Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

The small amount of new houses being built.... houses on top of houses, no space anywhere.

  • 03-01-2026 02:10AM
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,247 ✭✭✭


    Ireland has loads of land; we're talking over 6 million hectares of agricultural space alone; yet we're shoehorned into tiny, identical houses jammed together like sardines, with apartments overlooking your neighbour's bog roll. New house sizes have plummeted: the average single-family home is now just 216 sqm floor area (down 24 sqm since 2011), while scheme houses scrape by at 119 sqm and apartments at a ridiculous 72 sqm. Even an hour outside Dublin, you're lucky to get a 250-300 sqm plot, and parking? Forget it; new guidelines push for "minimal" or zero spaces in suburbs to fight climate change, leaving families double-parking on verges.​

    Developers love this because cranking out 500 carbon-copy boxes is cheap and quick; no need for creativity or quality when planning rules force density over decency. Gone are the days of bungalows with proper gardens or unique designs; now it's row after row of the same beige eyesores, shrinking year on year to hit government quotas. We're building more units (15,000+ in H1 2025 alone), but they're smaller, uglier, and less liveable, all to pretend we're solving the crisis without using our actual space.​

    Look at Germany for a better way: they give you a generous 500-800 sqm plot, let you pick a blueprint (or tweak one), and build something that actually fits a family; average living space around 95 sqm but with way more outdoor room and standard garages. No mass-cloning nonsense; suburbs there feel like proper communities, not dystopian barracks. Ireland could mandate bigger minimum plots (say 400 sqm outside cities), force parking per house, and ban identical repeats over 50 units; use the land we've got instead of stacking us like Lego!

    No other countries seem to be as bad as this; American, South African, German, French; these houses all look at least a bit unique. Why are we saddled with such awful housing and why do we have to endure it?



«134

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 909 ✭✭✭CreadanLady


    Why don't you go off away to one of those countries so if they are such lands of housing, honey and milk?

    The MFV Creadan Lady is a mussel dredger from Dunmore East.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,112 ✭✭✭Kaisr Sose


    the average single-family home is now just 216 sqm floor area (down 24 sqm since 2011), while scheme houses scrape by at 119 sqm and apartments at a ridiculous 72 sqm.

    What is the source for these numbers? All bar the apartment seem larger than AVG.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 15,841 ✭✭✭✭retalivity


    Yes, sacrificing arable land so everyone can have a garden sounds like a great idea in a world where resources are growing ever more scarce.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,146 ✭✭✭littlefeet


    I kinda see your point, but generally people dont want big gardens to maintain, family life, two people working, and children in a creche. Land for housing is very expensive in Ireland. Rezoning can make people millionaires or even billionaires at this stage. There are many towns outside the very big urban areas where there are developments with generous gardens and garages, they tend to be very expensive.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,187 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    Yeah because that’s the answer to our problems, anyone not liking the way things are done can just….“go off away”🤪



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 56,309 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    i suspect they meant that the total footprint of each house (and garden) is 216sqm, rather than that actually being floor space as stated?

    216sqm is a large house.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,146 ✭✭✭littlefeet


    Massive new developments about 20 20-minute drive away from where we live, and some are horrendous, and some are very pleasant. The things I notice, front gardens are gone, it's paved parking for two tight parking spaces, all the developments are tightly packed urban style, even if you buy a 4 or 5 bed, even if they are outside what is essentially a village or small town.

    There is one absolutely horrendous duplex development; on the other hand, there is a very pleasant duplex development nearby that gets it right, so some of the issue must be to do with design.

    T



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,112 ✭✭✭Kaisr Sose


    Later in the post they specify a minimum plot size of 400m², so I think the figures are for habital space. In which case, they are way off average home size, and they have not come back with the source for them.

    Post edited by Kaisr Sose on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,567 ✭✭✭extra-ordinary_


    Yeh…OP was switching between plot size and house size willy nilly



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,527 ✭✭✭hoodie6029


    When people here have the chance, mostly the rural one off houses, they build boring, bland boxes. No personality. Or they copy a ‘traditional’ style but make the house so big that it looks ridiculous.

