nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

2021 Irish Property Market chat - mod warnings post 1

hometruths

Happy new year to all.

2020 was the year of pent up demand. I think 2021 will be the year the pent up supply comes to market.

I think the pent up supply will exceed the pent up demand and prices will fall. By how much I have no idea!

edit: Mod Warnings

This thread is about the Irish Property Market, it is not about:
* Immigration
* Refugees
* Welfare recipients
* Welfare rates
* General Irish politics beyond its impact on property
* General Irish economy beyond its impact on property
* How wonderful Country X is to buy in

Additionally, the specific issue of Geodirectory vacancy figures has been done to death and is not to be discussed again.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

fliball123

PropQueries wrote: »

Well, if Copenhagen has 600,000 people living in the same footprint as Dublin has 100,000 people living in between the canals, there would be no reason to build in places like Navan for commuters working in Dublin.

If we utilised the city centre properties in the same way that Copenhagen does, the majority of young people sharing three-bed semis in Dublin would move into the city, which is where they obviously want to be and families could then move into their three-bed semis, without having to commute from e.g. Navan.

Problem solved. But, that's too easy a solution in Ireland

How much and how long do you think it will take to do what you suggest? It would not be easy to do or cheap.

PropQueries

awec wrote: »

What is the "wrong locations"?

If Ireland had a proper public transport system with regular services and wide coverage everyone would be better off for it.

Well, if Copenhagen has 600,000 people living in the same footprint as Dublin has 100,000 people living in between the canals, there would be no reason to build in places like Navan for commuters working in Dublin.

If we utilised the city centre properties in the same way that Copenhagen does, the majority of young people sharing three-bed semis in Dublin would move into the city, which is where they obviously want to be and families could then move into their three-bed semis, without having to commute from e.g. Navan.

Problem solved. But, that's too easy a solution in Ireland

timmyntc

PropQueries wrote: »

It is if it results in houses being built in the wrong locations IMO

If there is public transport to efficiently bring people to where they need to go then I wouldn't say it's the "wrong" place at all.

Obviously the best approach is to build densely - that way the travel distance for people is as low as it can get.
But after that public transport is the answer. Of course it will push up land prices, but so does having shops nearby, or a garda station. You'd hardly call these developer subsidies?

cnocbui

awec wrote: »

What is the "wrong locations"?

If Ireland had a proper public transport system with regular services and wide coverage everyone would be better off for it.

Not if they had to pay for it.

awec

PropQueries wrote: »

It is if it results in houses being built in the wrong locations IMO

What is the "wrong locations"?

If Ireland had a proper public transport system with regular services and wide coverage everyone would be better off for it.

fliball123

PropQueries wrote: »

But isn't regular public transport just a hidden subsidy to landowners outside the main urban centres? By spending billions on rail, bus, motorways etc., it just makes land with planning permission in places like e.g. Navan worth more than it would otherwise be as very few people (who work in Dublin) would consider living there otherwise.

There was an analysis I read a while ago about if the costs of the rail, motorways etc. were factored into the selling price, the cost of delivering homes in places like e.g. Navan would actually cost more than the cost of delivering a similar house in e.g. South Dublin.

Like the shared equity scheme, motorways, rail etc. are just another taxpayer back-door handout to landowners in the commuter counties IMO

Come on your stretching now for god sake we need public transport , the builders didnt all get together and say lets get them to build more roads and put more buses and trains on to make land more valuable.

Sure be careful as there are reports with the continued lockdown that builders and other trades people are leaving Ireland for England. The british are trying to start a building drive and poaching Irish talent

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/british-recruitment-drive-for-builders-sparks-fear-of-exodus-1.4508053

https://www.newstalk.com/news/its-like-the-recession-ireland-facing-construction-skills-shortage-as-workers-flee-covid-closure-1164215

https://www.independent.ie/business/irish/lockdown-endangers-vital-sector-as-builders-flee-to-uk-40186968.html

We are already behind with new builds. If people like you want to keep villainising them for trying to make a living then I dont blame them going. No one has to buy a house no one puts a gun to their head and says buy now. it should not be left to the private sector to build for people on the margins that is the public sectors remit. Please stop with your over the top attacks on builders. You have made some good points with price gouging but you ruin your reputation with regards to honesty and credability when you post utter sh1t like this.

Cant believe you have me defending builders but your on a different planet with your opinion props

PropQueries

awec wrote: »

You've officially jumped the shark. We're now on to how good public transport is actually bad.

It is if it results in houses being built in the wrong locations IMO

awec

PropQueries wrote: »

But isn't regular public transport just a hidden subsidy to landowners outside the main urban centres? By spending billions on rail, bus, motorways etc., it just makes land with planning permission in places like e.g. Navan worth more than it would otherwise be as very few people (who work in Dublin) would consider living there otherwise.

There was an analysis I read a while ago about if the costs of the rail, motorways etc. were factored into the selling price, the cost of delivering homes in places like e.g. Navan would actually cost more than the cost of delivering a similar house in e.g. South Dublin.

