I don’t think he’s necessarily wrong about not building apartments outside the city centre. Usually the compromise for living near the amenities in a city centre is space and that’s what gives apartments their value, so building them on the periphery of the city where they are both compromised in space and amenities doesn’t make much sense.
They are actually right. There is no demand for apartments outside the M50. The end value the market is willing to pay is less then construction costs which makes them unviable.
Not sure making micro gardens is helpful though unless theres fantastic public amenities in the scheme.
And if one person here replies “I’d like an apartment outside the M50” that doesnt mean theres demand for it
“It is not the cost of land, it is the cost of apartments when we could be building houses that is the main problem”
Absolute fucking bullshit, if it’s not the price of land how on earth are they building new apartments in Galway for a third of the cost in Dublin.
It’s insane that these reports just get published with zero expert rebuttals, it’s like letting McDonald’s set obesity targets.
Ok, maybe I didn’t sleep great but I found parts of article difficult to understand. Had to read it 2-3 times. But one thing to point we should be building apartments in our cities not just Dublin: Cork, Galway, limerick and our bigger towns are experiencing similar growing pains. It is about stopping a problem before it much worse and strangles the growth and not looking for excuses not to do like there is little demand. It is forward planning. I like the report and even Ó Broin comment on it, but where the fuck were these ideas and thinking 5 years ago, hell even 2 years ago. The problem with housing didn’t just start now it has been fucking up lives and businesses for nearly 10 years.
If only we could actually build apartments that are fit for long term habitation. When it comes to apartments it’s a cycle in Ireland.
Developers fling together any old shit that barely meets standards, people see it and live in it and then spread the word that the standard is awful, and then everyone has a perception going forward that apartments are awful.
It’s totally unsustainable and needs to change. There is absolutely no reason why apartments can’t be affordable and efficient when basically every other developed country has found a way to do it.
I don’t think perpetuating our semiD culture is the right way to go. It’s wasteful of space, and trying to meet density requirements with these three storey semiDs with their tiny rooms is ridiculous I think – the same space could be used to provide much nicer apartments.
The problem we have is obvious for anyone who travels on the LUAS lines. You start in places with high density (Tallaght and Sandyford), travel through mile upon mile of low-density housing estates, and density only begins to rise once you reach the city centre. Whether it’s through a combination of NIMBYism, planning resistance or just the general lack of mobility of people , we have things backwards. There’s reasons in well-run countries for things like property tax encouraging people to downsize as they get older, but we haven’t made that connection ourselves.
Maybe builders and developers shouldn’t be the ones creating plans to tackle the housing crisis?
Maybe the government should.
Once again completely ignoring the infrastructure cost for suburban sprawl.
The more spread-out people live, the more we need to spend on roads/water/waste/power infrastructure, the worse our public transport system becomes, and the less viable active travel becomes.
[deleted]
JFC letting the builders set the standards is like letting the National Rifle Association devise the rules of gun ownership – what you need when you meet a man with a gun is another man with a gun (we all know how that turns out). It’s totally self serving and unreliable advice.
1. Build up.
2. Sprawl out.
Choose one.
Smaller gardens are a good idea, although I’d prefer none. But the rest of it is ridiculous.
People in my town (Greystones) vehemently object to new builds. The open forum goes ballistic if there’s even a whiff of someone going in for planning permission.
Now, we have the final apartment block being build down the Marina, and granted they look absolutely shite compared to what they were suppose to look like, and guess who is objecting the most – The people who moved into their lovely new built houses in the marina.
These assholes either didn’t do their due diligence before buying their houses and were shocked to see that huge patch of land (surrounded by Glenveigh hoarding) was to be the site of the final apartment block.
They’re main complaint? “Not enough schools for more people to move in”. WE DONT ALL HAVE FUCKING CHILDREN MARGRET I JUST WANT TO STOP SLEEPING ON MY PARENTS LIVING ROOM FLOOR.
This is turkeys recommending vegan nut roasts for Christmas. We needn’t have bothered asking them.
The government should be looking at countries that actually know how to house and care for their citizens then applying what they learn to policies and law that compel builders to deliver developments on the basis of what people actually need
I do wonder if this is the same group that RTE had on a while ago, saying we needed to build even more housing estates to fix the housing crisis and that apartments aren’t viable.
It’s not an either or. We need loads more of both, fast.
Nobody wants to live in an apartment when you could live in a house! I’ve a five bedroom house and l do eeeeny meany miney moe each night to pick which room to sleep in,its fun. My back garden is 114 ft long and my cats love it,its a great life. Why the Hell would anybody ever pick an Apartment to live in??? Only the Builders want you to live in Apartments, there is no actual demand for them from the people.
