No social housing

16-01-2017 07:58PM #1

Can't believer there hasn't been a thread on AH about this already

https://www.rte.ie/news/2017/0116/845263-merrion-square-development.

The Unite trade union has put it in a planning application for its former headquarters which sought exemption from the social housing regulations.

Unite's Brendan Ogle was involved in the Apollo house occupation.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1 · 16-01-2017 08:00PM

Nothing involving Mr. Ogle would surprise me.

Gatling · 16-01-2017 08:17PM

They Unite are claiming it wasn't them ,it was someone else who applied for the exemption

The flying mouse · 16-01-2017 08:18PM

It just goes to reinstate my belief that once people get to the top of there Trees, in there relative organisations, be it church, state, politicians of all party's and trade unions leaders etc etc , they forget why & who put them there. They then run for what's best for themselves and not best for who they represent.

jameorahiely · 16-01-2017 08:20PM

Gatling wrote: »

They Unite are claiming it wasn't them ,it was someone else who applied for the exemption

The shaggy defence
Wasn't me

FTA69 · 16-01-2017 08:21PM

As someone who works for Unite, if the union knowingly did that then they're a disgrace for doing so. However, the fact that Unite may or may not have tried to shake a planning application doesn't mean Ogle was a part of it or had any knowledge of it. Unite is a union of 1.5m members with tens of thousands of staff, officers and organisers aren't at all privy to what happens regarding unions assets and buildings etc.

That having been said, I'd take half of what's on the Irish media with a pinch of salt and it's a gas coincidence this has come about at the same time certain establishment figures have been embarassed publically on the issue of homelessness in Ireland and how much of a f*ck up NAMA was.

Unite is well capable of doing the b*llocks, I see it myself every day but I must ask around about what happened in this case.

Harry Palmr · 16-01-2017 08:24PM

No social housing is a bigger issue than this particular story (if it is one), in the post war era when this state hardly had two pennies to rub together public housing was built. In the 21st century it's hardly done at all.

Gatling · 16-01-2017 08:24PM

FTA69 wrote: »

As someone who works for Unite, if the union knowingly did that then they're a disgrace for doing so. However, the fact that Unite may or may not have tried to shake a planning application doesn't mean Ogle was a part of it or had any knowledge of it. Unite is a union of 1.5m members with tens of thousands of staff, officers and organisers aren't at all privy to what happens regarding unions assets and buildings etc.

If it was done intentionally would their be blacklash from members and employees like yourself

16-01-2017 08:24PM

jameorahiely wrote: »

The shaggy defence
Wasn't me

The exemption application was made by a company called 'Unite the Union Trustee Company', which like the union itself, is based in London. I support unions but have a strong dislike of this sort of thing what about having values

homerjay2005 · 16-01-2017 08:38PM

we hear people whinging every day now about lack of social housing yet when it comes to putting social housing in various parts of the city, everybody is objecting against it.

bunch of hypocrites.

jameorahiely · 16-01-2017 08:45PM

mariaalice wrote: »

The exemption application was made by a company called 'Unite the Union Trustee Company', which like the union itself, is based in London. I support unions but have a strong dislike of this sort of thing what about having values

They used a company in belfast to apply for the planning to change the offices in to 6 apartments

http://www.dublincity.ie/swiftlg/apas/run/WPHAPPDETAIL.DisplayUrl?theApnID=3937/15&theTabNo=1&backURL=%3Ca%20href=wphappcriteria.display%3ESearch%20Criteria%3C/a%3E%20%3E%20%3Ca%20href='wphappsearchres.displayResultsURL?ResultID=3290558%26StartIndex=51%26SortOrder=APNID:asc%26DispResultsAs=wphappsresweek2%26BackURL=%3Ca%20href=wphappcriteria.display%3ESearch%20Criteria%3C/a%3E'%3ESearch%20Results%3C/a%3E

Spanish Eyes · 16-01-2017 08:50PM

Well it is in Merrion Square, so what the heck do you all expect really?

