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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

more nimbyism in Chapelizod ***Read Mod Note in OP***

24567…12

Comments

  • #32
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    Sleepy wrote: »
    CPO family / neighbour's land and build cheaply there! :p

    Way too far from anywhere to ever worry about that. Motorways are the only thing that get cpo around us and that’s already done.


  • #33
    Sweet.Science
    Registered Users Posts: 2,837 ✭✭✭Sweet.Science


    I have worked my ass off since i was 18 and cant afford property in Chapelizod

    People have never worked in their life and filled a form out online when they were 18 will end up living there

    How is this acceptable?


  • #34
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭[Deleted User]


    Sweet.Science wrote: »
    I have worked my ass off since i was 18 and cant afford property in Chapelizod

    People have never worked in their life and filled a form out online when they were 18 will end up living there

    How is this acceptable?

    because there is an onus on the state to house people who cannot house themselves. Maybe you might have heard about the homeless issues in Dublin???

    and why would you think people who have social homes in Chapelizod have never worked in their life?


  • #35
    Varta
    Closed Accounts Posts: 517 ✭✭✭Varta


    Spanish Eyes wrote: »
    The only issue I see with this development is that the Council should be obliged to set aside 20% or whatever for affordable housing, just like the 20% in private developments!

    Does anyone have a mock up of the design or where would I find it.

    I don't live in that area (Chapelizod), but I know it well. The site is magnificent, backing on to the Phoenix Park, across the road from a lovely 19th century church, on the banks of the Liffey, bus to town in 15 or so minutes and so on. It is a prime site. If designed well it could be great as there is nothing else along that road besides a car dealership and the boat clubs.

    There is another vacant site near the bridge and AFAIK it is council owned too, has been derelict for donkeys years. That's next I'd say.

    The site under consideration is on the left here.

    https://www.google.com/maps/@53.3474791,-6.3406568,3a,75y,100.43h,96.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szyZFDGUbodrZEjx3Qwhprg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

    This is the other vacant site on the left.
    https://www.google.com/maps/@53.3483175,-6.3468078,3a,75y,289.23h,93.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjlViQpuIAhcQm3ETvGuHYA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
    The site in your second link is privately owned. The development that is going ahead is a quick build modular design. What the residents group wants is a good design, properly built with a social mix. They want to see the site developed and new homes made available, just not 100% social housing and poor quality build. I don't think it can be lumped in with the usual nimbyism.


  • #36
    listermint
    Registered Users Posts: 33,576 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    Sweet.Science wrote: »
    I have worked my ass off since i was 18 and cant afford property in Chapelizod

    People have never worked in their life and filled a form out online when they were 18 will end up living there

    How is this acceptable?

    have you considered affordable housing ? Its the norm in well run developed countries on the continent to have mixed affordable housing.

    Perhaps you should be able to live in chapelizod.

    You know areas do actually need people of all wages scales to function right ?

    i mean who do you think works in Tesco, the coffee shops, collects your bins, does your taxes, is your solicitor, is your GP.

    Just because someone earns less than you or conversely more than you doesnt make them a better person or a scummy person.


    Housing is for all, well it was for all until the Americans started messing with the markets in the late 70s early 80s and here we are today.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Ray Palmer
    Registered Users Posts: 8,346 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    bubblypop wrote: »
    because there is an onus on the state to house people who cannot house themselves. Maybe you might have heard about the homeless issues in Dublin???

    and why would you think people who have social homes in Chapelizod have never worked in their life?
    They don't have to house them in better housing in prime locations than people paying their own way.

    There are towns complaining about depopulation they could house people.

    The highest positions on housing lists will be single parents with no jobs. That is how the lists work so they will get effectively free houses because all their income is state benefits. Equivalent salary for a parent with 3 kids and in state benefits is around €60k income. That jumps up if they have a house in a nice area provided.


  • #38
    AulWan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,653 ✭✭✭AulWan


    Kairi Witty Hitter wrote: »
    That is total rubbish to be fair. There are very strong grounds and many reasons for not wanting to live beside social housing or why people paying for their home should not have to live beside them.

    Says he who is thirty something and still lives (rurally) with his Ma.


  • #39
    Nermal
    Registered Users Posts: 2,611 ✭✭✭Nermal


    bubblypop wrote: »
    because there is an onus on the state to house people who cannot house themselves.

