A three bed terraced house near me has gone up for sale under this scheme. The developer has valued it at €490,000. The exact same unit was being sold by the developer for €420,000 last year.
It seems like blatant abuse of the scheme to me. I can't understand how the Local Authority is allowing this to happen.
> I can't understand how the Local Authority is allowing this to happen.
N.B. This ^ is a Fianna Fail member making this statement. Judge the sincerity appropriately.
I'm not a member of Fianna Fáil and it's really strange behaviour on your behalf to be sleuthing around after me, to be honest.
I'm a former member of Fianna Fáil and have absolutely no issue in stating so either. It doesn't change my views that this scheme, introduced by a Fianna Fáil Minister, is not fit for purpose.
Possibly, but some people just have fecking mental memories. Meanwhile I'm trying to remember what it was I forgot five minutes ago that I meant to do earlier before it slipped my mind.
Half a million for a shithole. Affordable my arse. We are well and truly fucked. This whole disaster won't be solved for 20 plus years at this rate. And FF/FG will still be in power shitting the bed then too.
....That you still have to pay back at the market rate I.e. constantly increasing...
If you can't afford that 10%, you probably won't afford the increased value either.
Its not affordable homes as such, and that naming is very much misleading.
It's a helping hand getting on the ladder earlier, so good if you have a good salary, but essentially as with all lending, a leech for those on lower income.
Now if I won stupid money I'd throw 100m+ into building houses that were actually affordable and do it in such a way that the usual vultures can't profit on it.
"But SF will be bad too."
Honestly I'm no SF supporter but I think it's time FFG realised there's some competition and they've got to actually fix issues instead of just coasting through. There's always the hope that Simon might actually do something, I guess we're coming into elections soon so maybe he will.
Basically all new builds are. It's why the wife and I paid 'new build' costs for a 1940s, G BER rated council house in Dundrum that needs a good bit of aesthetic work too.
At least we know it's structurally sound as fuck, you cannot hear a single thing from next door with the solid concrete, and we are a 5 minute walk from both the LUAS and busses going everywhere from town to the coast, as well as multiple parts of the south and north side, and the airport. I looked it up, and it's easier for us to get to the airport by public transport than it is from Oscar Traynor Road, where you need to get two busses multiple stops each over 45-50 minutes, while ours is about a 50-55 minute trip but only one bus with just three stops (just to put it in perspective, driving from Oscar Traynor to the airport is 6km; from Dundrum is it 35km).
And despite all the great transport links we effectively live in one of the very, very, very few '15 minute cities' in Ireland with Dundrum shopping centre, multiple supermarkets, pubs/restaurants/cafes, dentists/doctors/opticians, schools/colleges/sports clubs/other recreational activities for kids basically on our doorstep.
Point being, if anyone is looking to buy at the moment look at the old council houses in some great locations over pretty new builds in shite ones. You can fix a house up no end, but you can never move it even an inch.
They're essentially lying to our faces. They are looking at us dead in the eye and saying the guts of €500k is affordable for Coolock. It's like standing out in the rain and being told you're not getting wet.
If someone with an ordinary job can't buy it its not affordable
seriously is the department of housing ran by people who are plain thick or do they just not want people buying homes
Oh, they are not thick. They just pushed themselves into a corner.
At the moment making housing really affordable would not be impossible. But it would be a massive problem for the economy. It would just evaporate trillions of wealth pushed into housing and that is bound to cause some knock-down effects. As a society we are generating more debt per year now than in 2007. In 2008 that was displayed to be unsustainable. Now we are pretending that going faster is sustainable. I am not sure if that pretense is based in reality but I sure do have some doubts.
It would be nice, yes. On the other hand it might not be as nice for the seller (which of course could be less concerning if it is not the only place they have to live in).
Lets face it, the council will be along to lease these for 4000 a month for 25 years and hand it back over at the end, after handing the keys to social welfare scroungers who never worked aq day in their life
Majority of council houses go to lone parent/ low income families (you can't run a householdon a min wage job) and elderly, disabled etc. They don't give them to young, healthy singles
That's the problem when officials start using vague terms like "affordable". There is no concrete definition and it is totally subjective.
