Thanks for sharing. That makes sense, I guess that model is basically looking for most of their soft costs to be 0, which are approximately half of the build price.Construction cost = 179k, this includes site works and site development
"Soft" costs = 192.5k
Total costs = 371k.
The soft costs include:
Land = 61k
Finance = 16.7k
Profit = 43k
VAT = 44k
Could the government put out to tender, for example, the building of 500 houses on state owned land with a guarantee to rent them for say 100 years?
From this article about increasing costs of building materials due to covid and supply chain issues https://www.irishtimes.com/business...y-put-construction-on-the-back-foot-1.4551172
“If you look at a three-bed semi-detached home, which sells for about €300,000 or €350,000, construction materials costs are 13 per cent of that,” he says. “That means that materials costs will go from 13 per cent to about 14 per cent.”
Have we not done that already though back in the 60s and 70s, Ballymun was that so were vast council flats from glasgow to london. That is modular , high volume construction , it was also done by the communists on a vast scale throughout Eastern Europe. Ballymun was demolished a decade ago along with many council blocks in the UK although the ones left in London are now sought after due to their location. Surely we need to learn from the mistakes of the past or maybe demolishing them was the real mistake especially now in the era of high building costs.Average material costs and labour costs are around the same per square metre so modular designs which use cheaper materials, have less waste and reduce labour input would seem o be the way to go.
No, we haven't.Have we not done that already though back in the 60s and 70s, Ballymun was that so were vast council flats from glasgow to london. That is modular , high volume construction , it was also done by the communists on a vast scale throughout Eastern Europe. Ballymun was demolished a decade ago along with many council blocks in the UK although the ones left in London are now sought after due to their location. Surely we need to learn from the mistakes of the past or maybe demolishing them was the real mistake especially now in the era of high building costs.
We use 100 year old manufacturing methods which are highly labour intensive to build homes therefore they are very expensive and supply will be constrained by labour shortages.One option would be for local authorities to actively facilitate development.
They would have CPO powers for site assembly and would provide fully-serviced sites for self-build.
Much simpler planning too. You'd be allowed to build what you like within certain dimensions.
And watch landlords head for the door in even greater numbers.round property ownership in some way which gives tenants the right to buy a property they have rented for more than a given period of time
There are fewer but larger landlords. That's not necessarily a bad thing.And watch landlords head for the door in even greater numbers.
The Law of Unintended Consequences would be huge here.
The problem with much of the public housing constructed in the 60's and 70's was the people who lived in them. That said I'm not talking about public housing. I'm talking about all housing. We should build houses which look the same as they do now, in the same places as they are now, but use different construction methods. Houses should be manufactured and assembled, not built. We'd get a vastly superior product for a much lower price.@Purple but you didn't address my question about the modular high volume construction that was done in ballymun and throughout UK ? Surely if we are to go down this route we need to find out the problems encountered before. I don't think the solution is modular one off houses as they are really only for the country. They suit dry cold big countries like the US and Scandinavia where wood rot is not as big an issue.
I'm not dismissing it as of course it is the only way to deliver high volume, however in the urban areas and to achieve densification and stop the urban sprawl we need to 're examine the ballymun construction model. Afterall that was novel and was a Scandinavian innovation in the sixties. We obviously encountered big social problems with it subsequently. Therefore we need to look at the problems with this rather than dismissing them and pretending that we won't encounter them again because the Scandinavians have a new construction technique
Yeah, I know a few people who grew up in Ballymun and they talk of how much nicer the 'flats' there were compared to the alternatives. The problems stemmed from lack of opportunities and facilities.The problem with much of the public housing constructed in the 60's and 70's was the people who lived in them.
I work with a few people from the area who lived in the flats.Yeah, I know a few people who grew up in Ballymun and they talk of how much nicer the 'flats' there were compared to the alternatives. The problems stemmed from lack of opportunities and facilities.
The land costs for a 114 sqm house in Dublin in 2020 are 60,823.
In my opinion this is way too high, it needs to fall to 10k-20k per house/apt.
presumably govt. VAT receipts from housing have been fairly modest for the last 15 years.Land = 61k
Finance = 16.7k
Profit = 43k
VAT = 44k
The market sets the price. As long as there's a capacity constraint any efforts to reduce costs will just increase profits. We need to increase capacity before we reduce prices.presumably govt. VAT receipts from housing have been fairly modest for the last 15 years.
Could VAT be waived on houses priced below a certain threshold?
Coupled with govt-backed finance that's maybe 55K right there.
re: land costs - did the zoning windfall tax ever come into force?
also, and this is an unpopular suggestion in many circles, more needs to be done to encourage older homeowners to downsize. I live on a street of 4-bed houses, I'd say 75% are occupied by empty-nest retirees. There are similar streets all across Dublin, that's a lot of empty bedrooms and that's before you even get to the houses that are completely empty as a result of Fair Deal.
Tax incentives have been very effective at driving the development of student accommodation, something similar for retirement-village type developments might be worth looking into, along with appropriate financing packages to make it more practical to downsize (currently tricky from a finance and tax perspective I believe).
And watch landlords head for the door in even greater numbers.
The Law of Unintended Consequences would be huge here.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?