    There's no onus on the State to house them 6KM from the centre of the capital in apartments built to exacting building standards though, is there?


  • #40
    LuckyLloyd
    Registered Users Posts: 36,083 ✭✭✭✭LuckyLloyd


    Hopefully the objections will be swept aside in due course. You own your house, you don’t own land near your house. The objections are obviously frivolous, and will fail.


  • #41
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    AulWan wrote: »
    Says he who is thirty something and still lives (rurally) with his Ma.

    What has your totally irrelevant point got to do with what I said?

    Social housing should not be mixed into mice expensive residential developments.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    AulWan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,653 ✭✭✭AulWan


    Kairi Witty Hitter wrote: »
    What has your totally irrelevant point got to do with what I said?

    Social housing should not be mixed into mice expensive residential developments.

    Says the thirty something who still lives at home (rurally) with his Ma - for free.


  • #43
    Varta
    Closed Accounts Posts: 517 ✭✭✭Varta


    LuckyLloyd wrote: »
    Hopefully the objections will be swept aside in due course. You own your house, you don’t own land near your house. The objections are obviously frivolous, and will fail.

    Ownership of land does not give anyone the right to do as they please with it. Good planning and building regulations are essential. As citizens we should all have the right to object when we see what we believe is bad planning or a failure to adhere to building regulations. We all have to share the built environment. As for the objections that you have decided are obviously frivolous, I would be grateful if you could link to them.


  • #44
    Sir Oxman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,492 ✭✭✭Sir Oxman


    Kairi Witty Hitter wrote: »
    Anti-social behavior, crime, no respect for property or area, why should they live for free/cheap beside people who are working hard everyday to pay for their house etc etc.

    <snip further arseholery>
    Working people need social housing.


  • #45
    collywobble7
    Registered Users Posts: 95 ✭✭collywobble7


    Xterminator wrote:
    there are people dying literally for the want of a roof over their head

    No there aren't.


  • #46
    riclad
    Registered Users Posts: 8,184 ✭✭✭riclad


    no ones dying,the worst off are maybe children who live in a hotel room for years .
    IF people want the economy to grow , we need 20k housing units per year to be built.this includes social housing .
    Some companys will stop coming to ireland as there is a shortage of quality rental units for workers on a average wage.
    fg and fianna gael have a policy to provide social housing.
    that includes housing for pensioners , people on disability allowance.
    dublin city council have 1000,s of people on the housing list,
    they cannot say would you like a house in kerry or donegal.the reason why people go to citys and urban area,s is thats where the new jobs are .
    Maybe things will get better if theres fast broadband avaidable in every rural town and more people can work from home .
    people are also objecting to new apartment blocks, in certain area,s which are not social housing units.
    things may get better since the rule,s have changed to allow 10-15 storey buildings in the city centre .


  • #47
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    AulWan wrote: »
    Says the thirty something who still lives at home (rurally) with his Ma - for free.

    Irrelevant, It’s not costing the tax payer and I’ll be paying a large amount of money (and associated taxes) and employing a number of people to build my own house very shortly.


  • #48
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Ray Palmer wrote: »
    They don't have to house them in better housing in prime locations than people paying their own way.

    There are towns complaining about depopulation they could house people.

    The highest positions on housing lists will be single parents with no jobs. That is how the lists work so they will get effectively free houses because all their income is state benefits. Equivalent salary for a parent with 3 kids and in state benefits is around €60k income. That jumps up if they have a house in a nice area provided.

    How so? They don’t own the house so its value doesn’t benefit them.


  • #49
    AulWan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,653 ✭✭✭AulWan


    Kairi Witty Hitter wrote: »
    Irrelevant, It’s not costing the tax payer and I’ll be paying a large amount of money (and associated taxes) and employing a number of people to build my own house very shortly.

    Which makes your comments on social housing developments in Dublin, irrelevant.


  • #50
    Cyrus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,646 ✭✭✭✭Cyrus


    Sir Oxman wrote: »
    <snip further arseholery>
    Working people need social housing.

