The great myths of housing

Idbatterim

ridiculous planning laws need to be changed. Tax undeveloped sites at a significant level. Reduce the cost of building apartments, telling people with a Hyundai budget, to buy bmw :rolleyes: they don't have the bloody bmw budget and its a roof over the head we are talking about...

Then lets get onto the moral disgrace of free luxury, prime location homes for free. Paid for those breaking their balls, who don't have a hope of every renting or owning the equivalent...

FFG and FG in particular, have an issue. they had a sizeable vote, the problem is, the rip off prices they lust for, are supported by a good chunk of their voters, while the others, young urbanites, who believed the lies about rewarding the early risers, are absolutely hammered...

Its the typical Irish cowardice of trying to please everyone. They are such cowards, that they will turn their back on their own voters and throw a fortune into the homeless etc, who despise them and would never vote FG, than they would , for not being apologetic about helping people who work. Easier doing that, than the far left popular and populist mouthpieces for rte and joe duffy...

I delight in what they have created for themselves politically, FFG! I mean look, the left at least, we know who they represent. Its people having voted centre in Irish fashion, then getting robbed on housing and worse living standards for many, that doesn't compute...

Ace2007

Brian? wrote: »

Build up in the city and infill where available.

Incentivise older people downsizing by having smaller units readily available for them close to devices.

Build up? How does that get you a house with a garden?

Brian?

Ace2007 wrote: »

Build up? How does that get you a house with a garden?

It doesn’t. Who said it should?

It actually helps keep the price of the houses with gardens down though because your don’t have 2-3 professional couples sharing them anymore. They buy an apartment

timmyntc

fvp4 wrote: »

Anybody who has access to the Indo have any idea what the op means by the 0.3% first time buyer transactions or how that even justifies his argument about there being no crisis, if true.

Poster incorrectly stated 0.3% of transactions - they are 25% of transactions and 0.3% of all homeowners or something - its a weird stat by the author given that you are a FTB until you buy your house.

Cyrus

Brian? wrote: »

What’s your point? The property prices could be correct, it doesn’t undermine a single point I mde about affordability

i made my point, you refuted it saying the source wasnt a good one, then admitted you werent sure if the figures were accurate or not.

this land of milk and honey has similar average house prices to Dublin, so unless average salaries are a lot higher i presume there is a similar thread on the dutch version of boards saying similar things :pac:

timmyntc

PMBC wrote: »

The supply demand thing would seem to make sense. But when we built almost 90,000 one year, prices still went up. Just an observation

The demand that time was because people kept remortgaging and buying more and more. Then trying to flip it based on the ever-growing prices. So the volume of sales and builds were real. But there wasnt actually demand to own and live in a lot of those units. Nobody bought to own, they bought to speculate then sell.

I see what you're getting at, it was just a very unusual property frenzy.

Brian?

Cyrus wrote: »

i made my point, you refuted it saying the source wasnt a good one, then admitted you werent sure if the figures were accurate or not.

this land of milk and honey has similar average house prices to Dublin, so unless average salaries are a lot higher i presume there is a similar thread on the dutch version of boards saying similar things :pac:

I didn’t refute your point. I didn’t even disagree with your point.

Ace2007

Brian? wrote: »

It doesn’t. Who said it should?

It actually helps keep the price of the houses with gardens down though because your don’t have 2-3 professional couples sharing them anymore. They buy an apartment

So those looking to buy a family home are still no better off?

Instead we will have years of legal battles and appeals because no one wants high rise apartments in their area.

Who do you want to fund these apartment blocks, and the legal challengers that will follow because of planning laws?

All you have to do is use google - you had houses earmarked for St. Anne's Park granted premission, appealled, appealed again - no idea what's happened with it now, but folk want houses, but not in green areas, so where do they build them - on the outskirts of Dublin?

Idbatterim

Idbatterim wrote: »

FFG and FG in particular, have an issue. they had a sizeable vote, the problem is, the rip off prices they lust for, are supported by a good chunk of their voters, while the others, young urbanites, who believed the lies about rewarding the early risers, are absolutely hammered...

Yes, no reason for any young person or renter in fact to vote FFG. As for the rip off prices beloved of the old brigade, that just shows how people like to feather their own nests not just at the expense of younger generations, but in many cases their own children. The "move to Longford" brigade aren't helping things on here.

