Dáil debates

Wednesday, 3 February 2010

Planning and Development (Amendment) Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Second Stage (Resumed)

 

4:00 pm

Photo of Aengus Ó SnodaighAengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

Tá sé go maith go bhfuil an deis agam labhairt ar an Bhille seo. Is Bille tábhachtach é agus tá sé ríthráthúil go bhfuil sé os ár gcomhair inniu, go háirithe go bhfuil an deis againn tosú athuair ag féachaint ar phleanáil agus ar fhorbairt sa tír seo mar rinne muid an oiread sin botún le 20 nó 30 bliain anuas.

Ní ghá dúinn ach féachaint timpeall ar chathair Bhaile Átha Cliath chun féachaint ar na mórbhotúin a bhí déanta agus ní ghá dúinn ach féachaint ar an fhiosrúchán poiblí a bhí ann le tamall maith de bhlianta anois mar gheall ar an chaimiléireacht a bhí ar siúl i mBaile Átha Cliath, i gceantar na comhairle contae go háirithe, in áiteanna cosúil le Leamhcán, Tamhlacht, Blanchardstown agus a leithéid, áiteanna a bhí athzónáil déanta ar cheantair mhóra fhairsinge in ainneoin go raibh na daoine sa chomhairle contae ag an am ag rá nár chóir don phleanáil seo dul ar aghaidh. Ainneoin sin, agus de thairbhe breabanna a tugadh do pholaiteoirí, roinnt acu a bhí sa Teach seo, cuidíodh le daoine a bhí ag triail le forbairt a dhéanamh agus dá bharr sin táimid thíos leis mar chathair. Tá an sochaí ina iomlán thíos leis.

Tá sé tábhachtach anois go gcuirfimid an bunús ceart le déanamh cinnte nach bhfillfimid ar na botúin sin. Mar sin, tacaím leis an Bhille seo, ach go háirithe an chuid sin de, mar a deir an meamram a fuair muid, atá ag cur le daonlathas áitiúil mar cheann de bhunphrionsabail an Bhille. Is é mo thuairim féin nach dtéann an Bille fada go leor agus tá ceisteanna agam, cosúil le roinnt de na Teachtaí eile, le freagairt ag an Aire. Seans nuair a bheimid ag plé Chéim an Choiste, beidh sé in ann sin a dhéanamh agus athruithe a dhéanamh.

Ní ghá ach féachaint ar an oiread sin eastát tithíochta atá go hiomlán folamh nó leath-fholamh timpeall na tíre le feiceáil cá raibh muid mícheart. Is samplá an-soiléir é sin den dóigh a theip ar an phleanáil. Ní phleanáil tí amháin atá i gceist, ach pleanáil agus forbairt amach anseo. Is é sin an fáth go bhfuil sé tábhachtach go bhfuil na pleananna áitiúla tábhachtach sa Bhille seo agus go bhfuil beagáinín daingniú maidir le pleananna forbartha ó na comhairlí contae sa Bhille, agus maidir le pleananna réigiúnacha.

Samplá eile den teip iomlán ó thaobh pleanála de ná na tuilte a tharla i mbailte timpeall na tíre. Theip ar an chóras pleanála go huile agus go hiomlán a fheiceáil go raibh botún á dhéanamh nuair a tógadh tithe i gceantair a bhí i mbaol tuile. Ní bhainfidh an Bille seo leis sin, déanfaidh na comhairlí áitiúla agus na pleananna áitiúla sin agus foghlaimeoimid ón bhotún a rinneadh toisc raibh forbairt níos tábhachtaí ná pleanáil cheart le tamall maith de bhlianta.

In my contribution on the opening Stage of this important Bill, I want to concentrate on ensuring that the consequences of bad planning are addressed. I am referring to flooding, a lack of services and empty offices and homes across the country. As has been blatantly evident for the past year, we failed as a society to plan properly. Some of this owed to bad advice, some of it owed to the planning process corruption in which many elected officials and some council officeholders were involved. This corruption was not just confined to the Dublin area.

We need to ensure that, through the mechanisms imposed by the Bill, we do not repeat those mistakes. We must also not repeat the mistake of relying overly on a certain building type or height, as suggested recently. In Dublin at least, the property boom seemed to concentrate overly on apartment blocks, high rises and the rezoning of industrial estates to facilitate them. Proper planning takes account of the need for people to be close to their workplaces. The rezoning of industrial estates in Dublin forced many businesses further and further out of the city centre and the near suburbs. This is not sustainable if we are to be environmentally friendly, as more people need to commute to and from work. Local area plans not only take account of the residential and service needs of local areas, but also of their employment needs. Each local area plan ensures that space is set aside to encourage employment whenever it is created and facilitated by a future Government, as this Government has no action plan in that regard.

Concerning local area plans, communities need to be better facilitated so as that they can have the technical aid they need to play a full role. A mechanism by which communities were given extra help, resources and abilities to challenge planning applications detrimental to their societies and communities and Government plans on large developments such as roads and so on was the community development project system. Included in the list produced on Friday of community development projects that were not granted a reprieve was Community Technical Aid, CTA, one of this city's organisations that have helped communities to acquire and utilise the skills they require to play a full role in the planning system. In particular, it helped inner city communities that were trying to be regenerated to set their own demands. It allowed community members, from the youngest child to the oldest resident, to understand their role in future planning. Even at this late stage, will serious consideration be given to allowing a role for those community development projects and partnership that still exist so as that communities can be facilitated in trying to get to grips with major planning proposals and with playing a full role in local area planning?

