Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 71:

In page 47, to delete lines 23 and 24 and substitute the following:"11.(1) Section 48 (which relates to development contributions) of the Principal Act is amended—

(a) in subsection (3A) (inserted by the Urban Regeneration and Housing Act 2015) by substituting the following for paragraph (b);

"(b) where the development comprises houses and one or more of those houses has not been rented, leased, occupied or sold,",

and

(b) by substituting the following for subsection (3B) (as so inserted):

"(3B) Where a development referred to in subsection (3A) comprises houses one or more of which has not been rented, leased, occupied or sold the planning authority shall apply the change in the basis for the determination of the contribution referred to in that subsection only in respect of any house or houses that have not been rented, leased, occupied or sold.

(2) Section 48 (which relates to development contributions) of the Principal Act is amended in subsection (17)—".

I will also address other amendments in this group, amendments Nos. 72 to 75, inclusive, and Nos. 82 to 87, inclusive. I will then address Opposition amendments Nos. 79 to 81, inclusive, 96 and 98.

Turning first to amendment No. 71, sections 48 and 49 of the principal Act provide for development contributions. Amendment No. 71 is a technical amendment to clarify an unforeseen outcome from the way in which the Urban Regeneration and Housing Act 2015 provided for reductions in the application of development contributions to assist in addressing the current housing supply shortage situation. The amendment is intended to close a loophole in the 2015 Act whereby a developer who has not sold houses in a development and has been renting or leasing them thereby getting rental income in the process, could simultaneously apply for a reduction in the development contributions in respect of such houses, effectively gaining on the double. This possibility was not intended in the 2015 Act and the amendment now clarifies that any reduction in respect of development contributions can only be availed of in the cases of houses that have not been rented, leased, occupied or sold.

Amendment No. 72 inserts a new section in the Bill to amend section 144 of the principal Act. In this connection, section 144 enables the board, with the Minister's approval, to set fees for appeals and various other matters and functions with which the board is concerned. The amendment proposes to insert a new subparagraph in section 144 to provide explicitly that the board may determine a fee for an appeal by a property owner against the proposed application of the vacant site levy by a planning authority under the provision of the Urban Regeneration and Housing Act 2015.

Amendment No. 73 is now withdrawn as it is considered to be unnecessary.

Amendments Nos. 74 and 75 are technical amendments to Part XAB of the principal Act, specifically, in sections 177S and 177T. Changes are proposed in these two amendments to close potential gaps in the principal Act. To clarify that, the Minister will be the competent authority for the purpose of undertaking an appropriate assessment under the Habitats Directive of the draft national planning framework if such is required and to confirm who shall prepare the subsequent Natura impact report for the NPF - it will also be the Minister.

Government amendments Nos. 82 to 87, inclusive, all relate to what are minor technical amendments to the provisions relating to strategic housing developments in the Planning and Development (Housing) and Residential Tenancies Act 2016. It is proposed that these amending provisions will come into operation on the enactment of this Bill. I propose all of these Government amendments.

Moving on to the Opposition amendments, amendment No. 79 relates to section 179 of the principal planning Act which, in association with Part VIII of the planning regulations, sets out the arrangements for approval by local authorities of own-development proposals relating to social housing, local roads, libraries, community facilities, etc. The amendment proposes to insert a new subsection (2A) in section 179 to provide that the regulations made under this section shall require a local authority, when notifying prescribed bodies or providing information to the public on any local authority-owned developed proposal, that the information provided shall be the same as required if the proposed development were subject to a planning application. It is important to note that the Part VIII process is not the same as the application for planning permission but is rather a notice of intention to undertake a proposed development which is ultimately subject to the approval of the elected members. In any event, the Part VIII provisions already set out the procedure to give public notice of, and ensure that the public and prescribed bodies are consulted on, any such proposed developments and inviting submissions. I consider that the current Part VIII requirements are sufficient in this regard. On this basis, I do not consider the amendment necessary and I am opposing it.

Amendment No. 80 proposes to amend section 208 of the principal Act regarding public right of way. This amendment, by Deputy Eamon Ryan, proposes to revise section 208 of the principal Act to provide that where a provision in a development plan or local area plan in force on the commencement of this section relates to the preservation of a public right of way, the way shall be maintained by the planning authority. I do not have any issue with Deputy Ryan's proposal and I am, therefore, proposing to accept it, even though he is not here. I am not sure if Deputy Ryan can move it.