    Couple that with ‘tarmac all the way around’ the house and you have these dull McMansions sitting on their own roundabout. Add a cherry laurel hedge, non native grass seed and the rest of the accoutrements of a one off house built here in the last 30 years and you have an eyesore and environmental disaster on a half acre in the countryside.

    This is water. Inspiring speech by David Foster Wallace https://youtu.be/DCbGM4mqEVw?si=GS5uDvegp6Er1EOG



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Education Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 12,672 Mod ✭✭✭✭artanevilla


    Let's take a look at your comparisons:

    USA: Ireland is 1.56% of it's population and a tiny 0.74% of land area

    South Africa: 8.7% and 5.8%

    Germany: 6.3% and 19.7%

    France: 7.8% and 12.8%

    Do you think it's smart to compare Ireland to any of those countries by any metric? Certainly your argument that Ireland has "lot's of land" falls way short.

    Also what does "seemingly" mean? It seems to who? You?

    Nonsense post.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,722 ✭✭✭CelticRambler


    No other countries seem to be as bad as this; American, South African, German, French; these houses all look at least a bit unique. Why are we saddled with such awful housing and why do we have to endure it?

    Sounds like you've never seen a French housing estate. Try this proposed site, for example (north of Paris, in the Somme département):

    Untitled Image

    Germany's not much better, and the Germans (and Swiss) are really fond of their boxy, flat-roofed houses too.

    The French example above, as with so many "beyond-the-pale" Irish developments do everything to encourage continued car dependency for no particular advantage. The traditional "family home" doesn't really have any place in Western society any more, seeing as few of us live in a "traditional" family any more.

    Building up makes much more sense than building out and if the internal walls/floors/ceilings are done properly, you wouldn't even notice you had neighbours. That's where Ireland lags so far behind the rest of Europe. Half a dozen proper skyscrapers down around Ringsend (to include accessible public spaces and rent-controlled apartments of two to four bedrooms) would quickly solve most of Dublin's accommodation problems and ease the pressure on the hinterland.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,649 ✭✭✭El Tarangu


    I think that the days of front gardens and garages in urban areas are largely behind us - land too expensive to justify them these days. Front gardens kind of seem a waste in most cases anyway - people rarely sit out in them, they are often just used for parking cars



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,824 ✭✭✭✭LambshankRedemption


    There is lots of space to build on, but we really need to adopt building up philosophy.

    Never mind front and back gardens I really do question the need for balconies in so many(possibly all) apartments. It is a space that is really only usable about 3-4 months a year if that.

    Before anyone attacks for suggesting I ban balconies, I am just saying we need to build places that suit everyone, and many people dont need a balcony. I am sure many people would prefer having a park to walk in over the 2 metre by 1 metre outside space that comes with their apartment and ultimately they are paying for.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,280 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    I broadly agree.

    Ireland has loads of space.

    Minimum apt sizes should be as follows:

    Studio = 40 sqm

    1-Bed = 60 sqm

    2-bed = 80sqm

    Family houses with four bedrooms in schemes need to be 150 sqm at least.

    Post edited by Geuze on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,722 ✭✭✭CelticRambler


    Never mind front and back gardens I really do question the need for balconies in so many(possibly all) apartments. It is a space that is really only usable about 3-4 months a year if that.

    That probably stems from so many Irish people always having had the back garden (or a field) available, and living in bungalows or two-storey houses. We never learnt how to use balconies in the same way as the Continentals do. So they're added to new builds as a photogenic selling point, with little real consideration of how they can/could be used all year 'round if they were better designed.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 33,970 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Those are absolutely huge minimums. 150 sqm is an absurdly large apartment.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,339 ✭✭✭✭SuperBowserWorld


    ...

    Post edited by SuperBowserWorld on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,722 ✭✭✭CelticRambler


    There's another thing that I find really weird now, since I moved to the Continent: defining accommodation by the number of bedrooms rather than just rooms. If you look at any property listing in France - flat, house, chateau, whatever - it tells you how much square footage and how many rooms you're getting. Whether you use any particular room as a bedroom, home office, sitting room, or storage unit is entirely up to you.