Let those who can afford Merrion Sq pay for the apartments, but as a taxpayer I would think it ridiculous that a social tenant could avail of this top location. Sorry.

Unite should have sold the premises and built a mix of private and social housing. But that would not bring in much loot now would it?

Any response from the Union about this yet does anyone know?

qo2cj1dsne8y4k · 16-01-2017 09:01PM

Social housing is needed but not in prime locations

Dyr · 16-01-2017 09:04PM

Gatling wrote: »

If it was done intentionally would their be blacklash from members and employees like yourself

I'm a unite member and my attitude would be that the sooner they get shot of that building in merrion square the more I'll like it, its been tied up in legal rigmarole for years now. I could care less about exemptions for that yoke

FTA69 · 16-01-2017 09:10PM

Right, I was curious about this so sent a buddy of mine a message to see what the craic was; he's an active lay member of Unite based in Dublin. By the way I'm only putting forward my own thinking and what was said to me, I'm not providing some official inside track commentary - I don't know what f*ck is going on half the time with Unite in my own office never mind Ireland.

Couple of things, Apollo House was targeted specifically as a political action to raise awareness of homelessness and also importantly to shine a light on the NAMA fiasco about how publicly paid for buildings are allowed to be left rot. In other words, Apollo House would have happened regardless.

Now, on to Unite. The building in question was an 8 room Georgian building; Unite were going to turn it into four flats. The social housing quota for development is 10%; as you may guess it's impossible to allocate 10% of 4 flats to social housing, that's the reason why they were exempt. Apparently you have to state this exemption on the planning as a matter of course or it gets rejected.

I was under the illusion they were throwing up a block of flats like. Pure non story as I suspected.

jameorahiely · 16-01-2017 09:19PM

FTA69 wrote: »

Right, I was curious about this so sent a buddy of mine a message to see what the craic was; he's an active lay member of Unite based in Dublin. By the way I'm only putting forward my own thinking and what was said to me, I'm not providing some official inside track commentary - I don't know what f*ck is going on half the time with Unite in my own office never mind Ireland.

Couple of things, Apollo House was targeted specifically as a political action to raise awareness of homelessness and also importantly to shine a light on the NAMA fiasco about how publicly paid for buildings are allowed to be left rot. In other words, Apollo House would have happened regardless.

Now, on to Unite. The building in question was an 8 room Georgian building; Unite were going to turn it into four flats. The social housing quota for development is 10%; as you may guess it's impossible to allocate 10% of 4 flats to social housing, that's the reason why they were exempt. Apparently you have to state this exemption on the planning as a matter of course or it gets rejected.

I was under the illusion they were throwing up a block of flats like. Pure non story as I suspected.

12 apartments 10% would be 1.This is the same building? 15 merrion square. Where have the ither 8 apartments disappeared to?

PROTECTED STRUCTURE: The proposals shall consist of the internal reconfiguration and change of use of the basement, ground and upper floor areas of the existing Georgian protected structure into apartments and new build apartment accommodation to the rear of the site, facing onto Denzille Lane. Works to the existing protected structure are to facilitate a material change of use from offices to residential use, and will provide 6 no. apartments. The new build accommodation will provide a further 6 no. apartments with associated car parking at ground level. A landscaped amenity garden area is to be located between the existing and new build accommodation.

FTA69 · 16-01-2017 09:42PM

jameorahiely wrote: »

12 apartments 10% would be 1.This is the same building? 15 merrion square. Where have the ither 8 apartments disappeared to?

PROTECTED STRUCTURE: The proposals shall consist of the internal reconfiguration and change of use of the basement, ground and upper floor areas of the existing Georgian protected structure into apartments and new build apartment accommodation to the rear of the site, facing onto Denzille Lane. Works to the existing protected structure are to facilitate a material change of use from offices to residential use, and will provide 6 no. apartments. The new build accommodation will provide a further 6 no. apartments with associated car parking at ground level. A landscaped amenity garden area is to be located between the existing and new build accommodation.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2017/0116/845263-merrion-square-development/

RTÉ is saying it's four flats?

