20 years of planning applications and work to restore historic Wexford building no nearer to completion

By Simon Bourke, Wexford People

The redevelopment of Strandfield Manor House in Wexford town has been left in limbo after neighbouring residents appealed the project to An Coimisiún Pleanála (ACP). The building, which is situated in the middle of the Strandfield Manor housing estate on Spawell Road, has been the subject of a number of planning applications over the past 18 years but has yet to be fully refurbished.

During that time builders have been frequently in and out of the estate, leading residents to submit complaints to Wexford County Council (WCC) regarding noise pollution, increased traffic, and unfinished landscaping.

Built in the 18th century, Strandfield Manor House has been renovated and repaired over the years but has lain idle while works to make it habitable have continued.

The most recent application for planning permission was submitted on December 31, 2024 by Best Brick Developments. It applied to Wexford County Council (WCC) to develop six apartments along with “associated site works” at Strandfield Manor House.

The six apartments, consisting of one four-bed, two three-beds, and three two-beds, were the subject of a number of objections from residents earlier this year with allegations made that the developer was not adhering to its own planning application. Further concerns regarding the construction of two patios outside the building, the number of proposed parking spaces in the plans, and the lack of refuse disposal facilities were raised in the initial objections in January and February of this year.

On February 21, director of services with WCC, Ms Liz Hore, requested that Best Brick submit further information prior to a decision being made on whether to grant planning permission or not. Among her requests was a “reduction in overall car parking provision within the site, with (the) space currently shown for parking being used for enhanced pedestrian access, landscaping/amenity space and cycle parking and refuse/recycling storage”.

In response, Best Brick revised its proposed site layout plan to “reduce the overall car parking provision within the site”.

"A total of 10 spaces are provided, eight spaces for the six apartments and two visitor spaces provided,” it continued. “The area released from car parking has been reallocated to provide enhanced pedestrian access routes, cycle parking facilities, and appropriate refuse/recycling storage areas.”

Ms Hore also stated that the proposed balconies to the northern side of the building be omitted as they “are not considered to be appropriate for the character of the building”.

Complying with this request, Best Brick submitted a revised floor plan, with the balconies omitted, to WCC.

With regards to the external patio area, Ms Hore advised that it be removed as it conflicts “with the proposed parking spaces”.

However, while Best Brick submitted a revised site layout plan, that plan did not include the removal of the patios.

“Following the reduction in car parking provision within the site, sufficient space has been provided to accommodate the patio without conflicting with the proposed car parking layout,” it said.

Having provided new designs for cycle parking and refuse/recycling storage structures and revised landscaping for the site, CDP Architecture, on behalf of Best Brick, submitted a supporting statement to WCC.

"The majority of items raised in third-party submissions are included . . . and have, therefore, been thoroughly reviewed and addressed in the updated submission,” it read. “Concerns relating to patio access and potential conflicts with car parking have been considered.

"The layout has been reviewed to ensure that access to patios is unobstructed and that car parking arrangements do not interfere with pedestrian circulation or residential amenities. A detailed landscape and boundary treatment plan has been provided as part of the application.

"Taking the accompanying information into consideration, on behalf of our client, we ask that Wexford County Council grant the applicant a certificate for the above proposal.”

And on June 4, WCC informed the developer that planning permission for the project had been granted, albeit with some conditions.

Among those conditions was an instruction that the development be constructed in a manner which “does not generate significant disamenity affecting neighbouring residents; does not cause undue obstructions of pedestrians including people with mobility impairments; (and) does not cause significant traffic hazards and significant loss of on-street parking.”

WCC also requested that cycle parking and refuse/recycling facilities be maintained in “good condition" and “in a manner which has regard to visual amenities and public health” and that “no further permanent structures shall be erected on the indicated patio areas or on the area to the front (southwestern) side of the site unless a planning permission for such has first been granted”.

Following WCC’s decision to grant planning permission, a resident of the neighbouring Strandfield Manor estate lodged an appeal to the national planning authority An Coimisiún Pleanála on June 26.

That appeal, which is set for decision in October, came on foot of a number of objections made to WCC from residents regarding the proposed works. Those objections centred around the patio areas and bin storage detailed in the design plans.

“The patios are open to becoming spaces for other structures i.e., sheds, storage units, washing lines or housing animals (and will) detract from visual appeal of the original facade of the Manor house,” read one objection.

On potential issues with refuse and waste collection, the resident said, “The storage area contradicts best practice in residential urban design where bin storage should be discreetly located, screened from public view, accessible to residents without undermining the character of open spaces.”

“The proposed positioning diminishes the front of the Manor House. (It is) unclear if it will meet hygiene, containment or aesthetic standards. It is unclear how residents are expected to transport bins to this area. (There is) no designated collection point for waste trucks is shown in a safe and accessible location.”

Another resident said the impending completion of this long-running project is “very welcomed” but that issues remained in the design, specifically with the patios.

“I object to the patios erected by the developer. These patios are oversized and out of character. This has changed the aesthetics of a historical building. These patios will inevitably lead to drying of clothes, storage/containers and noise pollution and will limit privacy for residents entering and leaving the house including the residents living directly above.

“Patios are placed at the rear of a home for a reason.”

They also had sanitary concerns relating to the positioning of the refuse bins.

“Given the number of rooms to each apartment, it is inevitable that refuse will build up very quickly. This can lead to rubbish overflow for public view. Having the bins in this location is an eyesore and should not be seen by the residents of the Manor house or as you enter and leave the building.

"These containers are best placed to the right side (when facing the house) or to the rear of the Manor House where refuse trucks have space to safely reverse. I would like to see our estate, which is of mixed tenure, left in a state that is pleasing for all residents. One we can be proud of and interested in its upkeep.”

Another objection contended that the existing patios had been constructed without planning permission “are unsightly” and not in “character” of a house of such historical importance.

“These patios should not be at the front of the house. Patios should be at the rear of a house. They take away the character and will be used for storage, washing lines etc which should be at the rear of the house.”

With a high metal fence constructed around the building for safety purposes, this objector had a suggestion to make the overall design a little less intimidating for those living to the rear of Strandfield Manor House.

“We would like to suggest if trees could be planted to try and disguise the ugly, huge prison like fence that has been erected to try and camouflage this eyesore?”

Best Brick Developments must now await An Coimisiún Pleanála’s decision before it can complete works at the site.