fine for paying punters though...
http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0511/some-n ... table.html

I've come across this before in the UK - the primary issue there is that there isn't enough room in modern apartments for a kitchen table that can adequately fit a full family. Given the importance of sitting down to eat together in raising non-delinquent kids, i can see their point. I'm sure that people on the waiting list would rather have anything that's available, but social services do love their regulations.

I'd guess it's a similar issue with those apartments.

they will build new ones... lol

I'm not complaining that they have standards and I agree with them (and you) about the need for them.

What I am incensed about is that ALL apartments are not built to minimum standards that would mean they are suitable for everyone...

Hardly news though. I looked at a lot of apartments when I couldn't afford to buy anything at all and all that struck me is how few of them were designed for living in.

This. Storage space takes up valuable room that the developers could squeeze more apartments into, so it seems Irish apartments are built without any at all. God forbid you should own more than a few sticks of furniture, a week's worth of clothing and perhaps a few CDs.

30+% of them though?

Perhaps we have a use for some of those builders - knocking one-beds into two beds, putting proper sound insulation in and converting ground-floor apartments to lock-ups (i.e. one per apartment in the block).

Not possible due to being an intelligent and sensible suggestion


If we were to actually let values hit rock bottom I'm sure this is exactly what would happen in many places

I'm sure that lady on primetime's slum landlord exposé wouldn't mind them as a stopgap. She is in a one bed cottage with her nephew, she sleeps on a small sofa, damp and mildew to beat the band, just cold running water in the kitchen, no heating, no bathroom just a toilet in an outhouse in the yard. I know she shouldn't get 2nd best social housing but anything would be better

Time to start knocking some units together

I'm all for your suggestions seriously. Anything smaller than a 3 bedroomed apartment was not designed to be lived in and even some of the 3 bed ones I have doubts about.

30% would be conservative in my view.

Regarding apartment size, the problem was a market/regulation failure.
Other European countries had/have standards that had the same minimum sizes as Ireland in the 90s. However developers never built entirely to the minimum - they only used the minimums if necessary - they would have great difficulty selling small units.
In Ireland, developers designed to the minimum because they could sell at those sizes without difficulty and maximise profit by sticking in as many units as possible.
It is an indication of a dysfunctional market.
One of the reasons, IMO, is that apartments were bought by small time landlords who weren't living in these places and had no interest in what living in a place was like. Also they lacked even the attitudes of larger "landlord" companies one gets in Europe who tended to think longer term. The bubble also had an effect where value for money became irrelevant. There are also odd distortions that I find in the Irish rental market in that quality accommodation does not seem to be able to command a premium over poor quality accommodation - I wonder if this is caused by rent allowance...

The question is why did it take so long to change the standards? The minimum sizes in place nowadays are very decent, by contrast.

Regarding these apartments - I suspect that suitable location and ancillary services is what ruled much of these out.

I also, dont know why we get this distortion.

I have seen terrible standards of decor, poor furniture, small kitchens, old white goods in houses asking ~1700, and I have seen other houses asking the same amount, which were built and specified to owner occupier specifications, expensive kitchens, all german white goods etc., (I assume at this level of rent, rent allowance is not going to equalise or clear the market)

I have concluded that most renters (and maybe landlords?), don't value/price the standard of the kitchen, white goods, kit out furniture etc., And if you want to rent, you want to rent somewhere that was recently owner occupied.

I to have noticed the lack of any significant premium for quality rental accommodation.

The only premium I seem to achieve is a very short void period (2-3 days) and usually a choice of tenant.

Don't you mean 'I have noticed a lack of a discount for less-than-quality accommodation', thanks to factors such as rent allowance...

You forgot to mention the obligatory 20% rent increase in d2 and d4... you're slipping

My small experience, would concur about a choice of tenant and even zero void. I suppose the no void is worth (2-6 weeks) 4-12% every two years, so say 6% p.a. but for the quality of life difference for a tenant, i think the premium should be more like 20% p.a. Maybe i just overvalue modern looking interiors, insulation and A rated white goods.