Dyr · 16-01-2017 09:49PM

jameorahiely wrote: »

12 apartments 10% would be 1.This is the same building? 15 merrion square. Where have the ither 8 apartments disappeared to?

PROTECTED STRUCTURE: The proposals shall consist of the internal reconfiguration and change of use of the basement, ground and upper floor areas of the existing Georgian protected structure into apartments and new build apartment accommodation to the rear of the site, facing onto Denzille Lane. Works to the existing protected structure are to facilitate a material change of use from offices to residential use, and will provide 6 no. apartments. The new build accommodation will provide a further 6 no. apartments with associated car parking at ground level. A landscaped amenity garden area is to be located between the existing and new build accommodation.

Ever been in that building?

jameorahiely · 16-01-2017 09:57PM

FTA69 wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/news/2017/0116/845263-merrion-square-development/

RTÉ is saying it's four flats?

RTE says "three three-bed and one one-bed apartments"

Still 2 missing!?!

FTA69 · 16-01-2017 09:58PM

jameorahiely wrote: »

RTE says "three three-bed and one one-bed apartments"

Still 2 missing!?!

Yeah 3 3-beds and 1 one-bed is four flats mate.

jameorahiely · 16-01-2017 10:02PM

FTA69 wrote: »

Yeah 3 3-beds and 1 one-bed is four flats mate.

Oops yes, you're correct. Don't know what I was multiplying. 4 apartments, yet the planning says 12, strange

FTA69 · 16-01-2017 10:13PM

jameorahiely wrote: »

Oops yes, you're correct. Don't know what I was multiplying. 4 apartments, yet the planning says 12, strange

I honestly haven't a clue like, you may well be right as well. But all I know is RTÉ broke this "story" about evil Unite screwing the council out of social housing and then they themselves go on to say the latest planning application is to 1) keep the Georgian part as a single house and 2) turn the rest into four flats. Which would make 5 homes in total which is way off the social housing criterion.

Stink of sh*te off it, funny enough the story only comes out now too.

jimmycrackcorm · 17-01-2017 12:04AM

FTA69 wrote:

As someone who works for Unite, if the union knowingly did that then they're a disgrace for doing so. However, the fact that Unite may or may not have tried to shake a planning application doesn't mean Ogle was a part of it or had any knowledge of it. Unite is a union of 1.5m members with tens of thousands of staff, officers and organisers aren't at all privy to what happens regarding unions assets and buildings etc.

Perhaps Ogle should spend more time on his union activities if he isn't aware.

FTA69 wrote:

Now, on to Unite. The building in question was an 8 room Georgian building; Unite were going to turn it into four flats. The social housing quota for development is 10%; as you may guess it's impossible to allocate 10% of 4 flats to social housing, that's the reason why they were exempt. Apparently you have to state this exemption on the planning as a matter of course or it gets rejected.

The building was lying empty for three years yet Ogle didn't think that it can be used for social housing or for the homeless. Grand Nimbyism.

Tigger · 17-01-2017 12:21AM

Bria Witty Streetlight wrote: »

Nothing involving Mr. Ogle would surprise me.

he's clearly got no friends in low places

pjproby · 17-01-2017 01:03AM

Even if it was 4 apartments why could one not be allocated to social housing?

FTA69 · 17-01-2017 08:57AM

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Perhaps Ogle should spend more time on his union activities if he isn't aware

I'm sure Unite and the members are very happy with Brendan to be honest. Similarly Ogle is an officer, people like himself have nothing to do with things like asset management, administration etc. It's a massive organisation headquartered in London, the above sort of thing has nothing to do with people in his position.

The building was lying empty for three years yet Ogle didn't think that it can be used for social housing or for the homeless. Grand Nimbyism.

