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

The Dundrum nimbys are among the worst, and that's saying something given some of the dynamite quotes we've gotten from the Milltown nimbys in the last year.

They packed out Taney Hall to the rafters with nimbys voicing their objections to the scheme, average age in the room of circa 70.

There is a quote in that article from a woman who says her family bought their house in the area when it was first built in 1963. The irony seems to be completely lost on them that if residents at the time had objected to her house being built she would not be in such a privileged position today to voice their objection to a new scheme in Dundrum.

Take note of the politicians objecting to the scheme. FG are all over this one. Jim O'Leary is quoted in that article spouting absolute nonsense that the scheme needs to cater to employment as well as residential needs. Jim, if you're reading this, I would challenge you to take a walk around Dundrum Town Centre and even Nutgrove Shopping Centre and count all of the help wanted signs in the shop windows, there's quite a few of them. You say that the area is zoned for mixed use and 95% of the scheme is to be used for residential units, I would have thought that is perfectly commensurate with the need for housing presently. Josepha Madigan was a notable objector to the scheme too.

The nimbys are a national disgrace and it's near time their objections were treated with appropriate disdain.

The only trick to holding out in 2008-2011 was to not get fired or be forced to take a massive paycut. I was a penniless PhD student so no chance of buying property regardless, but I appreciated the 30+% drop in my rent

This time however I don't see the rents collapsing, certainly not to the same extent

2 job losses, (08 and 10) plus reduction in pay in subsequent jobs in our household. There was always a cloud over the jobs so we were prepared.

Recessions can be scary but they can bring incredible opportunity.

I feel this one could be very different to 08

What I don't understand with these new developments (and we're seeing the same thing out my way with the O' Deanvey Gardens redevelopment) is the sheer height and scale of the things. It's like there was no room for moderation at any stage of the planning.

Yes, we need lots more homes, and fast. Yes, we need to go higher than we have been historically. But at what point do we say 'okay, that's high enough?' in regards to how something sits into its surroundings? Again, we need big developments to help solve the housing crisis, but at the same time I would assume folks want to have some kind of visual attractiveness to the developments and not just massive monstrosities everywhere?

For better or worse, if that Dundrum development goes ahead its going to cause the mother of all traffic issues, on top of the mother of the mother of all traffic issues the mental hospital development is going to cause. I'm yet to see any plans as to how the roads or the luas is going to deal with either?

Beyond NIMBYism, some of these developments do have genuine issues..

Nobody ever said...quality comes cheap!! 😎

Wow, some startling figures in there. Rip off Republic at its finest. Where's the outrage? How long more can this continue?

Ridiculous regulation like MUP certainly and unnecessarily add to it.

I do agree we need dense developments, but this need seems to have given developers a kind of carte blanche to build the densest, highest, ugliest things they can and anyone who objects is branded a NIMBY and told to shut up.

There's definitely a space in between developers throwing up cheap ugly housing and NIMBY-ism objecting to everything. Good design is (you'd think anyway) a staple of architecture and building. With this push for accelerated building we've actual been given an amazing opportunity to create great spaces for people to live in but I'd imagine the simplest solution for developers is what we're going to see more and more of.

We're kind of agreeing here though, I've no issue with density as long as it's done right visually. A lot of objections I see are coming from folks saying that they've no problem with new developments in their area, just to please make them look visually appealing and not just a huge mass of concrete and glass with no consideration given to the area around it.

I suppose the problem is, visual flair and consideration costs more money. Why would developers bother spending more when they can just pack in as many apartments as possible?

Its just starting to give me shades of all the corpo flats that were thrown up as a matter of urgency to replace the falling down tenement buildings. They served their purpose and housed people, but ultimately now are ugly as sin and being torn down in a lot of cases.

How is yer wan at the end with her objection essay letter..climate change, mental health, removal of trees for the bridge, biodiversity

....and she still she could write more.