We are addressing planning and development. The Minister will table amendments to section 22 that are designed to remove any legal blockage to e-planning. What of planning notices? Not only will they be erected at the dwelling in question, but notice should also be served on other dwellings in the vicinity, for example, all homes within a radius of 500 m in an urban area and a radius of 1 mile in a rural area. Not everyone reads newspapers or has access to e-mail. Planning permissions and applications have gone ahead without neighbours being aware of them or their own roles in that regard. This mechanism is available in other countries and should be encouraged, as it allows people to understand that they have a role in objecting if they wish.

Will the Minister of State remove the €20 fee on planning objections? A recent European Court of Justice judgment means that VAT is to be applied on goods and services supplied by the State. Will the Minister of State give a commitment that VAT will not be charged on the fee, as doing so would make objecting more expensive for communities? Knowing the Government, it would charge VAT at the 21% rate because it believes that objecting to a planning application is a luxury. If it believed otherwise, it would remove the fee.

This legislation does not deal with a problem in my area fully, namely, the ability of the likes of the Railway Procurement Agency to ride roughshod over local communities. In some cases, it seems to be a law unto itself. It produces plans, but only then consults communities instead of consulting them in the first instance. I am referring to the Inchicore area where CIE operates. The intention is to place a portal — an exit — of the DART extension in the middle of a community. It would be like putting a portal in the heart of this Chamber. That would be the effect on people living around the site of the portal of the DART extension tunnel.

There was no consultation prior to the plan although there seems to be a bit of movement from the RPA after the fact. With proposals on that scale, there should be consultations with the community before the fact. Options should be outlined and the public should be asked for opinions, as alternatives have been proposed by various people in the community which would be less detrimental and probably more effective than what the RPA intends to do in that case.

Ugly and inappropriate buildings are also relevant to planning regulations. Some buildings overshadow older and established community buildings, and most councils are now in the middle of drawing up draft development plans. As elected Members, we know how to use this process and we understand its consequences, although others do not. Sometimes there are inappropriate buildings that may be in line with development plans but do not sit well with the area, sticking out like a sore thumb.

One of the recent examples is the proposal which will destroy and overshadow a national monument. There is a proposal to develop the area around Moore Street, the Carlton cinema and on to O'Connell Street and make it look like some type of fancy shopping centre with a ski resort. The plans look as if there is a ski resort on the top of the building heading towards the GPO. People could ski down the building, take off and land on the roof of the GPO.

This is inappropriate given that this is the historic heart of Dublin. This site was in the hands of the authorities but it has now reverted to private ownership, with the owners feeling they can do with it what they want. This site should be preserved and this is the type of proposal where a local area plan should be built up. This type of proposal should not get to the planning stage and should be ruled out as inappropriate and out of kilter with other buildings, the future planning for that area and the common good.

Much more imaginative proposals could be made for that site, particularly the side of Moore Street from No. 10 to No. 21. This would not only facilitate the preservation of the national monument but bring about significant tourist development for the future. It is the Acting Chairman's area and he would welcome more tourism for the north inner city in particular.

That is not the only affected area. There has been municipal destruction of historic sites elsewhere and I see nothing in the Bill that could prevent that other than to be aware of them in advance. The latest site was discovered in Smithfield. It is a Viking site showing that Viking Dublin was on both sides of the river, and this can be preserved intact. What has become common of late is for archaeologists to work under severe pressure to locate and excavate sites before covering them with concrete because they cannot preserve them in situ or else take them from the location, which defeats the science of archaeology.

When we come across sites like this with no development proposal, the State must step in quickly to preserve the site. Ireland has relied on tourism in the past and can rely on it more in future. That involves promoting our heritage and history, of which we have much. Not every site is as valuable as what I have outlined and not every site can be preserved. Key sites like the one on Wood Quay, which was destroyed by Dublin City Council, the site in Smithfield and the likes of the GPO and Moore Street should be saved. We can also go across the country taking in the likes of Tara and the Viking town outside Waterford.

Many sites must be preserved intact in their own environment to show the world. There are 60 million people in America who believe they are of Irish descent. Many of them would love to return to Ireland and see for themselves the parts of our history which are intact. There has been much done in the past and the likes of Newgrange, etc., have been well preserved, with interpretive centres built to ensure the site is not damaged with a significant influx of tourists. There are other plans which could destroy the environment and landscape of such sites. This ties in with the regional planning we spoke about.

A regional planning authority and regional plans have been mentioned. In the case of the Dublin and east coast region, will the new directly-elected mayor be in charge of this? That position will only come into being if the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy John Gormley, manages to get his act together and produce that legislation.

I do not have time to address the problem of multi-unit development. I do not know if section 31 of the Bill is anomalous but if it is passed into law, the council will ask itself to take property in charge in some cases because the council would be the owner of many dwellings, including affordable and social housing in some complexes. The council would have a vested interest in taking in charge some of the properties, which might cause a problem in future.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.