*Lus na Sli.
CLARE COUNTY COUNCIL have confirmed they are not the registered owners of green areas in the Lus na Si housing estate in Miltown Malbay.
Many hurdles delayed the construction and completion of the thirty four house social housing scheme which had an initial contract value of €4,099,752 in 2010, including the developer entering liquidation plus building subcontractors and suppliers mounting a blockage restricting access to the site in November 2010 as part of a protest over unpaid labour and materials.
Lus na Si was back in throes of debate among county councillors in recent weeks when both Cllr Bill Slattery (FG) and Cllr Joe Garrihy (FG) raised the matter. “On behalf of the residents of Lus Na Si estate on the Mullagh road Miltown Malbay, I wish to seek clarification and confirmation if the green area and other lands in the estate are in full ownership of Clare County Council (Leases etc). Who is responsible for grass cutting, management and maintenance and are there plans for further developments to take place on the excess green area of the estate,” Slattery questioned.
Engagement between all stakeholders and the community of Miltown Malbay was sought by Cllr Garrihy “for the purpose of developing public amenities, car parking and enhancement at the vacant site entering Lus Na Si homes Mullagh Road. Enhancement and development of this site has the potential to add significant value to the surrounding area including immediate adjoining homes and St Joseph’s Miltown Malbay National school”.
Acting senior executive officer in the West Clare Municipal District, John Corry confirmed that the green areas in the estate are not in the ownership of Clare County Council. He stated, “accordingly therefore Clare County Council is not responsible for the grass cutting, management and maintenance of this area. The West Clare MD can engage with the landowners and local stakeholders to investigate the potential for development of these lands , which are zoned Community (1) & Open Space (2) in the current Clare County Development Plan 2023-2029”.
When canvassing the area prior to the local elections in June, Cllr Slattery recalled that there was a woman trying to push a lawnmower “through a meadow” of green grass adjacent to the estate attempting to cut “a massive amount of grass”. He added, “residents say a hole has been left in the ground by a group or certain individuals”.
Lahinch based Slattery said a community centre project was proposed for the area in 2006 with a working group of 54 people established leading to the purchase of the site, completion of a feasibility study which calculated an estimated cost of €1.5m but the project fell through. “Who are the stakeholders? If Clare County Council don’t own it, who does? I can’t understand how Clare County Council would purchase ground and leave the rest for something else. Who is responsible that I can go to on who will maintain this piece of ground,” he asked.
“There is something disingenuous to say the Council developed the social houses and left areas undefined, the lands identified on piece two are logically the open space for the estate and we’re saying it has nothing to do with us, there are really good residents there who are fed up of trying to cut this grass on a voluntary basis,” observed Cllr Shane Talty (FF).
Facts on the ground need to be established, Cllr Garrihy insisted. “It is an opportunity for a win win, deal with the issues outlined on management and maintenance and at the same time add to the investment already made, €350,000 has already raised by the community for the school project where parking is already needed”. He continued, “There is a real opportunity there to deal with a lot of issues and at the same bring about a lot of benefit”.
Similar problems existed in Kilrush where land was owned by a semi-state company, Cllr Ian Lynch (IND) recalled. “How does it fare out when residents go in there, I thought we could go through Carmel Greene (property management department) to force their hand but she has no authority”. He suggested charging a commercial rate for the lack of maintenance, “surely we have a role in forcing their hand, at the minute people can walk away and leave it overgrown”.
Addressing the meeting, Corry said he agreed with the sentiment raised by both councillors who tabled motions. “There are GDPR implications so I can’t say who owns the site. We have an appetite to engage with the local community group to look at the potential for enhancing that area, it is zoned with two different zonings on the site, we will certainly come to the table and engage with the local community group.”.
When questioned by Cllr Slattery on whether both sites were registered to the same group, Corry confirmed they were and that they were registered in the land registry office.