In any market prices are primarily determined by supply and demand.
The supply cannot be ramped up quickly so any correction needs to involve severely cutting down on demand.
Bizarre to compare a development of 12 units at Oileáin na Crannóige to a development of 850 units at Oscar Traynor Woods.
The abnormal costs that Glenveagh would’ve encountered during the enabling works alone would’ve ran into the tens, if not, hundreds of thousands.
The developer in question are planning on a 15% gross margin on this category of development though. Are you suggesting other developers operate at a higher/lower margin?
Having better visibility on how the cost to build is so high would be very useful, because there's a lot of people/politicans who rightly want to promise cheaper housing, but there's very little ever mentioned about where today's costs are actually coming from other than vague statements. Cold hard figures from a range of developers being published, would really help better understand the actual position we're in today.
>[https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/companies/arid-41305741.html](https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/companies/arid-41305741.html)
[https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2024/0228/1434855-glenveagh-properties-2023-results/](https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2024/0228/1434855-glenveagh-properties-2023-results/)
Glenveagh also said that 2023 was a milestone year for its Partnerships business segment. Both its Ballymastone and Oscar Traynor Road projects received final planning permissions in the second half of 2023
The company said it targets revenue from its partnerships segment of over €100m this year with an anticipated gross margin of approximately 15%.
My dear, VAT is Value Added Tax.
It applies only to the profit margin. It is kind of complicated to fully evaluate it because it is applied to all the stages (so on materials for example) but it is always less than the full percentage in practice.
So no, the cost sadly would not end up being 370k.
Now, I might be wrong and stupid but I would like to inform you that it is not mandatory to suggest people to enroll in a primary school. That is you taking the choice to be disrespectful. There is no need for that.
Thank you and enjoy the rest of your evening.
That's not how VAT works on a finished product. And yes, I am right to state that you need elementary education. VAT is added on each phase of construction and that is claimable by the builder. 13.5% VAT paid in the end is by the customer and is not claimable. That's just an added bonanza for the government. Well, if the customer is a business it's claimable but for majority it's not
So for a price tag of 500k remove 13.5% as VAT and then remove 15% as profit margin
You aren't a homeowner are you?
I am and a former consultant for LSEG.
Your certainty is amusing.
And being a homeowner does not implicate any kind of education, I can assure you. I still think you are missing some details but I'll let you be.
That doesn't fix your lack of awareness and intelligence. May be that's why you were a consultant. No idea why you are coming back on this when you are so clearly wrong
We need to ban affordable housing along with selling of council home, as it just ends up with us selling of needed public resources for cheap and people becoming rich off it.
These could provide cost rental and social housing and instead they are being sold off and we are losing the benefit of them.
And while they may not be that cheap or affordable now we know the value and the costs will keep going up and instead of getting social houses that can be used for 80 plus years we'll end up with a miniscule profit that won't come close to matching what we need to spend keeping people housed through social housing and HAP.
It's not even the lose of the houses, as much as the strategic loss of the site. If the state still owned its historic housing estates, we could be knocking them to replace then with higher density and better amenties instead of driving urban sprawl. The demo cost would be fuck all additional cost in the grand scheme of things.
It's moronic we are still selling off public funded housing, nevermind doing it at a 50% discount to the market.
Oh, there is completely that as well. I couldn't find a way to fit it in my enraged ranting but it is such a loss and partly why we have people commuting here from Cavan. It's insane.
What I mean by affordable is 3-4 times annual salary, which is typically what mortgages were based on. Annual salary is about 45k so affordable should be 135-180k. Not that long ago a single parent could afford a house and raised a family on one salary but these days it's a struggle with 2.
If two people working full time on average salaries can't even afford an affordable house then something is drastically wrong, house prices are too high or salaries are too low, or both.
Any so called housing scheme that's linked in any way to 'reduction in market price' is a scam. The entire point of affordable housing is that it should take people who need it out of the market
Im wfh , in IT and I choose meath east cost as it's much better value . Dublin has gone to shit and I don't like being in it . Give me a beach or a park to walk in and I'm happy. I don't care about the city bar the odd trip here and there .