1) Merrion Square has Nothing to do with Ogle.
2) It's not up to Unite, Glen Hansard, Man on the Moon or whoever to house the homeless - it's up to the government to make that provision. Through NAMA, we in effect paid for and took ownership over huge amounts of property that was going to waste and sold back to the developers for a pittance after we bailed them out. That's what Apollo House was drawing attention to.
3) The Unite office didn't meet the criterion for social housing at all, it's a tiny development of four flats thus the RTÉ 'story' was a load of contrived messing and that's obvious to anyone who looks at this case.

You're only labouring this non point because you seem to have a bee in your bonnet over Brendan Ogle.

Wheeliebin30 · 17-01-2017 09:03AM

FTA69 wrote: »

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I'm sure Unite and the members are very happy with Brendan to be honest. Similarly Ogle is an officer, people like himself have nothing to do with things like asset management, administration etc. It's a massive organisation headquartered in London, the above sort of thing has nothing to do with people in his position.

1) Merrion Square has Nothing to do with Ogle.
2) It's not up to Unite, Glen Hansard, Man on the Moon or whoever to house the homeless - it's up to the government to make that provision. Through NAMA, we in effect paid for and took ownership over huge amounts of property that was going to waste and sold back to the developers for a pittance after we bailed them out. That's what Apollo House was drawing attention to.
3) The Unite office didn't meet the criterion for social housing at all, it's a tiny development of four flats thus the RTÉ 'story' was a load of contrived messing and that's obvious to anyone who looks at this case.

You're only labouring this non point because you seem to have a bee in your bonnet over Brendan Ogle.

Why does he think his building should be excempt from the social housing rules?

Brian? · 17-01-2017 09:15AM

The policy of the private sector providing social housing is ludicrous to begin with. The State hasn't built enough social housing to satisfy the demand in 40 years.

If the buckets of stamp duty collected during the Celtic Tiger had been used to build even a modicum of social housing we wouldn't be in a crisis now. Instead of changing a system that clearly doesn't work the lunacy continues.

10% of 4 flats is impossible to deliver. This is a non story, hatchet job on Unite. It's a classic tactic, whip up hatred towards an evil trade union to distract from government incompetence.

FTA69 · 17-01-2017 09:19AM

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

FTA69 wrote: »

Why does he think his building should be excempt from the social housing rules?

Jesus this is like pulling teeth. Previous levels of social housing obligation was 20%; alleged Labour politician Alan Kelly cut this to 10%.

Unite's former property is being made into four flats. It is impossible to deliver 0.4% of a flat for social housing; even under the old rules they'd have been exempt.

In other words, the rules don't apply to developments less than ten as it would be impossible to deliver.

As Brian has astutely pointed out, this is a non-story and hatchet job and don't hold your breath for RTÉ to clarify the messing and/or grill the government about their failure to build any social housing when we so desperately need it.

VinLieger · 17-01-2017 09:36AM

FTA69 wrote: »

I honestly haven't a clue like, you may well be right as well. But all I know is RTÉ broke this "story" about evil Unite screwing the council out of social housing and then they themselves go on to say the latest planning application is to 1) keep the Georgian part as a single house and 2) turn the rest into four flats. Which would make 5 homes in total which is way off the social housing criterion.

Stink of sh*te off it, funny enough the story only comes out now too.

Theres nothing stinking about it, the fact is they had an empty building they could have used indefinitely but instead chose to go for a building that was nothing but a PR stunt that had to fail and the people would always have been evicted from

FTA69 · 17-01-2017 09:40AM

VinLieger wrote: »

Theres nothing stinking about it, the fact is they had an empty building they could have used indefinitely but instead chose to go for a building that was nothing but a PR stunt that had to fail and the people would always have been evicted from

Big difference between an 8 room house and a huge building like Apollo House with multiple washing facilities and a kitchen.

Likewise, for the umpteenth time, it isn't up to Unite to deal with homelessness provision it's the governments. Apollo House was a political action aimed at highlighting the NAMA debacle and the crisis itself. And it was a very successful one judging by the eagerness of some people in the media to engage in hatchet job non-stories. As for being a failure? Lol. They were never off the news and all those dwelling in Apollo got offered long stretch accommodation with their own keys.

Some failure.

No social housing

Comments