Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 17 May 2017

Vol. 951 No. 1

Urban Regeneration and Housing (Amendment) Bill 2017: First Stage

I move:

That leave be granted to introduce a Bill entitled an Act to amend the Urban Regeneration and Housing Act 2015 to remove certain exemptions applying to the vacant site levy, to raise the rate applying the longer a site remains vacant, and to require the zoning and area of the site to be published on the vacant site register.

I believe it is fair to say that we are living in the middle of a housing emergency. Some 7,500 people currently live in emergency accommodation. One in every three homeless persons is a child. Rents are at record levels. Home ownership is beyond the reach of many on average incomes. At the very heart of these problems is the availability and cost of land. The high cost of land in Ireland drives costs of rents, business leases, house prices and infrastructure investment. High land prices encourage speculation and land hoarding. In turn, these practices lead to excessive land vacancy, inefficient land use, dereliction and problematic sites that often invite anti-social behaviour.

Yet, the political and administrative institutions of our country remain largely passive on this key issue. The Urban Regeneration and Housing Act 2015 introduced a vacant site levy but left us with several loopholes and allowed for very slow implementation. This Bill seeks to amend the 2015 Act. Its central aim is to make more land available so that more housing can be developed and so the cost of land and housing can be moderated. It has four main purposes.

It seeks to apply the vacant site levy to all lands that can potentially accommodate housing within existing development standards. The current Act sets a limit of 0.05 ha or 500 sq. m, meaning the levy cannot be applied to vacant sites smaller than this. Therefore, there is no activation of these sites. They are not considered a priority. This excludes many sites that could readily accommodate residential units. Some 174 sites were excluded from the Dublin City Council vacant site register on this basis alone. The new provision would allow the levy to be applied to sites of an area that, in the opinion of the planning authority, could accommodate housing units and still meet development standards.

The second provision is to ensure the rate of the levy will be increased the longer the site remains vacant. Currently, the 3% levy applies, regardless of how long a site has been vacant. However, this will not deal with landowners who are hoarding or speculating if the rate of land price inflation is high. There will be very little incentive for such landowners to sell or develop the site in question. We propose that the levy be increased by one percentage point for every full year a site remains on the register. In this way, the longer it remains vacant, the larger the levy that will apply. It will create a significant incentive for the owner to activate it.

The third provision is to remove the lower rates of levy applying to sites with outstanding loans. In the bands set down by the 2015 Act the higher the loan attached to a vacant site the lower the levy that applies. We believe this provision invites deliberate manipulation of the legislation, incentivises debt and excludes a significant number of sites from the scope of the Act. It unfairly prioritises the rights of the landowner over the public good. We, therefore, propose to repeal these provisions.

The final provision is to require the zoning and area of each site to be published on the vacant site register. This will provide better information and for greater transparency and improve the usability of the register.

The Government must take several measures to deal with the critical housing shortage. It should be much more active on over-the-shop premises, vacant housing, derelict sites and underused housing. The Bill is just one measure the Social Democrats proposes to deal with the crisis. We commend the Bill to the House and would be grateful to receive the support of Deputies on all sides.

Is the Bill being opposed?

Question put and agreed to.

Since this is a Private Members' Bill, Second Stage must, under Standing Orders, be taken in Private Members' time.

I move: "That the Bill be taken in Private Members' time."

Question put and agreed to.
Barr
Roinn