UCD accomdation fees gone up...

KeyLimePie

by 3 hundred belgrove and merville are 4288 now

http://www.ucd.ie/residences/studentpages/fees/

aequinoctium

SOBs

muffinman

ha! Weren't they quoted in the Observer as saying that their new ownership (or something.. lease expired?) of Belgrove wouldn't result in an increase in rates...

Pride Fighter

People should vote on this with their feet. You can get rent in Clonskeagh or anywhere nearby for a fraction of that. If they dont get people in their apartments they will have to cut prices. What idiot raises prices when their is deflation in the economy?

Tayto2000

Pride Fighter wrote: »

People should vote on this with their feet. You can get rent in Clonskeagh or anywhere nearby for a fraction of that. If they dont get people in their apartments they will have to cut prices. What idiot raises prices when their is deflation in the economy?

Supply and demand should sort it out all right, rents have flatlined across Dublin over the last year... That said, I suspect there will still be plenty willing to pay the extra for the convenience of living on campus...

Brimmy

Wow those prices are getting ridiculous now..

I can't see all the places being filled with rent and conditions better off campus..

Browney7

€4288 for Belgrove:eek::eek:

bit late for April fools don't you think:rolleyes:

beautifulmeath

lol true, are u currently living in belgrove?

BlackMamba

There goes my plan to live on campus next year!:(:rolleyes:

Stepherunie

Fees for on campus go up every year. Not a new thing my any stretch of the imagination.

gubbie

Stepherunie wrote: »

Fees for on campus go up every year. Not a new thing my any stretch of the imagination.

There has been inflation every year
This is a recession woman! Everywhere else is getting cheaper

mad lad

Fees for res went up every year because rent in Dublin was going up. The opposite is now the case. Res have said their increasing the rent on res to cover the costs involved in building and staffing the security checkpoints (200,000 annually), which 78% of students oppose apparently.

delta_bravo

mad lad wrote: »

Res have said their increasing the rent on res to cover the costs involved in building and staffing the security checkpoints (200,000 annually), which 78% of students oppose apparently.

Where did you pull this 78% out of? Possibly another argument they could make is that their student residences have been repeatedly vandalised, leading to higher insurance and upkeep costs.

Mushy

If I was to somehow able to afford living away from home next year, I'd go to the apartments above the Spar near Roebuck. My friends live there, quite cheap, absolutely lovely apartments. So yes, alternatives out there to be used.

BlackMamba

Mushy wrote: »

If I was to somehow able to afford living away from home next year, I'd go to the apartments above the Spar near Roebuck. My friends live there, quite cheap, absolutely lovely apartments. So yes, alternatives out there to be used.

What is the name of those apartments?

Paul Tergat

BlackMamba wrote: »

What is the name of those apartments?

roebuck hill

ya-ba-da-ba-doo

there is an easier solution.. rent outside of ucd.. its cheaper and you could defo find somewhere near.. house would probably be nicer aswel with no security guards an all..

Mushy

BlackMamba wrote: »

What is the name of those apartments?

AFAIK, its The Concourse, Roebuck Hill, Roebuck Road. Thats the full address, but the The Concourse is mentioned for ordering pizza/Chinese:D

mad lad

delta_bravo wrote: »

Where did you pull this 78% out of? Possibly another argument they could make is that their student residences have been repeatedly vandalised, leading to higher insurance and upkeep costs.

The 78% figure came from a poll in the Tribune (hence the use of the word 'apparently'). The company who owns the lease stated that the increase in costs is due to the security gates. Res was vandalised by people living in res itself last year so having gates to keep people out isn't going to solve that problem. Extra security on res itself might, but the gates are totally unecesssary.

Tayto2000

mad lad wrote: »

Res was vandalised by people living in res itself last year so having gates to keep people out isn't going to solve that problem.

Not entirely true. If you remember, all the damage was blamed on non UCD people attending parties. Gates keep out non UCD randomers who can't be held accountable for damage through loss of deposit etc.

mad lad wrote: »

Extra security on res itself might, but the gates are totally unecesssary.

Extra security people won't help, they have no powers to remove people or similar. Keeping them out is the best way: there's a reason pubs and clubs keep their security at the door, not beside the bar. It's a lot easier to keep troublemakers out than have to try and remove them.

Extra security would also be significantly more expensive in the long run, it's ongoing wages vs a one off fixed cost. Remember, res is run by a leasing company, they don't want to be hiring in lots of security people all the time. The approach they're taking is the same as that in any Dublin apartment complex, gates and access systems for residents instead of lots of security staff hanging about.

miaowsky

I lived in Roebuck Hill...fantastic!! so close to campus but not campus win win! plus a spar/supermacs downstairs...what more could you need (take that centra :P)

gubbie

Surely the money they'd save in not having to fix the residences would be enough to pay for the extra security

Kick in the balls though really-extra security that no one wants AND having to pay for it

shanegj

miaowsky wrote: »

I lived in Roebuck Hill...fantastic!! so close to campus but not campus win win! plus a spar/supermacs downstairs...what more could you need (take that centra :P)

just wondering how much the rent was if ya don't mind

papajimsmooth

Im sure gary redmond will sort all this out. ahhahahahaha

miaowsky

shanegj wrote: »

just wondering how much the rent was if ya don't mind

errrrm 3 of us were in a 2 bed apartment, so the single room was 470, and the shared room was 425 each, but this was back about 2-3 years ago. And the bills in the place were dirt cheap

shanegj

miaowsky wrote: »

errrrm 3 of us were in a 2 bed apartment, so the single room was 470, and the shared room was 425 each, but this was back about 2-3 years ago. And the bills in the place were dirt cheap

thanks

kizboe

what's the story with the fences/gates they've put in place?