Register to Comment
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 43
  1. #11
    joel joel is offline

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    5,305

    Quote Originally Posted by dlohan View Post
    You have completely misunderstood the graphic. It doesn't show most of the other European countries. It is comparative only to a few of them. You cannot make an assessment of our building the 2nd smallest houses.

    You could have as easily entitled this article - "Ireland builds largest houses in Ireland - aside from Denmark, France & Spain".

    But that wouldn't be sufficient of a downer. Can't have any optimism here.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #12
    cactusflower cactusflower is offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    8,521

    Quote Originally Posted by seabhcan View Post
    According to the BBC, only the UK builds smaller new homes than Ireland. The average new home in Ireland is 88m^2, vs 137m^2 in Denmark and 214m^2 in the US.

    The UK has some excuse with an average population density of 246 people per sqkm (395/sqkm for England alone). But Ireland has only 60 people /sqkm.

    BBC NEWS | UK | Magazine | Room to swing a cat? Hardly
    The article doesn't say where the Irish stats come from or for what period they cover. The UK figures are 2003-6. If they took a snap shot of dwelling sizes constructed in Ireland at the height of the boom there would have been a disproportionate amount of single bed and two bed flats built, because of the spike in land prices. In Dublin, the City Council bumped up the minimum size of units/rooms about two years ago - that would not have fed into construction stage before the crash.

    An average size across all units constructed is pretty meaningless if some are one bed and others four bed. What matters is the minimum set out in the building regulations. I don't know how that compares with other EU states, but certainly the smallest apartments in Paris are tiny in comparison with ours.

    My guess is that the average Irish house size across the whole building stock is quite high.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #13
    Cael Cael is offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    31,417

    It just goes to show how the gombeen developers and their FF puppets have been sh1tting on the Irish people. And now we have to bail these vermin out?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #14
    Cael Cael is offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    31,417

    Lots of facts and figures on the subject in this finfacts article:


    The survey reports says that Irelandís smallish houses are built perplexingly small as the nation emerges as one of the most affluent in world. Average house lots are much larger in the United States (and Australia, Canada and New Zealand) than in the UK. In the United States, new detached houses are built at 2.7 per acre (6.6 per hectare). In Australia, new detached houses are being built at 5.5 per acre (13.3 per hectare). By comparison, in the UK, new houses were built at an average of 16 per acre (40 per hectare) in 2005.

    The survey report using data from the Irish Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government Housing Statistics report, that was published in November 2005, says that future lot sizes are likely to be even smaller in Dublin, where present zoning calls for 20 houses per acre (49 per hectare), which would require five (5) more houses to be crowded onto an acre than just four years ago (13 more houses per hectare).

    Seven Dublin houses or six United Kingdom houses could be built on the average new house lot in the United States or three to four compared to Australia.

    The survey says that much of recently built housing stock in many continental (Western Europe) markets is detached. For example, single family houses comprise two-thirds of new house construction in France. The United Kingdom has some of the most tightly packed suburbs in the high-income world, at densities nearly double that of Western Europe and 60 percent greater than in Japan. Strikingly, new houses, adjusted for size differences, are more than twice as costly relative to incomes in Ireland and the United Kingdom as in Australia and New Zealand. Moreover, new houses in the UK and Ireland are approximately five to six times as costly, adjusted for size differences, as in affordable markets such as Indianapolis or Winnipeg.

    State of Chassis: Artificial restriction on land supply puts Ireland and UK at bottom of property league in Developed World; Irish urbanisation at 4% is among Europe's lowest
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #15
    muck_savage muck_savage is offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    334

    Highest prices for the smallest houses in one of the least densely populated countries in Europe.

    This is the Fianna Fail economic miracle. Greed.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #16
    cactusflower cactusflower is offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    8,521

    Quote Originally Posted by Cael View Post
    Lots of facts and figures on the subject in this finfacts article:


    The survey reports says that Irelandís smallish houses are built perplexingly small as the nation emerges as one of the most affluent in world. Average house lots are much larger in the United States (and Australia, Canada and New Zealand) than in the UK. In the United States, new detached houses are built at 2.7 per acre (6.6 per hectare). In Australia, new detached houses are being built at 5.5 per acre (13.3 per hectare). By comparison, in the UK, new houses were built at an average of 16 per acre (40 per hectare) in 2005.

    The survey report using data from the Irish Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government Housing Statistics report, that was published in November 2005, says that future lot sizes are likely to be even smaller in Dublin, where present zoning calls for 20 houses per acre (49 per hectare), which would require five (5) more houses to be crowded onto an acre than just four years ago (13 more houses per hectare).