Like the shared equity scheme, motorways, rail etc. are just another taxpayer back-door handout to landowners in the commuter counties IMO

You've officially jumped the shark. We're now on to how good public transport is actually bad.

Up next, how provisioning of essential services like running water or electricity are just back door handouts for landowners.

PropQueries

Hubertj wrote: »

Yep, if only the relevant stakeholders engaged constructively to provide adequate public transport

But isn't regular public transport just a hidden subsidy to landowners outside the main urban centres? By spending billions on rail, bus, motorways etc., it just makes land with planning permission in places like e.g. Navan worth more than it would otherwise be as very few people (who work in Dublin) would consider living there otherwise.

There was an analysis I read a while ago about if the costs of the rail, motorways etc. were factored into the selling price, the cost of delivering homes in places like e.g. Navan would actually cost more than the cost of delivering a similar house in e.g. South Dublin.

Like the shared equity scheme, motorways, rail etc. are just another taxpayer back-door handout to landowners in the commuter counties IMO

[Deleted User]

JimmyVik wrote: »

Sure they say in their sales blurb you are 45 minutes from Dublin.
I had to laugh at that.

It reminded me of the time they used to say Dunshaughlin was 20 mins from Dublin city center.

Maybe not o connell St but it is 20 mins from Dublin, tbf

yagan

JimmyVik wrote: »

It reminded me of the time they used to say Dunshaughlin was 20 mins from Dublin city center.

"ATHLONE, THE GATEWAY TO DUBLIN! BUY NOW!"

Hubertj

Villa05 wrote: »

Nothing,
The issue is the commute and its cost to the commuter, the environment and to the state in helping the country break its co2 emmisions target helping to achieve that 500million annual fine.

Yep, if only the relevant stakeholders engaged constructively to provide adequate public transport

JimmyVik

Villa05 wrote: »

Nothing,
The issue is the commute and its cost to the commuter, the environment and to the state in helping the country break its co2 emmisions target helping to achieve that 500million annual fine.

Sure they say in their sales blurb you are 45 minutes from Dublin.
I had to laugh at that.

It reminded me of the time they used to say Dunshaughlin was 20 mins from Dublin city center.

Villa05

Hubertj wrote:

Whatâ€™s wrong with Navan? Part from the accents.

Nothing,
The issue is the commute and its cost to the commuter, the environment and to the state in helping the country break its co2 emmisions target helping to achieve that 500million annual fine.

PropQueries

dor843088 wrote: »

Dublin is not built or planned for dense population and does not use its footprint efficiently. That's the whole point. Redesign the city or simply encourage people to move out through legislation. It's an obvious choice let alone the other problems it will cure.

Or to use a variation of a vacant property tax, maybe an under-utilized property tax on properties in high demand areas.

This really wouldn't impact Irish people as much as it would the international funds who most likely own many of these types of properties in our cities at this stage IMO

And, as David McWilliams said, if they're rich enough to under-utilise a million euro property in a city location, they're rich enough to pay such a tax IMO

Hubertj

dor843088 wrote: »

Dublin is not built or planned for dense population and does not use its footprint efficiently. That's the whole point. Redesign the city or simply encourage people to move out through legislation. It's an obvious choice let alone the other problems it will cure.

I would agree with that. Public transport is an embarrassment, provision of services is an embarrassment, councils politicised. Public servants have lost sight of the meaning of their roles - serve the public

dor843088

PropQueries wrote: »

That's definitely true and I think the state has already stated they're looking at c. 20% WFH from their own staff in the near future. Interesting point on Dublin Bus's future projections as well.

But I would disagree that the capital is overcrowded. Copenhagen has 600,000 people living in the same footprint as Dublin City has 100,000 people living between the canals.

Dublin is not built or planned for dense population and does not use its footprint efficiently. That's the whole point. Redesign the city or simply encourage people to move out through legislation. It's an obvious choice let alone the other problems it will cure.

awec

dor843088 wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/business-podcast/inside-business-with-ciaran-hancock-dublin-bus-ceo-ray-coyne-on-the-future-of-transport-in-the-city-1.4500064?mode=amp

Cheers will take a listen to that later.

dor843088

awec wrote: »

Got a link for this?

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/business-podcast/inside-business-with-ciaran-hancock-dublin-bus-ceo-ray-coyne-on-the-future-of-transport-in-the-city-1.4500064?mode=amp

PropQueries

dor843088 wrote: »

The future will be WFH. The government can make huge inroads to curing a lot of problems with the stroke of a pen . Traffic congestion, emissions targets, stretched services and an overcrowded capital can be greatly reduced through legislation towards WFH. There is more legislation coming down the tracks leaning towards WFH rights for workers. Even the CEO of Dublin bus who would be having close contact with government officials has stated this is how it will be and he only expects buses to be half full in the future due largely to WFH. WFH is a huge win win for everybody especially the government there is no way they wont push for it.

That's definitely true and I think the state has already stated they're looking at c. 20% WFH from their own staff in the near future. Interesting point on Dublin Bus's future projections as well.