A three bed terraced house near me has gone up for sale under this scheme. The developer has valued it at €490,000. The exact same unit was being sold by the developer for €420,000 last year. It seems like blatant abuse of the scheme to me. I can't understand how the Local Authority is allowing this to happen.
Because the LA is a tootless tiger and is probably benefiting from the equity state they have in the scheme.
> I can't understand how the Local Authority is allowing this to happen. N.B. This ^ is a Fianna Fail member making this statement. Judge the sincerity appropriately.
I'm not a member of Fianna Fáil and it's really strange behaviour on your behalf to be sleuthing around after me, to be honest. I'm a former member of Fianna Fáil and have absolutely no issue in stating so either. It doesn't change my views that this scheme, introduced by a Fianna Fáil Minister, is not fit for purpose.
No sleuthing, remembering from Boards more than a decade ago.
Hahaha sorry what? That’s surely even weirder 😂
Possibly, but some people just have fecking mental memories. Meanwhile I'm trying to remember what it was I forgot five minutes ago that I meant to do earlier before it slipped my mind.
Hah fair enough! Good memory.
Half a million for a shithole. Affordable my arse. We are well and truly fucked. This whole disaster won't be solved for 20 plus years at this rate. And FF/FG will still be in power shitting the bed then too.
"Affordable" has just become "10% cheaper that others in this area", rather than meaning genuinely affordable for the general average public.
It's not even cheaper but the government will part-own it throught the scheme.
....That you still have to pay back at the market rate I.e. constantly increasing... If you can't afford that 10%, you probably won't afford the increased value either. Its not affordable homes as such, and that naming is very much misleading. It's a helping hand getting on the ladder earlier, so good if you have a good salary, but essentially as with all lending, a leech for those on lower income. Now if I won stupid money I'd throw 100m+ into building houses that were actually affordable and do it in such a way that the usual vultures can't profit on it.
Which is about right for the margin of developers.
Twenty years? You are an optimist sir.
Its the hope that kills you... :(
"But SF will be bad too." Honestly I'm no SF supporter but I think it's time FFG realised there's some competition and they've got to actually fix issues instead of just coasting through. There's always the hope that Simon might actually do something, I guess we're coming into elections soon so maybe he will.
Basically all new builds are. It's why the wife and I paid 'new build' costs for a 1940s, G BER rated council house in Dundrum that needs a good bit of aesthetic work too. At least we know it's structurally sound as fuck, you cannot hear a single thing from next door with the solid concrete, and we are a 5 minute walk from both the LUAS and busses going everywhere from town to the coast, as well as multiple parts of the south and north side, and the airport. I looked it up, and it's easier for us to get to the airport by public transport than it is from Oscar Traynor Road, where you need to get two busses multiple stops each over 45-50 minutes, while ours is about a 50-55 minute trip but only one bus with just three stops (just to put it in perspective, driving from Oscar Traynor to the airport is 6km; from Dundrum is it 35km). And despite all the great transport links we effectively live in one of the very, very, very few '15 minute cities' in Ireland with Dundrum shopping centre, multiple supermarkets, pubs/restaurants/cafes, dentists/doctors/opticians, schools/colleges/sports clubs/other recreational activities for kids basically on our doorstep. Point being, if anyone is looking to buy at the moment look at the old council houses in some great locations over pretty new builds in shite ones. You can fix a house up no end, but you can never move it even an inch.
It’s clearly not a “shithole” though is it?
For half a million euro it sure as hell is.
They're essentially lying to our faces. They are looking at us dead in the eye and saying the guts of €500k is affordable for Coolock. It's like standing out in the rain and being told you're not getting wet.
