Vacant Properties in Ireland

Marius34

schmittel wrote: »

I cannot help the fact that you see no difference between long term averages and previous censuses. You are wrong, but I doubt you will graciously admit it. That's not your style.

I admit that I though many historical point of time of previous censuses (every 5 years), would build a long term average.
If that's not what you meant, than sorry by bad.

Marius34

Some comparison information around Census and GeoDirectory vacancies.

High-level vacancy data is already available from the Census 2016 statistics produced by
the Central Statistics Office (CSO) and other data is available from GeoDirectory and local
authority vacancy surveys. However, there is currently no one existing data source that can
pin-point exact location of properties, the length of time properties have remained vacant, or
the overall condition of the vacant properties.


It is evident that variances exist in currently available data sets. It is possible that there are a
number of reasons to explain the variances between the Census vacancy rate in April 2016
of 183,312 properties and GeoDirectory’s subsequent vacancy figures of 94,640 address
points or units in June 2018 including:
 some of the units identified as vacant in the Census may have been temporarily vacant
(e.g. between letting or for sale). From notes gathered by enumerators where additional
information on the underlying reasons for vacancy could be gathered (some 57,246 of
the total of 183,312 vacant homes identified), they were classified as for sale, for rent,
owner in nursing home, renovation work underway, owner in hospital and owner with
relatives.
 given pent-up housing demand and current low levels of new properties coming onto the
market, it is probable that a number of properties recorded as vacant in Census 2016
have since been brought back into use.


In terms of approaches to identifying vacant properties, the GeoDirectory database includes
an address as vacant, if it falls under one of the following:
 The dwelling is vacant and ready to be inhabited, based on whether the property does
or does not receive post;
 The dwelling is vacant and requires a small amount of cosmetic/repair work to make it
habitable; or
 The dwelling is not a holiday home.

Marius34

It appears, vacancy based on GeoDirectory has decreased since end of 2017 in all Counties, accept the ones with lowest vacancy rates, which is Dublin and Kildare.
Overall from 4.8% to 4.5%

2017 Q4:


2020 Q2:

hometruths

Marius34 wrote: »

Some comparison information around Census and GeoDirectory vacancies.

High-level vacancy data is already available from the Census 2016 statistics produced by
the Central Statistics Office (CSO) and other data is available from GeoDirectory and local
authority vacancy surveys. However, there is currently no one existing data source that can
pin-point exact location of properties, the length of time properties have remained vacant, or
the overall condition of the vacant properties.


It is evident that variances exist in currently available data sets. It is possible that there are a
number of reasons to explain the variances between the Census vacancy rate in April 2016
of 183,312 properties and GeoDirectory’s subsequent vacancy figures of 94,640 address
points or units in June 2018 including:
 some of the units identified as vacant in the Census may have been temporarily vacant
(e.g. between letting or for sale). From notes gathered by enumerators where additional
information on the underlying reasons for vacancy could be gathered (some 57,246 of
the total of 183,312 vacant homes identified), they were classified as for sale, for rent,
owner in nursing home, renovation work underway, owner in hospital and owner with
relatives.
 given pent-up housing demand and current low levels of new properties coming onto the
market, it is probable that a number of properties recorded as vacant in Census 2016
have since been brought back into use.


In terms of approaches to identifying vacant properties, the GeoDirectory database includes
an address as vacant, if it falls under one of the following:
 The dwelling is vacant and ready to be inhabited, based on whether the property does
or does not receive post;
 The dwelling is vacant and requires a small amount of cosmetic/repair work to make it
habitable; or
 The dwelling is not a holiday home.

Always handy to link to the source of such stuff which I presume is the National Vacant Housing Reuse Strategy 2018-2021

I've just read a chunk of it. Utter waffle and spin. Depressing really.

Hubertj

schmittel wrote: »

Always handy to link to the source of such stuff which I presume is the National Vacant Housing Reuse Strategy 2018-2021

I've just read a chunk of it. Utter waffle and spin. Depressing really.

I’ll take your word for it. I would be more cynical and say it is waffle and spin without reading but you have justified my opinion which is not based on fact. Thank you.

Hubertj

I have a question on long term unfinished houses and “ghost estates”. If you have an unfinished house I presume weather would have a negative impact over time? Therefore does it get to a stage where it would have to be demolished and started again?

Marius34

schmittel wrote: »

Always handy to link to the source of such stuff which I presume is the National Vacant Housing Reuse Strategy 2018-2021

I've just read a chunk of it. Utter waffle and spin. Depressing really.

