THE country's most senior planner has blamed the scourge of ghost estates on "dubious practices" by local authorities, who were only interested in securing the maximum amount of development in their area.
Chairman of An Bord Pleanala John O'Connor said yesterday that his warnings against large scale developments being located in inappropriate areas were largely ignored, and that a lack of planning guidelines contributed to the problem.
The thousands of ghost estates, excess supply of housing and urban sprawl could not be blamed on the planning system, he said, but by planners who often ignored the public good.
Private interests "held too much sway" and it was "sad" that legislation had to be enacted to ensure good planning.
"In the past we had land zonings taking place without any possibility of services being put in place.
"In planning, the public good must be given greater priority over private interests. In the past, private interests held too much sway," he said.
Mr O'Connor also defended the role of the planning appeals board in not stopping the rampant over-development that took place over the past decade.
Empty
Just 9pc of all developments went to the board on appeal, and they often had to be passed because they fitted in with local development plans, he said.
"I'm sure the board bears some responsibility and would have granted some permissions. But only 9pc of local authority planning decisions come to the board on appeal.
"The bord has rejected many out-of-scale developments, and I criticised this five years ago."
The board's annual report shows that Donegal topped the list of counties for bad planning, where nearly 60pc of appealed decisions were overturned by the board.
It is closely followed by Roscommon (53pc) and Longford (48pc) which are among the worst counties for overzoning land and building hundreds of housing units which are now empty.
The agency's report also says: l The number of cases being appealed has fallen by 33pc, down to 3,786 cases. l More than 70pc of cases are being decided within the 18- week period set down in law. l 44 projects including railway lines, wind farms and health facilities are going through a fast-track planning process. l An average of one in three local authorities' planning decisions are reversed by the board.
Paul Melia
Irish Independent
www.buckplanning.ie
Showing posts with label annual report. Show all posts
Showing posts with label annual report. Show all posts
Sunday, 31 October 2010
Glut of housing is laid at door of local authorities
DUBIOUS DECISIONS made by local authorities are to blame for the glut of so-called “ghost estates” particularly in rural counties, An Bord Pleanála chairman John O’Connor has said.
Many of the State’s 88 local authorities thought only of themselves when planning and zoning instead of having regard to regional and national development. Where the board had approved developments which were now ghost estates it was merely following zoning decisions, he said.
Mr O’Connor was speaking following the publication of the board’s 2009 annual report which showed that counties with the highest rates of decisions overturned by the board were the same counties which were recently revealed to have the biggest problems with ghost estates.
Donegal had the worst planning record with almost 60 per cent of appealed decisions overturned by the board, followed by Roscommon at just over 53 per cent. The National Housing Development Survey, published last week, found that Donegal had 133 ghost estates while Roscommon had 118. These were particularly large numbers given the low population densities of these counties.
Mr O’Connor said he had warned local authorities four or five years ago about inappropriate large-scale housing developments on the edges of towns and villages, and the impact such developments were having on those settlements.
“Unfortunately, I think in the past private interest had too much sway over the public good.”
Local authorities had all been “planning for themselves”, he said, without regard to zoning or developments in neighbouring county council areas.
“The tendency for each local authority [was] to look within its own area as to what was the maximum development that could be secured there, without looking at what was happened in the neighbouring authorities or to other authorities in the region, so when you added it all up you got these inflated figures.”
The board could not have stopped the development of ghost estates, he said, because only 9 per cent of local planning decisions were appealed to the board. Where the board did approve developments which are now ghost estates, it was because the land had been zoned for housing by the local authorities.
“I’m sure the board bears some responsibility and probably would have granted some cases . . . but in all cases this land would have been zoned and serviced. The board’s role in the whole planning process is that if land is zoned and serviced normally there is a presumption that development will be granted.
“The issue of ghost estates, a lot of these you will appreciate from the recent analysis were down to dubious local decision making.”
However, Mr O’Connor said the current “very deep lull” in construction activity could not last.
“The present level of activity in the development construction sectors is not sustainable if the country was to have any future in the long run.”
A review of the system of development levies set by local authorities would help maintain some level of construction activity and employment, he said. In some counties levies were excessively high and represented a disincentive to development. There was an argument that no levies should be imposed where a “brownfield” site, which was already serviced was being developed. He called for central Government guidance in relation to the setting of appropriate levies.
While bad local planning could be pointed to as the main culprit in the creation of ghost estates, the planning system was not responsible for the overall excesses of the boom years and could not be relied on to prevent another boom-bust cycle. “This is a matter for macro-economic fiscal and financial policies,” he said.
REJECTED COUNTIES WITH HIGHEST RATES OF PLANNING DECISIONS OVERTURNED:
1 Donegal 59.5%
2 Roscommon 53.3%
3 Longford 48%
4 Galway (excluding city) 46.8%
5 Waterford (excluding city) 44.3%
6 Westmeath 42.3%
7 Leitrim 41.4%
8 South Tipperary 39.7%
9 Wexford 38.8%
10 Cavan 38.6%
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Many of the State’s 88 local authorities thought only of themselves when planning and zoning instead of having regard to regional and national development. Where the board had approved developments which were now ghost estates it was merely following zoning decisions, he said.
Mr O’Connor was speaking following the publication of the board’s 2009 annual report which showed that counties with the highest rates of decisions overturned by the board were the same counties which were recently revealed to have the biggest problems with ghost estates.
Donegal had the worst planning record with almost 60 per cent of appealed decisions overturned by the board, followed by Roscommon at just over 53 per cent. The National Housing Development Survey, published last week, found that Donegal had 133 ghost estates while Roscommon had 118. These were particularly large numbers given the low population densities of these counties.
Mr O’Connor said he had warned local authorities four or five years ago about inappropriate large-scale housing developments on the edges of towns and villages, and the impact such developments were having on those settlements.