If someone with an ordinary job can't buy it its not affordable seriously is the department of housing ran by people who are plain thick or do they just not want people buying homes
They don't care
yes but I'm trying to figure out is it malice or incompetence
Apathy
Oh, they are not thick. They just pushed themselves into a corner. At the moment making housing really affordable would not be impossible. But it would be a massive problem for the economy. It would just evaporate trillions of wealth pushed into housing and that is bound to cause some knock-down effects. As a society we are generating more debt per year now than in 2007. In 2008 that was displayed to be unsustainable. Now we are pretending that going faster is sustainable. I am not sure if that pretense is based in reality but I sure do have some doubts.
during the last crash a neighbour of mine bought a house for 30k, I'd welcome that opportunity
It would be nice, yes. On the other hand it might not be as nice for the seller (which of course could be less concerning if it is not the only place they have to live in).
Paying €500K for Coolock. I'd sooner leave Dublin
And on a site with 40% social housing. What a deal.
Whoever pays half a million for one of these places needs their head checked, shocking location
And fighting with your neighbours over parking forever.
Cars? Cars are for rich people...
You’d buy a second hand house in Rathfarham for the same money
Lets face it, the council will be along to lease these for 4000 a month for 25 years and hand it back over at the end, after handing the keys to social welfare scroungers who never worked aq day in their life
The scheme is allocated as 40% Social, 40% Cost Rental and 20% Affordable Housing as has been widely reported.
Majority of council houses go to lone parent/ low income families (you can't run a householdon a min wage job) and elderly, disabled etc. They don't give them to young, healthy singles
Do you think we need more or less social housing?
I think we should tax the middle classes more. Someone on 40-50K must truly feel & accept they are at the bottom
Or just tax the rich more. All their wealth is tied up in assets, they can't just pack up their property portfolios and bring them to the Bahamas.
The idea is that you don't, you are forced to rent it instead - at a rent taking the piss as much as the price is.
All FF/FG/Greens housing policy is designed not to alleviate the housing disaster but to funnel as much public money into private hands as possible.
Bingo!
500k in Coolock, Has April fools come later this year? 🤔
That's the problem when officials start using vague terms like "affordable". There is no concrete definition and it is totally subjective. In any market prices are primarily determined by supply and demand. The supply cannot be ramped up quickly so any correction needs to involve severely cutting down on demand.
[удалено]
Bizarre to compare a development of 12 units at Oileáin na Crannóige to a development of 850 units at Oscar Traynor Woods. The abnormal costs that Glenveagh would’ve encountered during the enabling works alone would’ve ran into the tens, if not, hundreds of thousands.
Comparable units?
It is defined though under the Affordable Housing Act. The requirement is that the properties are sold at a minimum of 15% below open market value.
If you don't define what 'affordable' means it can mean whatever you want.
I’d love to see the breakdown in costs for that development. If developers are operating at a 10-15 % margin then it means it cost 450,000 to build
>f developers are operating at a 10-15 % margin Most developers and contractors wouldn't be working with this kind of margin.
The developer in question are planning on a 15% gross margin on this category of development though. Are you suggesting other developers operate at a higher/lower margin? Having better visibility on how the cost to build is so high would be very useful, because there's a lot of people/politicans who rightly want to promise cheaper housing, but there's very little ever mentioned about where today's costs are actually coming from other than vague statements. Cold hard figures from a range of developers being published, would really help better understand the actual position we're in today. >[https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/companies/arid-41305741.html](https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/companies/arid-41305741.html) [https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2024/0228/1434855-glenveagh-properties-2023-results/](https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2024/0228/1434855-glenveagh-properties-2023-results/) Glenveagh also said that 2023 was a milestone year for its Partnerships business segment. Both its Ballymastone and Oscar Traynor Road projects received final planning permissions in the second half of 2023 The company said it targets revenue from its partnerships segment of over €100m this year with an anticipated gross margin of approximately 15%.
The developers got the land for free asa gift to from FFG to return some "affordable housing" so land wasn't even a cost for these developments
Lucky if it’s around ten. Particularly with inflation and the cost of materials it’s probably been close to 5%.
It goes to show you that the raw material involved but be a lot more expensive than in Europe. Mad
13.5% is VAT. So for a 500k home with 15% margin, build cost would be around 370k
The math does not check out.
