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

Find out what % of an estate is social housing

Options
245

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,980 ✭✭✭suvigirl


    That's just those jealous begrudgers. Personally I couldn't care less what the person next door paid or didn't pay for their house.

    has absolutely no affect on anyone else whatsoever



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,980 ✭✭✭suvigirl




  • Registered Users Posts: 165 ✭✭JCN12


    Rumour has it they are also very good at apportioning anecdotal labels when confronted with facts.



  • Registered Users Posts: 81,186 ✭✭✭✭Atlantic Dawn
    M


    If you go to Landdirect.ie you can view the folio of a house for €5, this will tell you the owner. I suppose not cheap if there's 100 houses but you might only need to know what houses are immediately around you.



  • Registered Users Posts: 831 ✭✭✭boetstark


    And what about the very large percentage of those on housing list here in Limerick that don't work, isn't that free housing.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 252 ✭✭Bobby_Bolivia


    You pay very, very little tax compared to others if you qualify for social housing.

    You take more than you give.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,194 ✭✭✭sprucemoose


    yes

    ghettoisation is a thing, its not a new idea. spreading social housing throughout a development is a much better idea that clustering them together



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,296 ✭✭✭CPTM


    There's also the massive datasets on data.gov that have planning permissions, along with descriptions (sometimes with notes on social housing) in the description field.



  • Registered Users Posts: 831 ✭✭✭boetstark


    That's complete and utter rubbish. Of course it has if it affects the value of the house you are working hard to repay.

    And unfortunately it only takes one or two social housing families to cause chaos in an area.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,097 ✭✭✭Ezeoul


    A variation of this exact same thread must pop up at least a couple of times a month, honest to god, do people not know the score by now?

    I'm a private owner. I've a social house to my left, and another private owner to my right.

    Guess which neighbour is the anti-social nightmare. I'll give you a hint. They live on my right.

    Vast social housing estates that likes of those built in the 70s and 80s are never coming back. Nor should they.

    Honestly, get over it.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,764 ✭✭✭mrslancaster


    Are you saying that people living in every social housing community in the country are living in ghettos?



  • Registered Users Posts: 625 ✭✭✭Cal4567


    Department of Housing produces this every quarter which has a breakdown of all new social housing in an area. This is public record.

    This would be in addition to the Part V provision that applies to all projects over 10 units, I believe.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,764 ✭✭✭mrslancaster


    Why do you think large social housing estates are any different to large privately built developments? The SH buildings are not of a lesser standard, people living in SH have access to the same education system, health service, job opportunities, sports and other cultural and community activities. No matter where people live they usually have the same aspirations to live a happy peaceful life. Imo anyone who thinks that people who avail of subsidized housing are living in ghettos, and should be housed in a more costly house to prevent them falling into a life of ASB, is seriously arrogant and condescending.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,097 ✭✭✭Ezeoul


    I don't think the buildings are of lesser standards.

    But I can tell you something, having grown up in a council estate with an extremely rough reputation, that the families living there most definitely did not have the same access or the same opportunities as those in "better" areas. Always last on the list for funding when it came to schools, medical centres etc, or basically anything - and we were actually told to lie about where we lived when applying for jobs or our CVs would go in the bin.

    Sprawling estates with little or no services, where families are just dumped and forgotten about, should never happen again.

    I can also tell you from my own experience, having moved on from social housing and into home ownership, that anti-social behavior and assholes come in all shapes, sizes, and income brackets, and they don't all live in social housing.

    Post edited by Ezeoul on


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,764 ✭✭✭mrslancaster


    Where did the rough reputation come from and what opportunities do you mean? I know many schools didn't encourage students to go to third level in the past but that wasn't confined to SH estates.

    Agree that those who engage in asb and dodgy people come from all walks of life and all areas of the country, so why are entire SH estates constantly labelled as rough, ghettos, and generally undesirable places to live when problems are from a tiny minority of residents.

    If any local council built a 100+ unit estate of SH today, do you think that people would not want to live in those properties just because they were built by the council and not a private developer? Or that those people would be better people, or live a better life, simply by living adjacent to an owner occupier? It's an absurd notion. Anyone who thinks that some areas (and really they mean the people living there) are undesirable or inferior or defective or flawed in some way and need rescuing needs to lose that attitude.

    I also believe that labelling children from a young age by calling local schools 'Deis' is wrong. How is it helpful to tell young children that the area they live in and their community is socially disadvantaged and deprived. Even ads on tv are at it at the moment - look how great we are providing free nutritious food through Deis schools to kids who need it most - pretty disgusting saying parents in those areas are not taking care of their kids properly. No issue with any organisation helping local communities but don't demean those receiving the help and then brag about it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 698 ✭✭✭TedBundysDriver


    Or private housing families.

