned.ie/project/blankbanks-apartments-raheny-dublin-5/ and all gone to social housing. Five are three bedroom units , would love to know the rent paid for these. Here is a different Apt scheme on the same road only 180 meters away charging €2775 per month (furnished). https://www.daft.ie/for-rent/apartment-3-bedroom-apartment-occu-strand-view-howth-road-raheny-dublin-5/3196903 .

The majority of the homes nearby on the Howth Road are worth in excess of €800,000 with some over a million, so I guess there will not be much social inclusion.

I pass by these most days and was amazed they were all bought for social housing. It's like winning the lotto for the new residents. I knew there was something amiss when cheap deck chairs started appearing on the balconies.

That video makes me think of the people working at Cluid. One mentions how delighted they are to see people move into this fantastic homes but they then have to go home to their rented flat or hum drum semi that they're paying a fortune for. Political idealism gone mad.......:rolleyes:

ThunbergsAreGo

bubblypop wrote: »

those are people who cannot house themselves?

But many of the above do contribute

Maybe I took you up wrong

ThunbergsAreGo

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

But many of the above do contribute

Maybe I took you up wrong

I think so, social housing is for people who cannot house themselves, all people who cannot house themselves, for whatever reasons.
yeah, I didn't mean that everyone doesn't contribute, probably didn't explain myself very well!

maccored

tom1ie wrote: »

Which party will address this? There isn’t one.

how many parties have ever held real power in Ireland? theres only two. If you want to blame someone for the problems, blame those parties rather than the people who have social housing.

Then figure out for yourself which parties might do things differently.

We take no responsibility in this country,. we vote for parties who create an environment where you get as much money doing nothing than working, then we blame the people who take the money for doing nothing - not ourselves for voting in idiots.

tom1ie

maccored wrote: »

how many parties have ever held real power in Ireland? theres only two. If you want to blame someone for the problems, blame those parties rather than the people who have social housing.

Then figure out for yourself which parties might do things differently.

We take no responsibility in this country,. we vote for parties who create an environment where you get as much money doing nothing than working, then we blame the people who take the money for doing nothing - not ourselves for voting in idiots.

Agreed but will SF PBP labour or SD lower HAP which is distorting the rental market?
Can’t see it myself.

20/20

Wanderer78 wrote: »

please define these measures? in the middle of a flood plain maybe, next to a halting site, unpleasant areas such as next to a landfill, other next to other disruptive industries maybe? what types of lower standards, what does this mean?

This is your response when Nermal said Social housing should be built in cheap locations, to lower standards.

Do you agree with a whole scheme like this going to social housing
http://assigned.ie/project/blankbanks-apartments-raheny-dublin-5/ On a road where most homes are worth €800,000 and some over the million. A different scheme only 180 meters away on the same road is now taking bookings at €2775 per month available 21st May. Iam not into lower standards but there must be cheaper locations.

Wanderer78

20/20 wrote: »

This is your response when Nermal said Social housing should be built in cheap locations, to lower standards.

Do you agree with a whole scheme like this going to social housing
http://assigned.ie/project/blankbanks-apartments-raheny-dublin-5/ On a road where most homes are worth €800,000 and some over the million. A different scheme only 180 meters away on the same road is now taking bookings at €2775 per month available 21st May. Iam not into lower standards but there must be cheaper locations.

the whole issue of property price inflation has to be addressed, its starting fail catastrophically, for nearly everyone now. we have to try deal with things such as gentrification also, we re slowly driving out locals from their area, these issues are slowly destroying our society

Arealred

If you look at this on a country wide scale, the country does not have the money to buy all the properties it needs up front. Therefore it has to rent.


Councils should not be provided social housing in the capital city where the cost of the units are above 300k. That would build two units in Longford, Roscommon or Leitrim. If people particularly who are life long unemployed want social housing they shouldn't be allowed dictate where they get it.

maccored

tom1ie wrote: »

Agreed but will SF PBP labour or SD lower HAP which is distorting the rental market?
Can’t see it myself.

you cant expect such a complex issue to now be fixed by one action. it would probably taken numerous changes to different aspects of the problem to try resolve it.

Or you could ask yourself why company CEOs are making more money now than ever before. Is it because they are paying themselves more and their staff less? Paying people a liveable wage might be the answer. If they cant do that, they should go back to business college.

20/20

Wanderer78 wrote: »

the whole issue of property price inflation has to be addressed, its starting fail catastrophically, for nearly everyone now. we have to try deal with things such as gentrification also, we re slowly driving out locals from their area, these issues are slowly destroying our society

I suffer from dyslexia so you will have to explain gentrification.

40 social housing units in the middle of a road with million euro homes.

tom1ie

maccored wrote: »

you cant expect such a complex issue to now be fixed by one action. it would probably taken numerous changes to different aspects of the problem to try resolve it.

Or you could ask yourself why company CEOs are making more money now than ever before. Is it because they are paying themselves more and their staff less? Paying people a liveable wage might be the answer. If they cant do that, they should go back to business college.

Pay per more= there's more money in the system to be spent, thus companies selling (or REITS for example) have more scope to make more money.
Stop giving people more money and address costs.
Lower HAP so that rents arent kept artificially high.
Give more money to people and we end up in an inflation spiral.

gary550

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

I pass by these most days and was amazed they were all bought for social housing. It's like winning the lotto for the new residents. I knew there was something amiss when cheap deck chairs started appearing on the balconies.

That video makes me think of the people working at Cluid. One mentions how delighted they are to see people move into this fantastic homes but they then have to go home to their rented flat or hum drum semi that they're paying a fortune for. Political idealism gone mad.......:rolleyes:

Giving financially unaccomplished (and potentially unemployed) people the spoils of what is usually reserved for higher income earners in a place that is usually reserved for higher income earners is an absolute abomination and a big middle finger to the fools who work and pay an extraordinary amount of tax to keep this clown system going.

I may sound like a snob but christ on what planet can that be classified as right.

maccored

maccored wrote: »

We take no responsibility in this country,. we vote for parties

To be fair, Leo got in the door last time on his promise to take care of the people who get up early in the morning.


It's always been promised that the working man and woman will get taken care of. It's just never actually realised.

tom1ie

[Deleted User] wrote: »

To be fair, Leo got in the door last time on his promise to take care of the people who get up early in the morning.


It's always been promised that the working man and woman will get taken care of. It's just never actually realised.

Sure why would Leo change things though.
Rents are artificially high partly due to HAP which suits LL who FG represent I suppose.
If FG were of a mind to lower HAP the left leaning media would destroy them, hence it won't change.

Galwayguy35

Wanderer78 wrote: »

so potentially making people homeless, resolves issues by......

But they would only be made homeless by their own bad behaviour, if they act like decent people instead of feral rats there would be no problem.

tom1ie

tom1ie wrote: »

Sure why would Leo change things though

I'm pointing out that people ARE voting for change, but the change that's promised is just never delivered (or even attempted).

tom1ie

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'm pointing out that people ARE voting for change, but the change that's promised is just never delivered (or even attempted).

I'm agreeing with you I'm just pointing this out to others.

enricoh

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

I pass by these most days and was amazed they were all bought for social housing. It's like winning the lotto for the new residents. I knew there was something amiss when cheap deck chairs started appearing on the balconies.

That video makes me think of the people working at Cluid. One mentions how delighted they are to see people move into this fantastic homes but they then have to go home to their rented flat or hum drum semi that they're paying a fortune for. Political idealism gone mad.......:rolleyes:

A lad I know works for cluid, he was telling me he was going to end up getting sacked for clattering one of the spongers with the rage that was building up inside him!
So he has gone to a happy place instead, pays the spongers no heed now and focuses instead on those that are genuine and that he's helping them. I asked him what percentage is that , he reckoned 1 in every 3 customers!

https://eirigi.org/trackthevultures

Here lies our biggest problem.
I agree the spongers should be dealt with appropriately, but jesus this is shocking.

deandean

Jebus, that is shocking beyond belief.
It looks like the whole of Cherrywood will be BTL, currently 1300+ homes.
What hope do FTB's have?

20/20

enricoh wrote: »

A lad I know works for cluid, he was telling me he was going to end up getting sacked for clattering one of the spongers with the rage that was building up inside him!
So he has gone to a happy place instead, pays the spongers no heed now and focuses instead on those that are genuine and that he's helping them. I asked him what percentage is that , he reckoned 1 in every 3 customers!