“Unfortunately, I think in the past private interest had too much sway over the public good.”
Local authorities had all been “planning for themselves”, he said, without regard to zoning or developments in neighbouring county council areas.
“The tendency for each local authority [was] to look within its own area as to what was the maximum development that could be secured there, without looking at what was happened in the neighbouring authorities or to other authorities in the region, so when you added it all up you got these inflated figures.”
The board could not have stopped the development of ghost estates, he said, because only 9 per cent of local planning decisions were appealed to the board. Where the board did approve developments which are now ghost estates, it was because the land had been zoned for housing by the local authorities.
“I’m sure the board bears some responsibility and probably would have granted some cases . . . but in all cases this land would have been zoned and serviced. The board’s role in the whole planning process is that if land is zoned and serviced normally there is a presumption that development will be granted.
“The issue of ghost estates, a lot of these you will appreciate from the recent analysis were down to dubious local decision making.”
However, Mr O’Connor said the current “very deep lull” in construction activity could not last.
“The present level of activity in the development construction sectors is not sustainable if the country was to have any future in the long run.”
A review of the system of development levies set by local authorities would help maintain some level of construction activity and employment, he said. In some counties levies were excessively high and represented a disincentive to development. There was an argument that no levies should be imposed where a “brownfield” site, which was already serviced was being developed. He called for central Government guidance in relation to the setting of appropriate levies.
While bad local planning could be pointed to as the main culprit in the creation of ghost estates, the planning system was not responsible for the overall excesses of the boom years and could not be relied on to prevent another boom-bust cycle. “This is a matter for macro-economic fiscal and financial policies,” he said.
REJECTED COUNTIES WITH HIGHEST RATES OF PLANNING DECISIONS OVERTURNED:
1 Donegal 59.5%
2 Roscommon 53.3%
3 Longford 48%
4 Galway (excluding city) 46.8%
5 Waterford (excluding city) 44.3%
6 Westmeath 42.3%
7 Leitrim 41.4%
8 South Tipperary 39.7%
9 Wexford 38.8%
10 Cavan 38.6%
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Thursday, 22 October 2009
Bord's report doesn't have much appeal
AN BORD Pleanalá’s handsome looking annual report for 2008 contained no great surprises. The workload was down 16 per cent on the previous bumper year; there was a 20 per cent drop in the number of appeals dealt with in relation to one-off houses in rural areas and the percentage of local authority planning decisions appealed to the board showed an increase of 8.1 per cent compared to 6.7 per cent in 2007.
The rate of reversal of local planning authority decisions appealed showed a slight increase, 33 per cent in 2008 compared to 32 per cent in 2007.
The board met its statutory objective in dealing with appeals within 18 weeks in less than 50 per cent of cases – that doesn’t sound like something to boast about but the report sees it as a positive in that the previous year it only met the 18-week target in less than a quarter of the cases.
It says that “excessive and unsustainable zoning of land has been a contributor to the property bubble and its aftermath” and that “some of this land will have to be rezoned”.
Presenting the report, the chairperson of the board, John O’Connor, said that “it would be extremely short-sighted if there was a tendency to relax good planning standards in response to our current economic difficulties”. A reader from Mars might deduce from that that planning standards during the loadsamoney boom were fantastic. The number of ghost estates dotted around the country, the ugly holiday villages and empty apartment blocks tell a different story.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
The rate of reversal of local planning authority decisions appealed showed a slight increase, 33 per cent in 2008 compared to 32 per cent in 2007.
The board met its statutory objective in dealing with appeals within 18 weeks in less than 50 per cent of cases – that doesn’t sound like something to boast about but the report sees it as a positive in that the previous year it only met the 18-week target in less than a quarter of the cases.
It says that “excessive and unsustainable zoning of land has been a contributor to the property bubble and its aftermath” and that “some of this land will have to be rezoned”.
Presenting the report, the chairperson of the board, John O’Connor, said that “it would be extremely short-sighted if there was a tendency to relax good planning standards in response to our current economic difficulties”. A reader from Mars might deduce from that that planning standards during the loadsamoney boom were fantastic. The number of ghost estates dotted around the country, the ugly holiday villages and empty apartment blocks tell a different story.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Thursday, 15 October 2009
Bord Pleanála warns on relaxing planning rules
ANY RELAXATION of planning standards in response to the recession – even for land that falls into the hands of the National Asset Management Agency (Nama) – would be “extremely shortsighted”, the chairman of An Bord Pleanála has said.
At a press briefing yesterday on the board’s 2008 annual report, John O’Connor also said the “excessive and unsustainable zoning of land” that contributed to the property bubble would have to be tackled by local authorities.
“If we are to return to realistic development planning, some of this land will have to be dezoned, and facing up to this has a part to play in deflating the bubble,” he said, adding that this would apply “irrespective of whether it’s in the hands of Nama or not”.
Mr O’Connor said there was nothing in the legislation establishing Nama that would change the need to obtain planning permission. He said that “the normal requirements will apply”.
“There can be no expectation that proper planning standards would not be applied to development proposals, even where the land is linked to distressed loans,” Mr O’Connor said. “Now, more than ever, we need to embrace the principles of good planning and sustainable development in order to prevent further deterioration of our environment, to respond to climate change [and] to maximise the return from expensive infrastructure investment.”
Mr O’Connor said the planning Bill now before the Oireachtas should ensure a “much more coherent and sustainable approach to zoning”. Anyone assessing property values in terms of development potential would now have to “look beyond the particular zoning” and focus on the availability of services as well as other planning issues such as density, height, impact on amenities and orderly urban expansion.
Mr O’Connor expressed concern that developers may be tempted to return to lower density development as a “safer option” in the present market and warned that such applications, particularly in major urban centres, would be “critically assessed” by the board.