I delight in what they have created for themselves politically, FFG! I mean look, the left at least, we know who they represent. Its people having voted centre in Irish fashion, then getting robbed on housing and worse living standards for many, that doesn't compute...

I am a floating voter but FFg are doomed if they don't fix this. SF will get in sometime.

Brian?

Ace2007 wrote: »

So those looking to buy a family home are still no better off?

Instead we will have years of legal battles and appeals because no one wants high rise apartments in their area.

Who do you want to fund these apartment blocks, and the legal challengers that will follow because of planning laws?

All you have to do is use google - you had houses earmarked for St. Anne's Park granted premission, appealled, appealed again - no idea what's happened with it now, but folk want houses, but not in green areas, so where do they build them - on the outskirts of Dublin?

Why do you ignore my points?

If there are more apartments built in the city then there is less demand for houses. Keeping the prices down.

If older people downsize, the number of 2nd houses for sale goes up. Keeping prices down.

The system is broken and needs to be changed. Planning included. Fiddling round the edges just gets us more of the same.

Ace2007

Ace2007 wrote: »

So those looking to buy a family home are still no better off?

Instead we will have years of legal battles and appeals because no one wants high rise apartments in their area.

Who do you want to fund these apartment blocks, and the legal challengers that will follow because of planning laws?

All you have to do is use google - you had houses earmarked for St. Anne's Park granted premission, appealled, appealed again - no idea what's happened with it now, but folk want houses, but not in green areas, so where do they build them - on the outskirts of Dublin?

We can't build anymore semi detached houses in the centre, or easy suburbs, of Dublin. So apartments is the future.

Ace2007

fvp4 wrote: »

We can't build anymore semi detached houses in the centre, or easy suburbs, of Dublin. So apartments is the future.

But it's family homes that people are complaining about that they are been out bid on and can't buy in the areas they want to.

Those bidding 500k+ on houses are not interested in buying apartments.

Idbatterim

here is another issue, developer lead planning, they build what is easiest to build or mos profitable. Totally understandable...

HOWEVER there are many developments in my area of Dublin, houses were put up, when they should only be giving permission for apartments. You can then have people downsize into these apartments etc, and have much higher density. Rather than 5 bed homes going in. It is totally ridiculous...

Maybe there need to be incentives given to downsize, a proper LPT would do the job, like they have in properly run countries, but cant seem them touching that here. I cant answer how to solve problems here, when they arent prepared to change ANYTHING. Answers on a back of a postcard :rolleyes:

timmyntc

Ace2007 wrote: »

But it's family homes that people are complaining about that they are been out bid on and can't buy in the areas they want to.

Those bidding 500k+ on houses are not interested in buying apartments.

1) There are loads of family houses being rented to students or groups of professionals. These people would definitely rent apartments closer to the city centre if they were there and affordable. This would free up a lot of existing stock for families to rent or buy.

2) We can make apartments large enough to raise a family in. It wont be for everyone, but there will no doubt be plenty of people who would be more than happy to live in a central 3 bed apartment with good transport links and amenities nearby.

Ubbquittious

fvp4 wrote: »

We can't build anymore semi detached houses in the centre, or easy suburbs, of Dublin. So apartments is the future.

Or start pressurising the existing vacant and derelict houses to become usable houses again. Also a lot of the office buildings will be partially empty since the ushering in of working from home, these can be turned into apartments without the need to build anything new

Idbatterim

timmyntc wrote: »

1) There are loads of family houses being rented to students or groups of professionals. These people would definitely rent apartments closer to the city centre if they were there and affordable. This would free up a lot of existing stock for families to rent or buy.

2) We can make apartments large enough to raise a family in. It wont be for everyone, but there will no doubt be plenty of people who would be more than happy to live in a central 3 bed apartment with good transport links and amenities nearby.

YES! back to square one we need well located and reasonably priced apartments! Yet there will be talk here for years to come, over how to solve this, its pathetic and exhausting!

They wont build infrastructure here either, so redeveloping and building in established , serviced areas, makes by far the most sense. Where people can walk, cycle or have some semi decent bus route. That wont take an hour and a half to get into town, which it wont, even with the scandalous transport system here... if you are on 4-6 km out of the centre...

huge amounts of low rise crap commercial was built in the docklands, it should be rezoned for apartments...

Ace2007

timmyntc wrote: »

1) There are loads of family houses being rented to students or groups of professionals. These people would definitely rent apartments closer to the city centre if they were there and affordable. This would free up a lot of existing stock for families to rent or buy.

2) We can make apartments large enough to raise a family in. It wont be for everyone, but there will no doubt be plenty of people who would be more than happy to live in a central 3 bed apartment with good transport links and amenities nearby.

And how much would these apartments cost? Whose going to fund the building of them?

GreeBo

Brian? wrote: »

Because the poster said there are "loads of couples on 125k" each. That's simply wrong, I never said anything about expensive areas.

How is it simply wrong?
in 2016 1.9% of households had an income in excess of 200K, I'll go out on a limb and say that has increased.

I find it bizarre that you disagree that there are loads of couples on 125K, yet you think "quite a lot" of people emigrate from Ireland to The Netherlands...

Fred Cryton

The biggest myth of all is that the Shinners will magic up cheap homes for all, using magically available new land and magically cheap labour and materials to build them.

Especially when Eoin O Brien celebrated the fact that Johnny Ronan didn't get to build a 1,000 homes in Docklands.

Where do the Shinners think the homes are going to come from if they go after the banks, the investment funds and the developers who actually build them.

PauloMN

Many other countries in Europe manage to have families living long term in apartments. The difference is in the quality of the build and what a buyer gets for their money. Typical apartments I've been in in other countries have a really high standard of quality - proper sound proofing between floors and between units, quality fittings, high ceilings, proper storage both within the apartment and assigned storage space in basements etc. (no bikes or other stuff on the balcony), assigned and secure car parking. IMO that quality - which turns an apartment into a proper long term solution for a family to live in rather than a place to crash for a few years - is missing in the majority of apartments I have been in in Ireland.

I simply could not imagine spending the rest of my life living in the typical apartment complex in Ireland, yet I've been in really beautiful apartments on the continent where I could have imagined living long term.

If apartments are a big part of the future in Ireland, and it looks like they have to be, then the ante has to be seriously upped in terms of quality and space. Will people be willing to spend 3 bed semi with garden in the suburbs money on an apartment though?

GreeBo

Brian? wrote: »

It doesn’t. Who said it should?

It actually helps keep the price of the houses with gardens down though because your don’t have 2-3 professional couples sharing them anymore. They buy an apartment

I dont think anyone is saying it should, but to borrow an argument, my parents were able to afford a house with a garden on a single salary, why do I have to live in an apartment with no garden?


Wouldnt reducing the price of desirable houses with gardens increase demand and therefore increase the cost again?

micosoft

kippy wrote: »

There is no 'housing industry' - you simply cannot compare both.

There absolutely is a housing industry. It may be largely artisanal but it is there. And it's an absolutely fair question to ask if our current process to build housing is fit for purpose or could be enhanced. The answer is probably complex (tradition + skills + buyers expectations +etc) but I've no doubt a holistic look at how we build in Ireland would deliver efficiencies...

Cyrus

PauloMN wrote: »

Many other countries in Europe manage to have families living long term in apartments. The difference is in the quality of the build and what a buyer gets for their money. Typical apartments I've been in in other countries have a really high standard of quality - proper sound proofing between floors and between units, quality fittings, high ceilings, proper storage both within the apartment and assigned storage space in basements etc. (no bikes or other stuff on the balcony), assigned and secure car parking. IMO that quality - which turns an apartment into a proper long term solution for a family to live in rather than a place to crash for a few years - is missing in the majority of apartments I have been in in Ireland.

I simply could not imagine spending the rest of my life living in the typical apartment complex in Ireland, yet I've been in really beautiful apartments on the continent where I could have imagined living long term.

