NAMA €5.6 billion plan to build 20,000 new homes


#1

rte.ie/news/business/2015/1203/750994-nama/


#2

Is there any precedent anywhere for what is effectively a State agency building *private *housing? Does this happen in Scandinavia, for example?


#3

The work of the DDDA in introducing connected individuals to lucravtive projects needs to continue even if the DDDA is out of the equation.


#4

Such luck !

With an election coming up, the politicians will be able to present a housing solution.

Aren’t coincidences just wonderful !


#5

I have no real problem with the government stepping in to build private homes. In fact with the way developers are acting at the moment (for a whole complex mish-mash of reasons, I know) it seems vital that the government does step in. (I’d prefer site taxes as a first step, but this is fine too).

Surely though I can’t be the only one wincing at the statement that these will mostly be “starter homes”? Even outside of the whole idea of “starter homes” being a thing, one of the major issues I have with Dublin at the moment is that there is very little quality family housing inside the canals. Is that just not even on the radar for anyone in government?


#6

I disagree. 20,000 apartments/studios would potentially result in 20000 to 40000 people leaving shared accommodation which would then be redeployed as family homes.
There are plenty of family homes. For decades that was all that was being built. They are just being let as house shares which is unsatisfactory for the settled families living on the same streets.


#7

Are there plenty in the city centre though?

One of the major issues with the docklands is that it seems to empty out completely at the weekend. Obviously part of that is to do with normal “offices being closed” patterns, but at least part of it is that the population there is transient - there are tons of students and singletons who decamp elsewhere for the weekend, and people don’t stay more than a couple of years.

And then there is also the whole social mix factor. If there are only singletons and dinky couples in the area nobody is going to hang around to raise kids there, or to develop all the amenities that you tend to get in more settled communities.


#8

Yes, there are plenty in D7 and D8. Too many I’d say.


#9

Anyone know the details of plans for the glass bottle site?

From WIKI its 25 acres.
Custom House Docks is 72 units per acre,
Would it be safe to assume you could multiple the two and get 1,800 units in that site alone? You could generate more green & community space by building higher.


#10

So 320k is seen as an alright price for an FTB to kick off with.
Thats a big multiple of the average salary in this country…but it looks like official Govt policy now

independent.ie/business/iris … 58641.html


#11

So 320k is how much a “STARTER home” (such a thing does not exist but whatever).


#12

In a city where 70/80k a year is still viewed as ‘huge money’ that gets you into the top 10% of earners nationally. Still at least it’s not london. Which is just fucked up.


#13

The “starter home” concept is completely oxymoronic in a market with a turnover rate of around 2%. That means that the average turnover rate of houses is approx 50 years. If you’re going to buy, you have to be thinking medium to long-term.


#14

Compared to the “Hobbit Hole” for 14K the 320K NAMA price tag seems a tad expensive. I guess the price of the land for one of these in little old Ireland will be ~300K so we end up with the same overall price tag :smiling_imp:


#15

As I live here I can think of one, that is excellent

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_a … ment_Board

provides 80% of housing in Singapore cheap to citizens(not a citizen, then fuck off!)

Very good well run etc.


#16

Well, all this talk of NAMA building houses has definitely spooked the remaining Developers…they’ve gone running off to Europe to cry about it!

irishtimes.com/business/comm … -1.2456507


#17

landbanks are only worth money when there is a scarcity of property.
site value tax seems ever more sensible by the day although DLR country council would probably just see it as an excuse to increase site taxes and be shamefully wasteful building the sort of facilities that no normal person wants or needs with a limitless budget since shure the landowners of the area will pay for it.


#18

Michael O’Flynn recently accused DLR Co Co of holding up development in strategic development zones. He is not the only person to be highly critical of their DLR Co Co planners. I would be interested to see if DLR Co Co and other local authorities could be exposed to liability for new taxes on undeveloped land arising from the local authorities delaying the planning and development process. Local authorities and lack of bank finance are the biggest blockages to development at the moment. There is no scarcity of land.


#19

Then back to letting people build as high in to the air as they want within reason.
A potential developer sees an opportunity to make a few million on 1/4 acre plot for commercial or residential property then he enters the market, provides the product and exits again…but that isn’t the point of NAMA, now is it?


#20

To be fair, there’s some merit in what they say. Below market funding to “select” developers is a form of state aid.