The recession has had an impact on An Bord Pleanála’s workload, with a drop of more than 30 per cent in the intake of appeals in the past year. As a result, the number of cases on hand had almost halved to 1,550 and “routine delays” may soon be eliminated.
In 2008, however, “severe workload pressure” meant that the board met the statutory objective of determining appeals within 18 weeks in only 23 per cent of cases – down from 48 per cent in 2007. Last month, Mr O’Connor said the figure was 36 per cent.
Of 5,801 cases determined, appeals by developers against refusals had a 28 per cent success rate, while 39 per cent of third- party appeals were upheld.
The proportion of local authority decisions appealed rose from 6.7 per cent to 8.1 per cent.
From the introduction of the Strategic Infrastructure Act in 2007 to the end of last month, the board dealt with 137 requests from project sponsors for “pre-application consultations” on projects that were “too vague” in some cases, according to Mr O’Connor.
Of the 137 requests for projects to be processed under the Act, 33 qualified for its “fast-track” planning treatment, 46 were not regarded by the board as strategic infrastructure cases, and 18 were withdrawn or otherwise concluded.
Of 15 formal applications for permission received under the Act, eight have been concluded with four granted, three refused and one withdrawn.
Mr O’Connor said the public-service reform agenda must include rationalisation of the number of local authorities with planning functions – currently 88 county, city and town councils.
“Many of these authorities have administrative areas that are much too small and fractured to constitute meaningful planning units,” he said, adding that he would not favour “one big monolithic planning authority”.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
At a press briefing yesterday on the board’s 2008 annual report, John O’Connor also said the “excessive and unsustainable zoning of land” that contributed to the property bubble would have to be tackled by local authorities.
“If we are to return to realistic development planning, some of this land will have to be dezoned, and facing up to this has a part to play in deflating the bubble,” he said, adding that this would apply “irrespective of whether it’s in the hands of Nama or not”.
Mr O’Connor said there was nothing in the legislation establishing Nama that would change the need to obtain planning permission. He said that “the normal requirements will apply”.
“There can be no expectation that proper planning standards would not be applied to development proposals, even where the land is linked to distressed loans,” Mr O’Connor said. “Now, more than ever, we need to embrace the principles of good planning and sustainable development in order to prevent further deterioration of our environment, to respond to climate change [and] to maximise the return from expensive infrastructure investment.”
Mr O’Connor said the planning Bill now before the Oireachtas should ensure a “much more coherent and sustainable approach to zoning”. Anyone assessing property values in terms of development potential would now have to “look beyond the particular zoning” and focus on the availability of services as well as other planning issues such as density, height, impact on amenities and orderly urban expansion.
Mr O’Connor expressed concern that developers may be tempted to return to lower density development as a “safer option” in the present market and warned that such applications, particularly in major urban centres, would be “critically assessed” by the board.
The recession has had an impact on An Bord Pleanála’s workload, with a drop of more than 30 per cent in the intake of appeals in the past year. As a result, the number of cases on hand had almost halved to 1,550 and “routine delays” may soon be eliminated.
In 2008, however, “severe workload pressure” meant that the board met the statutory objective of determining appeals within 18 weeks in only 23 per cent of cases – down from 48 per cent in 2007. Last month, Mr O’Connor said the figure was 36 per cent.
Of 5,801 cases determined, appeals by developers against refusals had a 28 per cent success rate, while 39 per cent of third- party appeals were upheld.
The proportion of local authority decisions appealed rose from 6.7 per cent to 8.1 per cent.
From the introduction of the Strategic Infrastructure Act in 2007 to the end of last month, the board dealt with 137 requests from project sponsors for “pre-application consultations” on projects that were “too vague” in some cases, according to Mr O’Connor.
Of the 137 requests for projects to be processed under the Act, 33 qualified for its “fast-track” planning treatment, 46 were not regarded by the board as strategic infrastructure cases, and 18 were withdrawn or otherwise concluded.
Of 15 formal applications for permission received under the Act, eight have been concluded with four granted, three refused and one withdrawn.
Mr O’Connor said the public-service reform agenda must include rationalisation of the number of local authorities with planning functions – currently 88 county, city and town councils.
“Many of these authorities have administrative areas that are much too small and fractured to constitute meaningful planning units,” he said, adding that he would not favour “one big monolithic planning authority”.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Friday, 7 November 2008
Councils risk being sued over 'excessive' zoning
LOCAL authorities will leave themselves open to huge compensation claims if they continue to inappropriately zone large tracts of land for development, a planning expert warned yesterday.
An Bord Pleanala has also accused lawyers of engaging in "courtroom histrionics" which delay planning hearings.
Speaking at the launch of the board's 2007 annual report, chairman John O'Connor said local authorities needed to maximise the return on expensive infrastructural investment.
"Indiscriminate and excessive zonings" many of which were "completely out of line" with national guidelines need to be curtailed, he said.
Local authorities which failed to act faced the likelihood of the planning appeals board overturning permission decisions, which could lead to compensation claims from developers.
The comments come after Environment Minister John Gormley earlier this year ordered local authorities in Monaghan, Mayo and Waterford to amend their development plans because they were not in line with national planning policies.
Councillors have criticised the move but yesterday Mr O'Connor warned that much development was not being carried out in an "orderly" manner.
"In dealing with planning appeals the board is constantly coming across zoned sites that are too far removed from developed areas, too remote from public facilities such as piped services, footpaths, and lighting," he said.
He added there was a high likelihood that "possible consequent compensation liabilities" would increase, warning councillors to expend less effort "on responding to special pleading for unsuitably located lands".
He also said development must take place where money has been invested in water treatment plants, public transport, roads and schools.
Shopping centres should be located in town centres.
Waste management facilities must be located in appropriate locations, and proposers must show how residual liquid and solid waste will be disposed of.
Too many nursing homes were proposed for rural locations outside of town centres.
