Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Irish Property Market chat II - *read mod note post #1 before posting*

1873874876878879914

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,253 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    The 80k was over a 12 month period to April 2024, not an 8 month period.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭RichardAnd


    You're quite correct, but we're not doing it now. Efforts have been made to bring the number up, but it has actually gone down from last year. It was possible to deliver 80k houses a year in the past, but that was at a time when the economy was far more construction focused than it is today. Could it be done again? Probably, but not without major changes and not overnight.

    I'll also add that the quality of many Celtic Tiger builds was appalling; I would like to think that modern builds are not so slovenly built.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,253 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    I dont think 80k is on anyones realistic plan in the next 5 years, but 40k is on track for this year, then up towards 50k next.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭RichardAnd


    Well as mentioned earlier in the thread, the target was not met for 2024, which doesn't bode well for the coming year, but who knows.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,253 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    True, but >30k vs 34k target isnt a huge miss.

    completions >38k this year is highly probable.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,453 ✭✭✭McBain11


    Darragh O'Brien, is it yourself ? You've been moved to another cabinet post pal, so I hope we won't have to endure your endlessly repetitive posts on this topic anymore.

    You have been spinning and bluffing on behalf of the government at every turn for a year now. At an a extraordinary rate may I add, with nearly 5k posts in a year.

    These official housing completion stats are a monumental failure by government, there is no spinning it any other way. Incredibly, it won't matter to them as they'll spin and bluff their way through it. As a new government, new direction and pace on housing, more resources going in, new housing minister being the biggest thing to make it look like things are changing.

    It is absolutely galling to see this shower leading the country for the next few years.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 329 ✭✭Montys return


    It was close to 40k would be built this year. The government said it repeatedly since the summer.

    Privately, Darragh O Brien expressed frustration at not upping the Housing for All targets earlier this year but the leaders wanted to wait. He knew they have been inadequate for some time, but they can't even meet an inadequate target and we are to expect they will increase output by about 70% in the next few years.

    That is despite serious concerns widely reported about financing, infrastructure delivery (electricity, water/waste water connections, zoned land) and of course the well known planning issues we have in the Country.

    https://www.irishtimes.com/politics/2024/08/25/almost-40000-new-homes-to-be-completed-this-year-ahead-of-250000-five-year-plan-harris/

    https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/it-is-delusion-opposition-hits-out-at-housing-minister-in-testy-dail-debate-2-1687086.html



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,568 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    Ill tell you how they will try and spin it… The builders didnt use as much energy last year, as we were below target, so they will save all that pent up energy , to exceed figures for this year and build 82,000 homes…



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,568 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    50,000 units a year! LOL! this is better comedy, than them having just been outed, as outright lying to the electorate at election time, knowing full well, completions would likely be less than last year or certainly the same…

    NEXT UP! For the government shills posting on this forum , I want to know, where in gods name in Dublin, do you want to repeateldy build, the numbers needed? Where? IGBS site is gone, port would take decades to move, there are no meaningful sites with any serious number of units proposed , that arent decades away. So again, forget the labour shortage and the 2nd world infrastructure? Are they going to start reclaiming from the sea like the Dutch or Dubai?

    I can imagine it now, 200 years of planning disputes over it…

    They can lie all they want, I honestly wouldnt be surprised, if 35,0000 -40,000 is the peak, of what gets delivered…



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,109 ✭✭✭I see sheep


    Who is worse, the incompetents running the country or the people who vote them back in?

    "a terrible war imposed by the provisional IRA"

    Our West Brit Taoiseach



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,568 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    Its an impossible situation, the options are so useless here and I understand why those fools get voted back in, its obvious… The primary problem is, there isnt a single competent party. Say a new party came along, got only 15% of the vote, it would be a total kingmaker, they way Irish politics is so fragmented. Honestly, nothing here changes, until we get credible people or at least one credible party, to represent us in the Dail. What is there, explains totally, why the country is , the way it is, they are an absolute embarassment…



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭RichardAnd


    Heh I'll be back here in 2026 to hold you to that ;)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,633 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    You repeatedly claimed that we were going to increase numbers in 24 compared to 23, and in fact the completions shrank. FFG housing policy is an abject failure



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,633 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    2026 completions will bring it back on track, government are doing a great job. Record numbers of commencements don't you forget (nothing to do with developers rushing to front load developments solely to get fees waived)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,253 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    Who would you prefer to lead the govt and why do you think they would outbuild the current govt?

    Target for 2024 was missed, thats fair comment. 30k delivered vs a target of 34k.

    Over 2023 and 2024, the combined target was 62,400 and 62,800 were built.

    Overall, 2023/24 targets were therefore exceeded. Hardly an abject failure.

    We should still see approaching 40k this year, probably around 38k.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,253 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    Please enlighten us as to who is a better option.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,253 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    Please do :)

    49k commencements in the 12 months to July 2024, so no reason 38k wont be delivered this year.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,324 ✭✭✭Blut2


    If a private sector organisation missed its committed to plans by 13% it would lose contracts and potentially face legal action. And senior management heads would roll.