    We need affordable housing for working people on lower incomes , people's issues generally is houses for people who don't work


  • #51
    ExoPolitic
    Registered Users Posts: 353 ✭✭ExoPolitic


    Whilst I understand why some people don't want new social housing built in the capital and parrot "why does it have to be in Dublin" , Dublin does require it. Imagine the state of Dublin if there were no cleaners/ sweepers, nobody in employment in retail or any other lower paid job... The city would cease to function.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    Nermal
    Registered Users Posts: 2,611 ✭✭✭Nermal


    ExoPolitic wrote: »
    Whilst I understand why some people don't want new social housing built in the capital and parrot "why does it have to be in Dublin" , Dublin does require it. Imagine the state of Dublin if there were no cleaners/ sweepers, nobody in employment in retail or any other lower paid job... The city would cease to function.

    Cleaners and sweepers being incapable of commuting, of course.


  • #53
    woohoo!!!
    Registered Users Posts: 803 ✭✭✭woohoo!!!


    AFAIK the Council won't consider 100% social housing if there is a very large amount of it in an area, and will therefore consider 100% if otherwise.
    My estate of 200 or so houses has social and affordable, some ejits but no big problems either. They're to finish off the estate with 35 social houses but this wasn't advertised, as in the planning permissions was saying it was going to give 3 houses for part v or 10%social housing requirement. Now, I don't have an issue with it, but again this is not being advertised. It would be better and more transparent if they was done up front and centre and not a deal done behind closed doors with a housing body after the planing permission was granted.


  • #54
    Ray Palmer
    Registered Users Posts: 8,346 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    How so? They don’t own the house so its value doesn’t benefit them.

    If the state provide housing in an area where the rent is €1000 a month and also provide a place in an area that is €2000 somebody is getting a greater benefit. If you are comparing that as equivalent salary it is a substantial amount. It is an extra €12k a year after tax equivalent which is roughly €24k before tax.

    They also do benefit from price rises if they apply to buy the property which is sold at a huge discount.

    People in london became millionaires from buy their council housing and then selling it.


  • #55
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭[Deleted User]


    Ray Palmer wrote: »
    They also do benefit from price rises if they apply to buy the property which is sold at a huge discount.

    People in london became millionaires from buy their council housing and then selling it.

    The state should never sell off their social housing stock.
    It's supposed to be for people that cannot house themselves. When they can house themselves, then they should go buy a house for themselves.
    If they can't, they stay in social housing, getting moved into suitable accommodation at their needs change.
    Eg, when a family has grown up, the remaining parents should be moved into smaller accommodation, freeing up bigger houses for bigger younger families & so on.


  • #56
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Mod Note

    Off Topic posts deleted.


  • #57
    Electric Sheep
    Registered Users Posts: 2,102 ✭✭✭Electric Sheep


    Nermal wrote: »
    Cleaners and sweepers being incapable of commuting, of course.
    Yes, because they are low paid and therefor cannot afford a long commute.

    Of course, businesses would not want to pay a wage that would enable a commute.


  • #58
    mikemac2
    Registered Users Posts: 2,926 ✭✭✭mikemac2


    If it was a luxury apartment complex the older families of Chapelizod would still object

    Serial objectors there


  • #59
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,865 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    mikemac2 wrote: »
    If it was a luxury apartment complex the older families of Chapelizod would still object

    Serial objectors there

    Plenty of private apartments have been built there over the years. All well maintained and looking really good!

    Trap a Lizard (we always called it that, or Chappo) has form for trying to preserve its cute little village, and fair dues to them. But try parking outside the shop to get a bottle of milk and you will see that it is choked with traffic. Always. At least the site on the main road is not in the middle of the village.

    But to be fair, it is really a prime site, and needs to be built well and look good. And I do hope that those who get the properties in the end are working, and/ or older people from the area. Only fair really to those working in the City who have to travel for miles to get there, and cannot afford to live in Chappo.


  • #60
    handlemaster
    Registered Users Posts: 6,003 ✭✭✭handlemaster


    in mulhuddart locals are stopping social nousing which is currently been builth as they themselves werent offered any of them i.e. the protesters or their families.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    NIMAN
    Registered Users Posts: 32,951 ✭✭✭✭NIMAN


    handlemaster wrote: »
    in mulhuddart locals are stopping social nousing which is currently been builth as they themselves werent offered any of them i.e. the protesters or their families.

    And it appears they are saying all them bloody foreigners are getting them!


Advertisement