Lawyers were delaying the process by engaging in "courtroom histrionics" during planning hearings.
"There is concern that some lawyers participating in hearings are engaging in courtroom histrionics which may be good for the odd headline but have no place in a planning hearing," Mr O'Connor said.
"While not denying that lawyers can make a valuable input to hearings, this conduct tends to prolong hearings unduly, distract from the real purpose of the hearing and can also hinder the inspector in getting to the root of the planning and environmental issues involved and reporting the facts to the board." The Bar Council and Law Society said it would not be appropriate to comment.
Paul Melia
Irish Independent
www.buckplanning.ie
An Bord Pleanala has also accused lawyers of engaging in "courtroom histrionics" which delay planning hearings.
Speaking at the launch of the board's 2007 annual report, chairman John O'Connor said local authorities needed to maximise the return on expensive infrastructural investment.
"Indiscriminate and excessive zonings" many of which were "completely out of line" with national guidelines need to be curtailed, he said.
Local authorities which failed to act faced the likelihood of the planning appeals board overturning permission decisions, which could lead to compensation claims from developers.
The comments come after Environment Minister John Gormley earlier this year ordered local authorities in Monaghan, Mayo and Waterford to amend their development plans because they were not in line with national planning policies.
Councillors have criticised the move but yesterday Mr O'Connor warned that much development was not being carried out in an "orderly" manner.
"In dealing with planning appeals the board is constantly coming across zoned sites that are too far removed from developed areas, too remote from public facilities such as piped services, footpaths, and lighting," he said.
He added there was a high likelihood that "possible consequent compensation liabilities" would increase, warning councillors to expend less effort "on responding to special pleading for unsuitably located lands".
He also said development must take place where money has been invested in water treatment plants, public transport, roads and schools.
Shopping centres should be located in town centres.
Waste management facilities must be located in appropriate locations, and proposers must show how residual liquid and solid waste will be disposed of.
Too many nursing homes were proposed for rural locations outside of town centres.
Lawyers were delaying the process by engaging in "courtroom histrionics" during planning hearings.
"There is concern that some lawyers participating in hearings are engaging in courtroom histrionics which may be good for the odd headline but have no place in a planning hearing," Mr O'Connor said.
"While not denying that lawyers can make a valuable input to hearings, this conduct tends to prolong hearings unduly, distract from the real purpose of the hearing and can also hinder the inspector in getting to the root of the planning and environmental issues involved and reporting the facts to the board." The Bar Council and Law Society said it would not be appropriate to comment.
Paul Melia
Irish Independent
www.buckplanning.ie
Councils zoning too far from services, say planners
LOCAL councils should not zone land for development which does not have access to public transport and services, the chair of the planning appeals board has warned.
Launching An Bord Pleanála’s 2007 annual report, John O’Connor said the board constantly comes across zoned sites that are too far removed from developed areas, too remote from public facilities such as piped services, footpaths, lighting and with no prospect of public transport. Many of the proposals are dependant on long-distance commuting by private transport.
“The idea that every place must get development, no matter how thinly spread, was never sustainable, but will be distinctly less sustainable in the future — either in the environmental or the economic sense.
“Major public investment in railways, roads, water supplies, waste water treatment and education facilities, must dictate where future development should be located.
“Development is necessary to ensure these investments yield best returns but these investments cannot be replicated everywhere and this must be reflected in development plan zonings,” Mr O’Connor said.
He said the board also had concerns about the frequency with which decisions by local authorities do not reflect policies in their own development plans.
“The board can often be seen as a stronger defender of the development plan than the local authority who adopted it,” he said.
The board has also noted the inappropriate locations of some nursing home developments being appealed to it.
“Invariably, these have been refused by the board as it is considered that such facilities are best located within existing settlements where public services are available and where the occupants have some degree of access to shops and other amenities, or can walk up the street and encounter members of the local community,” Mr O’Connor said.
An Bord Pleanála has a backlog of about 1,000 cases before it and admitted that only one-in-four appeals received this year will be dealt with in the statutory time objective of 18 weeks.
At the end of last month, the board had 2,780 cases on hand, 250 less than the peak number of active files it had in March 2007.
It handled a record 6,700 cases last year but the 4,806 new cases it received in the first 10 months of 2008 is down 16% on the same period last year, although only 4% less than up to the end of October 2006.
The number of appeals relating to applications for 30 or more houses has fallen from 403 in the first three-quarters of 2007 year to just 297 in the same period this year.
Just under a third of local authority decisions appealed to An Bord Pleanála were reversed in 2007, while 29% of appeals by applicants who were refused permission were successful.
Fewer cases in which third parties appealed grants of permission by a council resulted in refusal by An Bord Pleanála, down to 37% from 43% in 2007.
The board said water resources are another constraint which must be considered in planning future development strategy and the long-term economic and environmental costs of pumping water or sewage over long distances will have to be factored into planning decisions.
* www.pleanala.ie
Irish Examiner
www.buckplanning.ie
Launching An Bord Pleanála’s 2007 annual report, John O’Connor said the board constantly comes across zoned sites that are too far removed from developed areas, too remote from public facilities such as piped services, footpaths, lighting and with no prospect of public transport. Many of the proposals are dependant on long-distance commuting by private transport.
“The idea that every place must get development, no matter how thinly spread, was never sustainable, but will be distinctly less sustainable in the future — either in the environmental or the economic sense.
“Major public investment in railways, roads, water supplies, waste water treatment and education facilities, must dictate where future development should be located.
“Development is necessary to ensure these investments yield best returns but these investments cannot be replicated everywhere and this must be reflected in development plan zonings,” Mr O’Connor said.
He said the board also had concerns about the frequency with which decisions by local authorities do not reflect policies in their own development plans.
“The board can often be seen as a stronger defender of the development plan than the local authority who adopted it,” he said.
