First time buyers housing scheme
July 8, 2003 at 10:37 am #706318bluefoamParticipant
Whats the opinion on the new gov housing scheme for first time buyers.
As a first time buyer myself I am all for it, but I have reservations. I & my better half are struggling to buy an appartement. And have comprimised on location, size and amenities in order to get on the ladder (to begin with we cannot afford flooring for the first while, because there is no first time buyers grant). If the government start selling places at cost, all well and good. But the accomodation should be just a way to get into the market and not offer the level of luxury you would expect when buying on the open market. It should be very high density and living space should not be generous.
If they do not do this they will not just reduce the value of our property, but will financially cripple us for years to come as our place will not be as central as their Dublin 8 scheme and will be more difficult to sell.
I think there is allot to consider here apart from just giving people the opportunity to buy property, there are knock on effects.
Sorry for my one sided view, I would be interested in what you have to say.
July 8, 2003 at 10:48 am #734214Paul ClerkinKeymaster
I’ve actually given up on ever owning my own home in Ireland and I don’t intend renting for ever….
July 8, 2003 at 12:07 pm #734215bigjoeParticipant
i think it is a good idea as well. a lot of conditions will have to be built in to stop people selling on at a profit after a short while. do not know how they will handle this. maybe cap the selling price to the rate of inflation.
July 8, 2003 at 12:14 pm #734216Andrew DuffyParticipant
I think I may lean the same way, Paul. Why not get better wages, weather and infrastructure somewhere else? Cheaper, better quality housing is the icing on the cake.
July 8, 2003 at 2:09 pm #734217shadowParticipant
This is an interesting concept. If only they would allow the architectural community to give their design capability to the porject. Perhaps a series of innovative even technologically challenging housing schemes for these sites. I am positive that a more creative solution to the hosuing problem can be developed. If these sites are just going to be more of the same semi-d and maisonette schemes that dominate then there is no leadeship. Just imagine the largest open architectural housing competition with real commissions and a contribution towards the future of Irish design and environment.
July 8, 2003 at 3:18 pm #734218urbanistoParticipant
I’m not really sure how I feel about this scheme. It smacks of cheap homes for the few but same-old-same-old for the rest. Its a sticky plaster solution which doesn’t in anyway solve the problems of exhorbitant house prices.
From a design point of view, I would be highly surprised if the agency to run the scheme came up with anything imaginative or different to whats going up in Ballymun now. As a lot of you will know, architects cost money and these schemes are supposed to be done at the cheapest possible cost.
I also foresee the homes being bought by long-term residents and landlords, and not used as a stepping stone to new home-buyers to get onto the property ladder.
It all looks great in the media spotlight but is far from the radical action needed to address this problem.
July 9, 2003 at 11:03 am #734219ewParticipant
Most of the issues raised here have been addressed in earlier schemes. Based on previous City Council schemes, to be eligible you can be earning well over the average industrial wage:
Single Income household: Income less than â‚¬32,000
Two Income household: (Principal income by 2.5) plus subsidary imcome. less than â‚¬80,000
There are a number if measures to stop you buying as a landlord. The most important is that the purchaser must live there as their principle residence.
To address profitering and speculative investment there is a “claw back” agreement.
The gist of which is as follows:
You must notify CC if selling within 20 years.
The % discount you gained on buying via the scheme is calculated on purchase date and recorded.
If you sell anytime within 10 years you owe CC that percentage of your sale price.
After 10 years the % is further reduced by 10% @ so that only at the end of the subsequent 10 years (ie year 20) you would owe CC nothing if you sold the house.
Seems a pretty good balance to me.
StephenC mentions long-term residents as a possible problem – In that these should be “stepping stone” properties. This is an interesting point. So far the schemes have targeted long-term residents as the scheme attempts to produce stable communities. I don’t think it’s in anybodys interest to have an area entirely composed of young working couples who are out all day and have the attitude that they’ll only be there for a couple of years anyway. There’d be no sense of community whatsoever. That’s of course just my opinion.
I think if the CC council (or whoever) decided that it were worth the social cost to provide just a transitionary first step then the existing schemes could be modified. For example they could set a different balance by perhaps bringing the 10 year tipping point in the claw-back back to 5 years..?
July 9, 2003 at 11:11 am #734220urbanistoParticipant
I agree with you about long term residents, on reflection it is a very important that any area has a community feel and I agree short term, working couples do not seem to provide this. The problem I was thinking of was that the schemes willl need to encourage peopl to move on eventually if they are to be effective for future first time byers as well. Its a very difficult balance to strike I think. On the one hand you want solid, sustainable communities while on the other you want to avoid a one off solution to todays problem while ignoring tomorrows
July 9, 2003 at 4:55 pm #734221bluefoamParticipant
Why do they need to be long term community schemes? Why can’t they be stop gap?
I’m not disagreeing, just asking.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.