17 comments
I don’t think he’s necessarily wrong about not building apartments outside the city centre. Usually the compromise for living near the amenities in a city centre is space and that’s what gives apartments their value, so building them on the periphery of the city where they are both compromised in space and amenities doesn’t make much sense.
They are actually right. There is no demand for apartments outside the M50. The end value the market is willing to pay is less then construction costs which makes them unviable.
Not sure making micro gardens is helpful though unless theres fantastic public amenities in the scheme.
And if one person here replies “I’d like an apartment outside the M50” that doesnt mean theres demand for it
“It is not the cost of land, it is the cost of apartments when we could be building houses that is the main problem”
Absolute fucking bullshit, if it’s not the price of land how on earth are they building new apartments in Galway for a third of the cost in Dublin.
It’s insane that these reports just get published with zero expert rebuttals, it’s like letting McDonald’s set obesity targets.
Ok, maybe I didn’t sleep great but I found parts of article difficult to understand. Had to read it 2-3 times. But one thing to point we should be building apartments in our cities not just Dublin: Cork, Galway, limerick and our bigger towns are experiencing similar growing pains. It is about stopping a problem before it much worse and strangles the growth and not looking for excuses not to do like there is little demand. It is forward planning. I like the report and even Ó Broin comment on it, but where the fuck were these ideas and thinking 5 years ago, hell even 2 years ago. The problem with housing didn’t just start now it has been fucking up lives and businesses for nearly 10 years.
If only we could actually build apartments that are fit for long term habitation. When it comes to apartments it’s a cycle in Ireland.
Developers fling together any old shit that barely meets standards, people see it and live in it and then spread the word that the standard is awful, and then everyone has a perception going forward that apartments are awful.
It’s totally unsustainable and needs to change. There is absolutely no reason why apartments can’t be affordable and efficient when basically every other developed country has found a way to do it.
I don’t think perpetuating our semiD culture is the right way to go. It’s wasteful of space, and trying to meet density requirements with these three storey semiDs with their tiny rooms is ridiculous I think – the same space could be used to provide much nicer apartments.
The problem we have is obvious for anyone who travels on the LUAS lines. You start in places with high density (Tallaght and Sandyford), travel through mile upon mile of low-density housing estates, and density only begins to rise once you reach the city centre. Whether it’s through a combination of NIMBYism, planning resistance or just the general lack of mobility of people , we have things backwards. There’s reasons in well-run countries for things like property tax encouraging people to downsize as they get older, but we haven’t made that connection ourselves.
Maybe builders and developers shouldn’t be the ones creating plans to tackle the housing crisis?
Maybe the government should.
Once again completely ignoring the infrastructure cost for suburban sprawl.
The more spread-out people live, the more we need to spend on roads/water/waste/power infrastructure, the worse our public transport system becomes, and the less viable active travel becomes.
[deleted]
JFC letting the builders set the standards is like letting the National Rifle Association devise the rules of gun ownership – what you need when you meet a man with a gun is another man with a gun (we all know how that turns out). It’s totally self serving and unreliable advice.
1. Build up.
2. Sprawl out.
Choose one.
Smaller gardens are a good idea, although I’d prefer none. But the rest of it is ridiculous.
People in my town (Greystones) vehemently object to new builds. The open forum goes ballistic if there’s even a whiff of someone going in for planning permission.
Now, we have the final apartment block being build down the Marina, and granted they look absolutely shite compared to what they were suppose to look like, and guess who is objecting the most – The people who moved into their lovely new built houses in the marina.
These assholes either didn’t do their due diligence before buying their houses and were shocked to see that huge patch of land (surrounded by Glenveigh hoarding) was to be the site of the final apartment block.
They’re main complaint? “Not enough schools for more people to move in”. WE DONT ALL HAVE FUCKING CHILDREN MARGRET I JUST WANT TO STOP SLEEPING ON MY PARENTS LIVING ROOM FLOOR.
This is turkeys recommending vegan nut roasts for Christmas. We needn’t have bothered asking them.
The government should be looking at countries that actually know how to house and care for their citizens then applying what they learn to policies and law that compel builders to deliver developments on the basis of what people actually need
I do wonder if this is the same group that RTE had on a while ago, saying we needed to build even more housing estates to fix the housing crisis and that apartments aren’t viable.
It’s not an either or. We need loads more of both, fast.
Nobody wants to live in an apartment when you could live in a house! I’ve a five bedroom house and l do eeeeny meany miney moe each night to pick which room to sleep in,its fun. My back garden is 114 ft long and my cats love it,its a great life. Why the Hell would anybody ever pick an Apartment to live in??? Only the Builders want you to live in Apartments, there is no actual demand for them from the people.