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

Modular houses offered as solution to homeless crisis

Boring username

Dublin City councillors will on Tuesday view factory-built houses which could be used to accommodate hundreds of homeless families currently living in hotels.
The mayors of the four Dublin local authorities will also view six samples of “cellular modular housing”, from six providers, which have gone on display.
Dublin Region Homeless Executive is hoping the exhibition will help win support for its proposals to erect up to 200 units of such housing on sites across Dublin.

With floor-to-ceiling windows in the living-cum-kitchen area and a B1 energy rating, it is warm and bright. It comes with a fully-fitted kitchen and bathroom, two good-sized bedrooms and storage space. It was assembled on-site in two hours, according to Tommy Forbes, one of MHI’s founders. It costs €85,000.
Across the site is an 80sq m unit, from MOM Services Ltd. Also two-bedroom, it has larger rooms, with the kitchen and living area alone coming in at 30 sq m. It took five days to construct and less than a day to assemble. It would cost €69,000.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/modular-houses-offered-as-solution-to-homeless-crisis-1.2351533

This sounds like a good idea, my only concern is why stop at 200? There should be thousands of these across the country to help with the homeless, housing, and student crisis. The problem could be solved in less than a week if done right. (Although yes, this is Ireland.)
I'd gladly live in a house like this if I got the chance. Although no doubt the likes of Claire Daly will seize their chance to decry these houses as dehumanising, unacceptable etc....

In addition to this, new shipping container homes should be considered too-they are strong, robust, and practical-not to mention they can be stacked also. The Dutch and British governments have adopted these to meet student needs:

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Iseedeadpixels

*Waits for yay helping the homeless and boo not with my taxes to spend all morning entertaining us.

Ave Sodalis

No doubt you'll get cries of "why are they getting houses when I have to pay a mortgage!" from some people. Most likely the same people who cry "why are we helping Syrians when we have a homeless problem of our own!" I think they're a great idea in many ways but the thing is, there isn't a housing problem. There's plenty of houses lying empty up and down the country. Does anyone know why these aren't being used?

gandalf

Boring username wrote: »

This sounds like a good idea, my only concern is why stop at 200? There should be thousands of these across the country to help with the homeless, housing, and student crisis. The problem could be solved in less than a week if done right. (Although yes, this is Ireland.)
I'd gladly live in a house like this if I got the chance. Although no doubt the likes of Claire Daly will seize their chance to decry these houses as dehumanising, unacceptable etc....

In addition to this, new shipping container homes should be considered too-they are strong, robust, and practical-not to mention they can be stacked also. The Dutch and British governments have adopted these to meet student needs:.

Absolutely. They could alleviate the housing crisis for families immediately and then be converted to student accommodation after that one proper housing stock comes online.

I have a feeling thought that the politicians do not want to piss off the vested interests who are making a lot of money from the accommodation crisis's at the moment.

The one thing that I read with dismay from the reports this morning is that it will take around a year for them to make a decision and then implement this temporary solution. Given the suppliers of the show houses can get them up and running in around a day what is really stopping the powers that be to get these up and running in three months? Surely there are vacant sites that can be prepared quickly and brought up to speed quicker. If it's a matter of funds I am sure they can reign back on the tax giveaway that apparently is coming and divert those funds to this. In the longer term it would save the councils a fortune on short term hotel fees that they are currently paying!!!

gandalf

sup_dude wrote: »

No doubt you'll get cries of "why are they getting houses when I have to pay a mortgage!" from some people. Most likely the same people who cry "why are we helping Syrians when we have a homeless problem of our own!" I think they're a great idea in many ways but the thing is, there isn't a housing problem. There's plenty of houses lying empty up and down the country. Does anyone know why these aren't being used?

