St Annes Park Planning Application

Sleeper12

kona wrote: »

Sure they will :rolleyes:

Half the people on the road i grew up on are over 60 and living in 5 bed houses of which 3 or 4 of the bedrooms are empty.

We need a bedroom tax & tax incentives to encourage downsizing. Carrot & stick

jon1981

Sleeper12 wrote: »

We need a bedroom tax & tax incentives to encourage downsizing. Carrot & stick

We need decent smaller homes in the locality. Can't expect a person in their 60s who lived there all their lives to relocate out of the area just to downsize. We'll all be old someday.

Spanish Eyes

How did the development get through local objections when the swimming pool was built on? Was everyone ok with the loss of that amenity?

Seth Brundle

jon1981 wrote: »

We need decent smaller homes in the locality. Can't expect a person in their 60s who lived there all their lives to relocate out of the area just to downsize. We'll all be old someday.

...and taking Raheny as an example, where would you build all of these decent smaller homes?

Spanish Eyes

Four storey or more apartments with a decent size balcony, room for eating and sitting there would be my ideal when I need to downsize!

But remember those moving from a freehold house will pay a hefty annual fee to a management company. I think that puts a lot of people off.

odyssey06

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

How did the development get through local objections when the swimming pool was built on? Was everyone ok with the loss of that amenity?

This one went through fast track planning process... short cut for we don't care about local objections.

expectationlost

there is suggestion that every estate should be required legally to build some older person suitable housing, so as is suggested above that people can move in to smaller houses but stay in the same area

Spanish Eyes

odyssey06 wrote: »

This one went through fast track planning process... short cut for we don't care about local objections.

But St Anne’s didn’t get through because of the geese or something!

And DCC were not in favour either. Why developers bother is beyond me, bet the fast track issue will be the guts of a lawsuit. Otherwise why bother.

Gloomtastic!

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

How did the development get through local objections when the swimming pool was built on? Was everyone ok with the loss of that amenity?

The swimming pool was pretty old and I think it got a crack in it that would have meant the whole thing needed rebuilding. Was never going to happen without public funds but it was privately owned by St Pauls.

Spanish Eyes

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

The swimming pool was pretty old and I think it got a crack in it that would have meant the whole thing needed rebuilding. Was never going to happen without public funds but it was privately owned by St Pauls.

Were the football fields publicly or privately owned.

Thanks for the explanation re the pool.

lawred2

How did the Op's objection go? Summarily rejected I hope.

tricky D

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

But St Anne’s didn’t get through because of the geese or something!

And DCC were not in favour either. Why developers bother is beyond me, bet the fast track issue will be the guts of a lawsuit. Otherwise why bother.

Pretty much nobody was in favour of it: locals, councillors, managers, etc. yet the Deciding Officer gave it the go ahead. However Crevak already have existing planning permission for 23 units in Edros, Howth, which was granted without any Assessments due under Habitats and Birds Directives, as well as the coastal planning requirements. I would have thought that this is ABP's job, but it is being left to ordinary folks to go to the High Court at a cost circa €30k a pop.

Sleeper12

expectationlost wrote:

there is suggestion that every estate should be required legally to build some older person suitable housing, so as is suggested above that people can move in to smaller houses but stay in the same area

I can't speak for the rest of the country but most areas of Dublin have apartments. The ground floor is suitable for people getting on in years. No stairs etc.

kona

Sleeper12 wrote: »

We need a bedroom tax & tax incentives to encourage downsizing. Carrot & stick

Id have thought around 700k should be enough. What pensioner needs tax incentives?

kona

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

Maybe we need some of those housing activists to protest outside aul wans houses. That'll soon shift them. :rolleyes:

They want free homes. Some people are actually willing to pay mortgages.

expectationlost

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I can't speak for the rest of the country but most areas of Dublin have apartments. .

do they?

ixoy

jon1981 wrote: »

New development on St Brigids road in Killester has 3 bed terrace houses priced at 550k. Currently at planning stage. 1 bed Apartments @ 250k up to 450k for a 3 bed Apartment. Its on the grounds of the Holy Faith Convent Killester.

Somewhat pricey for a 3-bed terrace in the area when you look what else is available. Probably sell regardless.

Sleeper12

expectationlost wrote:

do they?

Yes

expectationlost

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Yes

not in my estate, a few have been built as infill developments but obviously not planned for.

Sleeper12

expectationlost wrote:

not in my estate, a few have been built as infill developments but obviously not planned for.

Not every housing estate but plenty of apartments in every townland of Dublin.

jon1981

ixoy wrote: »

Somewhat pricey for a 3-bed terrace in the area when you look what else is available. Probably sell regardless.