    It's ridiculous looking at Irish property plans and seeing some poky little space described as a bedroom when you'd struggle to get fit a dog's basket in there, let alone a real bed.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 19,894 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    The Kenny Report.

    We had the ball at our feet 53 years ago.

    Kenny Report (1973) – Four Decades On The Shelf | Public Policy, Public Expenditure & GNP https://share.google/uF8PnTw0Eeohg0Qfn



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 443 ✭✭tppytoppy


    Boring bland houses are the vernacular and it is hard to get permission for anything else. Local Authority Planners are the self-appointed arbiters of "good" taste.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,527 ✭✭✭hoodie6029


    it’s no excuse for the horrendous gardens and painting your house battleship grey. And tarmacing as much as humanly possible.

    This is water. Inspiring speech by David Foster Wallace https://youtu.be/DCbGM4mqEVw?si=GS5uDvegp6Er1EOG



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,280 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    The 150 sqm refers to houses, not apartments.

    A family house should have a utility room, and at least two living rooms, preferably three.

    I am referring to 4-bedroom houses should be 150 sqm minimum.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 33,970 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Why? This is just a recipe for even more expensive housing. The problem with housing in Ireland is categorically not too small minimum sizes, if anything it is the complete opposite.

    I live in an 80 sqm 3 bedroom apartment. It is absolutely loads of space and when I want to move somewhere bigger I will do so and pay the higher price for it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,280 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    I agree that costs are too high, and the following costs should be cut sharply:

    (1) site costs

    (2) finance costs

    (3) de-risk, therefore lower profit margins

    Floorspace should not be the variable that suffers to maintain profits.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,280 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    I spent a few nights in a 2-bed apt, either 62 or 68sqm.

    While it wasn't very tight, there was just one living room, i.e. the kitchen and sitting room were all the one.

    Sure how could a couple or family live like that long-term, need some personal space.

    I have 150 sqm at the moment, four bedrooms, and it's okay, but the utility room is full!!!!



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 33,970 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    If your choice is a 62sqm 2 bed apartment or no apartment it is not that difficult a choice.

    Mandating minimums doesn't give people more space for the same price, it prices people out of owning or renting homes.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,824 ✭✭✭✭LambshankRedemption


    More than once, including where I live now, Ive wished the balcony had a kind of temporary conservatory type windows on the balconey, It could be a pleasant place to have tea and toast in the morning, even when its freezing cold outside or raining as is often the case. It could be a useful place to dry clothes, and speaking as someone who grows plants I could use it for that too or as well. Instead, all the balconeys I've had have been basically an outisde area in the wind and rain, with no way of closing it off or covering it, or protecting it from rain.

    And as I said its another 3-4 square metres that I am ultimately paying for.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,722 ✭✭✭CelticRambler


    It depends on your definition of "family". I know some theme parks offer a "family ticket" that includes one adult and one child.

    What you're proposing is more of the same, i.e. laying down minima based on obsolete social structures. I'm currently in the process of renovating my chicken-shed a my future grandad flat (me being the notional grandad). It'll be just over 30m², to include sitting room, bedroom, kitchen and toilet/shower. And that's a proper full-size kitchen, none of your "galley" nonsense.

    It's been designed with the potential of having a +1 come to live with me medium-long term, so making sure it provided for personal space was a consideration from the beginning.

    Starting with that floorplan (and if I wasn't limiting myself to an existing structure) I could easily add three more bedrooms and a hallway and come in at 80m². Let's be generous and add two more toilet/shower rooms and that's a comfortable "family home" at under 100m²

    The other 50m² you suggest would just be used to accumulate "stuff" and there's no reason for planners to give anyone a reason to collect more clutter.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 398 ✭✭iniscealtra


    my friends in France have done thís. Closed in the balcony with windows that open not glasa but perspex or something similar. It can be done.



Advertisement
Advertisement