    Seven Dublin houses or six United Kingdom houses could be built on the average new house lot in the United States or three to four compared to Australia.

    The survey says that much of recently built housing stock in many continental (Western Europe) markets is detached. For example, single family houses comprise two-thirds of new house construction in France. The United Kingdom has some of the most tightly packed suburbs in the high-income world, at densities nearly double that of Western Europe and 60 percent greater than in Japan. Strikingly, new houses, adjusted for size differences, are more than twice as costly relative to incomes in Ireland and the United Kingdom as in Australia and New Zealand. Moreover, new houses in the UK and Ireland are approximately five to six times as costly, adjusted for size differences, as in affordable markets such as Indianapolis or Winnipeg.

    State of Chassis: Artificial restriction on land supply puts Ireland and UK at bottom of property league in Developed World; Irish urbanisation at 4% is among Europe's lowest
    House sizes aren't the same as densities. The US model is entirely car dependent and suburban. They are trying to move away from it as its a social and evironmental disaster.

    We should not be building all over our most productive agricultural land. Ireland is the only eu country that doesn't protect Grade A lands.

    Its building regulations that matter, not meaningless averages.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #17
    Cael Cael is offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    31,417

    Quote Originally Posted by cactusflower View Post
    House sizes aren't the same as densities. The US model is entirely car dependent and suburban. They are trying to move away from it as its a social and evironmental disaster.

    We should not be building all over our most productive agricultural land. Ireland is the only eu country that doesn't protect Grade A lands.

    Its building regulations that matter, not meaningless averages.
    They are not meaningless averages. I dont know if you have ever been in a new irish house or apartment, but if you had you would not be talking about meaningless averages. New Irish homes are tiny. Incredibly small. So what is your plan - make the urban dwellers life like rats, so that they can pay farmers to keep grade A land? Wise up, a chara.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #18
    macdarawhitfield macdarawhitfield is offline

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,531

    I agree entirely cactus.Comparison with the USA is a bit silly.Ditto Canada,Australia.Petrol is for nothing is the US and sites are cheaper than - ahem - health insurance.But their lifestyle is even more car dependent than ours.The notion of popping down the local pub for a bit of human interaction remains exactly that.That's why they all drink at home watching Fox News until they go stir crazy and kill each other.But I digress.
    Most of the houses hereabouts are about 50% too big for any use you can envisage.2.4 kids and 5 bedrooms,all en suite of course ffs? Talk about empty nest syndrome.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #19
    cactusflower cactusflower is offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    8,521

    Quote Originally Posted by Cael View Post
    They are not meaningless averages. I dont know if you have ever been in a new irish house or apartment, but if you had you would not be talking about meaningless averages. New Irish homes are tiny. Incredibly small. So what is your plan - make the urban dwellers life like rats, so that they can pay farmers to keep grade A land? Wise up, a chara.
    Don't be silly, I'm just pointing out that an average house size is not the same as a minimum house size. Also that average dwelling density per acre/hectare is not the same as house size.

    I also pointed out that minimum standards have been increased in the last couple of years. From the time a standard is introduced, through the planning stage to construction is at very least 2-3 years, so very few at the new standard would have been constructed yet.

    In France and Spain its legal to build tiny little studio flats: they are brilliant for young people who want to live in the city centre and aren't into homes and gardens stuff.

    What matters just as much as size, is having parks, shops and cafes and public transport all a few minutes from your door. That doesn't happen in low density developments.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #20
    doubleglaze doubleglaze is offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    161

    Quote Originally Posted by macdarawhitfield View Post
    I agree entirely cactus.Comparison with the USA is a bit silly.Ditto Canada,Australia.Petrol is for nothing is the US and sites are cheaper than - ahem - health insurance.But their lifestyle is even more car dependent than ours.The notion of popping down the local pub for a bit of human interaction remains exactly that.That's why they all drink at home watching Fox News until they go stir crazy and kill each other.But I digress.
    Most of the houses hereabouts are about 50% too big for any use you can envisage.2.4 kids and 5 bedrooms,all en suite of course ffs? Talk about empty nest syndrome.
    Spare "bedrooms" are often used for guests/incapacitated relatives/musical instrument rooms/libraries-studies/home offices/storage-wardrobe space/laundry room/playroom...
    I don't know anyone who has too much space in his or her house. Only people with too little.

    I'd agree with you that the US car dependent lifestyle/suburban sprawl is unsustainable. I suppose we need to aim for balance.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment