Paul Murphy TD si oppone allo sviluppo residenziale nel suo quartiere.
https://i.redd.it/o2ch5sezr8ef1.jpeg
di jonnieggg
Paul Murphy TD si oppone allo sviluppo residenziale nel suo quartiere.
https://i.redd.it/o2ch5sezr8ef1.jpeg
di jonnieggg
43 commenti
A little bit hypocritical
He’s right, I know it’s easy to say hypocrit! But, to be fair, there was co-living in Dun Loaghaire and the rents were meant to be 350 euro a week for a prison cell, of course they raised the prices. We do need actual gaffs for families.
“We’re concerned that the building could be overcrowded and unsuitable for living standards, but also it’s too big and doesn’t align with the styles of all the other homeowners around the neighbourhood”
This is so disingenuous and hypocritical…
What’s that dining space for 16 people about?
I would also object to these embarrassments of dwellings.
Co-living is fucked because it is a fine option for students, but we all know families will be forced to live there and students will live with their ma
It was ok until he dropped the NIMBY line of “not in keeping with the estate”.
This is such a bullshit term that is used to ensure we never build any density.
It sounds he’s objecting to a living situation that nobody in their right mind would want implemented, whether that be in their locality or the other side of the country.
Fair enough, really.
Proper housing should be priority 1.
Paul Murphy is right. New homes should be affordable and livable. Cramming people into a tiny space for the sake of landlords profits is a social evil our grandparents fought (sucessfully) to end. Don’t betray their memory by allowing Victorian style housing conditions to return.
Rules for thee but not for me.
I object to the overuse of QR codes in his letter.
It’s not in keeping with the aesthetic of modern letterheads
You support HMOs and that co-living shite?
Genuinely can’t believe there’s people in this thread arguing in favour of co-living as some form of solution to the housing crisis.
Just accepting any remedy to a problem doesn’t mean you’ve found the solution.
Introducing neo-tenements isn’t the solution.
No votes if the housing crisis is solved
I’d say he’s always been against “co-living” developments to be fair
I suspect that many on this thread are playing the man and not the ball……I mean, are people seriously arguing in favour of a co-living build.
He’s right though. Co-living is fine for students but it’s not a sustainable way to house adults. Even at the most charitable view, the “it’s good for young professionals…” (it’s not) or “it’s affordable” (it never is), it’s a sticking plaster on a gaping wound.
If he was objecting to the development of actual apartments or houses, viable homes, then sure he’d be a hypocrite. But he’s not. He’s objecting to boarding kennels for humans.
This is ragebait – he objecting to a co living development which is essentially nothing more than an expensive tenement.
Oh co-living oh thank you masters how gracious of you to forgo making regular affordable housing and instead bless us with modern day tenements.
Brilliant because none of the cute hoors in the dail or their families will ever have to live somewhere like this.
I’m glad he spoke out against it. Stop papering over the cracks and fix the fucking problem.
A rare win for Paul Murphy on this one imo. I agree.
God forbid we condemn the return to the age of tenements?
Fuck your agenda
I have no problem with this. That neighbourhood is not the right place for a hostel.
Co-living can get fucked, he’s right on to challenge this, the government should never allowed it in the first place
So your saying you agree with Co-Living properties? Madness, as much as Paul Murphy might annoy me, hes completely right with this
For anyone interested in the truth just look at the plans. It is highly unlikely this is a home going to be used for a Co living arrangement.
The 16 person dining he’s on about is two 8 person dining tables.
This is a proposed 320sqm house. So 2 dining areas is not going to be out of the norm.
There is a substantial walk in wardrobe for the master bedroom, a large shed as part of the plan, a large utility room and pantry.
Basically, plenty of elements to suggest it’s a large family home rather than a Co living space.
I’ve had to live with 3 other people in a 1 bedroom apartment before and it drives you nuts. Fucking joke to see people here defending modern tenements just to own someone they disagree with.
“Well living in them will be better than living on the streets”, say people who seem to have co-living developments confused with homeless shelters.
He sure loves QR Codes
Lived in a co-living in Brussels with 12 odd other people in it. Knew a girl living in one with 20+. They take advantage of young foreign interns and students who are panicked about finding somewhere to live before moving. They’re horrible and should not be used as a solution to a housing crisis.
This post is in such bad faith and you know it is.
Is Murphy a wanker? Yes. Is he right about it being a bad idea to house 16 people in what amounts to the same space as two houses? Also yes.
He’s right. We are able to solve the housing crisis without creating neo-tenements and buckling further to greedy landlords.
Worth looking at the plans, that’s just a massive house, not a co-living space.
Ragebait at its finest. What he’s saying is perfectly reasonable. We need more housing, we do not need more exploitative housing like this. As someone else said, play the ball not the man.
Hes absolutely right
Co-living spaces are not the remedy to the housing crisis, but whether you like it or not; they provide housing supply and housing supply is ALWAYS a good thing. Their affordability, finish, maintenance, and overall standard are other conversations.
Co-living spaces are part of the picture of alleviating the housing crisis whether you like them or not.
The sheer volume of NIMBY cunts in this country is astounding.
We need more of every type of housing or accommodation. Co-living would not be for me, but perfect for others. How about we build them and let people who want to live in them do so, and the rest of us just try minding our own business for a change?
That’s one seriously fucking disingenuous title no?
He’s opposed to building in his neighbourhood because they’re building houses that are specifically designed and intended to be co-renting setups, aka shoving 3-4 grown adults into a house and having them share it with no sense of ownership or opportunity to climb the typical partner/pets/kids ladder.
It also helps that he’s been against this his entire career, but if you hate Paul you’re going to unintentionally pro-house sharing so maybe pause for a minute and look at yourself.
Some terrible takes here – many of you are saying that because the crisis is so bad we need to reduce standards and accept even worse accommodation. This is moronic, it means capitulating to the people who caused the housing crisis and are profiting from it. You don’t win by letting the person beating you beat you more.
He’s 100% right. Co-living is a shit show. Will be absolutely taken advantage of. Kennels for people. Overpriced tiny rooms. Disgusting and completely neglected common areas. No choice about what lunatics you’ll be living with. They’ll be the new tenements.
Very much in line with his policy. Nothing to see here