    It's actually disgusting the view on this site against people like myself in social housing.



  • Registered Users Posts: 107 ✭✭Inforapenny


    15% of income, wow. Is that 15% of gross income or take home pay? Presume the latter.

    Im currently spending nearly 50% of my take home pay on my mortgage.

    So much for rewarding the people who get up in the morning. We reward people who want, take, want, take etc



  • Registered Users Posts: 107 ✭✭Inforapenny


    Disagree, you have it easier than the person going out and working and having to pay a big mortgage because you pay a small amount of rent each week for a fancy social house.

    You can afford to live a better life as a good portion of your disposable income is not going on a mortgage compared to those not taking.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,980 ✭✭✭suvigirl


    No, it doesn't effect the price of my house, particularly as No one even knows the ownership of the rest of the houses.

    Oh, and just to correct you, it only takes one or two families in any area to cause chaos.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,980 ✭✭✭suvigirl




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 897 ✭✭✭sameoldname


    Your reward is getting to own a house after your mortgage is paid. A house is one of the few constantly-appreciating assets you can buy in the long-term and even if you chose not to live in it in the future it'll still provide you with rental income. Once you've paid for it it's also an asset with which you can secure new loans against if ever needed. You can also pass it down to future generations or you can sell it after the kids have moved out to buy something smaller in a nicer area. That's your reward.

    They on the other-hand will get none of those things.



  • Registered Users Posts: 831 ✭✭✭boetstark


    Firstly I agree that scumbag behaviour is definitely not limited to those on social housing benefits.

    Unfortunately every statistic shoes that anti social activities is more prevalent in areas with much social housing. Probably idle hands and such stuff.

    Also if there is social housing in immediate area or next door it 100% affects the value of your home , and that is from personal experience with 3 separate estate agents.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,980 ✭✭✭suvigirl


    Well, have a look at the Dublin housing market today. Social housing in an estate has little effects that anyone can see.

    in my estate, I have no idea who owns their house, who rents their house, if the council or housing bodies own any houses or who is on HAP. Has no affect on me whatsoever.



  • Registered Users Posts: 698 ✭✭✭TedBundysDriver


    Yeah, I just can't afford petrol for my Ferrari



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,264 ✭✭✭Tork


    If you don't want "undesirables" living near you, buy a house out in the sticks and be done with it. Once you move into an estate or any sort of built up area, you lose all control over who's living near you. Some people just neglect their houses, no matter what they've paid for them. Some houses will get bought up by the council as the original owners move on. Others will be bought by people who want to rent them out. You can rant all you want on a thread such as this one but it's not going to change a thing.

    Really, this thread is just a variation on the endless welfare bashing ones that have been started here on board.



  • Registered Users Posts: 897 ✭✭✭sameoldname


    Here's the thing, even if you do live out in the country it doesn't mean you won't live beside an "undesirable". I live out in the sticks 2 miles from the nearest council house and the owner of the house next door is the local drug dealer with his constant music, barking dogs and occasional garda raid. Unless you've enough money to buy all the land around you there is every chance you will end up living next to an anti-social prick, social housing or not.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,264 ✭✭✭Tork


    No, that's true. It is in the lap of the gods who you eventually end up living near. The original question asked in this thread is utterly pointless. Even if you move into an area that doesn't have a social or rented house in sight today, there is no guarantee that'll be the case in 5-10 years time. It's not a new phenomenon either. I know of estates and terraces which started out as perfectly nice normal places but went to the dogs over a decade or two. Not necessarily because of the local authority either. It's a lazy label.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,068 ✭✭✭Murph85




  • Registered Users Posts: 1,109 ✭✭✭herbalplants


    I viewed few houses in very desirable areas, most probate sale and my stomach turned at the condition those poor old people lived at the end of their life. Totally delapidated,hardly heating in the place yet their "inheritors", their lovely darlings have their hands up for as much money as they can grab. Yet there are houses more in the disadvantage areas which you can see the elderly were properly taken care off. A lot to be said.

    Today I viewed a house again in high sought after area, I cannot describe the absolute horrors, it looked like junkies lived in it there was a bedroom which I think it wasn't maintained since 1950. Pure poverty inside those walls. Yet highly sought area, far away from any council area.

    Living the life



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 698 ✭✭✭TedBundysDriver




This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement