Ireland
UK
Scotland
London
The decision by Dublin City Council to grant full planning permission for the redevelopment of a former Section 23 apartment block into an office block creates a worrying and unsettling precedent for other Section 23 areas, according to Labour Deputy for Dublin South Central Mary Upton.
Dublin City Council granted planning permission on March 12 for a five-storey apartment block in the inner city to be demolished and replaced with a six-storey office block on the corner of Island Street and Watling Street, Dublin 8.
Ms Upton said the decision was granted contrary to the serious concerns of local residents who lodged 39 objections to the redevelopment.
She said: "Despite this local opposition Dublin City Council have chosen to grant full planning permission for the redevelopment with only small modifications.
"There is a very serious issue raised by this decision. What now is the future for Section 23 developments? The Section 23 scheme was designed to offer tax relief for rented residential developments in certain designated areas, such as the South West Inner City."
She added: "The tax relief expires on July 31st 2008. This apartment development was only built 10 years ago. It appears that since the Section 23 relief will now expire the developer wants to demolish these apartments."
Deputy Upton has said that this sets a worrying precedent for other section 23 areas as developers who notice that the relief has expired may now apply to knock down other Section 23 residential developments and replace them with offices, retail or commercial uses.
"There are plenty of other sites surrounding this particular development which could be redeveloped and it makes no sense to tear down an apartment block which is only 10 years old."
Deputy Upton concluded: "I am also concerned that the resident's wishes appear to have been disregarded on this issue. I have no doubt that this decision will be appealed to An Bord Pleanála by local residents, but Dublin City Council should take more heed of local resident's concerns on this issue."
(VB/JM)