The board has also noted the inappropriate locations of some nursing home developments being appealed to it.
“Invariably, these have been refused by the board as it is considered that such facilities are best located within existing settlements where public services are available and where the occupants have some degree of access to shops and other amenities, or can walk up the street and encounter members of the local community,” Mr O’Connor said.
An Bord Pleanála has a backlog of about 1,000 cases before it and admitted that only one-in-four appeals received this year will be dealt with in the statutory time objective of 18 weeks.
At the end of last month, the board had 2,780 cases on hand, 250 less than the peak number of active files it had in March 2007.
It handled a record 6,700 cases last year but the 4,806 new cases it received in the first 10 months of 2008 is down 16% on the same period last year, although only 4% less than up to the end of October 2006.
The number of appeals relating to applications for 30 or more houses has fallen from 403 in the first three-quarters of 2007 year to just 297 in the same period this year.
Just under a third of local authority decisions appealed to An Bord Pleanála were reversed in 2007, while 29% of appeals by applicants who were refused permission were successful.
Fewer cases in which third parties appealed grants of permission by a council resulted in refusal by An Bord Pleanála, down to 37% from 43% in 2007.
The board said water resources are another constraint which must be considered in planning future development strategy and the long-term economic and environmental costs of pumping water or sewage over long distances will have to be factored into planning decisions.
* www.pleanala.ie
Irish Examiner
www.buckplanning.ie
'Excessive zonings' must be reversed
LOCAL AUTHORITIES will have to undo some of the "indiscriminate and excessive zonings" of land that are "now completely out of line with current imperatives", according to the chairman of An Bord Pleanála.
Speaking at the launch of its annual report yesterday, John O'Connor identified these imperatives as the economic downturn, climate change, energy costs, maximising return on infrastructural investment and avoiding "unnecessary sprawl" into agricultural land.
Referring to goings-on involving councillors zoning more and more land against planning advice, he said the appeals board would continue to refuse permission if the zonings were in conflict with national policies or regional planning guidelines.
In such cases local authorities could face massive compensation claims from developers. This should be taken into account by councillors when they rezoned land in response to "special pleadings by landowners and other vested interests".
"The idea that every place must get development, no matter how thinly spread, was never sustainable, but will be distinctly less sustainable in the future," he said. Local authorities needed to realise that investments in infrastructure "cannot be replicated everywhere".
In dealing with planning appeals, Mr O'Connor said the board "is constantly coming across zoned sites that are too far removed from developed areas, too remote from public facilities such as piped services, footpaths, lighting and with no prospect of public transport".
Welcoming the recent publication by the Minister for the Environment of draft planning guidelines on flood risk management, he said the board hoped that these would lead to fewer appeals against permissions granted in floodplains. Water resources were another constraint that had to be taken into account, he said. Already, some urban areas were having difficulties in sourcing drinking water and finding suitable water bodies in which to discharge treated sewage.
"This will mean tough decisions directing development to areas that don't have such constraints . . . The long-term economic and environmental costs of pumping water or sewage over long distances will have to be factored into planning."
Mr O'Connor said the board also had concerns about the number of decisions on individual schemes that did not reflect planning policies. The appeals board was often "a stronger defender of the development plan than the local authority who adopted it".
"This has serious implications for the credibility of the whole system . . . If councils are not seen to respect their own plans, developers and the general public are less likely to do so," he said. This applied, in particular, to local authorities approving out-of-town shopping centres even in defiance of their development plans. But despite some "patchy decisions", the 2000 retail planning guidelines had "served us well".
"There is an onus on planning authorities to protect town centres from being denuded of their retail function, to preserve the capacity of major road junctions, to ensure the local availability of retail services [and] to reduce reliance on private transport."
Mr O'Connor added that "there is a risk that the long-term price to the community of permitting huge megastores . . . outside our towns and cities could be much greater than any short-term gain in terms of grocery prices".
On the growing number of applications for nursing homes, he said some were being proposed for "singularly inappropriate" locations, notably "isolated greenfield sites remote from towns or villages, shops or services of any description". The proportion of local authority decisions reversed by the board in 2007 remained steady at 32 per cent.
The Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Speaking at the launch of its annual report yesterday, John O'Connor identified these imperatives as the economic downturn, climate change, energy costs, maximising return on infrastructural investment and avoiding "unnecessary sprawl" into agricultural land.
Referring to goings-on involving councillors zoning more and more land against planning advice, he said the appeals board would continue to refuse permission if the zonings were in conflict with national policies or regional planning guidelines.
In such cases local authorities could face massive compensation claims from developers. This should be taken into account by councillors when they rezoned land in response to "special pleadings by landowners and other vested interests".
"The idea that every place must get development, no matter how thinly spread, was never sustainable, but will be distinctly less sustainable in the future," he said. Local authorities needed to realise that investments in infrastructure "cannot be replicated everywhere".
In dealing with planning appeals, Mr O'Connor said the board "is constantly coming across zoned sites that are too far removed from developed areas, too remote from public facilities such as piped services, footpaths, lighting and with no prospect of public transport".
Welcoming the recent publication by the Minister for the Environment of draft planning guidelines on flood risk management, he said the board hoped that these would lead to fewer appeals against permissions granted in floodplains. Water resources were another constraint that had to be taken into account, he said. Already, some urban areas were having difficulties in sourcing drinking water and finding suitable water bodies in which to discharge treated sewage.
"This will mean tough decisions directing development to areas that don't have such constraints . . . The long-term economic and environmental costs of pumping water or sewage over long distances will have to be factored into planning."
Mr O'Connor said the board also had concerns about the number of decisions on individual schemes that did not reflect planning policies. The appeals board was often "a stronger defender of the development plan than the local authority who adopted it".
