With rent increasing is now the time to buy a 2nd property from the bank

Far higher spec, as you’d expect, than PBSA.

1 Like

I honestly cant understand why they removed these from planning going forward. If there is no demand for them, then they wont shift or be rented, and the developer loses out. As it stands, there are thousands of young professionals and students in Dublin who do not want to buy a house and who do not want to rent an apartment. So the likes of these, for a short term lease, suits them perfectly. Having the social aspect too could be helpful to some who are on their own looking to meet people. How many people living in apartments in Dublin never met their next door neighbour? At least this way promotes getting to know people.

Its far from an ideal living situation and is not a long term one. But it isnt being sold like that. Its a stop gap solution for an individual looking for something small and cheap. Albeit the cheap part isnt really hitting it here, but the facilities are far better than a lot of places for similar or higher money.

But no, the government dont want it any more because people complained it wasnt for them. Well, it was never intended to be for them, so they have no stopped a legitimate source of housing because it doesnt fit in with the ideals of those wanting their forever home.


Completely agree, it’s ridiculous. 1800 is not cheap but a 2 bed apartment in Dublin now would be minimum 2500 per month so when you throw in the gym and bills it’s much of a muchness. Plus the social aspect as you say I’m sure there would be plenty of interest. This government though are determined to fuck up the housing market every way they can so this is just another example of this.

1 Like

The angry left and associated angry architects, Mulallys, social media warriors etc were dead set against them and the gov, as usual, caved to them.

I’d agree, they are only a small part of the solution but I could see a place for them. If there’s more of them then the price comes down …


well thats it. They talk about it being pointless building bigger and more expensive units, but if people move into them, then it leaves a property behind them for someone else to take. For all their shite talk, more units will help, not hinder. It helps bring down rent values and property values too. But no, they’d rather argue over stupid shit than get things sorted.

1 Like

At the moment we have pretty limited building capacity, surely it would be best to direct it towards most desirable stock.

These are developers free to build what they want. Setting planning to prohibit a type of dwelling is not ideal.

In a perfect world we’d have 3 bed forever homes with big gardens in city centres on bus and train routes for all. In a realistic world we should have as much accommodation units as possible to cater for all needs.


This is my point. We have limited building capacity, we should require whatever building capacity we have to build what we need/want.

That’s nonsense. If someone is putting up the money to develop a site they should be allowed put whatever they want in there within in reason.

If the government want to control exactly what’s built they need to buy and develop those sites.

1 Like

Komrade Glas wants control of the means of production


Control economy wahey!

For some developers, particularly with regards to high density urban areas, the cost of construction, between actual hard costs and soft costs like fees and contributions etc do not make it a viable option for return on investment. So they dont do it. Commuter areas with high density housing gives better returns. So limiting the type of housing in higher populated areas is not going to get them more units, developers will build where they make money. Its their investment, if it fails, they lose out. Its not for the government to tell them they cant do something just because its not a forever home


Interesting turn of events looking through the pictures of this 2 bed flat.

1 Like

news article on the report mentioned above.

1 Like

Is the problem that the council’s or whatever are insisting these places are spec’ed to an A rating.No wonder there’s no money to be made doing them up.Any building that’s a B rating is plenty cosy and good to live in and easy enough to heat.



Standards and regulations always cost money. That’s rarely mentioned when demands are made.

1 Like

Many architects would argue that it’s pointless in this country to build to A standard and the extra cost will never be recovered in terms of saving in heating. You couldn’t explain that to the retards in the civil service though.


As a consequence of being an economic backwater for decades, Ireland has an abundance of “family” housing sprawled outside the likes of Dublin.

We have had the lowest number of apartments in Europe.

Instead of seeing this as a golden opportunity to realign this, many couldn’t look past their nose on this.

1 Like

I agree with you, I don’t think I’ve ever objected to apartments. I don’t think shared living spaces are desirable and where we have limited capacity to build - which we apparently do - we shouldn’t waste resources on a type of units we don’t want. By all means build lots of apartments.