Cost of Building in Dublin

Cuddlesworth

So the SCSI released a report today on the cost of building a 3 Bed semi D in the greater Dublin Region, claiming the cost to build a 3 bed semi D is 330k and the cost of construction is only 45% of that.

While I do query some of the figures it does appear to correlate to the current lack of building going on.


The breakdown of non construction costs is as follows:
cost $Psf $Psm % of total
Professional Fees 5,500 5 49 2%
Levies 11,750 10 104 4%
Land & Acquisition Costs 57,500 47 510 17%
Sales & Marketing Costs 8,200 7 73 2%
Finance Cost 20,002 16 177 6%
Margin 37,980 31 337 11%
VAT 39,310 32 349 12%

Sheep in a field

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

So the SCSI released a report today on the cost of building a 3 Bed semi D in the greater Dublin Region, claiming the cost to build a 3 bed semi D is 330k and the cost of construction is only 45% of that.

While I do query some of the figures it does appear to correlate to the current lack of building going on.


The breakdown of non construction costs is as follows:
cost $Psf $Psm % of total
Professional Fees 5,500 5 49 2%
Levies 11,750 10 104 4%
Land & Acquisition Costs 57,500 47 510 17%
Sales & Marketing Costs 8,200 7 73 2%
Finance Cost 20,002 16 177 6%
Margin 37,980 31 337 11%
VAT 39,310 32 349 12%

Based on the above table and the report, some of the savings suggested are..

Proposal 1 - Reduce VAT to 9 from 13.5%

Saving = €11,647.41 (€39310/13.5*4)

Would the government really consider reducing the VAT by 4.5%??

Proposal 2 - Reduce Finance Cost to 5% (from a estimated 10%)

Saving = €10,001 (€20,002/10*5)

Seems a bit drastic to expect a 50% saving on this?

Proposal 3 - Reduce Development Levies to €1,500

Saving = €10,250 (€11,750 - 1500)

Huge saving imagined here...87%??

Proposal 4 - Increase Supply of Land

Saving uncalculated

Proposal 5 - Introduce Cost Benefit Analysis for all Regulations

Saving uncalculated

athtrasna

http://touch.boards.ie/forum/1245

There's a whole forum on here about it

Goat Paddock

Higher densities should be allowed, therefore providing more units to meet demand, and economies of scale provided by higher densities may reduce the cost per unit.

This would also help contain urban sprawl.

newacc2015

Goat Paddock wrote: »

Higher densities should be allowed, therefore providing more units to meet demand, and economies of scale provided by higher densities may reduce the cost per unit.

This would also help contain urban sprawl.

There is no incentives to have higher density. In fact there is less incentives to build apartments over houses. DCC gives you a fixed levy per sq meter built. Meaning the levies are the same for a house or an apartment. They should reduce them for apartments if you build apartments which are high in demand eg 3 bed plus to encourage them to be built

If you want to build an apartment in DCC, you need to build ridiculous things like a ton of lifts and stairs. Experts estimate these totally unnecessary items add about 20-30k on an apartment.

Gumbo

newacc2015 wrote: »

There is no incentives to have higher density. In fact there is less incentives to build apartments over houses. DCC gives you a fixed levy per sq meter built. Meaning the levies are the same for a house or an apartment. They should reduce them for apartments if you build apartments which are high in demand eg 3 bed plus to encourage them to be built

If you want to build an apartment in DCC, you need to build ridiculous things like a ton of lifts and stairs. Experts estimate these totally unnecessary items add about 20-30k on an apartment.

A ton of lifts?
One lift can suffice depending on the amount of apartments, and those stairs are what will get you to safety in case of a fire.

Idbatterim

The below is from ires chief David Ehrlich. I'd like to know just how much cheaper apartments here could be if they were built same spec as in Canada. (See below)...

"Depending on the size of the block we would have two or four lifts in one shaft. Here, with regulations around dual aspect, sizing and the ratio of lifts to apartments, that is not possible.

"Most apartments in Dublin were built to be sold. There aren't many properties that are specifically for renting, and there is a difference between a rental property and a property that will be sold.

"If you offered someone a dual-aspect apartment or a lower rent, the vast majority would take the lower rent," he said.

Gumbo

Yeah I seen that earlier in the week too.
Our planners require dual aspect, it's a Dublin City Development Plan requirement.
Technically speaking one lift is enough in most apartment blocks, but of course, scale of provisions apply and it depends on the number of units.

I don't know many blocks that have lots of lifts relative to units. Why is it not possible to have more lifts in one shaft? It comes down to design and limited land space in the city centre imo. Of the dual aspect was removed then yes, more units could be built, but at what cost, quality?

The quote from the guy seems to hint that he wants hotel style apartments.

Idbatterim

You mention quality. But they have no regard for noise in apartments which has made my life hell in those I have lived in... I'd like to know difference in cost. If saving is decent , most would go with the cheaper rent or mortgage, myself included...

Those making planning decisions are out of touch with reality... It's getting harder and harder to put a roof over your head. Something has to be done on the cost front. Something also has to be done about supply, by going from a mere 4 to 6 floors for example, a scheme can house 50% more... Due to nonsensical height opposition this crisis has been massively exacerbated, same as the boom...

Gumbo

You won't get a height argument from me. I actually submitted an observation to the current development plan to increase height but it made no difference.

Everybody gives out about the planning rules etc but DCC advertise public consultations but nobody bother their back sides going and submitting an observation.

Idbatterim

That's true kceire. I emailed this to Simon Coventry yesterday, well this is an extract of email " I have an interest in planning, infrastructure and housing etc. I read earlier about the proposals for the Irish Glass Bottle site, but this is only part of a larger issue at play. In terms of the city development plan, it is now at stage 3, as far as I am concerned when this went out to public discussion from 10th Nov 2014 - 14th Jan 2015 things were vastly different. I note from the Dublincitydevelopmentplan.ie website that "Before it is finalised, members of Dublin City Council may choose to amend The Draft Dublin City Development Plan 2016-2022." I.e that is the current phase. I am very concerned we are going to be left with something totally obsolete and not fit for purpose, for another 6 years, based on different times, despite the fact they were very recent. Decisions made by people who dont have to live with the consequences, listening to people who care only about themselves! I believe the recent city plan, had heights curbed a good deal since the boom time plan, if we are now at worse than boom time prices and pressure on property, why are they so cautious? The making it up as you go along, is exactly why this country struggles... "

newacc2015

kceire wrote: »

A ton of lifts?
One lift can suffice depending on the amount of apartments, and those stairs are what will get you to safety in case of a fire.

Alan Kelly wanted a max of 6 apartments per floor. They settled on 8 apartments using a lift per floor. I have lived in a high rise apartment block where there was dozens of apartments sharing a lift per floor, despite the apartment block being over 35 storeys. There was never any issue waiting for the lift. I can't personally see the need of a 5/6 storey apartment block needing so many lifts. They add a sizeable cost to the management fees.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/analysis-minister-dumbs-down-apartment-guidelines-1.2475452