Seanad debates

Wednesday, 19 March 2008

Sustainable Residential Development: Motion

 

6:00 pm

Photo of Pearse DohertyPearse Doherty (Sinn Fein)

If one talks to any councillor throughout the State, one will hear that one of the major frustrations concerns trying to liaise with the planning sections. Councillors understand the burden the planners are under in trying to deal with enforcement, regulations and the huge number of applications, particularly given the construction boom, and while perhaps they will not be as busy in the future, they are stretched at present. If there is a need to have area plans for all of the towns and villages of 400 plus under the guidelines, that is a change from existing legislation and, therefore, resources need to be put into the forward planning units of the councils.

Sometimes we are very good in terms of providing guidelines or legislation but very bad at the follow-up and providing resources to back them up and implement them. Having listened to the Minister's contribution, there is little with which I would disagree. I agree with his sentiments and the approach he is taking. However, the details of how we enforce legislation and roll it out need to be followed up.

Chapter 6.3(e) states that individual applications can be no more than 15% of the housing stock in a village at any given time. While that is to be welcomed as a means of ensuring no one developer builds a massive residential or other development within a town, we also need to put a cap on the number of individual applications that are made. Over the lifetime of a plan, one could have 20 individual applications of up to 15%. It is a rolling process and one could see the doubling of the size of a village within the lifetime of a plan, which would not result in proper development. It is an issue that needs to be examined.

We presume that towns and villages are serviced but the reality is that many are not, and will not be for a long time under the approach by the Department to funding for capital projects, particularly water and environment projects. In Donegal, for example, over a four-year programme the contributions that will be amassed from the public in development contributions for sewerage schemes throughout the county amount to €32 million yet over €120 million is required by Donegal County Council to meet its part of the matched funding. The council has two options, therefore. One is to not provide sewerage schemes in towns and villages and the other is to increase development charges by 400%.

If we are to have sustainable development and higher density in towns and villages, we need to provide services and provide for those in the planning departments who draw up the local area plans. We also need to row back on the idea whereby local authorities are asked to put up close to 40% of matching funding to develop sewerage schemes, which cannot be done at this time.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.