Mmm, what's wrong here around Census & GeoDirectory vacancy comparison? You have better source?

hometruths

Hubertj wrote: »

I’ll take your word for it. I would be more cynical and say it is waffle and spin without reading but you have justified my opinion which is not based on fact. Thank you.

Pleasure is all mine, not many people take my word for it round these parts. According to some I am the Trumpian Comical Ali of boards.

cnocbui

Hubertj wrote: »

I have a question on long term unfinished houses and “ghost estates”. If you have an unfinished house I presume weather would have a negative impact over time? Therefore does it get to a stage where it would have to be demolished and started again?

There is a set of four town houses completed to builders finish near me that have sat untouched for at least 12-14 years I would say. I don't think weather matters with block built so long as there are no leaks. I believe NAMA has them up for sale, but the clowns want to sell all four as a lot, so no one is interested given the additional capital required to finish them off.

If they had put them to market individually I am certain they would have sold.

hometruths

Marius34 wrote: »

Mmm, what's wrong here around Census & GeoDirectory vacancy comparison? You have better source?

Nothing wrong with somebody comparing Census & GeoDirectory vacancies. My point was it is nice to know the source of the comparison. It provides context. And credibility. Or lack thereof, depending on the source.

hometruths

Marius34 wrote: »

Some comparison information around Census and GeoDirectory vacancies.

High-level vacancy data is already available from the Census 2016 statistics produced by the Central Statistics Office (CSO) and other data is available from GeoDirectory and local authority vacancy surveys. However, there is currently no one existing data source that can pin-point exact location of properties, the length of time properties have remained vacant, or the overall condition of the vacant properties.

The National Vacant Housing Reuse Strategy was published in July 2018. In or before May 2017 the CSO released Small Area level data that allowed AIRO to map the data in May 2017.

Indeed Marius has previously posted an example of this mapping:



On top of that the CSO has the exact addresses of all these vacant properties. I cannot believe it is not possible for them to share this data with the Dept of Housing.

To claim that the Dept is hindered by not being able to identify these properties strikes me as disingenuous at best.

Marius34 wrote: »

It is evident that variances exist in currently available data sets. It is possible that there are a number of reasons to explain the variances between the Census vacancy rate in April 2016 of 183,312 properties and GeoDirectory’s subsequent vacancy figures of 94,640 address
points or units in June 2018 including:
 some of the units identified as vacant in the Census may have been temporarily vacant
(e.g. between letting or for sale). From notes gathered by enumerators where additional information on the underlying reasons for vacancy could be gathered (some 57,246 of the total of 183,312 vacant homes identified), they were classified as for sale, for rent, owner in nursing home, renovation work underway, owner in hospital and owner with relatives.

This is disingenuous at best, for reasons already discussed ad nauseam.

Marius34 wrote: »

 given pent-up housing demand and current low levels of new properties coming onto the market, it is probable that a number of properties recorded as vacant in Census 2016 have since been brought back into use.

For sure it is likely that a number of the specific properties recorded as vacant will now be occupied. But has the vacancy rate fallen dramatically? Until they address the reasons why a large number of owners are choosing to keep their properties vacant, it is unlikely to fall dramatically.

Marius34 wrote: »

In terms of approaches to identifying vacant properties, the GeoDirectory database includes
an address as vacant, if it falls under one of the following:
 The dwelling is vacant and ready to be inhabited, based on whether the property does or does not receive post;
 The dwelling is vacant and requires a small amount of cosmetic/repair work to make it habitable; or
 The dwelling is not a holiday home.

This is kind of comical if I have read this right? We have one source of data, the CSO, that uses whether there is a build up of post to indicate vacancy versus another, GeoDirectory, that deems it vacant because it does not receive any post?!

hometruths

Has anyone seen more in depth detail of how GeoDirectory classifies vacant properties than this:

One of the reasons for the sharp increase in construction is the low number of vacant properties in the market. In the GeoView report, a property is considered vacant if it falls into one of the following groups:

The dwelling is vacant and ready to be inhabited, based on whether the property does or does not receive post;
The dwelling is vacant and requires a small amount of cosmetic/repair work to make it habitable; and
The dwelling is not a holiday home.

It seems a bit vague, particularly compared to the detail we have on the census methodology. Have been hunting for more info but struggling to find.

I think a lot more detail is needed to properly compare the 183k vs 94k figure.

Marius34

schmittel wrote: »

On top of that the CSO has the exact addresses of all these vacant properties. I cannot believe it is not possible for them to share this data with the Dept of Housing.

To claim that the Dept is hindered by not being able to identify these properties strikes me as disingenuous at best.

I would guess even CSO workers can not get information of details to exact address. Address entered might be mapped to defined small area, to avoid any data privacy issue. Thus they may not have address in their database.
Census it's a very sensitive data.
There would be no issue if it's only Address, and its vacancy. But census has much more than that, making easy to identify the person.

For sure it is likely that a number of the specific properties recorded as vacant will now be occupied. But has the vacancy rate fallen dramatically? Until they address the reasons why a large number of owners are choosing to keep their properties vacant, it is unlikely to fall dramatically.

Looking at the GeoDirectory, it seems that vacancy rate should have fallen around 0.4% for total number of properties. So maybe vacancy now is ~8.000 lower than it was in 2016

Bass Reeves

cnocbui wrote: »

There is a set of four town houses completed to builders finish near me that have sat untouched for at least 12-14 years I would say. I don't think weather matters with block built so long as there are no leaks. I believe NAMA has them up for sale, but the clowns want to sell all four as a lot, so no one is interested given the additional capital required to finish them off.

If they had put them to market individually I am certain they would have sold.

As they are town houses all the houses are linked. Nama cannot sell them unfinished to individuals, selling to individual builders would be tricky with access to water and sewerage to be sorted maybe as well as fireproofing between houses etc. As well common area's need to be sorted such as parking areas and back gardens maybe

Selling as a single lot is only optio

hometruths

Marius34 wrote: »

I would guess even CSO workers can not get information of details to exact address. Address entered might be mapped to defined small area, to avoid any data privacy issue. Thus they may not have address in their database.
Census it's a very sensitive data.
There would be no issue if it's only Address, and its vacancy. But census has much more than that, making easy to identify the person.

The enumerators visit the property and collect the address. It is kind of the point of the whole exercise. As is then using that info to make informed planning policy decisions.

But admittedly you may be right, there is possibly some GDPR type law prohibits such sensible behaviour, so hopefully we can agree to disagree.

Marius34 wrote: »

Looking at the GeoDirectory, it seems that vacancy rate should have fallen around 0.4% for total number of properties. So maybe vacancy now is ~8.000 lower than it was in 2016

Should have fallen around 0.4%? Where are you getting that from? I'm definitely not convinced by that.

And even if it was true, would we not expect the vacancy rate to fall by a lot more than 0.4% in the midst of a chronic housing crisis?

hometruths

Being so much of a census fanboy I've never really looked to closely at the GeoDirectories reports, as never felt the need, given I have faith in the CSO.

But I have just taken a closer look, and must say it is very revealing.

On vacancies in Q2 June 2017, shortly after the whole vacancy kerfuffle kicked off, GeoDirectories reported this on vacancy rate by counties:

Dublin 0.89% | Kildare 1.99% | Wicklow 2.65%



Fast forward 2.5 years to Q4 Dec 2019 and the figures are:

Dublin 1.3% | Kildare 2.2% | Wicklow 3.2%



Which begs the obvious question - why are the vacancy rates going up in the midst of a chronic housing shortage?

Marius34

schmittel wrote: »

On vacancies in Q2 June 2017, shortly after the whole vacancy kerfuffle kicked off, GeoDirectories reported this on vacancy rate by counties:

Dublin 0.89% | Kildare 1.99% | Wicklow 2.65%

Fast forward 2.5 years to Q4 Dec 2019 and the figures are:

Dublin 1.3% | Kildare 2.2% | Wicklow 3.2%

Which begs the obvious question - why are the vacancy rates going up in the midst of a chronic housing shortage?

Latest is 2020 Q2:
Dublin 1.3% | Kildare 2.0% | Wicklow 2.9%

Nationally vacancy decrease from 4.9% - 4.5%. Which is 0.4%, that's why I mentioned in previous comment that it could be around 0.4%

As you see there are 3 counties with very low vacancy rates, since it's so low, I don't think it can be pushed much, thus it's fluctuate around low vacancy rates.

hometruths

As is so often the case, a little further reading, leads to a lot greater understanding.

After scrabbling around in the dark, I found the answer to the big difference in the GeoDirector and Census figures, hiding in broad daylight - in the Q2 2017 GeoDirectories Residential Report


Apologies for quoting at such length, but it is worth reading in it's entirety:

GeoDirectory report a vacant stock of 96,243 address points or units in June 2017, while the 2016 Census reported a vacant stock of 183,312 address points or units, as of April 2016. Thus the GeoDirectory figure is around half the Census figure, which is a substantial difference, of the order of 87,000 dwellings. The average vacancy rate across the State is 4.9 per cent, according to GeoDirectory (Figure 10), compared with 12.3 per cent, according to the Census of Population.

Drilling down further, however, it is possible to explain some of this substantial difference. The CSO has provided some data on the reasons why vacant dwellings
were vacant at the time of the Census of Population for a small sample of vacant buildings (i.e. around 57,000 dwellings or close to one-third of the total). For this
one-third of vacant dwellings, they include dwellings classified as for sale (10,948 dwellings), for rent (10,350), owner in nursing home (4,165), renovation work underway (3,678), owner in hospital (1,469), and owner with relatives (847).

Some of these categories could be construed as dwellings which might not normally be classified as vacant in the context of vacant long term, but would represent more of a transition or temporary vacancy rate, i.e. while properties are waiting to be sold or rented out. In the aggregate they represent a total of around 31,500 properties out of the 57,000, or 55 per cent, implying that 25,500 of this total would be deemed to be vacant. As these explanations were only provided for one-third of vacant dwellings, (if it is assumed that 55 per cent of the remaining two-thirds were similarly classified, leaving 45 per cent as representing the true vacant total) this would reduce the CSO figure for the number of vacant dwellings considerably to around 83,000, which would
be closer to the GeoDirectory figure of 96,243.

TLDR: GeoDirectory are saying that in real terms their vacancy figure for June 2017 is approximately 15% higher than that of the census in April 2016.

So, now we're comparing apples with apples as it were, can any of the vacancy deniers spot the gigantic elephant in the room and would they care to comment?

hometruths

Marius34 wrote: »

Latest is 2020 Q2:
Dublin 1.3% | Kildare 2.0% | Wicklow 2.9%

Nationally vacancy decrease from 4.9% - 4.5%. Which is 0.4%, that's why I mentioned in previous comment that it could be around 0.4%

As you see there are 3 counties with very low vacancy rates, since it's so low, I don't think it can be pushed much, thus it's fluctuate around low vacancy rates.

2020 Q2 Vacancy rates? Pfft. Have you noticed anything different going on recently?

That's why I focussed on Q4 2019.

National vacancy rates? Pfft. I thought we all now agreed it was only the most densely populated areas we should worry about because we would expect Leitrim to be full of empties!

That's why I focussed on Dublin, Kildare & Wicklow.

Marius34

schmittel wrote: »

As is so often the case, a little further reading, leads to a lot greater understanding.

After scrabbling around in the dark, I found the answer to the big difference in the GeoDirector and Census figures, hiding in broad daylight - in the Q2 2017 GeoDirectories Residential Report


Apologies for quoting at such length, but it is worth reading in it's entirety:

TLDR: GeoDirectory are saying that in real terms their vacancy figure for June 2017 is approximately 15% higher than that of the census in April 2016.

So, now we're comparing apples with apples as it were, can any of the vacancy deniers spot the gigantic elephant in the room and would they care to comment?

Yeah, that's why I was not dismissing Census vacancy. It simply counts properties vacant even if the property is in use, but with temporal vacancy.

In normal terms we see vacant, properties that are not in use. Which is not a case for Census.
Where as GeoDirectory is focus in long term vacancy, a place where it's not occupied for months or so.
I'm not sure why there are more interest in properties with temporal vacancies, and not in data with Long Term vacancy.

hometruths

Marius34 wrote: »

Yeah, that's why I was not dismissing Census vacancy. It simply counts properties vacant even if the property is in use, but with temporal vacancy.

In normal terms we see vacant, properties that are not in use. Which is not a case for Census.
Where as GeoDirectory is focus in long term vacancy, a place where it's not occupied for months or so.
I'm not sure why there are more interest in properties with temporal vacancies, and not in data with Long Term vacancy.

And now we know why there is such a big difference between the CSO figures and the GeoDirectory figures would you agree we have an obscenely high vacancy figure when we are in the middle of a housing shortage?

Marius34

schmittel wrote: »

And now we know why there is such a big difference between the CSO figures and the GeoDirectory figures would you agree we have an obscenely high vacancy figure when we are in the middle of a housing shortage?

It's low vacancy (long term) in Urban areas, mainly in counties surrounding Dublin.
It's high in West Ireland and country side.

hometruths

Marius34 wrote: »

It's low vacancy (long term) in Urban areas, mainly in counties surrounding Dublin.
It's high in West Ireland and country side.

Ok, well as I said to Hubert earlier, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink, so no point flogging him to death.

