color

This study has been prepared by Glenveagh Homes to examine how other ‘best practice’ development standards compare to the Irish development standards with regard to sustainable compact growth.

Applying a Qualitative rather than Quantitative Approach:

The strategy is focused on qualitative measures to create developments (that engender a positive sense of place and that will cater for the full demographic) that people of all demographics want to live and engendering a positive sense of place and community.

This is central to resolving the housing shortage. The study undertaken seeks to maximise an affordable product, which is desirable to the consumer.

Achieve compact growth by providing sustainable own-door housing at appropriate densities.

Green 4

Our Strategy

Alignment with the Government objectives:

Housing for all is the government's overarching housing delivery objective, which is about pathways to a better future that draws a comprehensive approach together.

“Everyone in the State should have access to a home to purchase or rent at an affordable price, built to a high standard and in the right place, offering a high quality of life”.

This landing page has been compiled on the back of the Government's objectives to prepare new compact growth design guidelines, which will aim to address:

Increasing both housing supply and affordability.

Alignment with Government objectives

Current challenges for delivering compact growth:

The prohibitive cost resulting in planned schemes not commencing

Viability 

There are only a few developers who are self-delivering apartments

Complexity 

4-5 x more for apartments given the duration of construction and risk profile

Finance Costs

No appetite for owner-occupied apartments outside of M50 (and limited within M50)

Consumer Preferences

Apartments/duplexes raise the minimum required prices across the entire development

Affordability

Apartments/duplexes are reliant on a management company, resulting in an obligation to pay annual management fees

Management Company

Note 1: Section 28 ministerial guidelines reference an optimum density between 35 – 50 UPH

Key Challenges

Here we illustrate with a working example the constraints that exist when applying the current development standards. On the basis that Section 28 guidelines reference an optimum density between 35 – 50 UPH, we utilised a baseline density of 40 UPH.

We also aligned public open space provision with current standards (set at 15% of the overall site area) and applied the rigid and prescriptive min area standards (≥ 500 sqm).

Text & Image

The scheme is reliant on the introduction of a more urban product. 45% of the total units consist of apartments and duplexes.

The main challenge: Outside of the M50, there is little/no appetite for owner-occupied apartments.

45% of the units have reduced private amenities between 5 sqm and 7 sqm (which is unsuitable for family living).

The Public Open Space allocation lacks functionality and integration within the scheme.

The Public Open Space provision only caters for a small % of the demographic.

The Positives of Compact Growth

Group of houses

Limit urban sprawl and maximise land efficiency 


Bank

Trees and road

Promotes more sustainable modes of public transport 


Train

Hands interlinking

Creating safer environments through increased passive surveillance 

Providing a more diverse hierarchy of public amenities

Key Solutions

Reframe from current rigid and prescriptive standards

Apply a Qualitative Approach vs a Quantitative Approach

Apply a 40 sqm min private open space standard 

Re-thinking and optimising Private Open Space

Align separation distance with UK best practice standards and as per the positive application of DMURS in relation to front facade separations distances

Reconsidering our approach to Separation Distance

Apply a qualitative approach to public open space centred around accessibility, functionality and variety

Re-Imagine the function of Public Open Space

Note: There may be a misconception that what we are proposing is an ‘over-haul’ of development standards, where in fact we a proposing 3 simple tasks that have already been implemented to date in Ireland. We are proposing no changes to the current minimum unit area requirements and are also ensuring there is sufficient provision for amenities such as car parking, bin stores, bike stores etc.

Re-Imaging the Function of Public Open Space

The traditional public open space provision consists of a single large space, catering for all units in the scheme.

These spaces lack function and are often desolate and underutilised most of the year. Many of the units are also situated a considerable distance from the open space.

These spaces also only cater for a very small percentage of the demographic within the scheme.

Re-imaging the function Public Open Space

Apply qualitative standards to public open space centred around accessibility, functionality and surveillance, a stronger relationship between public and private will prevail:

Apply min 10% open space for every scheme 

Spaces made up of higher quality and higher functioning spaces

 Spaces made up of varying spaces suited for all demographics, fostering a sense of community.

Spaces that can be utilised all year round.

Spaces are evenly distributed around the scheme.

Proposed Solution: 

Re-thinking and Optimising Private Open Space

Propose a holistic and balanced approach to scheme private amenities.

Providing sufficient provision for private open space, with future adaptability considered.

All dwellings have a minimum private amenity allocation of 40 sqm.

Proposed solution: holistic 

By ensuring all units receive at least 40 sqm of private open space at 40UPH, there is a 25% increase in the overall scheme private amenity allocation when compared to the current layout on module 3.

Currently, to achieve the min density requirements, typically a suburban scheme would require circa 45% of the units to be apartments and duplex units, which offer a reduced private amenity area in the form of a balcony between 5 sqm and 7 sqm. Arguably this is unsuitable for family living and there is no scope to extend or adapt your home to suit your ever-changing lifestyle needs.

This increase in overall private amenities typically results in more soft landscaping, which provides for more natural drainage to alleviate/improve mitigation against flooding risk (hardscape vs. soft landscape ratio reduced).

Proposed solution: Holistic

Reconsidering our Approach to Separation Distance 

The origins of the 22m separation distance date back to the 1900s to mitigate against environmental issues associated with outdoor toilets and outbuildings, separation distances were increased to 22m.

It was also common that people grew their own produce, therefore there was a spatial requirement to facilitate a growing area within the back garden.

A lot of these standards were defined within the “homes fit for heroes” Tudor Walters Report (1918).

Apply a separation distance of distance to 16m, which aligns with best practice standards in Europe and the UK.

These same separation distances are promoted within the DMURS manual with regard to front façade setbacks.

Current Situation

Something for Everyone

Here we demonstrate that as an industry we must also consider providing `lifecycle' schemes that cater for the entire demographic.

We want to acknowledge that by creating a product offering for first-time buyers through to downsizers, we are freeing up more under-utilised family homes, which will contribute to solving the current housing crisis.

As an industry, we need to provide scheme solutions that cater for everyone, allowing them the option to stay within the one community all their lives and create those roots where they will know all their neighbours and can stay close to family.

Something for everyone 

Proposed Solution

Here we put into practice the key solutions we have identified and illustrate via this working example, the benefits of the ‘New Approach’ and how this proposal compares to the scheme designed for the current development standards. For this example, we utilised the same site layout/area as per the previous scenario within the current compliant layout (scheme designed to current development standards). 

Optimised private open space, ensuring at least 40 sqm is provided per dwelling.

Applied a min 10% POS baseline (a quantum already permitted in some county development plans).

Applied a relaxation to the current rigid POS min area requirements, rather than focusing on a more holistic approach ensuring these spaces cater for the entire demographic.

Results

Achieve a 40 UPH density with all own-door housing. 

Provides a more desirable and affordable product for the consumer.

All dwellings have a min private amenity allocation of 40sqm. 

We cater for every consumer group from first-time buyers to downsizers.

Public Open Space is more evenly distributed around the site. Accessible to all units.

Provides a higher quality and higher functioning Public Open Space provision that can be utilised all year round.

We focused on diversity, ensuring the Public Open Space is made up of varying spaces suited for all demographics.

Sustainability Benefits

We appointed a third-party expert to undertake a high-level carbon comparison between the two 40 UPH schemes:

Scheme 1: Designed to current development standards

Scheme 2: Designed to incorporate the new standards proposed by Glenveagh

The two options were also evaluated for wider sustainability benefits beyond carbon, such as climate adaptation, biodiversity, health and well-being, as well as community connections and place-making.

There is a significant reduction in both the embodied and whole-life carbon emissions associated with the ‘proposed’ development – a key consideration in Ireland’s transition to a net-zero carbon future.

In addition, the proposed increase in the quality of open space will positively impact short and long-term climate change resilience, biodiversity and the health and well-being of residents.

The absolute emissions do not reflect the same percentage reduction in carbon as per the m2 rate solely due to the increase in overall residential GIA between the two schemes (the proposed scheme is more generous in overall residential GIA by 5%).

Potential PV energy generation: Own-door housing units provide a larger roof area per m2 of GIA compared to apartment buildings. The proposed approach, therefore, has a larger area for PV roof installation and renewable energy generation is increased by +21% compared to the current approach. Half of the site's electricity demand can be supplied by renewables in the proposed approach.

Key Attractions & Affordability

Higher-quality, more sustainable schemes.

Replacement of apartments and duplex apartments with own-door housing.

Improving access to housing and affordability.

Cost saving of €802 /20% per sqm blended across the entire development.

Greater demand from end-users: owner-occupiers and renters.

Text and Image 1 

Implied purchase price reduction of €60,705.

Implied monthly rent cost reduction of €568 (ex. Cost rental).

Text and Image 2

Greater Tenure Mix Flexibility With No Multi-Family Units

Apartments are not viable for private buyers resulting in at least 40% build-torent on traditional developments.

The lower price per unit gives the option to create a greater weighting towards owner-occupiers.

Furthermore, occupants' quality of life regardless of tenure is greatly enhanced by the more even distribution of private open space.