77 social housing units planned for Castlebar as councillors demand affordable homes amid ‘chronic’ need in Mayo
A 64-unit social housing development planned for Lawn Road in Castlebar has been broadly welcomed by councillors, but the proposal sparked a debate over the absence of any affordable housing within the scheme.
The issue of affordability dominated discussions at the Castlebar Municipal District meeting, with several members warning that there is a growing cohort of working individuals and families who do not qualify for social housing, but cannot afford to buy on the open market.
Members pointed to a previous housing development in Westport where a number of social units were later converted to affordable homes, and questioned if a similar approach could be taken in Castlebar without delaying the planning process.
The Lawn Road proposal consists of 64-units, including a terraced mix of 18 one-bedroom apartments, 30 three-storey townhouses, four two-storey houses and 12 duplex apartments.
Combined with a separate Part Eight approved at the meeting, which will see four derelict units on Ellison Street demolished to make way for 13 new homes, a total of 77-social housing units are now planned for Castlebar.
Cllr Donna Sheridan said that while she welcomed the project, it failed to address what she described as a significant gap in the housing system.
“We have to start looking at affordable housing, there is a major gap there for the workers who need somewhere to live in this town too,” said Cllr Sheridan.
“Between [those eligible for] social housing and those who can afford a mortgage there is a big gap, and we are not addressing it,
“While I welcome it, and we do need as many social houses as we can get, we also need affordable. We need to start including affordable housing in all of our developments,” she added.
Cllr Harry Barrett supported Cllr Sheridan’s remarks, saying the need for affordable housing in Mayo is “chronic”.
“Affordability is the key word now and making sure working couples in this town and this county have somewhere to live,” he said.
Cllr Michael Kilcoyne echoed those concerns and proposed an amendment to the Part Eight that would see at least 10 of the units allocated as affordable rather than social housing.
We need to start including affordable housing in all of our developments
“The number of people out there who can apply for [social] houses is dropping all the time,” he said. “Most people finding themselves in difficulty at the moment are those who are over the wage threshold - they can’t qualify for social housing.”
Cllr Blackie Gavin supported the proposed amendment.
However, Cllr Cyril Burke warned that altering the Part Eight at this stage could delay the planning process, as the proposal would have to return to the Department of Housing for approval before coming back before the Municipal District.
Head of the Castlebar Municipal District David Mellett reminded councillors that the Part Eight process was “solely a planning matter” relating to the design, layout, height, density and environmental impact of the 64-unit development, and not the tenure mix.
“The proposed amendment relating to the tenure mix is a housing policy that would be outside of this planning consideration,” he explained.
Cllr Kilcoyne pointed to a precedent set in Westport and Belmullet Municipal District, where councillors amended a development on Golf Course Road.
What had originally been a 55-unit social housing scheme ultimately became a 50-unit development, with five affordable homes placed on the market for first-time buyers.
Mayo County Council architect Matt Stevens said that, in the Westport case, it had been a “long and onerous” process to flip five social units into affordable ones.
He explained that affordable and social housing are generally handled by different divisions within the Department of Housing, and that amending the Part Eight would require resubmission and another vote.
Let's get the planning through first then fight the battle to get affordable units
Mr Stevens said the council were currently looking at two sites for affordable housing. Noting this potential development was at an early stage, he said that one site involved 15 affordable units and the other 35.
Cllr Ger Deere urged members to approve the Part Eight as presented and make the case for affordable housing during subsequent stages of the project.
“Let's get the planning through first then fight the battle to get affordable units,” he said.
Mr Stevens acknowledged there was “merit” in that approach, noting that this was effectively what occurred in Westport.
Although it proved to be a “pain in the neck”, councillors there made their case after Part Eight approval, and succeeded in changing five units to affordable housing.
Mr Mellet confirmed that the switch in Westport occurred during subsequent phases of the project.
“If it can be done in Westport it can be done in Castlebar,” Cllr Barrett said. “Let's proceed and then make the case [for affordable units] as we go along.”
Before the vote, Cathaoirleach Al McDonnell sought clarification that approving the proposal as presented would not permanently rule out the possibility of converting 10 units to affordable housing at a later stage.
Mr Stevens confirmed that there would be room for negotiation, citing the Westport example.
“There is a bureaucratic process involved, but it can be done,” he said.
Councillors subsequently voted against Cllr Kilcoyne’s amendment, over fears it would ultimately delay the project, and approved the Part Eight as presented.
Members agreed they would now work to ensure that at least 10 of the units could ultimately be earmarked for affordable housing.
This article has been funded by the Local Democracy Reporting Scheme.