Derelict cottage options

westcoast66

Wonder if someone could give us some advice here. On part of a property we own (farm), there is a derelict cottage. Its been empty about 30 years and roof has caved in. The structure itself is dangerous.

We had a meeting with council (Wicklow) and asked about a rebuild. Their advice was basically, because it is derelict, it would be treated as a new planning application. This would be refused as we do not have a housing need.

Does anyone know or recommend what we could do with this building? It seems a total shame that all we can do is let it rot. There are number of other derelict buildings in the locality that seem to have met the same fate. Any ideas?

JimmyMW

westcoast66 wrote: »

Wonder if someone could give us some advice here. On part of a property we own (farm), there is a derelict cottage. Its been empty about 30 years and roof has caved in. The structure itself is dangerous.

We had a meeting with council (Wicklow) and asked about a rebuild. Their advice was basically, because it is derelict, it would be treated as a new planning application. This would be refused as we do not have a housing need.

Does anyone know or recommend what we could do with this building? It seems a total shame that all we can do is let it rot. There are number of other derelict buildings in the locality that seem to have met the same fate. Any ideas?

Did the planners also rule out a renovation of the existing structure? or was it a rebuild only they ruled out?

arctictree

JimmyMW wrote: »

Did the planners also rule out a renovation of the existing structure? or was it a rebuild only they ruled out?

Hi - we never mentioned renovation. To be honest, the existing structure is probably beyond repair. The gable ends are falling down and getting worse with each storm.

sydthebeat

JimmyMW wrote: »

Did the planners also rule out a renovation of the existing structure? or was it a rebuild only they ruled out?

if its derelict it has no planning status, so to use it again for anything it must get permission.

if you want to use it for a specific purpose you need to prove it has been used for that purpose within the previous 7 years (open to clarification on the length of time)

Miose

I'm very interested to read this. We have a cottage that was family owned but uninhabited for 40+ years. While it is uninhabited, structurally it would appear ok from the outside. I have always intended on doing it up and assumed I'd just have to apply for planning permission if intending to extend it. This changes everything. Could anyone point me to the regulations in this regard? Sorry for hijacking your thread OP. We are also in an area where housing need is a requirement and wouldn't meet that.

Metric Tensor

As syd says if it hasn't been lived in for X number of years it is not counted as a house and you technically need planning permission to re-inhabit it. This does not just apply to derelict houses btw!

I have to say that I thought it was either X=5 or X=10 that was the number but syd normally has his finger on the pulse so X=7.

I can't remember where I sourced the number the last time I needed it. If a bell rings for me I'll update the thread!

Bigus

In retrospect , maybe the op should have put some sort of a roof on it before the meeting with the planners ? Ie better to ask for forgiveness , rather then permission , however , with the low asking prices even for good properties in the bust it's understandable to have let sometime go.

TeaBagMania

What are your goals are you looking for a habitable residence?

If not could you not fix it slowly over time, maybe get the walls and gables fixed this year, a roof put on next, and doors and windows the year after. If nothing else it would be great for storage.

post up a few pics if you have them

Angry bird

Non habitable derelict structure in a dangerous condition. Any council will treat any effort to replace it as a new build as if it was never there as it is not a house anymore nor has it been for a long time and as you describe probably beyond saving. Don't try to fix it or rerooof it as you risk the planning enforcement section coming down on top of you. About the only think that it may be exempt from is to demolish it should the Council serve you with a dangerous structure notice.

For clarification repairing a wall and replacing slates on a roof can be exempt from planning. Where sections of a roof or a wall is gone as in this example, replacing them needs planning permission for it is not exempt. There are umpteen planning decisions and some court cases that have established this.

Angry bird

There's no hard and fast rule re length of time for a house to be considered derelict but having said that 5 years is the figure I've generally cone across as in provide proof that it's been used in the past 5 years. Reason being it's for a judge to determine in court on a case by case basis with the intention to abandon being the key. I've come across a case where an old house looked like it was derelict for 12 years but the applicant demonstrated that there had been efforts to evict squatters and that there had been no intention to abandon, something which our legal side agreed with and planning for a replacement house was granted on appeal to Bord Pleanala.

arctictree

Why are the councils so against restoring derelict properties? Surely, it's much better to do this than to build a bungalow on a green acre?

