On the return of 'tax based' property 'incentives' 2013/4

Believe it or not I think we are. It is of course a Dublin problem ( with a dash fo Cork and a small infusion of Galway) but let me delineate the problem first.

  1. Low quality housing has been taken out of the market
  2. It is no longer possible to get 1 beds through planning.
  3. Pre 63 bedsits have been removed in Dublin ( not that many elsewhere compared to Dublin)
  4. The lack of these is a direct contributor to homelessness in Dublin, people with some financial resources are competing and squeezing others out at the low end of the market now. IE blokes who would never have lived in a bedsit are squeezing out those who always lived in a bedsit…and in a tight market.

All of this means that 1 bed/bedsits for singletons, disproportionately but not exclusively male, are heading into perma short supply. These units cater for all sorts, the depressed, the sad, the cash strapped, the newly divorced or separated and shown the door. But there is no doubt that there is demand for one bed/bedsit type units at the bottom of the market. 2 bed small family units are in greater supply overall.

I do not think that these apartments should be supplied in grossly unmodernised NCR and Rathmines redbrickiana, no.

I think it is time for Foyer type apartment blocks.

These would contain a minimum 50 and sometimes up to 200 apartments in a block or multiblock complex. They must provide an element of shelter so there needs to be a 24 hour doorperson to keep undesirables at bay.

They would be located INSIDE the canals, by and large. I don’t think there is much demand out along the M50 somewhow. One or two in the Docklands SDZ would be a jolly good idea, even right on the river.

In other words, access controlled or lightly sheltered accomodation is what we need, today. 1000 units a year to market in inner city Dublin for 2 or 3 years.

There may be a lesser demand for ‘lightly sheltered’ or controlled access small family ( one/2 adult one/2 child and no more with internal creche facility to accomodate anti social working hours) units too but only if child minding is built in and usable from 6am to 10pm, not quite sure how to make that stack myself but it is not unrelated to back to education for single mothers as well as antisocial working hours etc, but it is not as high a priority) These small family units would be limited to a 4 year tenancy at most but the object is that childcare does not become an impediment to economic or educational access for a limited period

And to get these built and operable I think that a tax break incentivisation regime is required, believe it or not. And I would not be averse to seeing one signalled in the budget in October 2014. Tax breaks are not always bad, some of us remember teh state of the quays in Dublin in 1985 and 10 years later in 1995 when things were much improved. But I do not propose that Foyers are to be designated in ‘blocks’ like apartments were. The housing type should be stipulated and let the ‘market’ identify the sites. :slight_smile:

I never thought I’d see the day when 2Pack signed up to the Pin to rail against the insanity of our tax incentivised and indiscriminate housing bubble but there you are. Said now. :nin

Certainly focused incentives to meet particular clearly defined development needs - be they social or physical - is normal and necessary in any developed economy with a social conscience.
A big problem here in the past was the lunatic extension of the scope of these schemes, often as a result of intense political lobbying, that allowed every cheat, clown and chancer going to clamber aboard for all the wrong reasons - the BMW housing rush being a prime example.
In my opinion there should be incentives for conversion of former bed-sit diggeries into proper ‘flat-per-floor’ dwellings of one or two bedrooms - such as are common in London - as the return of most of these large buildings to single family use is simply impracticable for the way we live today.
Likewise there should be a determined drive - using both carrot and stick - strictly starting in the cores and only working out as the inner bits were done to encourage modern ‘Live over the Shop’ dwelling units be refurbed/created over retail premises in all of our town centres, large and small, not necessarily for shop keepers families mind, although managers and key staff might welcome the closeness to work. This would assist no end in urban re-generation and offer an alternative for those only seeking one or two bed living to big out-of-town blocks.

I noted a lot of 1st and 2nd floor offices are for sale/rent in Tullamore.
Tullamore is a town with many many vacant properties.
If the Council gave up on the idea of being able to extract rates from these properties then they could be returned to the private rental market as 1 and 2 bed converted apartments.
I figure that since there is still so much accomodation sharing going on there is a market for small apartments where one is willing to pay an extra amount for the privacy of sole occupancy.
That’s not a tax incentive but it would be an incentive.

There was no such thing as a BMW region tax break.

Tax incentives were nationwide, focused on all sorts of scams like Horses/Hotels/Golf/Car Parks and resulted in seemingly millions of hotels being built as well as housing…to the point where many established Dublin hotels were ruined by these newcomers. The likes of the Four Seasons hotel was a large tax break scam. The Bertie era ones flooded the country with untargeted rubbish.

No need, the market will take care of most of them bar maybe the North Circular road.

An exemption from benefit in kind where staff live over the shop they work in ( or over a shop within 200m of their shop) might help there. Never heard what happened after they tried this Living over shop type scheme in Capel Street (IE did it work or not???) It would benefit Limerick and Cork a lot, not so much low rise ( no space up there) Galway. :slight_smile:

But we need LOTS of quasi sheltered/managed lite 1 bed/studio gaffs in Inner City areas. NOW!

Lots of good ideas here but I have seen enough of my tax euros tipped into the property trough.

I would rather see active disincentives to leaving property and sites unoccupied/undeveloped. The area between the canals is blighted with derelict sites and buildings. These should be taxed until developed with the only approved development being along the lines described above.

For example -
the corner of Richmond St/SCR (Behind the Bernard Shaw)
The abandoned building in Harcourt St (stretching through to Camden St)
The old Irish Nationwide building at the top of Camden St
The corner of Rathmines Rd and the canal
The corner opposite the Bernard Shaw (and the Bretzel)
The site at the junction of Kevin St and Aungier St

These have all been empty since Noah drifted past in the Ark. A hefty ‘abandoned site/building’ tax would shift these in jig time - and if it didn’t the Corpo would be richer at the expense of the speculators. If owners are difficult to determine then it’s ‘Prove it or lose it’ .