Cluid dont listen to the public either. The public that pay their wages. I have asked twice for a copy of what the lease allows on the balconies. No reply.
The tenants only started moving into the Howth Road scheme in the last few weeks and I have had to email photos to Cluid on four occasions of washing on clothes horse's on the balconies. I have ten different cases of clothes out to dry on balconies,(but I am to embarrassed to send photos in every second day). One appartment in particular has a bike out, which is not normally allowed. That development has at least three unused bike storage areas. That same appartment has a 6 foot brass candelabra which would not look out of place in the pro cathedral, and for most of last Saturday it looked like the mats from a bathroom floor were hanging over the glass balcony to dry. I dont think its unreasonable to say this looks unsightly on a main road. But Cluid just pass the emails to a dedicated Housing Officer and I hear no more and washing is back out two days later.

deandean

deandean wrote: »

Jebus, that is shocking beyond belief.
It looks like the whole of Cherrywood will be BTL, currently 1300+ homes.
What hope do FTB's have?

Ftb have no hope, Havnt had much in the last few years under the idiots elected.
Social housing tenants won't have much luck either, between the new 4 month own door for the new arrivals and this.
Renters wont have much fun either with the inflating rents..
Who wins though? Easy to see.
Who looses? The squeezed middle as usual.

Gloomtastic!

20/20 wrote: »

Cluid dont listen to the public either. The public that pay their wages. I have asked twice for a copy of what the lease allows on the balconies. No reply.
The tenants only started moving into the Howth Road scheme in the last few weeks and I have had to email photos to Cluid on four occasions of washing on clothes horse's on the balconies. I have ten different cases of clothes out to dry on balconies,(but I am to embarrassed to send photos in every second day). One appartment in particular has a bike out, which is not normally allowed. That development has at least three unused bike storage areas. That same appartment has a 6 foot brass candelabra which would not look out of place in the pro cathedral, and for most of last Saturday it looked like the mats from a bathroom floor were hanging over the glass balcony to dry. I dont think its unreasonable to say this looks unsightly on a main road. But Cluid just pass the emails to a dedicated Housing Officer and I hear no more and washing is back out two days later.

Just a bit of friendly advice. You are going to go deranged if you keep on at this. You will get nowhere. Try and find something else to fill your time. Good luck!

20/20

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

Just a bit of friendly advice. You are going to go deranged if you keep on at this. You will get nowhere. Try and find something else to fill your time. Good luck!

Thanks, reading back now I am starting to look a bit crazy about them. And it does not bother me as much as some residents in the area either.

Also Iam not standing outside the block taking photos every-time something happens. The PTZ security cameras just click away for the emails.

20/20

20/20 wrote: »

Thanks, reading back now I am starting to look a bit crazy about them. And it does not bother me as much as some residents in the area either.

Also Iam not standing outside the block taking photos every-time something happens. The PTZ security cameras just click away for the emails.

To be fair, although i would agree you're wasting your time getting annoyed, I can fully understand your frustration, and I'd probably be the exact same, too.

20/20

20/20 wrote: »

Cluid dont listen to the public either. The public that pay their wages. I have asked twice for a copy of what the lease allows on the balconies. No reply.
The tenants only started moving into the Howth Road scheme in the last few weeks and I have had to email photos to Cluid on four occasions of washing on clothes horse's on the balconies. I have ten different cases of clothes out to dry on balconies,(but I am to embarrassed to send photos in every second day). One appartment in particular has a bike out, which is not normally allowed. That development has at least three unused bike storage areas. That same appartment has a 6 foot brass candelabra which would not look out of place in the pro cathedral, and for most of last Saturday it looked like the mats from a bathroom floor were hanging over the glass balcony to dry. I dont think its unreasonable to say this looks unsightly on a main road. But Cluid just pass the emails to a dedicated Housing Officer and I hear no more and washing is back out two days later.

What is the problem exactly?
Do you live in the development?
This reads like seeing clothes dry is somehow offending you.........

Idbatterim

You would need dictatorial powers to solve the housing crisis... moving this, is like moving an oil tanker, its glacial, and people have run out of patience. You can be guaranteed" the vulneable " less vulnerable than yourself perhaps, but far better off financially, will be top of the list for any new housing, as the government are so **** scared of the homeless figures etc...

I mean these people I.e us, they are screwing, actually vote. It shows you the cowardice of the politicians here... not one would say they were here to look after workers and there are 165 others in the dail, to pander exclusively to the wasters, like they do...

Mrs OBumble

bubblypop wrote: »

What is the problem exactly?
Do you live in the development?
This reads like seeing clothes dry is somehow offending you.........

Whether the OP lives there or not, the attitude that People Should Not Have THINGS on The Balcony is quite strange. The whole point if a balcony is outdoor space which people can use.