Chisler2

arctictree wrote: »

Why are the councils so against restoring derelict properties? Surely, it's much better to do this than to build a bungalow on a green acre?

Councils are not "against" bringing traditional (Irish vernacular) buildings back into use but the process of doing so is different to building a modern house.

From the original post it would seem that not only has the dwelling been neglected to the extent it has become a dangerous structure but that the owners do not fit Wicklow CoCo's criteria for housing need without which planning permission for a "rebuild" would not be given.

However bringing the building back into use could be effected by other, gentler, ways and means. In addition to local planning criteria there are also the agendas of The Heritage Council and Teagasc (download their "Traditional Buildings on Irish Farms" for their position). Your local Conservation Officer will be happy to give free advice. Increasing awareness of the beauty fitness-for-purpose-and place and embodiment of our cultural richness of these old dwellings and farm-buildings has revivified the conservation arena. As "links" are not allowed by Forum rules I can P.M. you contacts and information to get you started. Meanwhile set up a meeting with a Conservation Architect or building contractor with competence and experience in work on traditional buildings. Saving the dwelling may still be possible and I applaud your determination.

westcoast66

Metric Tensor wrote: »

As syd says if it hasn't been lived in for X number of years it is not counted as a house and you technically need planning permission to re-inhabit it. This does not just apply to derelict houses btw!

Are you sure its as simple as that? Surely just because a house has not been lived in does not change its planning status? I can think of a number of houses myself that have not been lived in for 10 years or more but the owners are just away. How does the council know how long a house has not been lived in for?

westcoast66

Angry bird wrote: »

Non habitable derelict structure in a dangerous condition. Any council will treat any effort to replace it as a new build as if it was never there as it is not a house anymore nor has it been for a long time and as you describe probably beyond saving. Don't try to fix it or rerooof it as you risk the planning enforcement section coming down on top of you. About the only think that it may be exempt from is to demolish it should the Council serve you with a dangerous structure notice.

I would be interested in knowing why councils take the above attitude? Surely any work to restore a building to its original use and save it from dereliction is a good thing?

westcoast66

TeaBagMania wrote: »

What are your goals are you looking for a habitable residence?

If not could you not fix it slowly over time, maybe get the walls and gables fixed this year, a roof put on next, and doors and windows the year after. If nothing else it would be great for storage.

post up a few pics if you have them

My goal is to restore the original farmhouse and use it for its original purpose ie a farmhouse. Council just seem to be totally opposed to the idea and are focused on the housing need rule.

Metric Tensor

If this is your family farm and you are farming it then you have a housing need - unless of course you already have a house.

If you already have a house on the farm then by restoring this house you would have two houses on the farm thereby potentially generating accommodation for someone who does not have a housing need in this area. If the council are restricting occupation to people with need the fabric of the rural area is probably at risk - so they are trying to protect your area and keep it rural.

If you really want to live in the house they might accept you proposing to knock your existing house and move into the newly renovated farm house.

arctictree

I notice that Wicklow co. co. have a draft development plan for 2016 - 2022 and there is a new section in it about derelict/abandoned buildings. See http://www.wicklow.ie/sites/default/files/Chapter%204%20-%20Housing.pdf, HD23 :

HD23
The conversion or reinstatement of non-residential or abandoned residential buildings back to residential use in the rural areas will be supported where the proposed development meets the following criteria:

• the original walls must be substantially intact – rebuilding of structures of a ruinous nature willnot be considered

• buildings must be of local, visual, architectural or historical interest
• buildings must be capable of undergoing conversion / rebuilding and their original appearance must be substantially retained. (A structural survey by a qualified engineer will be required with any planning application); and
• works must be executed in a sensitive manner and retain architecturally important features wherever possible and make us of traditional and complementary materials, techniques and specifications.

As far as I know, this was not there before so could be a new angle?

Shortgrass13

Metric Tensor wrote: »

As syd says if it hasn't been lived in for X number of years it is not counted as a house and you technically need planning permission to re-inhabit it. This does not just apply to derelict houses btw!

I have to say that I thought it was either X=5 or X=10 that was the number but syd normally has his finger on the pulse so X=7.

I can't remember where I sourced the number the last time I needed it. If a bell rings for me I'll update the thread!

Not always the case some local authorities relax the rural housing policy and actively encourage renovation if in keeping with the character of the structure.