Second most expensive public transport city on earth - Dublin

Terrontress

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-39806865

Has anyone seen the attached? A Deutsche Bank report which puts Dublin behind London as the second most expensive city on earth for a monthly travel ticket.

I don't think the report, or at least the headline, takes tax saver into account so it is a bit misleading, but it's surprising to see it up there, given the general agreement that Dublin public transport is extremely limited.

Also of note is Dublin's taxis. More expensive than London, Frankfurt, New York or Paris.

david75

It's odd. All my London mates complain about the tube etc and it is excessively expensive but I always tell them come to Dublin and see how crap ours is and how utterly overpriced. As well as unreliable.

Not surprised to see Dublin in that ranking at all. A cost/efficiency scale would be even more appalling though.

Chuchote

Too many cars on the road (unsurprising with all the free public service parking), and so it's virtually impossible to run a cheap, efficient mass public transport system.

Bray Head

Terrontress wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-39806865


I don't think the report, or at least the headline, takes tax saver into account so it is a bit misleading, but it's surprising to see it up there, given the general agreement that Dublin public transport is extremely limited.

Not everyone can claim tax relief at the higher rate, or at all in some cases.

So I think it is correct to quote the headline price.

Geuze

Dublin weekly/monthly passes are very pricey.


Nurnberg = metro, tram, bus

http://www.vgn.de/preise/

Day pass = 7.90 for entire city and suburbs, 11.90 for a small group of people

Entire weekend, 2 days, for the same prices

Monthly pass = 76-86 euro

Annual pass = 58.40 per month

BlinkingLights

Well we won't pay to subsidise it, so what do you expect?

Bray Head

Brussels is about the same size as Dublin

Annual ticket is €583 and includes metro, bus, tram and suburban rail services.
It is also completely clear and needs just one click from the regional transport authority's homepage.

dinky earnshaw

Terrontress wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-39806865

Also of note is Dublin's taxis. More expensive than London, Frankfurt, New York or Paris.

For a 5 mile journey midweek in business hours. I wonder how big the sample size of journeys are.
The 30 odd kms from Heathrow to central London costs about £90 the same distance in a Dublin taxi would be considerably less.

Chuchote

dinky earnshaw wrote: »

For a 5 mile journey midweek in business hours. I wonder how big the sample size of journeys are.
The 30 odd kms from Heathrow to central London costs about £90 the same distance in a Dublin taxi would be considerably less.

But taxis in Dublin used to have a weird practice - I don't know if this is still so - where a journey to a kilometre or so before Bray was reasonable, then the price shot up after you crossed the border just before Bray.

bk

BlinkingLights wrote: »

Well we won't pay to subsidise it, so what do you expect?

But we do subsidise public transport here, very heavily!

For instance Dublin Bus not only gets a direct subsidy, the NTA also buys and gives it for free all it's buses! And then their is the Free Travel Pass and Taxsaver scheme which are indirect subsidies. Oh and then there are all their depots and bus stations paid out of taxpayers money.

All taken into account, we subsidise public transport to a similar level as most other EU countries.

BlinkingLights

bk wrote: »

But we do subsidise public transport here, very heavily!

For instance Dublin Bus not only gets a direct subsidy, the NTA also buys and gives it for free all it's buses! And then their is the Free Travel Pass and Taxsaver scheme which are indirect subsidies. Oh and then there are all their depots and bus stations paid out of taxpayers money.

All taken into account, we subsidise public transport to a similar level as most other EU countries.

There are plenty of reports that don't agree

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/ireland-has-lowest-subsidy-in-the-eu-for-public-transport-d%C3%A1il-hears-1.1393426?mode=amp

Also it's a vicious circle : patchy, unreliable services result in a low expectation so people don't use the services. Then CIE concludes no demand exists and it depletes them further.

devnull

BlinkingLights wrote: »

There are plenty of reports that don't agree

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/ireland-has-lowest-subsidy-in-the-eu-for-public-transport-d%C3%A1il-hears-1.1393426?mode=amp

Also it's a vicious circle : patchy, unreliable services result in a low expectation so people don't use the services. Then CIE concludes no demand exists and it depletes them further.