Why not double up with an incentive/disincentive tax pair. Are these all suitable for accomodation pusposes and zoned for same though Mike???

NAMA will lobby like mad against any disincentive regime like the one you described. I would personally apply it near eg Luas / dart and stepping ‘outward’ every 2 years thereafter but my does Inner Dublin have soooooooo many eyesores…just not so much along the liffey like they were for years. :slight_smile:

Unfortunately, yes it does.

What is rather evident is that the new type of ‘growth’ in Dublin is eschewing the giant tin box emporia along the M50 and looking towards the city centre and ‘urbanised’ growth and clustering. Perhaps Amazon and ebay/paypal are the last of their breed, growing strongly along the M50 as did MS and Vodafone for example.

The newer TMTs are more urbanised, Facebook and Linkedin are city centre types. Google and Twitter are expanding WELL INSIDE orbital motorways not alongside or outside them…this not always in Dublin. That trend is likely to continue to my mind.

No idea - some of them have definitely been residential in the past - but the Corpo sets the rules so it can change them.

On your point about the tech companies. Rental costs are really becoming an issue. Over the last year I’ve worked with a couple of companies that recruit key personnel from outside Ireland. Word has got out that Dublin’s public transport infrastructure is crap and that you don’t want to take a job with any company located outside the city centre. A lot of these people are single guys who want 1 bed flats like they can get in other European cities - they just can’t believe the rents asked in Dublin. There’s been a pattern developing over the last few years where people come for six months, end up in a grotty kip on the NCR, thinking they’ll get something better when they know the city/other people and then find out the ugly truth and leave. The only ones that stay are the ones that get a girlfriend. I’m doing some work with a European company that wants to move some of their key personnel here in the next two months. I’ve told them to hold off until after the students have settled. I’ve also seriously suggested to one company that they run more social events outside the company in the hope that their staff establish local relationships that encourage them to stay in Ireland.

I’m not convinced that the issue is just supply - it’s also quality and the €650 rent allowance floor - that RA floor is higher than typical rents for decent 1 bed accomodation in equivalent European cities (and most accomodation is decent due to locally imposed (and enforced) standards). Typically these companies are saying that their staff expect to pay between 5 and 800 pm and that for 800 they would expect more space, a nicer area. They all end up disappointed.

The ugly truth is that we have never done decent accomodation for singletons (either in Dublin or elsewhere) and that we need to fix it quick, I’m sure Google would avail of any tax incentive that could result in the provision of decent centrally located accomodation for singletons in the interests of retention. Bet it will have the best broadband in Dublin as well. :slight_smile:

The BMW region was singled out for special concessions in the hotel biz anyway. Capital allowances on hotel buildings continued to be allowed as total income shelters after the allowances were restricted to rental income elsewhere in the country.

I am recommending a targetted allowance for a narrow class of accomodation, largely in Dublin, only.

There were no BMW wide allowances for homes which is what this thread is about and many of those availing of BMW hotel allowances were not from the BMW region but from Dublin.

One hotel in Galway was owned by a pack of senior KBC managers under the 7 year 100% capital allowance scheme ( pre 2003) which was nationwide and not confined to the BMW region as would have been the case post 2003 ( and over a much longer period) and it closed the second the tax break ran out c.2009 . I’d rather something more long term and more sustainable than that TBH. :slight_smile:

Pinsters calling for property based tax incentives. Who would have thought it? :slight_smile:

Is this the bottom?

I’m calling for flexibility in the local authorities so that 1st and 2nd floor space can be returned to the rental market as living accomodation with Councils accepting realities that their rates roll is diminishing and these properties are no longer needed as office space and will allow the centre of towns to become living spaces again. No tax incentives required. Just publicise it. Point out to Landlords who have had property sitting idle for months if not years that here you have a property on which you receive no income but you could be receiving a few hundred euro every month.
The last thing I want is tax based incentives because from past experience all that achieved was increase the “perceived” worth of the property while it fell dereliction.
Basic principle would be work the asset and extract profit. Let it sit idle and get nothing.

I’d also expect local authorities to use the legislation that is there to force owners to do something with derelict property. There are 17 properties on the register of derelict properties in Tullamore. I suspect that one of them is owned by a republician linked money launderer who was chased by the Revenue Commissioners a few years ago but I could be wrong. There are other derelict properties owned by Solicitors who specialise in representing scumbag defendents and others owned by connected businessmen on the main thorougfares in the town and they should really be added to the derelict list too but the rules don’t seem to apply to these people.

The government deliberately refused to incentivise last year and many more have become homeless since.

I have not altered my stance since, not in the least. If DCC won’t build these then by all means put them down on the docklands instead. But build the shaggin things quick, they are desperately needed in Dublin.

I’d time limit this break to buildings under construction by end 2016 latest!!!

They refused to incentivise because the banks need higher prices.
I’m not buying the ‘prices are too low to build’ argument.
Simply abolishing the VAT on new builds greatly improves affordability at a stroke.
It’s purely a political decision.

seankyne.ie/pq-no-278-2nd-july-r … rovements/

Nope

Never mind the VAT rates, I am talking capital allowances and income allowances too if necessary. Build the things fast ( and well)

Righty ho. This thread has been solemnly quiet for 2 years, how badly do we need this class of accomodation in Dublin today???