"This has serious implications for the credibility of the whole system . . . If councils are not seen to respect their own plans, developers and the general public are less likely to do so," he said. This applied, in particular, to local authorities approving out-of-town shopping centres even in defiance of their development plans. But despite some "patchy decisions", the 2000 retail planning guidelines had "served us well".
"There is an onus on planning authorities to protect town centres from being denuded of their retail function, to preserve the capacity of major road junctions, to ensure the local availability of retail services [and] to reduce reliance on private transport."
Mr O'Connor added that "there is a risk that the long-term price to the community of permitting huge megastores . . . outside our towns and cities could be much greater than any short-term gain in terms of grocery prices".
On the growing number of applications for nursing homes, he said some were being proposed for "singularly inappropriate" locations, notably "isolated greenfield sites remote from towns or villages, shops or services of any description". The proportion of local authority decisions reversed by the board in 2007 remained steady at 32 per cent.
The Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Saturday, 10 November 2007
An Bord Pleanála - Annual Report 2006
At the publication of Bord Pleanála’s Annual Report, 2006, on 9th November 2007, the Chairperson of the Board, John O’Connor, said that the Board is experiencing a considerable level of activity under the Planning and Development (Strategic Infrastructure) Act, 2006. To date, the Board has received 64 applications from project sponsors for pre-planning application discussions in accordance with the provisions of Section 37B and other corresponding sections of the Act. First meetings between the sponsors and Board teams headed by some of our most experienced inspectors have been held in relation to 52 of these cases and the pre-application phase of the process has been completed in 19 cases. In all the Board has held over 85 pre application meetings to-date. These cases cover a wide range of projects such as electricity infrastructure, gas infrastructure, waste, mainline, metro and light rail, harbours, airports, large wind farms, etc. The pre-application phase involves the Board determining whether the project is to be admitted as a Strategic Infrastructure project and advising on the significant planning sustainability and environmental issues that will have to be addressed in the formal application. In this the Board will seek to ensure that the project addresses broader national and regional policies and takes account of its impact across other sectors.
Following closure of the pre-application phase formal applications for approval of projects have been received in 3 cases viz, the Dunboyne railway extension, a gas-fired power plant in Co. Louth and a LNG terminal at Ballylongford Co. Kerry. Notice has been given to the general public and relevant consultees and details have been sent for reports to the local authorities concerned. The Board has discretion as to whether an oral hearing will be held but it is the Board’s intention to hold hearings in all cases where there are significant planning or environmental issues or where there are serious concerns for the local community or statutory consultees.
It needs to be stressed that under the new Act the twin criteria of proper planning and sustainable development and the effects on the environment must be applied to all strategic infrastructure projects. This is a significant change in relation to rail projects, motorways and gas pipelines. For example, the broader planning implications of new rail projects will have to be addressed, including the location and design of stations, integration with other transport services, etc. Also, the broader transportation implications of other infrastructure such as harbour developments have to be carefully assessed.
The Board has a statutory objective to determine Strategic Infrastructure cases within 18 weeks of the latest date for the receipt of submissions from the general public. In the interests of transparency and to avoid any perception of pre-judgement the Board has decided as a matter of policy that the inspector who has led the Board’s team in the pre-application phase will not participate in the formal application phase or have any involvement in the oral hearing or the ultimate recommendation to the Board. Different inspectors will be appointed to carry out these functions.
The Board has published a number of guidelines advising applicants and local authorities of the procedures to be followed and advising the general public and interested bodies on how they can participate in the process.
A Strategic Infrastructure Division, comprising 5 members, has been set up within the Board to perform the functions assigned to it under the Act. The new Division of the Board will be supported by a separate Division within the organisation with a staff of 25. 6 additional Senior Inspectors have already been appointed and further recruitment is underway to ensure that the new Division has the necessary capacity to meet the demanding targets set for the Board in the legislation. The Strategic Infrastructure Division is now also handling major roads and other local authority infrastructure projects and related Compulsory Purchase Orders (transferred to the Board under the 2000 Act).
Planning appeals running at record level
Mr. O’Connor also said that the number of appeals or the scale of developments coming to the Board is not, so far, indicating any decline in the level of construction activity. The record intake of planning appeals in 2005 and 2006 is set to be surpassed in the current year and this is putting severe strain on the Board’s resources. As a result, it is proving difficult to maintain the satisfactory performance in terms of the time taken to determine appeals.
* Up to the end of September 2007 the intake of appeals, infrastructure and other cases was 14% up on last year’s intake. On present trends, the 2007 intake is set to approach the 7,000 mark.
* Despite a 10% increase in cases determined, the percentage of cases being decided within the 18 week statutory time objective has fallen further from 53% in 2006 to 49% in 2007.
* Reflecting the high intake, the number of cases on hands at the end of September 2007 was 2741, an increase of 22% over September 2006.
The Board is taking all possible measures to deal with the backlog and to get back as soon as possible to achieving its overall strategic objective to dispose of 90% of cases within 18 weeks. These include putting in place additional resources and considering other options to increase output. The Board regrets the delays that are occurring.
It appears that the continuing high volume of appeals reflects the general increase in planning applications to local authorities and is not due to an increase in the rate of appeal, which has consistently remained at around 7% nationally.
Apart from the Strategic Infrastructure cases the intake of cases has been boosted, in particular, by appeals relating to larger housing schemes (30+ units), quarries (reflecting the general tightening up of the control of quarry developments under the 2000 Act) agricultural developments (reflecting the Nitrates Regulations), wind farms, and houses in suburban gardens.
General trends in 2006 report
The following are some general trends in normal planning appeals contained in the 2006 report:-
* The share of local decisions appealed which were reversed by the Board was 33%, compared to 30% in 2005.
* First party appeals against refusal resulted in grants of permission in 26% of cases, up from 24% in 2005.
