Reply - Q11 Social and Affordable Housing

COMHAIRLE CHONTAE ÁTHA CLIATH THEAS
SOUTH DUBLIN COUNTY COUNCIL

South Dublin County Council Crest

MEETING OF COUNTY COUNCIL

Monday, March 13, 2006

QUESTION No. 11

QUESTION: Cllr. Robert Dowds

To ask the Manager whether or not builders/ developers have successfully traded the location of social/ affordable housing intended for an affluent area to a poorer area and, if so, could he list all the examples where this has happened?

REPLY

The Council's Housing Strategy, which was prepared in accordance with Part V of the Planning & Development Act 2000, was adopted by the Council at its meeting held on 11th June, 2001. This Strategy was reviewed and now forms an integral part of the County Development Plan 2004- 2010, which was adopted by the Council on 10th November 2004.

The strategy requires 15% of all new residential developments to be reserved for Social/Affordable housing purposes.

The Planning and Development Act 2000 as amended by the Act of 2002,provided the following options and flexibility for securing compliance with the requirements of Part V set out as follows in par 2.3 of the guidelines issued by the Department of the Environment, Heritage & Local Government August 2003:

The transfer to the planning authority of other land within its functional area;
The provision of new units for the planning authority on other lands within its functional area;
The transfer of fully or partialy serviced sites to the planning authority on other lands within its functional area;
The transfer of new housing or fully or partially serviced sites to an approved housing body or other nominated persons;
The payment to the planning authority of a sum of money in liew of land, new units or sites which must be used for the provision of social and affordable housing; or
A combination of any of the above.

A planning authority may also sell, lease or exchange any land within its possesion if necessary for the purposes of an overall agreement.

The changes made to Part V concern delivery of housing more quickly and more efficiently. Draft guidelines and guidelines issued by the Department of the Environment , Heritage & Local Govenment in April and August 2003 respectively, advise that priority has to be given in negotiations to the provision of housing units, rather than the payment of money.

It is this Council's preferred option to acquire units on site and it would only be in exceptional circumstances that a financial contribution would be considered. In a small number of cases, due to particular circumstances, off site provision would be considered. The Council is always mindful in its negotiations with developers of promoting and advancing social inclusion and of acquiring units at an affordable price for eligible applicants on the Affordable Housing List. The affluence or otherwise of an area has no bearing on the negotiation or the decision.

In negotiating agreements under Part V units have been acquired off site in two developments to date:

There have been on-going discussions regarding the concerns of residents in the immediatevicinity of Springfield ,Tallaght regarding the large number of rented dwellings. concerns were expressed that privater housing at the location would result in a further increase of rented dwellings. With this in mind, there was a strong case to support owner occupied dwellings in the area and reduce the overall transient nature which had developed. The only way to secure this arrangements was to have the housing as 'affordable' and with the support of the local residents and the elected members, it was agreed that 40 affordable residential dwellings be acquired to partially satisfy a developer's Part V requirement for a development on Stocking Lane. in the interest of a sustainable and a balanced community, at Springfield.

An off site agreeement was made in relation to a small development at Castlefield Knocklyon to provide the 15% requirement at Esker, Lucan as part of an overall agreement delivering 17 units in Esker, Lucan at affordable prices for purchase by eligible applicants. The design and scale of the particular development meant that it was neither practical or possible to secure the one affordable unit in the Castlefield development.