Last year direct subsidy was 40m

Bus eireann also got 50m of vehicles from the state.

The other figures the socialist party compare Dublin with are higher because new vehicle purchase costs are worked in to the subsidy. Y

In ireland it is additional. She's comparing apples with oranges.

bk

BlinkingLights wrote: »

Well we won't pay to subsidise it, so what do you expect?

BlinkingLights wrote: »

There are plenty of reports that don't agree

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/ireland-has-lowest-subsidy-in-the-eu-for-public-transport-d%C3%A1il-hears-1.1393426?mode=amp

Also it's a vicious circle : patchy, unreliable services result in a low expectation so people don't use the services. Then CIE concludes no demand exists and it depletes them further.

Those reports are nonsense and completely dishonest!

In Ireland, the NTA buys the buses and coaches for PSO routes for DB and BE. They aren't included in the direct subsidy number, neither are the FTP paymetns or taxsaver allowance.

Ireland is one of the few countries to do it that way. In other European countries, they receive a larger direct subsidy, but are then expected to buy their own buses and coaches out of that money, build their own depots and bus stations, offer reductions for monthly/annual tickets, OAPs, students, etc.

You really aren't comparing like to like. If you tot up all the indirect subsidies that DB and BE get, in reality it ends up comparable to other EU countries.

Geuze

Geuze wrote: »

Dublin weekly/monthly passes are very pricey.

Nurnberg = metro, tram, bus

http://www.vgn.de/preise/

Day pass = 7.90 for entire city and suburbs, 11.90 for a small group of people

Entire weekend, 2 days, for the same prices

Monthly pass = 76-86 euro

Annual pass = 58.40 per month

But, note that a single ticket is 3.00 in Nurnberg, with 1.60 for a short-trip.

devnull

Sorry I quoted bus eireann figures. Will post the Dublin Bus ones later.

But the same principle applies that the state spends tens of millions every year on new vehicles that are not included in direct subsidy and as ireland is a small country overall direct subsidy in millions of euro is not at all a good measure

howiya

bk wrote: »

Those reports are nonsense and completely dishonest!

In Ireland, the NTA buys the buses and coaches for PSO routes for DB and BE. They aren't included in the direct subsidy number, neither are the FTP paymetns or taxsaver allowance.

Ireland is one of the few countries to do it that way. In other European countries, they receive a larger direct subsidy, but are then expected to buy their own buses and coaches out of that money, build their own depots and bus stations, offer reductions for monthly/annual tickets, OAPs, students, etc.

You really aren't comparing like to like. If you tot up all the indirect subsidies that DB and BE get, in reality it ends up comparable to other EU countries.

If the subsidies are comparable then why is public transport so expensive? There are only two other EU cities in the top ten. Seven EU cities (representing six countries) make the top 20.

Riskymove

Bray Head wrote: »

Brussels is about the same size as Dublin

I lived in Brussels and have to disagree. I could walk home from Brussels centre to the outskirts in around 40 mins... Dublin is far more spread out

And as we know people are commuting longer distances here also.

Chuchote

howiya wrote: »

If the subsidies are comparable then why is public transport so expensive? There are only two other EU cities in the top ten. Seven EU cities (representing six countries) make the top 20.

Because there isn't enough public transport for economies of scale, I'd guess; and the reason for that is that 40% of journeys under 4km in Ireland (a nice 20-minute cycle) are made by car. So the roads are full of single-passenger cars, and the buses and trams are held up. If more people took to the bike for short journeys, buses would zip through, there'd be more demand for buses, prices would go down… and so on.

magicbastarder

Chuchote wrote: »

40% of journeys under 4km in Ireland (a nice 20-minute cycle) are made by car.

the figures i've seen are worse:
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/more-than-half-of-travellers-use-cars-for-journeys-under-2km-1.2303451

Chuchote

magicbastarder wrote: »

the figures i've seen are worse:
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/more-than-half-of-travellers-use-cars-for-journeys-under-2km-1.2303451

(from 2015)

More than half of travellers use cars for journeys under 2km
Bicycle trips made up just 1.6% of all journeys last year

#headdesk

ilovesmybrick

Annual ticket for Vienna (which by population is only slightly larger than Dublin) is 365 quid, and around 45 for the month. Covers all buses, trains, ubhans and trams in the city. It's heavily subsidized but there's pretty much no need to have a car to get anywhere in the city (around 400 sq.Km).

I love Sean nos

bk wrote: »

the Free Travel Pass

Does Dublin Bus make money out of these?

XPS_Zero

The Free Travel Scheme alone provides 11% of Dublin Bus Revenue, 20% of Bus Eireann Revenue, 8% of Irish Rail Revenue and 9% of Luas revenue.

Until the recent decision to increase it's funding is put into effect you can knock 4% or so off that for the current 'de facto' subsidy those companies are giving FT because of the funding freeze during the crash years, but that's still a huge chunk on it's own.

I would love to know what % Taxsaver is, or how much they save by having the NTA buy the busses etc

Maybe we could stand to subsidize it more, I'd like to see more figures, but we are hardly skimping on them.

Maybe..just maybe, it's similar a problem to the health service: that all the extra money given during the boom was sucked up by massively increased wages (especially premium payments) instead of actual service provision. We know BE's wages went up 90% during the boom, and didn't go down much during the crash.

Chuchote

ilovesmybrick wrote: »

Annual ticket for Vienna (which by population is only slightly larger than Dublin) is 365 quid, and around 45 for the month. Covers all buses, trains, ubhans and trams in the city. It's heavily subsidized but there's pretty much no need to have a car to get anywhere in the city (around 400 sq.Km).

A euro a day!

ilovesmybrick

Chuchote wrote: »

ilovesmybrick wrote: »

Annual ticket for Vienna (which by population is only slightly larger than Dublin) is 365 quid, and around 45 for the month. Covers all buses, trains, ubhans and trams in the city. It's heavily subsidized but there's pretty much no need to have a car to get anywhere in the city (around 400 sq.Km).

A euro a day!

That's their selling point!

devnull

XPS_Zero wrote: »

The Free Travel Scheme alone provides 11% of Dublin Bus Revenue, 20% of Bus Eireann Revenue, 8% of Irish Rail Revenue and 9% of Luas revenue.

Until the recent decision to increase it's funding is put into effect you can knock 4% or so off that for the current 'de facto' subsidy those companies are giving FT because of the funding freeze during the crash years, but that's still a huge chunk on it's own.

I would love to know what % Taxsaver is, or how much they save by having the NTA buy the busses etc

Maybe we could stand to subsidize it more, I'd like to see more figures, but we are hardly skimping on them.

Maybe..just maybe, it's similar a problem to the health service: that all the extra money given during the boom was sucked up by massively increased wages (especially premium payments) instead of actual service provision. We know BE's wages went up 90% during the boom, and didn't go down much during the crash.

Excluding free travel pass revenue, and the cost of buses, subsidy per journey is:
€1.03c Bus Eireann (€40.6m subsidy overall)
€0.47c Dublin Bus (€59.6m subsidy overall)

Publicly avaliable bus funding consists of (2016)
€50m for Bus Eireann
€35m for Dublin Bus

If you add these in you're going to end up at roughly:
€2.25c per journey for Bus Eireann
€0.75c per journey for Dublin Bus.

I don't have per company figures for DSP., only an overall one for the CIE Group.

Chuchote

Riskymove wrote: »

I lived in Brussels and have to disagree. I could walk home from Brussels centre to the outskirts in around 40 mins... Dublin is far more spread out

And as we know people are commuting longer distances here also.

So if Brussels' annual pass is a euro a day, how many euros a day is the Dublin annual pass?

cython

Chuchote wrote: »

So if Brussels' annual pass is a euro a day, how many euros a day is the Dublin annual pass?

Based on a bus/rail/Luas annual ticket being €2180 (before any tax relief), approx €6 (actually €5.97). Even with the max tax relief, you're still looking at near enough to €3 per day here.

BlinkingLights

I would like to see a comparison, like-for-like as I know the French system for example and there are plenty of subsidies coming from all sorts of sources, it's absolutely not on 'en bloc' fund.

The same applies in Brussels where you've funds coming from not only different sources, but different governments and language communities, as well as from the EU and NATO in some cases too where special routes were subsidised.

The sense I get is that Irish public transport is pretty underfunded and is using urban services to cross-subsidise rural services, particularly in the Bus ?ireann world.

The state of public transport in the cities, other than Dublin, is even worse. Cork's bus network and frequency is an absolute joke when you compare it with say French cities of similar scale and population.

Also, Leap still doesn't really work and you still have the insane situation of passengers having to push past each other getting in / out of busses slowing down journey times because CIE has some kind of OCD attitude to fare evasion, which apparently is absolutely unique to Ireland and doesn't happen anywhere else in the world (in their imagination).

Until you can just go from point A to point B on a single Leap journey, the Leap card is nothing more than a virtual purse / pre-paid credit card in most instances.

They could have saved themselves a small fortune and just accepted Visa debit.

markpb

BlinkingLights wrote:

They could have saved themselves a small fortune and just accepted Visa debit.

Any suggestion that RPA should have developed leap on emv is simply ludicrous and displays an immense lack of understanding of the complexity of doing that. London only relatively recently started accepting emv after years of effort, huge expense and a lot of support from Visa and Cube. The idea that Ireland could have gone there first is crazy. And that's ignoring the fact that Irish banks didn't start rolling out contactless cards here until several years after leap had been launched.

Even now, a project to add emv support to leap will be complicated and expensive. All the validators on every bus, at every luas, dart and IR station and all the handheld RPU unites will need to be replaced and most of the back-end software rewritten or replaced. As with London, the complexity of building a system that supports both systems would be too big so they'll probably end up running both systems indefinitely.

howiya

markpb wrote: »

Any suggestion that RPA should have developed leap on emv is simply ludicrous and displays an immense lack of understanding of the complexity of doing that. London only relatively recently started accepting emv after years of effort, huge expense and a lot of support from Visa and Cube. The idea that Ireland could have gone there first is crazy. And that's ignoring the fact that Irish banks didn't start rolling out contactless cards here until several years after leap had been launched.

Even now, a project to add emv support to leap will be complicated and expensive. All the validators on every bus, at every luas, dart and IR station and all the handheld RPU unites will need to be replaced and most of the back-end software rewritten or replaced. As with London, the complexity of building a system that supports both systems would be too big so they'll probably end up running both systems indefinitely.

London started accepting contactless payments on buses in 2012. Hardly relatively recently.

Leap was launched in 2011. The first contactless payment in Ireland took place in 2010 with banks rolling out cards from 2011 onwards. BOI had some 400,000 cards in issue by mid 2012. Hardly several years after leap was launched.

TFL took 9 years from the launch of Oyster before they started taking contactless payments. The key difference is that the technology wasn't there in 2003. It did exist when we decided not to use it.

I do agree with that decision and your suggestion that it would have been crazy for us to go with contactless payments first. The use of Oyster fostered a culture in London of using cards for payment of fares. Leap has done the same for us. Now it's time to move to the next step and pay with a different card.

Will it be expensive? Yes. Does that mean we shouldn't do it? I don't think so

Macha

Three words: low population density. The fewer passengers/km, the higher the costs/passenger.

Chuchote

Macha wrote: »

Three words: low population density. The fewer passengers/km, the higher the costs/passenger.

But we could have a fast, efficient public transport service - even using just the buses, Luas (hopefully to airport) and trains we have now, if there were fewer single-passenger cars blocking the way.

XPS_Zero

Macha wrote: »

Three words: low population density. The fewer passengers/km, the higher the costs/passenger.

Sure, but that's not the case along some corridors like Swords/Airport/CC, yet we never bothered to build that either. Besides, the intelligent way to do these things is supposed to be based on future projected population, not wait until population explodes then catch up duh duh oh jesus better build a subway now duh...that's Ireland all over. If they'd built the m50 and DART Upgrade in 1995 they'd have been accused of throwing perfectly good money away that could be going to extra 10ers and 5ers on the pension or dole, whereas we instead waited until it was desperately needed then moaned that it was too late.

I've no doubt at least sections of Luas should have been underground, calculate the time from Abbey Street to Connoly station it's a bloody embarrassment, having to stop at Green lights and even when not stopped go snail pace slow because of idiots who can't look up from Facebook and issuing brain farts on Twitter for long enough to cross the road.

ClovenHoof

Macha wrote: »

Three words: low population density. The fewer passengers/km, the higher the costs/passenger.

That's a total myth. Dublin does not, and never had low population density.

Its about the same as Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Prague, Vienna, Olso and Brussels all of which have complex metro, bus, tram and commuter rail networks.

The issue with Dublin is there is a car parking space for every civil servant and too much cheap car parking in the city centre. Coupled with CIE which is an organisation that sees itself as doomed and obsolete from the top to the bottom.

Also the Irish are a nation of idiots in many ways. They get off at foreign airports and hop onto a metro or train in the terminal and talk about how great it is. Then as soon as an underground rail system is proposed for Dublin they basically go to war against the idea.

devnull

Also another problem is that the car park owners have far too much clout in planning decisions and inreastructure and the changes to public transport and road configurations etc.

Chuchote

devnull wrote: »

Also another problem is that the car park owners have far too much clout in planning decisions and inreastructure and the changes to public transport and road configurations etc.

And why is that?

markpb

devnull wrote: »

Also another problem is that the car park owners have far too much clout in planning decisions and inreastructure and the changes to public transport and road configurations etc.

Chuchote wrote: »

And why is that?

I presume it's because they claim to campaign on behalf of all the shops in the city centre, i.e. Don't hurt us or you're also hurting all the shops who pay a significant chunk of the rates that run DCC.

DCC are constantly in fear of doing something that will hurt the city centre's reputation as the main shopping and entertainment district for Dublin. It is constantly under threat from the suburban shopping centres and this is what the car park operators play up to.

sbsquarepants

david75 wrote: »

It's odd. All my London mates complain about the tube etc and it is excessively expensive but I always tell them come to Dublin and see how crap ours is and how utterly overpriced. As well as unreliable.
.

I'm always amazed at this too. How anyone can complain about any underground system is beyond me. Any underground system I've ever used anywhere was absolutely fantastic in my opinion. I personally think they are worth pretty much any cost of construction.

As an aside - I always get a giggle out of English friends / relatives complaining about the NHS too. They should be on their knees praising Jesus for blessing them with such a "shambles":)

Peregrinus

ClovenHoof wrote: »

That's a total myth. Dublin does not, and never had low population density.

Its about the same as Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Prague, Vienna, Olso and Brussels all of which have complex metro, bus, tram and commuter rail networks . . . .

SFAIK that's true only for the Dublin City Council area.

But for organising commuter transport, that's not really the relevant area; most of the people who commute in Dublin live outside the City Council area; you need to look at the metro region.

Compare Dublin and Amsterdam

Dublin City Council: Population: 527,000; density 4,588 persons/km
Amsterdam City Council: 827,000; density 4,908 persons/km.

So far so good: Amsterdam has more people, and a slightly higher density, but the differences aren't huge.

But now look at the metro regions for both cities:

Dublin: Population 1.80 million; density 257 persons/km
Amsterdam: Population 2.33 million; density 904 persons/km.

So, in the Amsterdam metro region, population density is between three and four times higher than in Dublin. That makes a huge difference when it comes to organising transport for the region.

Bray Head

Peregrinus wrote: »

SFAIK that's true only for the Dublin City Council area.  

But for organising commuter transport, that's not really the relevant area; most of the people who commute in Dublin live outside the City Council area; you need to look at the metro region.

Compare Dublin and Amsterdam

Dublin City Council:  Population: 527,000; density 4,588 persons/km
Amsterdam City Council:  827,000; density 4,908 persons/km.

So far so good: Amsterdam has more people, and a slightly higher density, but the differences aren't huge.

But now look at the metro regions for both cities:

Dublin:  Population 1.80 million; density 257 persons/km
Amsterdam:  Population 2.33 million; density 904 persons/km.

So, in the Amsterdam metro region, population density is between three and four times higher than in Dublin.  That makes a huge difference when it comes to organising transport for the region.

I presume you are simply summing the population of Dublin, Kildare, Meath and Wicklow. I would respectfully put it that this is nonsense. Most of north and west Meath is outside Dublin's economic orbit. Likewise for south Kildare. Same for south and much of west Wicklow. A good third of county Wicklow by area is not populated at all.

It would be great if the CSO could come up with meaningful definitions of urban Dublin and publish statistics based on it. It would take in some of Wicklow, Kildare and Meath and might even exclude a bit of Fingal.

Irish people are wedded to the county concept which is in many instances useless for analytical purposes.

Uriel.

ClovenHoof wrote: »

The issue with Dublin is there is a car parking space for every civil servant

Do you have a reference for that?
Is it just civil or are you talking about the broader public service.

I find it hard to believe that there's a car park space for every civil servant
I'd also like to see the % of civil/public servants that travel to work by car versus other means of transport

Bray Head

Uriel. wrote: »

Do you have a reference for that?
Is it just civil or are you talking about the broader public service.

I find it hard to believe that there's a car park space for every civil servant
I'd also like to see the % of civil/public servants that travel to work by car versus other means of transport

This is not true. Anecdotally I know of some departments with spaces for 10% or so of staff only. Most of the departments based near Leinster House don't have surface parking and not very much underground either.
I would be curious to know the true figure though.

ClovenHoof

Peregrinus wrote: »

SFAIK that's true only for the Dublin City Council area.

But for organising commuter transport, that's not really the relevant area; most of the people who commute in Dublin live outside the City Council area; you need to look at the metro region.

Compare Dublin and Amsterdam

Dublin City Council: Population: 527,000; density 4,588 persons/km
Amsterdam City Council: 827,000; density 4,908 persons/km.

So far so good: Amsterdam has more people, and a slightly higher density, but the differences aren't huge.

But now look at the metro regions for both cities:

Dublin: Population 1.80 million; density 257 persons/km
Amsterdam: Population 2.33 million; density 904 persons/km.

So, in the Amsterdam metro region, population density is between three and four times higher than in Dublin. That makes a huge difference when it comes to organising transport for the region.

So because there are more sick people in the Amsterdam metro area, Dublin does not need to build any hospital at all. A few Boots chemists is enough.

That's the logic that people are using when it comes to public transport in Dublin.

wordofwarning

Peregrinus wrote: »

Dublin: Population 1.80 million; density 257 persons/km
Amsterdam: Population 2.33 million; density 904 persons/km.

So, in the Amsterdam metro region, population density is between three and four times higher than in Dublin. That makes a huge difference when it comes to organising transport for the region.

But Dublin has very few people living in the Wicklow mountains, limited population in North Co. Dublin. If anything the people spread of Dublin justifies good quality transport. Instead of the population sprawl all over the place, as is the case in Amsterdam. It is in very limited areas in Dublin. The GDA has pockets of large numbers of people

HivemindXX

ClovenHoof wrote: »

So because there are more sick people in the Amsterdam metro area, Dublin does not need to build any hospital at all. A few Boots chemists is enough.

That's the logic that people are using when it comes to public transport in Dublin.

Ignoring a correction and going off on a completely irrelevant tangent does not do your argument any good. Your assertion that Dublin does not have a low population density has been challenged, very effectively in my opinion, and you have no response. I'm forced to assume that your assertion is the complete myth here.

Can you argue against the point made? Do you think it is acceptable to just use the Dublin City Council area for your population density calculations and if so do you think it is therefore acceptable to just consider that area for improved public transport?

Macha

ClovenHoof wrote: »

Macha wrote: »

Three words: low population density. The fewer passengers/km, the higher the costs/passenger.

That's a total myth. Dublin does not, and never had low population density.

Its about the same as Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Prague, Vienna, Olso and Brussels all of which have complex metro, bus, tram and commuter rail networks.

The issue with Dublin is there is a car parking space for every civil servant and too much cheap car parking in the city centre. Coupled with CIE which is an organisation that sees itself as doomed and obsolete from the top to the bottom.

Also the Irish are a nation of idiots in many ways. They get off at foreign airports and hop onto a metro or train in the terminal and talk about how great it is. Then as soon as an underground rail system is proposed for Dublin they basically go to war against the idea.

Those cities also have issues. It's extremely common in Belgium to have a company car and parking spot at work. In fact, there are so many cars in Brussels it has seriously high air pollution problems. So I don't think that's the crux of the issue.
I can tell you, living in Brussels, that when I wait at a tram or bus stop, I am rarely the only person there. But I'm often one of two people getting off the Luas at Brides Glen.
But I also live in an apartment in Brussels, not a house. That's the trade-off that Irish people aren't willing to make.

wordofwarning

Macha wrote: »

But I also live in an apartment in Brussels, not a house. That's the trade-off that Irish people aren't willing to make.

Yet there is a ton of apartment being built in Dublin. The biggest trend in Dublin is high quality, luxury apartments. The dream in Dublin is no longer a 3 bed semi-d in the middle of nowhere Wicklow, but a nice luxury apartment in Dublin 1/2. Only today in the Irish Times, a developer announced he sold 12 luxury 1 bedroom apartments in Dublin 2 for €415k each. There is plenty of 2/3 bedroom apartments being built.

A trade off Irish people were not willing to make was a damp, dark shoebox apartment in a ghetto of Dublin. The REITs have zero issue letting high quality apartments in good areas. Developers are finally realising, middle class Dubliners like quality apartments

ClovenHoof

wordofwarning wrote: »

Yet there is a ton of apartment being built in Dublin. The biggest trend in Dublin is high quality, luxury apartments. The dream in Dublin is no longer a 3 bed semi-d in the middle of nowhere Wicklow, but a nice luxury apartment in Dublin 1/2. Only today in the Irish Times, a developer announced he sold 12 luxury 1 bedroom apartments in Dublin 2 for €415k each. There is plenty of 2/3 bedroom apartments being built.

A trade off Irish people were not willing to make was a damp, dark shoebox apartment in a ghetto of Dublin. The REITs have zero issue letting high quality apartments in good areas. Developers are finally realising, middle class Dubliners like quality apartments

People who lived in Ballymun loved their flats. The only people who had a problem with them were people who didn't live in ballymun.

Chuchote

ClovenHoof wrote: »

People who lived in Ballymun loved their flats. The only people who had a problem with them were people who didn't live in ballymun.

And the people tasked with fixing the lifts, according to the word on the street - the lifts were often broken.

Very badly served with shops, playgrounds and other services too.

wordofwarning

Chuchote wrote: »

And the people tasked with fixing the lifts, according to the word on the street - the lifts were often broken.

Very badly served with shops, playgrounds and other services too.

True, the lifts were always broken.

The lack of services was BS from the locals. There are plenty of middle class areas in Dublin with zero services. The residents of those areas did not engage in anti-social behaviour etc.

The same issues of anti-social behaviour, crime, heroin use etc were also common in social housing in the inner city. It is just no one in the inner city, brought the story of lack of services there as the cause of all problems like the residents of Ballymun blamed for their issues. You don't see residents in the west of Ireland with no services engaging in anti-social behaviour.