Owen Keegan questions suitability of build-to-rent for social housing

Large numbers of people on Dublin City Council’s social housing waiting list are due to be housed in build-to-rent (BTR) apartment blocks within the next two years, council figures show.

BTR schemes are fast becoming the "dominant source" of developer-provided social housing in the city, with levels expected to hit almost 80 per cent by 2024, council chief executive Owen Keegan said.

Mr Keegan said there was a “particular significant concern” about developers using BTR schemes to satisfy their obligation to provide social housing, because they did not have to comply with minimum sizes or provide any family homes.

Under Part V of the Planning Act, developers of schemes of four or more homes must agree to sell at least 10 per cent of homes to their local authority for social housing.

Developer Michael O’Flynn: ‘We have not accepted that there’s a housing crisis’

---

John FitzGerald: Pandemic savings have not yet hit house prices

---

Dublin is in the ha’penny place when it comes to rising property prices

---

Ukrainian refugee crisis could spur radical ideas on housing

---

In his response to submissions on the new city development plan, Mr Keegan said he was concerned about the suitability of BTR schemes for long-term homes for social housing tenants given they did not have to comply with minimum standards in relation to size and mix of apartments.

While local authorities and approved housing bodies were increasing their output of social housing “Part V will continue to be a significant provider in terms of meeting these particular housing needs”, Mr Keegan said.

“The data indicates that BTR has quickly become the dominant source for Part V provision from a zero base in 2016. It is projected that in 2024, BTR will result in the provision of nearly 80 per cent of overall Part V agreements in the city,” he said.

The council’s analysis of BTR applications since January 2018 showed “virtually no three-bed or family units have been proposed or permitted”. Figures show that of the BTR applications submitted to date, more than half (56.2 per cent) were for studio or one-bed apartments, a third were for two-bed apartments, just under 10 per cent were applications for the now defunct co-living scheme, and 2 per cent were for three-bed apartments.

‘Significant concerns’

This gave rise to “significant concerns regarding the suitability of such BTR units to meet the varied housing needs” of social housing tenants, Mr Keegan said, “including provision for universal design, specialist needs and the differing size and make-up of family units in the city and their use as a long-term form of housing for more vulnerable members of society”.

Mr Keegan is recommending councillors press ahead with restrictions on BTR schemes in the new development plan, in defiance of the State’s planning regulator, which said the curbs clashed with national policy. Provisions in the development plan would require 40 per cent of apartments in BTR schemes to be built to the same design criteria as standard apartments.

In a submission, deputy planning regulator Anne Marie O’Connor said there was “no national policy grounding in the Minister’s guidelines” for specifying “that 40 per cent of build-to-rent developments are to be of a different set of internal design standards”.