But I would disagree that the capital is overcrowded. Copenhagen has 600,000 people living in the same footprint as Dublin City has 100,000 people living between the canals.

awec

dor843088 wrote: »

The future will be WFH. The government can make huge inroads to curing a lot of problems with the stroke of a pen . Traffic congestion, emissions targets, stretched services and an overcrowded capital can be greatly reduced through legislation towards WFH. There is more legislation coming down the tracks leaning towards WFH rights for workers. Even the CEO of Dublin bus who would be having close contact with government officials has stated this is how it will be and he only expects buses to be half full in the future due largely to WFH. WFH is a huge win win for everybody especially the government there is no way they wont push for it.

Got a link for this?

Hubertj

Villa05 wrote: »

Interesting the the initial budget for this was 75m and he was trying to get the banks to match this. Freedom of information showed that the minister wanted to allocate far more to this scheme
4, 000 units is 2/3 of the current Ftb market. It shows how the state needs to subsidise citizens to the tune of up to 40% of the price of the house so that they can compete with entities that pay little or no tax.
If they paid the same amount of tax as the first time buyers it might level the playing field somewhat

What’s wrong with Navan? Part from the accents.

dor843088

The future will be WFH. The government can make huge inroads to curing a lot of problems with the stroke of a pen . Traffic congestion, emissions targets, stretched services and an overcrowded capital can be greatly reduced through legislation towards WFH. There is more legislation coming down the tracks leaning towards WFH rights for workers. Even the CEO of Dublin bus who would be having close contact with government officials has stated this is how it will be and he only expects buses to be half full in the future due largely to WFH. WFH is a huge win win for everybody especially the government there is no way they wont push for it.

PropQueries

Villa05 wrote: »

There's a piece on the journal. Ie from glenveagh homes promoting a development in Navan obviously targeted at Dublin workers. In the register your interest link they ask if you are hoping to qualify for help to buy

I guess that is the first box of the critics ticked
Building in the wrong place

If the state is subsidising new builds they should fulfill that requirement

Actually a very good point. If the state is indeed going to subsidise etc. these homes by up to more than a third, the least they should ensure is that they're built in the right locations. Which begs the question, where's the Green Party in all this. They do have a real seat at the table here. I would assume reducing commuting times would result in less carbon emissions.

I still don't understand how the proposed price caps under the scheme are €225k in the north-west and €450k in Dublin. There is absolutely no way it costs €200k more to build a standard three-bed semi in Co. Dublin compared to Co. Mayo IMO

Cuddlesworth

schmittel wrote: »

Often wondered if there is something wrong with it (other than the price), been for sale for a very long time. I agree it looks like a fabulous house.

Find it on google maps satellite view, expertly cut out of the photos is a bungalow or large shed about 20 feet from the back door of the house leading into another large house(ballyboo). And its really close to a wedding venue, close enough I would guess that it would be very audible. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say its a bit much asking for 2 million considering those caveats.

Villa05

PropQueries wrote:

Interesting opinion piece in the Irish Times today about the proposed shared equity housing scheme:

There's a piece on the journal. Ie from glenveagh homes promoting a development in Navan obviously targeted at Dublin workers. In the register your interest link they ask if you are hoping to qualify for help to buy

I guess that is the first box of the critics ticked
Building in the wrong place

If the state is subsidising new builds they should fulfill that requirement

Villa05

PropQueries wrote:

"Opposition is clearly having an impact. At the outset, Minister for Housing Darragh Oâ€™Brien was gung-ho â€“ saying a similar scheme in Britain increased supply by 50 per cent and that it hadnâ€™t led to price inflation. Now heâ€™s playing down the potential impact, noting â‚¬150 million is small in the context of an â‚¬11 billion Irish mortgage market and that the scheme is really only targeting about 4,000 potential buyers. It remains to be seen whether it will even get that far."

Interesting the the initial budget for this was 75m and he was trying to get the banks to match this. Freedom of information showed that the minister wanted to allocate far more to this scheme
4, 000 units is 2/3 of the current Ftb market. It shows how the state needs to subsidise citizens to the tune of up to 40% of the price of the house so that they can compete with entities that pay little or no tax.
If they paid the same amount of tax as the first time buyers it might level the playing field somewhat

cnocbui

I love being out in the middle of nowhere. No crime, turn the music up as loud as you want, get an all-over tan on the 4 days a year the weather will let you, lovely views you never grow tired of, and 1 Gbps fibre. ;-)

Hubertj

schmittel wrote: »

Often wondered if there is something wrong with it (other than the price), been for sale for a very long time. I agree it looks like a fabulous house.

Has it? Must be the price then as it has so much going for it. Very private but in the middle of the village instead of 3km out in middle of nowhere.

hometruths

Hubertj wrote: »

https://www.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/enniskerry-lodge-church-hill-enniskerry-wicklow/4392606

I really like this place. I have no idea on the price but really like that it is so secluded but still in the village. Also, from what I can see it is not a protected structure so gives more flexibility to whatever modernisation work etc to you would carry out.

Often wondered if there is something wrong with it (other than the price), been for sale for a very long time. I agree it looks like a fabulous house.