    This not withstanding that the 34k goal was already woefully low given every analysis is suggesting 50k p.a. is the minimum required.

    The same standards should apply here.

    Letting yearly housing completions decrease, while also letting yearly immigration numbers increase at the same time, is a horrendous combination that is well within government power to control.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,109 ✭✭✭I see sheep


    "a terrible war imposed by the provisional IRA"

    Our West Brit Taoiseach



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭RichardAnd




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,027 ✭✭✭PeadarCo


    The reason the government got back in is because the majority of people are not impacted by the housing crisis. 70 odd percent of the country own houses. Obviously there is a big generational divide within that figure however things have to be seen in that context.

    The issues around building houses aren't that complicated but require long term solutions.

    If you want houses built you need people to build them, you can't just magic up thousands of qualified, trades people, architects, planners etc. If try bring them in from abroad, well you see in this thread alone the reaction to "immigrants". This will not change no matter who is power.

    You need to tackle NIMBYs that oppose large numbers of property developments. On a Irish Times podcast discussing the failure to develop the Old Dundrum shopping centre it was mentioned that the vast majority of large housing developments face judicial review. Thats local and sometimes not local people objecting slowing down and making housing developments more expensive.

    Recent government legislation may help alleviate some of these issues but only time will tell. But a change in government won't stop NIMBYs objecting in what ever way they are allowed to.

    If you look at the reporting around the objections in the case of the Old Dundrum shopping center, there were apparently a large number of objections because it would have contained a large amount of rental units. Or put it another way locals in the area were objecting to increasing the supply of rental accommodation despite about a decade of chronic supply issues in the rental market. That alone sums up the problem for whoever is in government, a substantial and vocal portion of people in Ireland actively oppose solutions to the housing crisis.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,190 ✭✭✭extra-ordinary_


    "there were apparently a large number of objections because it would have contained a large amount of rental units. Or put it another way locals in the area were objecting to increasing the supply of rental accommodation despite about a decade of chronic supply issues in the rental market. That alone sums up the problem for whoever is in government, a substantial and vocal portion of people in Ireland actively oppose solutions to the housing crisis."

    Presumably, the objectors would rather have seen the new properties available for sale and have owner occupiers contributing to their area, rather than nosebleed rents for the profiteering of whatever investment fund…



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,253 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    I would say its more a convenient excuse to object. If those apartments were for sale, the same folks would object but with a different reason.

    Local bat population, heights not inkeeping with the LDP, the development is injurous to the history of the area etc.

    Take your pick from Objection Bingo.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,253 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    All good points.

    Most people are not directly impacted by the housing crisis and indeed, their property prices are increasing.

    I also believe the electorate dont see any credible opposition.

    People pick the best horse in the race; not because it's the perfect horse, but because it is better than the opposition.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 310 ✭✭danfrancisco83


    Well said. It's like this

    **************************************************

    2 bed apartments for social housing -

    "I object! These apartments should be for market rent, for people working in the area"

    2 bed apartments for rent -

    "I object! These apartments should be for sale, for people getting a foothold on the property ladder"

    2 bed apartments for sale -

    "I object! These should be houses, people don't want to live in apartments, what if they have kids?"

    **************************************************

    This is basically the script RBB follows, and it has served him well.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 866 ✭✭✭jams100


    Drove out by Celbridge today and loads of new houses that were built maybe 2 to 3 years ago had roof tiles blown off.

    Whereas the houses further down the road that were built in the 1970s or 80s were fine.

    Why do new houses look and clearly are less sturdy? (It's not as if they are cheap to buy. Are companies deliberate using cheap materials?).

    I get that wind was extreme yesterday but surely that should have more of an adverse effect on a house built 50 yrs ago vs 2 yrs ago?



  • Registered Users, Subscribers, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,683 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Good point, particularly as one of the reasons as new houses are so expensive to buy is because of increased building standards.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,624 ✭✭✭Rocket_GD


    There were many objections put in place for that development that it would ruin their skyline view of the Luas bridge which is a “cultural landmark” for the area, despite it only being built 20 odd years ago.

    The NIMBY are the worst of the worst in my opinion.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,520 ✭✭✭✭o1s1n
    Master of the Universe


    I grew up in a 1970s built house and it was no better quality wise really. Paper thin walls.

    Some of these new builds going up don't look great either. A few years back I was decorating a friend's new build in Belmayne and the finish on everything was shockingly bad.

    Actually really noticed that too when looking at some 5-10 year old builds when viewing properties to buy a few years ago.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭RichardAnd


    Well maybe I'm being optimistic in my hope that newer builds are of a higher quality, but I think anything mass produced is going to suffer from problems. There is also the sad reality that we don't really build anything these days to last. I guess we'll see in 20 years.



Advertisement