That price is quoted based on costs estimated before they even break ground... likely to be higher. Agree 550k is pushing it... that said alot of old houses in the area are selling for 500k and probably require upward of 100k in renovations.

downtheroad

Seth Brundle wrote: »

jon1981 wrote: »

We need decent smaller homes in the locality. Can't expect a person in their 60s who lived there all their lives to relocate out of the area just to downsize. We'll all be old someday.

...and taking Raheny as an example, where would you build all of these decent smaller homes?

Church land. Huge amounts of land being wasted in every suburb in Dublin having churches that are far too big for the number of people that actually attend.

A church in Finglas is downsizing and social housing being built on the site. This could be replicated all across Dublin.
http://www.thejournal.ie/finglas-church-closure-3220514-Feb2017/

Clontarf has 3 catholic churches, I'd start there and remove 2 of them and let the 3rd remain to cater for the area. Obviously this would require a lot of co-operation from both the church and state.

odyssey06

downtheroad wrote: »

Clontarf has 3 catholic churches, I'd start there and remove 2 of them and let the 3rd remain to cater for the area. Obviously this would require a lot of co-operation from both the church and state.

Or the state could just use the land it already owns:
https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2017/1121/921658-social-housing-local-authorities/

In Dublin city, where there are more than 22,000 people on the housing list, the local authority has directly built 56 homes in the same time period. It is estimated that the council owns enough land to support more than 12,000 properties.

But sure, give Eoghan Murphy another scapegoat to go with the grannies in nursing homes and empty nesters and Air BnB landlords and people with large gardens. Anything except doing a proper job to justify his salary.

downtheroad

odyssey06 wrote: »

downtheroad wrote: »

Clontarf has 3 catholic churches, I'd start there and remove 2 of them and let the 3rd remain to cater for the area. Obviously this would require a lot of co-operation from both the church and state.

Or the state could just use the land it already owns:
https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2017/1121/921658-social-housing-local-authorities/

In Dublin city, where there are more than 22,000 people on the housing list, the local authority has directly built 56 homes in the same time period. It is estimated that the council owns enough land to support more than 12,000 properties.

But sure, give Eoghan Murphy another scapegoat to go with the grannies in nursing homes and empty nesters and Air BnB landlords and people with large gardens. Anything except doing a proper job to justify his salary.

I can't see any reference in that article to state owned land in either Raheny or Clontarf, the 2 examples used above. We absolutely do need smaller homes in our Dublin suburbs. I recently bought a house near St Annes and the number of houses I viewed that are appropriately sized for a family but were being occupied by 1 person was beyond belief. By building smaller sized homes in local areas, people will have an option to downsize if they so wish, thereby freeing up family sized homes for another generation to buy and keep the cycle moving.

It's all well and good if Dublin City Council have land to build on, but good luck asking somebody who has lived most of their life in a suburb such as Raheny to downsize to a property in an area they are unfamiliar with. My suggestion of using, what is in my opinion, wasted land that the church happen to own, at least is land in each suburb of Dublin that might appeal to local residents.

odyssey06

downtheroad wrote: »

It's all well and good if Dublin City Council have land to build on, but good luck asking somebody who has lived most of their life in a suburb such as Raheny to downsize to a property in an area they are unfamiliar with. My suggestion of using, what is in my opinion, wasted land that the church happen to own, at least is land in each suburb of Dublin that might appeal to local residents.

It's a tiny amount of land relative to the state owned land.

There are many apartments already in Clontarf, new and old. Castle Avenue, Saint Lawrence Road either end etc
Apartments replaced the Old Shieling hotel in Raheny and Hollybrook Hotel in Killester and the Dollymount House.

If someone wanted to downsize they would be able to.

ozmo

downtheroad wrote: »

... using, what is in my opinion, wasted land that the church happen to own...

It may seem wasted to some - but to others its the heart of the village you would be ripping out.

We don't want to build on absolutely every square of space of Dublin- I thinking of the horrible concrete jungles of some UK and USA cities - and worse in other countries - sure you can get lots in - but would your residents be happy living there then?

John_Rambo

ozmo wrote: »

It may seem wasted to some - but to others its the heart of the village you would be ripping out.

Have you seen the architectural abomination that is Raheny (catholic) church?


Have you seen the abysmal attendance in Raheny (catholic) church on Sundays?

Pawwed Rig

John_Rambo wrote: »

Have you seen the architectural abomination that is Raheny (catholic) church?

Not sure if you are being entirely serious but I would get behind this. It is an ugly monster of a yoke that would easily accommodate a large development. If you include the car park you have a pretty decent site. The train station could also be built over.
All Saints Church across the road could easily manage both congregations.

A really ambitious programme would incorporate the site as far as the Supervalu and have a massive residential/ commercial development.

Sleeper12

John_Rambo wrote:

Have you seen the architectural abomination that is Raheny (catholic) church?

Ugliest building in the village by a country mile.

Pawwed Rig

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Ugliest building in the village by a country mile.

The HSE box held up by steel girders at Watermill Road is a close second albeit less intrusive