wexfordplanner
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
From my research I have found that a fairly high percentage of derelicts are not reusable. This due mainly to planning reasons. Road issues and parking seem to be the biggest problem area. Some houses are on regional roas and wouldnt have a hope of getting PP and others are located down long winding dirt lanes.
In terms of condition, Im of the opinion that most derelicts could successfully be renovated. It really depends on the deep pockets and determination of the owner. However, it seems to me that the public have no appreciation of the value of derelict dwellings and that is why they remain largely un-used.
Pureeire, are you aware of any classification system that has been used to ‘classify’ (!!!) derelicts? ie derlelict….ruinous… Im finding it hard to come up with one myself.
Pureeire, just wondering what you classify as derelict? A ruin with not much more than walls? A house without a roof? Or just a dwelling which is in fairly good condition but hasnt been lived in for awhile?
The issue of contributions is extremely ‘hazy’ to say the least!!. All funds are supposed to go into an account with will be used by the LA to provide S&Aff housing elsewhere in their area. However, no studies / reports have been conducted on where the money is going, how much money there is available etc etc… This is one of the major flaws of Part V as it currently operates.
From the research I have conducted so far there seems to be a number of stumbling blocks that have the potential of making any initiatives almost impossible to implement. Firstly, the owners of derelict properties are proving very hard to locate. Owners die and dwellings are inherited but tracking down these people is hard work. With the state of the land registry in Ireland, this could take months. Secondly, even with the attraction of incentives, owners are reluctant to re-use or even sell. This due to the planning red tape and the perceived costs of restoration.
In terms of incentives, the Rural Renewal Scheme is currently in operation in the BMW region and gives tax relief to owner occupied and rented dwellings. However, the aim of the scheme is to renew rural areas through re-population etc and the restoration of derelict dwellings is just a part of this. Other incentives have been applied in the UK to an urban context through the Empty Property Scheme, which with some modification, could be used in rural areas also. I think the grants which you refer to are mainly for Georgian Housing and Protected Structures, it is doubtful that any rural derelict houses would qualify under these schemes??
In my opinion a reworking of Part V is the most sensible and practical option. Housing strategies are predominantly focused on urban areas and completely overlook the rural issue – affordable, social and derelict housing.
Honeyhive, the developers of the sites you mentioned may have been requested by DCC to pay a contribution instead of handing over the 20%. This is the most common way of complying with Part V. For example, between January and June 2004 there were only 1,438 S&Aff units proposed in the country. DCC, Fingal and South Dublin account for the vast majority of these with Wexford, D/L Rath and Donegal Co Co amounting to 0. So just because schemes are being built doesnt mean that they will all have 20% S&A housing.
To be honest im not sure, but I couldnt see too much of a problem in getting one, Freedom of information and all that…..
The planners wont receive the objection straight away. It could have been loged and still in admin when you rang? The regs are strict in this regard so I doubt very much that there is anything underhanded going on.
Is he currently in the process of writing a new book?
Does anybody have any details on expected release date?
The LUAS EIS (1998?) shows the exact route of the line and more detailed information. I know its available from the Planning / Architecture Library in UCD.
A reoccurring point that is made on many of these treads is trying to develop Dublin more like other European cities (I presume the likes of Barcelona, Helsinki, Amsterdam etc).With the paving, new lights etc recently installed along O’Connell Street you could be in any city in Europe, (apart of course from the weather, shop signs etc..). This is a feature of the vast majority of new urban regeneration schemes both here and abroad. For the main street of our country, could our urban designers and planners not have done some thinking before jumping straight in? Maybe a more imaginative design where the culture, history and traditions of the State were taken into account would have been more appropriate and not just the mindless following of European planners in a place where these designs do actually work? What is on the ground, at the moment at least, is dull, lifeless and has little sense of place.
Sinead and Devin, in defence of PVC King, I did get a lengthy and very helpful reply by email to the ideas that were posted above.
WexfordPlanner
Thanks for all the helpful replies.
I was wondering what people would think of a possible re-working of the Part 5 Social / Affordable Housing. As this currently really only applies to urban projects / zoned land, could a new section be added to local authorities Housing Strategy about restoring derelict dwellings. Instead of giving 20% or a financial contribution, is it posible to give developers another option, to restore derelict rural dwellings instead. This would not only contribute to the housing supply in rural areas, but would also clear eyesores, protect our built heritage and would enable developers to make a true contribution to the housing supply in this country? A booklet could be produced for each LA with details of derelict dwellings such as owners, things to be protected, projected costs etc….., to make the process a bit easier.
What do people think? Would this work?