If apartments are a big part of the future in Ireland, and it looks like they have to be, then the ante has to be seriously upped in terms of quality and space. Will people be willing to spend 3 bed semi with garden in the suburbs money on an apartment though?

i did in the past, and the apartment had all of the things you mention, large underground storage, secure parking, 1000 sq feet for a two bed, lovely communal grounds. But i have never been in a complex like it since i have to say.

went back recently to see the gardens if anything it looks better than it did 5 years ago.

if building apartments (especially outside the core city centre) developers should be mandated to provide a certain (large) amount of communal green space per unit and underground lockups, that would make them a lot more interesting.

micosoft

PauloMN wrote: »

Many other countries in Europe manage to have families living long term in apartments. The difference is in the quality of the build and what a buyer gets for their money. Typical apartments I've been in in other countries have a really high standard of quality - proper sound proofing between floors and between units, quality fittings, high ceilings, proper storage both within the apartment and assigned storage space in basements etc. (no bikes or other stuff on the balcony), assigned and secure car parking. IMO that quality - which turns an apartment into a proper long term solution for a family to live in rather than a place to crash for a few years - is missing in the majority of apartments I have been in in Ireland.

I simply could not imagine spending the rest of my life living in the typical apartment complex in Ireland, yet I've been in really beautiful apartments on the continent where I could have imagined living long term.

If apartments are a big part of the future in Ireland, and it looks like they have to be, then the ante has to be seriously upped in terms of quality and space. Will people be willing to spend 3 bed semi with garden in the suburbs money on an apartment though?

It's a really long term shift though and cultural. A lot of the middle class in the cities have houses in the country. A lot of this was built around climate - you wanted to escape the city in August because the heat was unbearable. So you disappeared to your country house...

Mad_maxx

Brian? wrote: »

It's called having an opinion.

yes but the same opinion over and over again is very tedious ( the capitalist system is the problem etc )

Ace2007

Cyrus wrote: »

if building apartments (especially outside the core city centre) developers should be mandated to provide a certain (large) amount of communal green space per unit and underground lockups, that would make them a lot more interesting.

Again, it's within the city that the huge issue is with prices and within the city that people have certain areas set on. The issue isn't a housing crises that the media portrait, it's houses not available when certain cohort of the population want.

You could build 10,000 luxury apartments in Baldoyle and you probably won't fill them as they aren't what people want.

mariaalice

Mad_maxx wrote: »

yes but the same opinion over and over again is very tedious ( the capitalist system is the problem etc )

And for the sake of balance the two posters who are obsessed with social housing and those who live in them, rarely post about anything else. I use to think one was trolling but on balance not, it more comes across as the ranting is a release and a coping mechanism, the other comes across a quite an unlikeable individual.

GreeBo

Ace2007 wrote: »

Again, it's within the city that the huge issue is with prices and within the city that people have certain areas set on. The issue isn't a housing crises that the media portrait, it's houses not available when certain cohort of the population want.

You could build 10,000 luxury apartments in Baldoyle and you probably won't fill them as they aren't what people want.

There are pretty few vacant lots in the areas that people want to live though, so either they stump up and pay to live in the area they want, or they live somewhere else.

If there were no homes available in certain counties then people would have a point, but not being able to live where you want because you cant afford it is bizarre to me.
I was only able to buy where I wanted 3 houses later, people on low to middle incomes cant seriously expect to live in desirable locations, if they are desirable then its a fight over limited resources and those with more money will win out everytime, unless you interrupt the market.

Cyrus

Ace2007 wrote: »

Again, it's within the city that the huge issue is with prices and within the city that people have certain areas set on. The issue isn't a housing crises that the media portrait, it's houses not available when certain cohort of the population want.

You could build 10,000 luxury apartments in Baldoyle and you probably won't fill them as they aren't what people want.

when i say core city centre i mean D1 and D2 (areas where you probably wont have green space free) but if being built in ranelagh or dalkey then they need green space.

Ace2007

GreeBo wrote: »

There are pretty few vacant lots in the areas that people want to live though, so either they stump up and pay to live in the area they want, or they live somewhere else.

If there were no homes available in certain counties then people would have a point, but not being able to live where you want because you cant afford it is bizarre to me.
I was only able to buy where I wanted 3 houses later, people on low to middle incomes cant seriously expect to live in desirable locations, if they are desirable then its a fight over limited resources and those with more money will win out everytime, unless you interrupt the market.

And we've come full circle, and what my original point was - if you can't afford, stop complaining and buy where you can. To many people today want the dream home from Day 1.