A SUBJECT surrounded by great mystery and confusion, maybe Ireland's planners will finally get to the bottom of how Part V of the Planning and Development Act 2000 actually works.
They will be out in force on May 22nd for an IPI members only conference on Part V, "Lessons learnt, future directions".
Part V requires builders to set aside a percentage of new homes developments for social and affordable housing. So far, so straightforward, but some developers have been allowed give financial contributions to the local authorities in lieu of housing units or ignore the rule in swanky developments, offering alternative units in their less, shall we say, salubrious developments instead.
Speakers at the conference will include Nicholas Mansergh, who was involved in a recent court case relating to Part V. Barrister Brian Conroy will talk about recent case law relating to Part V and IHBA director Hubert Fitzpatrick will give the construction industry's perspective on how it will be implemented.
According to Dr Diarmuid O'Grada, planning consultant and lecturer in planning in UCD, another Part V issue is the "growing anomaly between the urban and rural contributions to Part V" and he says it has essentially become "a levy on apartments. The threshold is set at four units so it is predominantly apartments, and Dublin is making an inordinate contribution.
In rural areas where there is more one-off housing, there is a much lower contribution with Roscommon and Leitrim making zero contribution to Part V last year." He says the property tax was abolished because of similar inequities.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Showing posts with label planning and development act 2000. Show all posts
Showing posts with label planning and development act 2000. Show all posts
Friday, 16 May 2008
Friday, 2 May 2008
Demolition was 'flagrant violation' of law
A MAN who demolished an old farmhouse in an area of scenic amenity on a west Cork headland and built a new house in its place was accused by a judge of "driving a coach and four" through the Planning Act.
David Galvin was convicted and fined €1,500 for carrying out an unauthorised development at Brow Head peninsula on March 22nd last year in breach of section 151 of the Planning and Development Act 2000.
He was also ordered to pay €10,000 in costs and €3,483.25 in expenses to Cork County Council when he appeared before Bandon District Court yesterday.
Mr Galvin had claimed that he had not demolished and rebuilt the original farmhouse but had refurbished it and, as such, it was an exempt development.
However, Judge Gerard Haughton said that having heard two days of evidence from Cork County Council officials, he was satisfied that the council had acted in good faith in bringing the prosecution against Mr Galvin.
He said Mr Galvin had gone all out to get the work done as quickly as possible and "in flagrant violation" of the Planning and Development Act.
"He drove a coach and four through it and I can see little that can be said in mitigation," the judge remarked.
Judge Haughton said he had heard evidence that a house which was on the site on March 6th, 2007, and deemed habitable under the Planning and Development Act, had been demolished by the defendant. He added the development on the site could not possibly be considered a refurbishment of an existing dwelling.
Earlier, the barrister acting for Cork County Council, Tim O'Sullivan, told the court that Mr Galvin had not complied with an enforcement notice that ordered him to cease work on the site.
Seán Taylor, a planner with the council, said the site was located in an area on the peninsula designated as a "scenic amenity" overlooking Barleycove Bay, an area of special protection.
The court heard Mr Galvin believed the complaint the council received in relation to the site was "vexatious or malicious and had arisen from begrudgery".
An enforcement notice was sent to the defendant on May 1st, 2007, ordering that he cease construction and demolish any unauthorised development, but this was not complied with.
Defence solicitor Ernest Cantillon told the court that his client had no previous convictions and he said a conviction would have serious implications for Mr Galvin.
He said Mr Galvin had taken advice from experts that had now been found to be wrong and that he would have to pay the price.
However, Judge Haughton pointed out that the defendant was aware he could have sought retention of the old farmhouse in the development but he had not pursued this course of action.
MICHELLE McDONAGH
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
David Galvin was convicted and fined €1,500 for carrying out an unauthorised development at Brow Head peninsula on March 22nd last year in breach of section 151 of the Planning and Development Act 2000.
He was also ordered to pay €10,000 in costs and €3,483.25 in expenses to Cork County Council when he appeared before Bandon District Court yesterday.
Mr Galvin had claimed that he had not demolished and rebuilt the original farmhouse but had refurbished it and, as such, it was an exempt development.
However, Judge Gerard Haughton said that having heard two days of evidence from Cork County Council officials, he was satisfied that the council had acted in good faith in bringing the prosecution against Mr Galvin.
He said Mr Galvin had gone all out to get the work done as quickly as possible and "in flagrant violation" of the Planning and Development Act.
"He drove a coach and four through it and I can see little that can be said in mitigation," the judge remarked.
Judge Haughton said he had heard evidence that a house which was on the site on March 6th, 2007, and deemed habitable under the Planning and Development Act, had been demolished by the defendant. He added the development on the site could not possibly be considered a refurbishment of an existing dwelling.
Earlier, the barrister acting for Cork County Council, Tim O'Sullivan, told the court that Mr Galvin had not complied with an enforcement notice that ordered him to cease work on the site.
Seán Taylor, a planner with the council, said the site was located in an area on the peninsula designated as a "scenic amenity" overlooking Barleycove Bay, an area of special protection.
The court heard Mr Galvin believed the complaint the council received in relation to the site was "vexatious or malicious and had arisen from begrudgery".
An enforcement notice was sent to the defendant on May 1st, 2007, ordering that he cease construction and demolish any unauthorised development, but this was not complied with.
Defence solicitor Ernest Cantillon told the court that his client had no previous convictions and he said a conviction would have serious implications for Mr Galvin.
He said Mr Galvin had taken advice from experts that had now been found to be wrong and that he would have to pay the price.
However, Judge Haughton pointed out that the defendant was aware he could have sought retention of the old farmhouse in the development but he had not pursued this course of action.
MICHELLE McDONAGH
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)