The Action Plan for Housing.

A relative of mine has/had a buy to let house on the south side, with tenants for the last 6 years. She was advised by her auctioneer that now would be a good time to sell up as prices are at the top of the market, and she "wouldn't want to be a landlord" in the case of political change resulting in restrictions such as rent freezes and bans on eviction.

She didn't particularly want to sell as it is a handy earner and she wasn't happy to kick out decent tenants after 6 years, but the argument made sense.

A sign of things to come? I don't blame her but at the same time I'm basically the people she kicked out. If my landlord does the same I'm fucked.
she must own the house outright (or her pension does) if its a handy earner as the tax is half of the rent otherwise which makes it quite an achivement for any rental to perform on a straight up monthly basis.
There is some talk to easing the tax on domestic landlords to bring them a bit closer to the professional landlords as the gap between the 2 is massive - SF will most likely be part of a coalition next time which means they will not get to just burn every landlord up and down the country regardless
 

MerchantOfEnnis

Full Member
she must own the house outright (or her pension does) if its a handy earner as the tax is half of the rent otherwise which makes it quite an achivement for any rental to perform on a straight up monthly basis.
There is some talk to easing the tax on domestic landlords to bring them a bit closer to the professional landlords as the gap between the 2 is massive - SF will most likely be part of a coalition next time which means they will not get to just burn every landlord up and down the country regardless
Maybe buy to let is the wrong term so, I just mean rental property, not sure what the ownership status is
 

Hank Scorpio

Full Member

Just two Bord Pleanála board members voted on disputed Intel development – three required legally​


Just two Bord Pleanála (ABP) board members refused a challenge against a controversial Intel expansion in county Kildare – despite there being a legal requirement for three board members to make such decisions.

The 2019 case was the first of its kind assigned to deputy chairperson Paul Hyde, currently the subject of four investigations into alleged misconduct. Michelle Fagan, one of whose decisions is now subject to High Court proceedings following a Ditch report, was the other board member who refused an oral hearing in the case.

The application was for a strategic infrastructure development (SID). Though two board members made the decision, according to the Planning and Development Act 2000, “The quorum for a meeting of the Strategic Infrastructure Division shall be three” – which calls into question the legal basis for Hyde and Fagan’s ruling. The proposed Intel development has since been subject to a sustained legal challenge by a local farmer.

Hyde's first SID as lead board member​

As part of an €8 billion Intel Ireland expansion project, Eirgid in July 2019 sought planning permission from ABP for construction work to manage increased power demand at the US tech giant’s chip-manufacturing facility in Leixlip, county Kildare.

The application was for an SID – large developments considered of importance to the national economy that go directly to ABP, bypassing local councils. Hyde had never been assigned an SID application, while Michelle Fagan isn’t a member of ABP’s five-person SID division.

Local farmer Thomas Reid objected and requested an oral hearing from the board. Reid came to prominence when the Supreme Court in 2015 ruled that the IDA had wrongfully sought to acquire his farmland through compulsory purchase legislation for another Intel expansion.

Board records released by ABP to The Ditch confirm that only Fagan and Hyde attended the meeting to determine Reid’s request. Just two months after being assigned the case, they refused Reid an oral hearing. Planning legislation allows for two board members to decide certain cases but specifically requires three members to determine any matter relating to SIDs.

Around the same time, Intel also received permission for an extension to its Leixlip plant, which ABP classified as a “manufacturing and processing” rather than SID application.

Reid challenged this decision. Despite criticising the board’s decision-making process, in May 2021 the High Court dismissed Reid’s application for judicial review. In April the Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of the High Court’s decision.

Reid had also requested an oral hearing in this case but was again refused by Hyde and Fagan. The board has considered 84 similar applications since January 2018, with only two allocated to Hyde. Last month the Irish Examiner reported that Hyde asked the ABP planning inspector in this case to change his report.

ABP, Dave Walsh, Hyde and Fagan all declined to comment.


[On the ditch]
 

Roxetten

Full Member
where will all these houses guaranteed by politicians be built?
Brown field sites surely, we need to tackle dereliction too, loads of privately owned houses in Cork city lying empty for various reasons, this issue should be tackled.

The Vita Cortex site is ideal for housing.

You could build two nice houses on the Manhattan site also.

There's a few houses for sale in Ballphehane atm, a settled area now that the gurriers have grown up and moved on.
 

EVENT GUIDE - HIGHLIGHT
Qween
Cyprus Avenue, Caroline St.

26th Nov 2022 @ 7:00 pm
More info..

Meat and Potatoes

Crawford Art Gallery, Tomorrow @ 10am

View more events ▼
Top