Those houses are not in ideal locations for where the jobs are actually located. A lot of tax incentive holiday homes. They would be ideal for short term stay refugees who do plan on going back to their home country once it stablises though.

osarusan

sup_dude wrote: »

No doubt you'll get cries of "why are they getting houses when I have to pay a mortgage!" from some people. Most likely the same people who cry "why are we helping Syrians when we have a homeless problem of our own!"

Indeed.

BattleCorp

What's the lifespan of one of those buildings?

For nearly €100k, the state could probably build standard houses, but to a lower spec. Simpler designes etc.

BattleCorp

gandalf wrote: »

Those houses are not in ideal locations for where the jobs are actually located. A lot of tax incentive holiday homes. They would be ideal for short term stay refugees who do plan on going back to their home country once it stablises though.

Ha Ha Ha. "Go home once it stabilises though." On holidays maybe.

Ave Sodalis

BattleCorp wrote: »

Ha Ha Ha. "Go home once it stabilises though." On holidays maybe.

:rolleyes:

NachoBusiness

Vast vast majority of homelessness is not caused by a lack of homes and so the answer to it could never be just having more homes.

Making it illegal for landlords to refuse rent allowance might be a better start.

[Deleted User]

The tents will be out on the street for photo opportunities before anyone even considers moving into one of these. Not to mention, an estate or multiple estates of these things, used only to accommodate people with absolutely nowhere else to go (i.e. no long term ability to provide for themselves beyond state assistance), would become no-go areas pretty quickly.

El_Duderino 09

BattleCorp wrote:

For nearly â‚¬100k, the state could probably build standard houses, but to a lower spec. Simpler designes etc.

You need to factor in the unemployment of bricklayers, labourers etc. who would become long term unemployed if this type of housing becomes the norm.

I grew up in a celtic tiger mansion and now its burden on my mother. I'd be quite happy to live in a cheap and cheerful house and spend my money on more important things than bricks and mortar.

NachoBusiness wrote:

Vast vast majority of homelessness is not caused by a lack of homes and so the answer to it could never be just having more homes.

So true. A small mental illness/brain damage/stroke/learning difficulty can make it impossible to live in a house. Some people might look fine but actually they need full time carers. You can't just give them a house and wash your hands of them.

[Deleted User]

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

So true. A small mental illness/brain damage/stroke/learning difficulty can make it impossible to live in a house. Some people might look fine but actually they need full time carers. You can't just give them a house and wash your hands of them.

You're talking about this: http://static3.depositphotos.com/1005772/205/i/950/depositphotos_2059078-Homeless-Man.jpg

When our actual homeless problem is this: https://media.zenfs.com/en_uk/News/TheJournal.ie/protest-homeless-family-pictured-wi-2-630x489.jpg

Is house sharing still off the table? I don't know why. I know I'd pick a house-share over a shipping container.

Ave Sodalis

Sergio Georgini wrote: »

You're talking about this: http://static3.depositphotos.com/1005772/205/i/950/depositphotos_2059078-Homeless-Man.jpg

When our actual homeless problem is this: https://media.zenfs.com/en_uk/News/TheJournal.ie/protest-homeless-family-pictured-wi-2-630x489.jpg

I don't think our actual homeless problem can be defined either way. There's both of those photos on the streets. I think what El_Duderino is saying is that, due to the diversity of people who are homeless, and the various reasons they are homeless, handing them a house mightn't be the solution as not having a house mightn't be the problem.

waraf

Jaysus, that thing's nicer than my gaff. Any homeless lads wanna trade?

_Brian

BattleCorp wrote: »

What's the lifespan of one of those buildings?

For nearly €100k, the state could probably build standard houses, but to a lower spec. Simpler designes etc.

There seems to be a huge ammount of money being suggested for these and alot is going into someone's pocket..

Surely the fixed site mobile homes would be much, much better value. For about €35k you get double glazing and three bedrooms and likely last 20 years IF looked after.

Here's a sample advertised for €37k, buying direct from manufacturer in bulk I'd expect it for €30k, another €5k would have it sited no problems.

http://www.wallacemobilehomes.com/mobile-homes-for-sale/new-mobile-homes/mobile/swift/swift-burgondy

I'm all for helping those less fortunate but there is nothing wrong in insisting in value for money too.

Benteke

So let me get this straight if I pretend to be homeless I get a free gaf

allibastor

sup_dude wrote: »

No doubt you'll get cries of "why are they getting houses when I have to pay a mortgage!" from some people. Most likely the same people who cry "why are we helping Syrians when we have a homeless problem of our own!" I think they're a great idea in many ways but the thing is, there isn't a housing problem. There's plenty of houses lying empty up and down the country. Does anyone know why these aren't being used?

Because all the unfinished estates etc are in the hand of the developer. Government dont own them, even if NAMA is involved.

How do you think the likes of Johnny Ronan are able to be back in Multi million euro deals a couple of years after having major financial issues?

kylith

Sergio Georgini wrote: »

You're talking about this: http://static3.depositphotos.com/1005772/205/i/950/depositphotos_2059078-Homeless-Man.jpg

When our actual homeless problem is this: https://media.zenfs.com/en_uk/News/TheJournal.ie/protest-homeless-family-pictured-wi-2-630x489.jpg

Is house sharing still off the table? I don't know why. I know I'd pick a house-share over a shipping container.

Wasn't that woman in the tent a more complicated thing than 'homeless - living in a tent'. Googling it turns up two people living in a tent having turned down accommodation in a hostel. I know there are another couple camping in Waterford having moved back from the UK and not being here long enough to qualify social housing.

BattleCorp

_Brian wrote: »

Surely the fixed site mobile homes would be much, much better value. For about €35k you get double glazing and three bedrooms and likely last 20 years IF looked after.

Here's a sample advertised for €37k, buying direct from manufacturer in bulk I'd expect it for €30k, another €5k would have it sited no problems.

http://www.wallacemobilehomes.com/mobile-homes-for-sale/new-mobile-homes/mobile/swift/swift-burgondy

I'm all for helping those less fortunate but there is nothing wrong in insisting in value for money too.

Mobile homes are feckin freezing in the winter. I wouldn't think that they'd be a long term answer.

Simple rectangular shaped houses with studded walls inside, cladding for roofing etc. Insulate the fcuk out of them and hey presto, you'd get a lot of those type of houses for less than 100k each.

The problem is where to put them because if you put a load of them together, you've a ghetto in a few years.

okedoke

NachoBusiness wrote: »

Vast vast majority of homelessness is not caused by a lack of homes and so the answer to it could never be just having more homes.

Making it illegal for landlords to refuse rent allowance might be a better start.

The only reason landlords refuse rent allowance is that there is too few houses in total. If there were enough houses/apts/containers etc. to meet demand, enough landlords would be forced to accept rent allowance (or leave their properties empty) to meet demand from rent allowance tenants.

There is no way to solve the housing problem but to have more housing, every other proposed solution just changes who is homeless, not how many.

e.g.
"no evictions/no reposession" - one person/family stays in house at expenses of person/family who could rent/buy after repossession.
"increase rent allowance" - rent allowance renters could then rent houses that would have been rented by private renters.

etc. etc.

[Deleted User]

kylith wrote: »

Wasn't that woman in the tent a more complicated thing than 'homeless - living in a tent'. Googling it turns up two people living in a tent having turned down accommodation in a hostel. I know there are another couple camping in Waterford having moved back from the UK and not being here long enough to qualify social housing.

I think the tent woman sums up our problem. Some people, for whatever reasons, simply can't or won't look after themselves despite the supports that the state is providing. These are our "homeless". When we hear the word "homeless" mentioned in the media and by left-leaning types, this is who they are referring to.

_Brian

BattleCorp wrote: »

Mobile homes are feckin freezing in the winter. I wouldn't think that they'd be a long term answer.

Simple rectangular shaped houses with studded walls inside, cladding for roofing etc. Insulate the fcuk out of them and hey presto, you'd get a lot of those type of houses for less than 100k each.

The problem is where to put them because if you put a load of them together, you've a ghetto in a few years.

Its all relative..
We use our caravan in cold weather and the heating does a great job.. I bet if you talk to anyone in direct provision in Mosney and offer them this sheltered acc for 10 years free and a permit to work they would snap your hand off..

My first rented acc when I was married would have frost on the insides of the windows in the morning and was damn cold.. but we worked hard and moved on.

BattleCorp

okedoke wrote: »

The only reason landlords refuse rent allowance is that there is too few houses in total. If there were enough houses/apts/containers etc. to meet demand, enough landlords would be forced to accept rent allowance (or leave their properties empty) to meet demand from rent allowance tenants.

There is no way to solve the housing problem but to have more housing, every other solution just changes who is homeless, not how many.

Down my way some landlords who accept rent allowance won't rent to you unless you give a few bob cash under the table to suppliment the rent allowance.

allibastor

BattleCorp wrote: »

Down my way some landlords who accept rent allowance won't rent to you unless you give a few bob cash under the table to suppliment the rent allowance.

I imagine a lot do this. Where I live the rent allowance for a family of 4 is something like 475 per month. Nothing is available for rent for less than 800 a month, unless it is a bedsit or 1 bed granny flat.

kneemos

BattleCorp wrote: »

Mobile homes are feckin freezing in the winter. I wouldn't think that they'd be a long term answer.

Simple rectangular shaped houses with studded walls inside, cladding for roofing etc. Insulate the fcuk out of them and hey presto, you'd get a lot of those type of houses for less than 100k each.

The problem is where to put them because if you put a load of them together, you've a ghetto in a few years.

I've seen a few of those fixed mobiles around the place that people have made permanent homes out of.
Don't think building ghettos is a good idea though.
As we know temporary in Ireland means minimum thirty years.

_Brian

kneemos wrote: »

I've seen a few of those fixed mobiles around the place that people have made permanent homes out of.
Don't think building ghettos is a good idea though.
As we know temporary in Ireland means minimum thirty years.

The big problem is where/how to site them, as you say without creating ghettos..

Maybe expecting each county to take X to be distributed nationally.. But the problem is that rural areas are black spots for employment and so it really is condemning them with little chance of improving their circumstances..

Fukuyama

A lot of "homeless" (as in, on the street homeless) are males with drink/drug problems. And a portion of these will have previous offences and criminal records. All we're effectively doing here is moving them into state accommodation on the taxpayers dime.

What seems like a cheap solution is going to turn into a very expensive ghetto.

BattleCorp

_Brian wrote: »

The big problem is where/how to site them, as you say without creating ghettos..

Maybe expecting each county to take X to be distributed nationally.. But the problem is that rural areas are black spots for employment and so it really is condemning them with little chance of improving their circumstances..

I'll have my modular house or mobile home in either Aylsbury Road or Shrewsbury Road please.

allibastor

Would having office space in Dublin converted not be a cheaper and better option. There is loads of empty office space that could be converted with relative ease of money. lots are good spec, lots of glass and insulation etc with good parking and access

gandalf

Fukuyama wrote: »

A lot of "homeless" (as in, on the street homeless) are males with drink/drug problems. And a portion of these will have previous offences and criminal records. All we're effectively doing here is moving them into state accommodation on the taxpayers dime.

What seems like a cheap solution is going to turn into a very expensive ghetto.

TBH I doubt these homes would be aimed at them at least not to directly take them off the streets. They would need assistance and treatment before they would be anywhere near the stage of getting home by themselves.

These would however address the widening gap created by the hike in the private market accommodation prices. People who are on rent supplement which no longer covers their rent costs or even gets close to covering the majority of those costs. It is preferable to them being put up in hotels and B&B's at the councils expense but it is temporary and there has to be a longer term plan running parallel in the background.