AN BINSE LUACHÁLA
VALUATION TRIBUNAL
AN tACHT UM LAITHREAIN TREIGHTE, 1990
DERELICT SITES ACT, 1990

Joseph O'Toole Esq APPELLANT
and
Galway County Council RESPONDENT

RE: Derelict Site at Bishop Street, Tuam (Demesne Townland), Owner: Joseph O'Toole, Co. Galway
Market Value

B E F O R E
Paul Butler S.C. (Acting Chairman)
Padraig Connellan Solicitor
Veronica Gates Barrister

JUDGMENT OF THE VALUATION TRIBUNAL
ISSUED ON THE 2ND DAY OF APRIL, 1992

By notice of appeal dated 31st day of July, 1991, the appellant appealed against the determination of Galway County Council in fixing a market value under Section 22 of the Derelict Sites Act, 1990 of £20,000 on the above described site.

The grounds of appeal as set out in the Notice of Appeal, received on behalf of the appellant, from Mr. Paul O'Grady, Civil Engineering Survey Services, Engineers/Architects/Surveyors of Tuam, Co. Galway was that the valuation is exceptionally low and would not bear examination in relation to similar properties in the general area. Mr. O'Grady pointed out that there are tenants subletting some of the buildings thereon and there is also a very large and secure yard very close to the town centre of the Town of Tuam with good access. He said the yard is very secure and there are a number of other out buildings and lean-to's together with derelict cottages thereon. Mr. O'Grady said that quite apart from its current use, the property has undoubted development potential and has all services immediately adjacent to the site. He put forward a valuation closer to £50,000 as being appropriate.

In reply to a letter from the Tribunal Galway County Council replied on the 6th September, 1991 confirming that;-
(1) The appeal is on foot of a valuation determined by Galway County Council, notification of which issued on the 8th July, 1991.
(2) That the site is described as "derelict old store".
(3) That the Market Value has been determined at £20,000.
(4) That the local authority is not aware of any other person effected by the determination and
(5) Stating that in their opinion there is no reason why the appeal should not be accepted as a valid appeal.

In a further letter dated the 27th November, 1991 Galway County Council confirmed that they would be entering an appearance at the hearing of the appeal and that the grounds on which they intended to rely is that the valuation placed on the site is a market value of the property as required under Section 22 of the Derelict Sites Act, 1990.

ORAL HEARING
At the oral hearing which took place on the 17th December, 1991 in Galway Mr. Paul O'Grady, B.A, M.S.E, LL.B, M.I.A.V.I. represented the Appellant. Mr. Thomas O'Donoghue, Solicitor, Galway County Council and Mr. Martin Tyrrell, Valuer appeared on behalf of the Respondent.

In opening his case Mr. O'Grady said that because this legislation is so recent he had reflected on the ramifications of market value as determined by the Tribunal and the purposes for which this might be used. He said that, considering that, there are sitting tenants who have built business entities in the site, who pay a very small rent and who cannot be moved, he was now changing his point of view and putting forward a much lower valuation based on the fact that his client can never totally occupy the site. He said that he now proposed a valuation for the site of £10,000. He said that the site in question was a portion of a much larger purchase that his clients made many years ago. He said that the subject site is composed of the entrance to all the lands to the immediate west of the site, which he said could potentially be termed building land at some foreseeable future but that the appellant inherited a coal distributor who has been there for 25 years who occupies all of the left hand side of the subject property including derelict sheds. He submitted a map of the site to the Tribunal and outlined the property occupied by the coal merchant, Mr. Patrick Raferty. He said that not all of the sheds are derelict, some are semi-derelict, but that the type of business carried out by Mr. Raferty which is coal, briquettes and turf does not require sheds of great quality. He also referred to cottages on the right hand side which are now derelict but, he said, up to five years ago were occupied by two families. He said that while they are not now in occupation they have never vacated the property to the satisfaction of his client. Mr. O'Grady said that he would argue in favour of the higher valuation if the site was clear with no sitting tenancies but that as the property now stands he could not value his clients interest as any more than £10,000. Mr. O'Grady said that in his opinion property values in Tuam went down slightly in 1988, he said that 1989 was slightly better.

Under cross examination from Mr. O'Donoghue, Mr. O'Grady said that there were no written agreements for any of the sub-lettings and that his client purchased the site with the sitting tenants thereon. He agreed with Mr. O'Donoghue that the houses are now uninhabited and are in total ruin. However, he said that there is a lock on one of the doors the key of which is kept by one of the sons of the previous tenants. He accepted that an inspection of the houses would show total dereliction. He said that Mr. Raferty, the Coal Merchant does not need sheds to carry out his business and that in some cases they are a nuisance to him. He said that Mr. Raferty has three trucks and has four or five employees working full-time in the yard. He agreed with Mr. O'Donoghue that the subject site is situate less than a quarter of a mile from the square and indeed probably only 300 metres from the Town Centre with what he described as a very effective housing estate to the North, a river to the back of it and a large municipal park known as the Palace Grounds. He also agreed that it would be a very desirable area to build and have residences, flats or small houses. Mr. O'Grady said that it was his clients intention to develop this area but that proper access through the subject site was required. He said that the major drawbacks to development are the sitting tenancies and the fact that there is also a partially constructed development which has been in dispute with the County Council for 20 years. He said that his client has only the right to drive over that site to get to his other lands and that he cannot enjoy any kind of possession of the lands until the matter of the tenancies are sorted out. Mr. O'Donoghue said that the County Council valuer's estimate of £20,000 was on the basis that it be sold as it stands at the moment without any sitting tenants. He asked Mr. O'Grady if in those circumstances he would advise a client to purchase. Mr. O'Grady said that he would.

Mr. Martin Tyrrell, Auctioneer and Valuer of Martin Tyrrell Auctioneering, Tuam said that the subject property is in an excellent location quite close to St. Jarleths College, a heated swimming pool and the Palace Grounds. He said that he would consider it to be a prime location in Tuam. He pointed to a comparison further away from the Town Centre on the Dublin Road where, he said, he was able to get £17,000. He said that his valuation of £20,000 was on the basis of vacant possession. He said that he considered that overall his valuation was realistic and that it was a practical one in relation to all the factors concerned and especially in relation to the excellent location of the property. In summing up Mr. O'Donoghue said that what has been valued here is the site, not the appellants interest in it and the question of the tenancy entitlement was a matter for another Tribunal. Mr. O'Grady said that any sums should be levied against the tenant rather than his client.

FINDINGS
The Tribunal is conscious of Section 22 (1) of the Derelict Sites Act, 1990 which states that:-
"A local authority shall determine, as soon as may be after it is entered on the register, and at least once every five years thereafter, the market value of urban land by estimating or causing to be estimated the price which the unencumbered fee simple of such land would fetch if it was sold on the open market on the valuation date in such manner and in such conditions as might reasonably be calculated to obtain for the vendor the best market price for the land."

There is uncontradicted evidence in this case that the subject property is in a prime location close to Tuam Town Centre and surrounded by excellent amenities in colleges, parks, swimming pool, etc. It would appear to the Tribunal, on the base of the evidence given that the unencumbered fee simple of the site is realistically placed at £20,000 by the local authority. It therefore, determines that the valuation placed on the subject by the respondent be upheld.