Irish Property Market chat II - *read mod note post #1 before posting*

HAP is too lucrative to give up for all those benefitting. For Dublin it can amount to 1250 if you have one child. The fact that 1250 is only an assistance payment and contributes to the overall rent shows just how a total crash (correction really) in the rental market isn't just a possibility (given the dislocation between 1250 pm in rent support and what average salaries are) but is a necessity.

Poolbeg now being offered back to the council on long term leases instead of offering them for sale. Investors are fleecing the tax payer with their resources to overpower the councils and the government from so many different angles from lobbying, hiring from the public sector those with connections to decision makers, threatening to starve supply etc. It's farcical.

The government have propped up the rental market making it a bubble and a bubble so large it has lifted all boats in our housing market. There is no metric where the current situation is sustainable. The question is where the chips fall when the whole thing collapses.

For example, companies creating more jobs in Ireland won't happen in the short to medium term with no where for employees to go and live. Less than 1000 rentals on Daft for the whole of Dublin for the last 5 months and people think jobs can still be created? eg tik tok claiming they can hire a couple thousand for Dublin over the next few years? Won't happen and this further growth of big comps ies is the sword on which our post-08 growth and recovery will fall.

How will the rental market crash happened with such a shortage of supply? And when will it happen?

Yeah but here we go again with a property tax. Any council owned property is exempt from property tax. Quoting the above "If it saves €1k then bring in a €1k tax to fund it" and guess who pays for it, the squeezed middle so how exactly is that fair.

All I am looking for is some form of fairness, everybody thinks retrofitting, building energy efficient state owned properties but its the squeezed middle who end up paying for the bulk of everything.

How exactly is that fair. I will ask the question again how is it fair that council housing stock is brought to a higher standard than owner occupied housing who can't afford to do our own properties but the state has no problem taxing us to pay for retrofitting council owned property.

You are missing the point. Tenants of social housing should pay something.

Great that your mother's house will be retrofitted free of charge but what about us in the middle.

If the work delivers 1k per year in savings to the owner/inhabitant in the form of reduced energy bills, then a tax of 1k constitutes 0 cost to the government and the owner/inhabitant

The current property tax is exempt on council houses, bring it in as universal environment tax. We don't have to continously repeat mistakes of the past

Throw all the carbon tax at the project also to speed it up

Self build or contractor?

when you look on daft rental, for complexes under kennedy wilson and the likes you will only see 1 ad per apartmnt type... in reality they have a number of these apartments for lease. so the total number of lets you see available is not correct.

Everywhere I look, experts, like architects, note there is a higher cost to building to passive standards and then justify it on the energy savings. Who are these experts claiming there is not additional cost?

"The research project CEPHUS, in partnership with the European Commission, published a study and conducted a comparison on architecturally identical houses built to the lowest legal standards and the required material cost increase to facilitate the Passive House standard.

​The results ranged from a 2% to 17% increase with an average of an 8% increase in build costs." https://www.nparchitects.co.uk/uncategorised/much-passive-house-cost/

Come get your free lunch here, no limit per customer...

3 rate hikes bringing the fed rate to 0.75-1.00% in 2022 with the long term rate post 2024 being 2% assuming economy remains strong. That is still a low rate environment and nothing like the rates of the 70/80’s

1) you wasn't able to answer the question.

2) you got it wrong on the salaries. Salaries/labor costs in fact it is going up.

A development in Dublin. Pricing is often dictated by the motive if the resarcher

If you bothered to read my post you would have seen I asked about those in the middle. But sure interpret my post to suit your agenda.

Property tax should be paid by the people living in the not the owners as its those who inhabit the property who are availing of the local services. Those in social housing are benefiting from the local services. But no lets go after those in the middle they are the easy targets, take the tax from their wages and they can't do anything about it.

'Good detailing is not expensive'

Argon filled double glazing is 5% more expensive and is not a detail - same goes for large quantities of thick insulation and heat recovery ventilation systems.

If you have a high airtightness, you absolutely need an HVAC system again, not cheap. That advertisment posing as an article implies their better sealed than passive - (bulldust) - units dont have a heat recovery ventilation system.

"Passive House buildingsWith the Passive House concept the heat loss that typically takes place in buildings through the walls, roof and windows is drastically reduced. With the five basic principles –high-quality thermal insulation, windows with triple glazing, avoidance of thermal bridges, an airtight building envelope, and a ventilation system with heat recovery"

And the Irish lads take on passive:

"With great airtightness comes great ventilation - or at least it should. In phase two of Silken Park, the decision was taken to go with an Aereco demand controlled mechanical extract ventilation system. There are two major advantages to this system - it's maintenance free and has exceptionally low running costs. It does tend to be less efficient than heat recovery ventilation, says Jay Stuart, but tests have suggested that the shortfall is only in the order of 8 to 12 per cent."

And 'And nor will you see the words 'green' or even 'passive' - I'm not surprised, as they might be held liable for false advertising.

You might be happy with that as evidence of 'professional' opinion on passive not adding to build costs, but it doesn't pass my sniff test.

Would you like to buy a large, slightly used bridge - one careful owner?