* Third party appeals against grants of permission resulted in 43% refusals, up from 40% in 2005.
* 25% of appeals (27% in 2005) were disposed of without a formal decision by the Board, mainly because they were invalid (15%) or withdrawn (9%).
Unsustainable land zoning
The Chairperson said he noted the exercise by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government of his powers to intervene where zoning decisions in Development Plans are in conflict with national policies. He welcomes this and previous similar Ministerial interventions because the Board sometimes finds itself dealing with appeals relating to sites where the zoning clearly does not accord with the principles of sustainable development. The zoning of land should be a clear indicator that the land is suitable for development of the kind stated (subject to any qualifications indicated in the Development Plan) and is fundamental to the operation of our planning system. Mr. O’Connor warned, however, that it could not be assumed that the Board would be constrained to grant permission by zonings which were not sustainable or which contradicted national policies or regional planning guidelines.
He instanced cases where the site is at risk of flooding, where development would devalue investment in national roads, where development would pose an undue threat to heritage or habitats, or where excessively large tracts of land are zoned outside of small towns and villages. The Board would not be deflected from refusing permission in such cases merely because the local authorities might be at risk of having to pay compensation arising out of unjustifiable zonings.
Building heights
The Chairperson said the Board was concerned about the present situation in relation to building heights in cities and even towns. At present developments which, due to their height, can have a profound effect on the visual and urban character of cities/towns are being made largely on an ad hoc basis without the benefit of properly debated and adopted policies by local authorities. The difficulties in adopting clear policies often seem due to tension between developers and their architects on the one side and councillors, reflecting local concerns, on the other, with local authority management and planners somewhere between the two extremes.
The majority of high-rise developments seem to be appealed and, while the Board does its best to apply whatever policy context exists in each case, it has to decide on the particular merits of any proposal based on local circumstances but also bearing in mind broader national policies. Local authorities should be doing more to promote informed debate and to develop consensus around their policies so that there is a shared vision for the future development of urban centres and against which individual development schemes can be evaluated.
Water quality
The Chairperson said that the recent E.P.A. report on water quality prompted him to repeat previous concerns about the effect of the ongoing proliferation of septic tanks (including proprietary systems) associated with houses in the countryside. The 15-17,000 rural houses being built every year are adding to pressure on groundwater resources and must be accounting for some of the decline in standards reported by the E.P.A. (57% of groundwater sampling locations were contaminated by faecal coliforms). Over one-third of refusals of rural houses by the Board feature risk of pollution as a reason. Some local authorities are still granting planning permission without having a full set of drainage tests or without a proper assessment of the tests that are submitted. The Board considers that it is not appropriate to grant permission or even outline permission without establishing that it is possible to provide safe drainage on the site. It is not good enough to rely on conditions requiring post-permission evaluations and actions which may not prove effective. This can also apply to housing schemes on unserviced sites which rely on private treatment systems.
The Board welcomes the new waste water discharge regulations which should ensure that permission will not be given for developments discharging to overloaded or otherwise defective treatment plants.
Residential development standards
The Chairperson said that a lot of solid progress was being made in developing a new more sustainable planning paradigm for our expanding urban centres. There is now fairly widespread acceptance of the merits of building at higher densities (which does not necessarily mean high-rise), employing good quality designs, aligning with public transport plans and other infrastructure such as education, recreation, shopping and so on. In the case of large greenfield development areas the SDZ model is being seen as highly effective. However, the same approach can be adapted, if less formally, to smaller scale situations. Implementation of the new standards for residential accommodation published by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government should reinforce the acceptability of apartments as standard family accommodation by ensuring that units offer decent standards as regards internal space, light, storage and private open space. Local Authorities should make it clear to developers that they will look for these standards as a minimum in dealing with planning applications. It can be taken that the Board will do so in any cases coming on appeal, even if the local authority has accepted a lower standard in its decision. The days of blocks of small single aspect flats sitting in car parks are over!
www.buckplanning.ie
Following closure of the pre-application phase formal applications for approval of projects have been received in 3 cases viz, the Dunboyne railway extension, a gas-fired power plant in Co. Louth and a LNG terminal at Ballylongford Co. Kerry. Notice has been given to the general public and relevant consultees and details have been sent for reports to the local authorities concerned. The Board has discretion as to whether an oral hearing will be held but it is the Board’s intention to hold hearings in all cases where there are significant planning or environmental issues or where there are serious concerns for the local community or statutory consultees.
It needs to be stressed that under the new Act the twin criteria of proper planning and sustainable development and the effects on the environment must be applied to all strategic infrastructure projects. This is a significant change in relation to rail projects, motorways and gas pipelines. For example, the broader planning implications of new rail projects will have to be addressed, including the location and design of stations, integration with other transport services, etc. Also, the broader transportation implications of other infrastructure such as harbour developments have to be carefully assessed.
The Board has a statutory objective to determine Strategic Infrastructure cases within 18 weeks of the latest date for the receipt of submissions from the general public. In the interests of transparency and to avoid any perception of pre-judgement the Board has decided as a matter of policy that the inspector who has led the Board’s team in the pre-application phase will not participate in the formal application phase or have any involvement in the oral hearing or the ultimate recommendation to the Board. Different inspectors will be appointed to carry out these functions.
The Board has published a number of guidelines advising applicants and local authorities of the procedures to be followed and advising the general public and interested bodies on how they can participate in the process.
A Strategic Infrastructure Division, comprising 5 members, has been set up within the Board to perform the functions assigned to it under the Act. The new Division of the Board will be supported by a separate Division within the organisation with a staff of 25. 6 additional Senior Inspectors have already been appointed and further recruitment is underway to ensure that the new Division has the necessary capacity to meet the demanding targets set for the Board in the legislation. The Strategic Infrastructure Division is now also handling major roads and other local authority infrastructure projects and related Compulsory Purchase Orders (transferred to the Board under the 2000 Act).