Hopefully some of the other vacancy deniers will read the GeoDirectory/Census comparison and recognise what is staring them in the face.

I won't hold my breath though.

cnocbui

Bass Reeves wrote: »

As they are town houses all the houses are linked. Nama cannot sell them unfinished to individuals, selling to individual builders would be tricky with access to water and sewerage to be sorted maybe as well as fireproofing between houses etc. As well common area's need to be sorted such as parking areas and back gardens maybe

Selling as a single lot is only optio

Actually, there are two adjacent, but separate buildings. I should post a photo, because I have perhaps give the wrong impression as to the state of completion. I don't think it would be as gnarly as you make out.

Timing belt

schmittel wrote: »

Being so much of a census fanboy I've never really looked to closely at the GeoDirectories reports, as never felt the need, given I have faith in the CSO.

But I have just taken a closer look, and must say it is very revealing.

On vacancies in Q2 June 2017, shortly after the whole vacancy kerfuffle kicked off, GeoDirectories reported this on vacancy rate by counties:

Dublin 0.89% | Kildare 1.99% | Wicklow 2.65%



Fast forward 2.5 years to Q4 Dec 2019 and the figures are:

Dublin 1.3% | Kildare 2.2% | Wicklow 3.2%



Which begs the obvious question - why are the vacancy rates going up in the midst of a chronic housing shortage?

Maybe it is down to the apartments that did not comply with the fire-safety certificate.

hometruths

Timing belt wrote: »

Maybe it is down to the apartments that did not comply with the fire-safety certificate.

We can add it to the long list of maybes.

The numbers don’t lie though.

There is no shortage of housing stock, in Dublin or anywhere else.

Bass Reeves

schmittel wrote: »

Ok, well as I said to Hubert earlier, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink, so no point flogging him to death.

Hopefully some of the other vacancy deniers will read the GeoDirectory/Census comparison and recognise what is staring them in the face.

I won't hold my breath though.

Vacancy deniers now after we had property bulls.

So some here think there is 60-100k houses that are vacant and with a small investment can be bought onto the market. That these will flood onto the market over the next few years from hedge/vulture funds or from executor sales.

We say that the lower figure is right at 60k. Split these are spread equally around the country there will be around 18k of them in Dublin, 3-4k in Cork and 500-1500in every other county.

Now the thing about executor sales is they are always part of the market even if they doubled it unlikely they hugely effect the market. Now these mysterious houses owned by these vulture funds. It unlikely be be in single houses but in blocks of apartments or houses that were bulk purchased.

On reading the census report I recall seeing that about 65k of the vacant houses were vacant in 2010 and in 2016. It questionable how many of these are habitable or capable of being returned to the housing stock without serious investment.

Timing belt

schmittel wrote: »

We can add it to the long list of maybes.

The numbers don’t lie though.

There is no shortage of housing stock, in Dublin or anywhere else.

But is the stock inhabitable? If it is stock that does not have a fire safety cert then the answer is no. but this will only account for x%

hometruths

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Vacancy deniers now after we had property bulls.

So some here think there is 60-100k houses that are vacant and with a small investment can be bought onto the market. That these will flood onto the market over the next few years from hedge/vulture funds or from executor sales.

We say that the lower figure is right at 60k. Split these are spread equally around the country there will be around 18k of them in Dublin, 3-4k in Cork and 500-1500in every other county.

Now the thing about executor sales is they are always part of the market even if they doubled it unlikely they hugely effect the market. Now these mysterious houses owned by these vulture funds. It unlikely be be in single houses but in blocks of apartments or houses that were bulk purchased.

On reading the census report I recall seeing that about 65k of the vacant houses were vacant in 2010 and in 2016. It questionable how many of these are habitable or capable of being returned to the housing stock without serious investment.

My point on this is not, and never has been, that suddenly 1000s of hitherto vacant properties are going to flood the market in the short term and crash prices.

It is that according to the best figures available we currently have a perfectly normal level of total housing stock.

yet we are repeatedly told we have a chronic shortage.

In the short term that means we have a homeless crisis, in the long term it means we are in danger of ending up with too many of the wrong houses in the wrong places.

hometruths

Timing belt wrote: »

But is the stock inhabitable? If it e knocked?is stock that does not have a fire safety cert then the answer is no. but this will only account for x%

Forgive me I don’t know all the ins and outs to the fire safety cert issues, I have not been following it.

Is there a remedy? I.e can some of these buildings be fixed to obtain a fire safety cert or do they have to be knocked?

And when did these building become vacant due to the problem?