DCC promoting dereliction

cgcsb

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/redevelopment-of-manhattan-caf%C3%A9-site-blocked-despite-budget-warning-1.3893449

So DCC voted against the sale of this site, the former Manhattan cafe, to a developer, for the purposes of development, they want to retain the site. You might say, 'oh, they must have their own plans for the site between Richmond st, Harcourt Rd and Charlemont st'. But of course, you'd be wrong, they want to keep these derelict sites and just keep the derelict.

Is there some political agenda here? is there a vested interest in keeping the City derelict?

neris

any council member mentioned either seems to be a lefty or a tree hugger and they dont want it developed for sentimental reasons. Putting in all these art spaces is all well and good but how do these looneys think those facilities will be funded aswell. The building sells for 1.4 million, developer builds offices which A) create employment from build through to occupation occupied building pays rates. I think some of the councilors think the city either runs on fresh air or a money fairy just magically deposits millions in a DCC bank account every year

cgcsb

As a result of the sale being blocked, funding for housing and community facilities elsewhere will be reduced, so that we can have a derelict building rotting in our midst. So infuriating.

Gavin "shels"

Bonkers - such a prime chunk of land.

Amirani

This has made me reconsider the high preference I was going to give Ciaran Cuffe in the European elections. Shocking voting against this proposal.

Wheeliebin30

Remember.

Sinn Féin have the most seats on Dublin City Council.

Is it in their interests to solve the housing crisis?

Course not.

PhilOssophy

SF like to talk out of both sides of their mouth.....this is definitely not the 1st proposal for housing/developments they have objected to.

You couldn't make it up.

Assetbacked

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Remember.

Sinn Féin have the most seats on Dublin City Council.

Is it in their interests to solve the housing crisis?

Course not.

SF also coordinate most housing development objections in Dublin under the guise of community engagement when in reality it is good old fashioned NIMBYism.

abcabc123123

Amirani wrote: »

This has made me reconsider the high preference I was going to give Ciaran Cuffe in the European elections. Shocking voting against this proposal.

AFAIK he wanted the vote postponed for a month until DCC provide a list of derelict properties in their possession across the city, which they seem to be struggling to do. From what I can see the council have very little overall plan for the city and what is being built across the city is largely dependent on what is profitable to built, ie offices, student accom and shared accom.

cgcsb wrote: »

As a result of the sale being blocked, funding for housing and community facilities elsewhere will be reduced, so that we can have a derelict building rotting in our midst. So infuriating.

Sounds like the council is underfunded and probably badly managed if they're relying on this. Labour, the Greens and Soc Dems (well, Gary Gannon) were the only ones who voted against reducing the councils LPT by 15%, which cost the council €3.45m in income this year. All the other parties, FF, FG, the hard left and the independents voted for it.

abcabc123123

... and Rebecca Moynihans twitter feed is worth reading on the subject. The gist basically seems to be that they've been burned before; the council sells land to developers who then sit on it and let the value increase.

Gavin "shels"

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Remember.

Sinn Féin have the most seats on Dublin City Council.

Is it in their interests to solve the housing crisis?

Course not.

Don't forget they're "Fighting for You"

abcabc123123 wrote: »

... and Rebecca Moynihans twitter feed is worth reading on the subject. The gist basically seems to be that they've been burned before; the council sells land to developers who then sit on it and let the value increase.

Haven't read it recently but one case she always highlights is a plot of land at Dolphins Barn just at the junction with SCR - still derelict after being given to private developers for housing development. Rebecca Moynihan by far the best and most informative Councillor in Dublin 8.

retalivity

Gavin "shels" wrote: »

Don't forget they're "Fighting for You"



Haven't read it recently but one case she always highlights is a plot of land at Dolphins Barn just at the junction with SCR - still derelict after being given to private developers for housing development. Rebecca Moynihan by far the best and most informative Councillor in Dublin 8.

Same council that are selling large swathes of land all over the city that would be suitable fot housing, also have plans to build a 7storey 100% social housing apartment block on the thin sliver of land between the new weaver park and the adjoining apartment block. A brand new park, limited green space in d8, soon to be overshadowed and overtaken by (more) scobes

is_that_so

abcabc123123 wrote: »

Sounds like the council is underfunded and probably badly managed if they're relying on this. Labour, the Greens and Soc Dems (well, Gary Gannon) were the only ones who voted against reducing the councils LPT by 15%, which cost the council €3.45m in income this year. All the other parties, FF, FG, the hard left and the independents voted for it.

This is a feature of councils throughout the country, especially those with larger blocks of Indos or the left. Some of them wilfully reduce the LPT every year, consistently can't even agree a budget and the city/county manager has to step in and impose one. As for the decision, it is a bizarre one in the sense that not one of them has a notion what could go in its place just that the evil developer is not getting it.

expectationlost

abcabc123123 wrote: »

... and Rebecca Moynihans twitter feed is worth reading on the subject. The gist basically seems to be that they've been burned before; the council sells land to developers who then sit on it and let the value increase.

https://twitter.com/RebeccaMoy/status/1128996762059005952

is_that_so

abcabc123123 wrote: »

... and Rebecca Moynihans twitter feed is worth reading on the subject. The gist basically seems to be that they've been burned before; the council sells land to developers who then sit on it and let the value increase.

They can work out deals where developers have to use it or face penalties. They also have the power to block planning permission or even rezone it.

expectationlost

is_that_so wrote: »

They can work out deals where developers have to use it or face penalties. They also have the power to block planning permission or even rezone it.

Council site sold to private developer for housing still a derelict ‘eyesore’ https://www.businesspost.ie/news/council-site-sold-private-developer-housing-still-derelict-eyesore-436548

hmmm

9 storeys is ridiculous at the top of Harcourt street. It should be 20 storeys minimum.

And SF have no problem taking the easy route and saying "no" to things, it's having the bravery to say "yes" to something which they have a problem with.

i71jskz5xu42pb

hmmm wrote: »

it's having the bravery to say "yes" to something which they have a problem with.

I'm no SF fan but voting for stuff you have a problem with is not brave its stupid.
I get that in the course of politics occasionally people need to hold their nose and vote for something they're not 100% comfortable with.

But selling property to developers just to let them speculate on that land is something I'd have a problem with and something I'd vote against.

hatrickpatrick

Council chief executive Owen Keegan said there was a “whole range” of culture and recreation programmes that could not be funded without the sale of surplus council lands.

>Housing crisis
>Surplus council lands

Does. Not. Compute.