Planning appeals running at record level
Mr. O’Connor also said that the number of appeals or the scale of developments coming to the Board is not, so far, indicating any decline in the level of construction activity. The record intake of planning appeals in 2005 and 2006 is set to be surpassed in the current year and this is putting severe strain on the Board’s resources. As a result, it is proving difficult to maintain the satisfactory performance in terms of the time taken to determine appeals.
* Up to the end of September 2007 the intake of appeals, infrastructure and other cases was 14% up on last year’s intake. On present trends, the 2007 intake is set to approach the 7,000 mark.
* Despite a 10% increase in cases determined, the percentage of cases being decided within the 18 week statutory time objective has fallen further from 53% in 2006 to 49% in 2007.
* Reflecting the high intake, the number of cases on hands at the end of September 2007 was 2741, an increase of 22% over September 2006.
The Board is taking all possible measures to deal with the backlog and to get back as soon as possible to achieving its overall strategic objective to dispose of 90% of cases within 18 weeks. These include putting in place additional resources and considering other options to increase output. The Board regrets the delays that are occurring.
It appears that the continuing high volume of appeals reflects the general increase in planning applications to local authorities and is not due to an increase in the rate of appeal, which has consistently remained at around 7% nationally.
Apart from the Strategic Infrastructure cases the intake of cases has been boosted, in particular, by appeals relating to larger housing schemes (30+ units), quarries (reflecting the general tightening up of the control of quarry developments under the 2000 Act) agricultural developments (reflecting the Nitrates Regulations), wind farms, and houses in suburban gardens.
General trends in 2006 report
The following are some general trends in normal planning appeals contained in the 2006 report:-
* The share of local decisions appealed which were reversed by the Board was 33%, compared to 30% in 2005.
* First party appeals against refusal resulted in grants of permission in 26% of cases, up from 24% in 2005.
* Third party appeals against grants of permission resulted in 43% refusals, up from 40% in 2005.
* 25% of appeals (27% in 2005) were disposed of without a formal decision by the Board, mainly because they were invalid (15%) or withdrawn (9%).
Unsustainable land zoning
The Chairperson said he noted the exercise by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government of his powers to intervene where zoning decisions in Development Plans are in conflict with national policies. He welcomes this and previous similar Ministerial interventions because the Board sometimes finds itself dealing with appeals relating to sites where the zoning clearly does not accord with the principles of sustainable development. The zoning of land should be a clear indicator that the land is suitable for development of the kind stated (subject to any qualifications indicated in the Development Plan) and is fundamental to the operation of our planning system. Mr. O’Connor warned, however, that it could not be assumed that the Board would be constrained to grant permission by zonings which were not sustainable or which contradicted national policies or regional planning guidelines.
He instanced cases where the site is at risk of flooding, where development would devalue investment in national roads, where development would pose an undue threat to heritage or habitats, or where excessively large tracts of land are zoned outside of small towns and villages. The Board would not be deflected from refusing permission in such cases merely because the local authorities might be at risk of having to pay compensation arising out of unjustifiable zonings.
Building heights
The Chairperson said the Board was concerned about the present situation in relation to building heights in cities and even towns. At present developments which, due to their height, can have a profound effect on the visual and urban character of cities/towns are being made largely on an ad hoc basis without the benefit of properly debated and adopted policies by local authorities. The difficulties in adopting clear policies often seem due to tension between developers and their architects on the one side and councillors, reflecting local concerns, on the other, with local authority management and planners somewhere between the two extremes.
The majority of high-rise developments seem to be appealed and, while the Board does its best to apply whatever policy context exists in each case, it has to decide on the particular merits of any proposal based on local circumstances but also bearing in mind broader national policies. Local authorities should be doing more to promote informed debate and to develop consensus around their policies so that there is a shared vision for the future development of urban centres and against which individual development schemes can be evaluated.
Water quality
The Chairperson said that the recent E.P.A. report on water quality prompted him to repeat previous concerns about the effect of the ongoing proliferation of septic tanks (including proprietary systems) associated with houses in the countryside. The 15-17,000 rural houses being built every year are adding to pressure on groundwater resources and must be accounting for some of the decline in standards reported by the E.P.A. (57% of groundwater sampling locations were contaminated by faecal coliforms). Over one-third of refusals of rural houses by the Board feature risk of pollution as a reason. Some local authorities are still granting planning permission without having a full set of drainage tests or without a proper assessment of the tests that are submitted. The Board considers that it is not appropriate to grant permission or even outline permission without establishing that it is possible to provide safe drainage on the site. It is not good enough to rely on conditions requiring post-permission evaluations and actions which may not prove effective. This can also apply to housing schemes on unserviced sites which rely on private treatment systems.
The Board welcomes the new waste water discharge regulations which should ensure that permission will not be given for developments discharging to overloaded or otherwise defective treatment plants.
Residential development standards
The Chairperson said that a lot of solid progress was being made in developing a new more sustainable planning paradigm for our expanding urban centres. There is now fairly widespread acceptance of the merits of building at higher densities (which does not necessarily mean high-rise), employing good quality designs, aligning with public transport plans and other infrastructure such as education, recreation, shopping and so on. In the case of large greenfield development areas the SDZ model is being seen as highly effective. However, the same approach can be adapted, if less formally, to smaller scale situations. Implementation of the new standards for residential accommodation published by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government should reinforce the acceptability of apartments as standard family accommodation by ensuring that units offer decent standards as regards internal space, light, storage and private open space. Local Authorities should make it clear to developers that they will look for these standards as a minimum in dealing with planning applications. It can be taken that the Board will do so in any cases coming on appeal, even if the local authority has accepted a lower standard in its decision. The days of blocks of small single aspect flats sitting in car parks are over!
www.buckplanning.ie
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)