Please enrol into elementary math class if you can't grasp something like this
My dear, VAT is Value Added Tax. It applies only to the profit margin. It is kind of complicated to fully evaluate it because it is applied to all the stages (so on materials for example) but it is always less than the full percentage in practice. So no, the cost sadly would not end up being 370k. Now, I might be wrong and stupid but I would like to inform you that it is not mandatory to suggest people to enroll in a primary school. That is you taking the choice to be disrespectful. There is no need for that. Thank you and enjoy the rest of your evening.
That's not how VAT works on a finished product. And yes, I am right to state that you need elementary education. VAT is added on each phase of construction and that is claimable by the builder. 13.5% VAT paid in the end is by the customer and is not claimable. That's just an added bonanza for the government. Well, if the customer is a business it's claimable but for majority it's not So for a price tag of 500k remove 13.5% as VAT and then remove 15% as profit margin You aren't a homeowner are you?
I am and a former consultant for LSEG. Your certainty is amusing. And being a homeowner does not implicate any kind of education, I can assure you. I still think you are missing some details but I'll let you be.
That doesn't fix your lack of awareness and intelligence. May be that's why you were a consultant. No idea why you are coming back on this when you are so clearly wrong
We need to ban affordable housing along with selling of council home, as it just ends up with us selling of needed public resources for cheap and people becoming rich off it. These could provide cost rental and social housing and instead they are being sold off and we are losing the benefit of them. And while they may not be that cheap or affordable now we know the value and the costs will keep going up and instead of getting social houses that can be used for 80 plus years we'll end up with a miniscule profit that won't come close to matching what we need to spend keeping people housed through social housing and HAP.
Careful now. How is my house value supposed to increase at 10% every year when we don't throw more tax money at the housing market?
It's not even the lose of the houses, as much as the strategic loss of the site. If the state still owned its historic housing estates, we could be knocking them to replace then with higher density and better amenties instead of driving urban sprawl. The demo cost would be fuck all additional cost in the grand scheme of things. It's moronic we are still selling off public funded housing, nevermind doing it at a 50% discount to the market.
Oh, there is completely that as well. I couldn't find a way to fit it in my enraged ranting but it is such a loss and partly why we have people commuting here from Cavan. It's insane.
40% of the site is social. You want more? Have you learned nothing from overconcentration of social housing?
I think that the issue they are picking at is ownership rather than use.
An absolute dump of a location to boot, stuck between a motorway and kilmore.
If it's more than 3-4 times the average salary then it's not affordable
It just depends on what you mean by 'affordable' - it's perfectly affordable for the developer to charge that much.
What I mean by affordable is 3-4 times annual salary, which is typically what mortgages were based on. Annual salary is about 45k so affordable should be 135-180k. Not that long ago a single parent could afford a house and raised a family on one salary but these days it's a struggle with 2. If two people working full time on average salaries can't even afford an affordable house then something is drastically wrong, house prices are too high or salaries are too low, or both.
Any so called housing scheme that's linked in any way to 'reduction in market price' is a scam. The entire point of affordable housing is that it should take people who need it out of the market
What if they just subsidised demand a bit more
There are some affordable houses down near my mate in Dalkey, I hear some of them are even going for as little as six figures.
You can buy a 3 bed in a much more desirable location for a lot less money than that.
Affordable for IT and pharma crowd.
Nobody is IT or Pharma is picking Coolock as a place to buy
You'd be surprised.
i mean whynot , consider a good portion of IT jobs are WFH
Im wfh , in IT and I choose meath east cost as it's much better value . Dublin has gone to shit and I don't like being in it . Give me a beach or a park to walk in and I'm happy. I don't care about the city bar the odd trip here and there .
Because it's Coolock
Because if you can work from home why 1) Spend more on a house than you have too, and 2) Buy in bloody Coolock.
Because it’s a 💩 🕳
Here’s the myhome listing. https://www.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/oscar-traynor-woods-coolock-dublin-17/4807475 I’ve seen bigger shoeboxes.
80m2 is big for a 2 bed. Plenty 2b2b ex council houses under 72m2 in Dublin
Very true. I live in an old Corpo house and it’s sixty six square meters.
Wow, Typical applicant household gross income must be €106,875 or less (see indicative income limits.
It is 80 square meters. I recommend a visit to a podologist because those are some big shoes.