The Phantom Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 4 hours ago, Stu Peters said: I spent a long (because of the storm) weekend in Dun Laoghaire a few weeks ago. Must be 30 years since I was last there to catch the ferry to Holyhead. What a fabulous town it is now - lots of ‘heritage’ areas (including the high street) interspersed with modern chrome and glass buildings in a perfect juxtaposition of styles. Admittedly they were probably funded by Brussels, but my Victorian hotel overlooked the best of modern architecture. It felt vibrant and alive. If only you were in a position to be able to try and implement and develop such an architectural delight 😉 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeCurious Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 3 hours ago, Banker said: Aren’t Dandara building apartments on the land by Tesco, IOMG providing some funds to get this brownfield site developed. Same as Villers block and ocean castle site Port Erin. Yes, they got the land from Corpy in 2006 when they moved out to Braddan (the hypocrisy of DBC whining about businesses fleeing out of town to another LA is still funny) so it's been about 18 years lying fallow aross from one of the busiest stores on the island. Did hear a rumour that Dandara finished the new depot ahead of program before Corpy had started packing so they started charging them rent for a month or more on the old builiding until they moved out becasue they took possession of the Lake Road site once the new Braddan place was ready for occupation. But I could be wrong. Anyway, why are we, the taxpayers, subsidising the biggest developer on the island? Aren't they making enough? Or is this the get out jail free card where the IOMG mandate public sector and affordable housing? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Peters Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 4 hours ago, The Phantom said: If only you were in a position to be able to try and implement and develop such an architectural delight 😉 Indeed, I’ll write to the European Parliament and ask for a couple of billion euros. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercenary Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 4 hours ago, CallMeCurious said: Yes, they got the land from Corpy in 2006 when they moved out to Braddan (the hypocrisy of DBC whining about businesses fleeing out of town to another LA is still funny) so it's been about 18 years lying fallow aross from one of the busiest stores on the island. Did hear a rumour that Dandara finished the new depot ahead of program before Corpy had started packing so they started charging them rent for a month or more on the old builiding until they moved out becasue they took possession of the Lake Road site once the new Braddan place was ready for occupation. But I could be wrong. Anyway, why are we, the taxpayers, subsidising the biggest developer on the island? Aren't they making enough? Or is this the get out jail free card where the IOMG mandate public sector and affordable housing? Have you not answered your own question there, if a developer has sat on it for 20 years then there's obviously issues with the economic viability of its development. Developing brownfield sites is not cheap and while its sat derelict/unused its only costing the developer money/poor use of capital. And to head off the "it's because it's sitting in a landbank and they develop all the more profitable greenfield sites first", whilst there is surely an element of this Dandara have shown they can quickly ramp up/down number of staff and sites to suit levels of demand, it's not like they choose to employ a fixed number of staff and run through developments one by one. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Flint Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 39 minutes ago, Stu Peters said: Indeed, I’ll write to the European Parliament and ask for a couple of billion euros. Not a bad idea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holte End Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 40 minutes ago, Stu Peters said: Indeed, I’ll write to the European Parliament and ask for a couple of billion euros. Why not ask the Government man in Brussels to do it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 2 minutes ago, Holte End said: Why not ask the Government man in Brussels to do it. Problem is that the European Parliament might actually want to see something of value for their euros. We don't do that here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holte End Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 39 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: Problem is that the European Parliament might actually want to see something of value for their euros. We don't do that here. They won't because they don't do that there either. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Phantom Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 11 hours ago, Stu Peters said: Indeed, I’ll write to the European Parliament and ask for a couple of billion euros. You joining Braddan Commissioners? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Buggane Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 Or the unemployed at the end of this abysmal governments tenure Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josem Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 On 2/13/2024 at 10:52 PM, CallMeCurious said: With so much of the countryside... being built on... I don't know if you've ever been to the Isle of Man, but this is obviously false as it relates to the Isle of Man: very little of the countryside is built on. Roughly 4% of the land of the Isle of Man is used for housing. Roughly 88% of the land of the Isle of Man is protected under biosphere care/core areas, and used for various "green" uses (farmland; forestry; parks; etc. etc.). The remaining 8% of the land of the Isle of Man is used for transport, commercial, government, recreational and industrial uses. It is, of course, important to have homes for cows and sheep on the Isle of Man. But it is also incredibly important to have homes for humans, and stopping the provision of homes for humans based on the false idea that so much of our land is built upon is immoral. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeCurious Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 5 hours ago, Josem said: I don't know if you've ever been to the Isle of Man, but this is obviously false as it relates to the Isle of Man: very little of the countryside is built on. Roughly 4% of the land of the Isle of Man is used for housing. Roughly 88% of the land of the Isle of Man is protected under biosphere care/core areas, and used for various "green" uses (farmland; forestry; parks; etc. etc.). The remaining 8% of the land of the Isle of Man is used for transport, commercial, government, recreational and industrial uses. It is, of course, important to have homes for cows and sheep on the Isle of Man. But it is also incredibly important to have homes for humans, and stopping the provision of homes for humans based on the false idea that so much of our land is built upon is immoral. Saying 4% of the total land area is housing is disingenous at worst or dumb at best. As is 88% is protected. What is key question is; how much of the land is SUITABLE for construction (nowhere near 100%) and how much is SUITABLE for agriculture (a lot less than 88%). If these brown field sites, despite being zoned for residential/commercial already are not economic for the developers then the government should buy them up dirt cheap, turn them into green spaces or simple carparks for public use. That would either prompt real action from the developers or allow governemnt to turn a profit when the greenfield sites eventually run out. I guess we can just build on the beaches and reclaim land that way too.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daisy Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 5 hours ago, Josem said: I don't know if you've ever been to the Isle of Man, but this is obviously false as it relates to the Isle of Man: very little of the countryside is built on. Roughly 4% of the land of the Isle of Man is used for housing. Roughly 88% of the land of the Isle of Man is protected under biosphere care/core areas, and used for various "green" uses (farmland; forestry; parks; etc. etc.). The remaining 8% of the land of the Isle of Man is used for transport, commercial, government, recreational and industrial uses. It is, of course, important to have homes for cows and sheep on the Isle of Man. But it is also incredibly important to have homes for humans, and stopping the provision of homes for humans based on the false idea that so much of our land is built upon is immoral. There are more than enough homes - developers are controlling their own stock to THEIR advantage not to the advantage of the Manx FTB or any average buyer. You continually spout nonsense that because not all the green has been built on it's OK to keep building on it. Its absolutely NOT OK. Once OUR - not YOUR green fields have gone - they've gone. Please do not assume the position of being Manx nor assume to speak for all Manx people. If anything is immoral it is the practice adopted by developers ..which you should be familiar with. 5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopek Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 The problem with opposite Tesco is '[how to shore up' the riverbank and how to do it cheaply to not affect home prices???? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeCurious Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 On 2/16/2024 at 7:37 PM, Kopek said: The problem with opposite Tesco is '[how to shore up' the riverbank and how to do it cheaply to not affect home prices???? Doesn't seem to be a problem for a developer in Ramsey on the Sulby river. When they built Tescos, I beleive they had to make a concrete raft with dozens of individual piles to get a stable foundation. Heard the plans described as a hairbrush, there were that many. That's because, apparently, the land there is metres deep of silt and sediment before it gets to bedrock. But I could be wrong. As for shoring it up, they've done it at the NSC, basically an effing great concrete wall will do it. No doubt the developers will wait for the MUA to find a reason to do it for them. Lets hope it works out better than Laxey did. The problem is and has been for a while, (as Braddan have now admitted they will have to do) that the first budget to get cut is maintenance when money is tight. Often the bare minimum is not even achieved and eventually an ongoing problem (silting, bank erosion, overgrown banks blocking water courses) ends up being a crisis. As for preventative maintenance forget it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.