John Gormley (Dublin South East, Green Party)

Accordingly, the proposal in the Bill is to have a two thirds majority for material changes after the draft plan has been placed on display. The two thirds requirement does not apply to approving the draft plan before it is placed on public display. As I stated previously, one of the key objectives of the Bill is to strengthen local democracy and accountability in accordance with the ongoing process of local government reform to be pursued in the forthcoming White Paper on local government. The increased requirement for two thirds support for material amendments to draft development plans is appropriate, as the development plan forms the blueprint for development within a planning authority area.

I turn now to the question of community gain. The Bill amends the principal Act to provide for a wider definition of public infrastructure and facilities to reflect newer infrastructural requirements. Having regard to the sustainable communities agenda and other policy developments such as the developing areas initiative, the wider definition of public infrastructure and and facilities will, if needed, provide local authorities with greater flexibility to use development levies. This will allow the levies to be spent on a broader range of items such as flood relief works, broadband provision and school sites, matters raised by many Senators.

Senator Quinn referred, rightly, to the relationship between planning policy and promoting healthy lifestyles. Under existing planning legislation, planning authorities' development plans must include objectives for the following: integration of planning and sustainable development of an area with social, community and cultural requirements for the area and its population; and the preservation, improvement and extension of amenities and recreational amenities. Statutory planning guidance such as the guidelines I published, namely, "Guidelines for planning authorities on sustainable residential development in urban areas — cities, towns and villages — 2008" and "Guidelines for planning authorities on design standards for apartments 2007", has been provided for planning authorities which reinforces the need to provide adequate open space and recreational facilities, particularly for children, and in designing new residential development they should prioritise cycling and walking and minimise the need for private cars. The residential development guidelines recommend integrated housing and public transport development which minimises the requirement for car use and proper footpath and cycleway access for new developments. They also recommend direct walking and cycling routes to local facilities such as shops and schools and set quantative open space standards for active or passive use within developments. The guidelines can be assessed on my Department's website.

Legislation and guidance provide the framework and tools for planning authorities to make provisions in their development plan for policies to positively address obesity and support general healthy lifestyles for people of all ages. My Department is represented on the task force on obesity within the remit of the Department of Health and Children and will continue to play a full role in cross-departmental initiatives in this area.

A number of Senators made reference to derelict sites. The Derelict Sites Act 1990 provides for the acquisition of such sites by local authorities to enable them to require the execution of works on such sites by the owners and, in certain circumstances, to execute works on derelict sites at the expense of the owners and to provide for other matters connected with matters aforesaid. My Department is in the process of updating the list of prescribed areas under section 21 of the Act which allows local authorities to propose areas for prescription as urban areas for the purposes of the Act. The areas are prescribed by way of a statutory instrument. Following its enactment, the local authorities may impose levies on the owner of the site. The levy is based on the value of the land. The imposition of levies on the owners or occupiers of the lands in question is to encourage the owners or occupiers to remove the lands from dereliction.

Senator Glynn referred to the issue of legislation on dangerous buildings not being enforced. Building regulations generally apply to the construction of a new building, the extension and material alteration of an existing building and material change of use of an existing building. Where a building control authority considers that construction works or a change of use within the scope of the building regulations may give rise to a risk to the health and safety of persons who may be in or about the building or works, it may apply to the High Court or Circuit Court under section 12 of the Building Control Acts 1990 and 2007 for an order requiring the following: the removal, alteration or making safe of any structure, service, fitting or equipment, or the discontinuance of any works or the restriction or prohibition of the use of the building until any of the above requirements has been effected. Enforcement of the building regulations is the responsibility of the 37 building control authorities.

Senator Norris raised the issue of flood plains. In September 2008 my colleague, the Minister of State with responsibility for the OPW, Deputy Martin Mansergh, and I issued for public consultation draft guidelines for planning authorities. These guidelines, entitled The Planning System and Flood Risk Management, are aimed at ensuring a more consistent, rigorous and systematic approach to incorporating flood risk identification, assessment and management in the planning system and building upon its long-standing acknowledgement in the legislation as an important planning issue. Submissions received on foot of the consultation process are being considered by my Department in conjunction with the OPW with a view to finalising and publishing the statutory guidelines by the end of the year at the latest.

Senator Norris also made the point that the development of Spain's metro system was possible because planning laws had been adjusted to secure rights to land underneath houses. The Planning and Development (Strategic Infrastructure) Act 2006 introduced a streamlined planning consent procedure for strategic infrastructural developments and amended the rules of compulsory acquisition to provide that the value of any land lying ten metres or more below the surface shall be taken to be nil unless it can be shown to be of greater value by a claimant.

Allied to this, the Planning and Development (Amendment) Bill 2009 will amend the Transport (Railway Infrastructure) Act 2001 to provide An Bord Pleanála with powers to recover costs in respect of applications for railway orders. The applicant pays principle is the basis for the payment of costs under the strategic infrastructure Act. Applicants are currently required to pay costs associated with the development consent process as determined by the board. The development consent application fee of €100,000 is offset against these costs and the developer pays the balance as applicable.

The costs to date on some major projects have been significant. The board does not recover any of the significant costs it incurs in dealing with cases that do not proceed beyond the pre-application stage. The board must strike a balance between offering continual improvement in pre-application consultations for those cases that are truly strategic infrastructure and funding the costs associated with the pre-application consultation service it provides. The Bill provides for the recovery by An Bord Pleanála of its costs associated with the pre-application stage. Such costs can be offset against the formal application fee for those cases that proceed to be determined by the board.

Senators also raised a number of issues relating to developers' performance, including the matters of unfinished estates, the provision of bonds as security relating to the completion of essential works on estates and measures to refuse permission to a developer with a history of non-compliance with previous permissions. In early 2008, my Department issued policy guidance on taking residential developments in charge, emphasising the importance of a proactive role for local authorities in ensuring, in so far as they can, that residential developments are completed properly by developers to the standards set out in the planning permission. Planning authorities were urged to ensure they attached appropriate conditions to planning permissions, including conditions regarding bonds and phasing of developments, inspected the developments during and after construction and took early enforcement action if appropriate.

Concerning bonds, the guidance stated that the amount of security and the terms under which it is required to be given must enable the planning authority, without cost to itself, to complete the necessary services, including roads, footpaths, water mains, sewers, lighting and open spaces, to a satisfactory standard in the event of default by the developer. It was also stated that the condition must require that the lodgement of the security be coupled with an agreement that would empower the planning authority to realise the amount of the security and that the bond must be of sufficient duration to allow time to inspect the development after the expiration of permission and still call it a bond if necessary.

Section 35 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 introduced the concept of the refusal of planning permission because of the applicant's non-compliance with a previous planning permission, but this refusal was subject to the consent of the High Court. The Planning and Development (Strategic Infrastructure) Act 2006 amended this provision by reversing the burden of proof. Now, the planning authority can refuse permission in such a case and the planning applicant must apply to the High Court if he or she wants to have that decision reversed.

I am broadening and strengthening the circumstances under which a planning authority can refuse planning permission to include instances in which an applicant has carried out an unauthorised substantial development or has been convicted of any offence under the planning Acts. I am confident that this provision will facilitate the greater use of section 35 by the planning authorities which should make for a culture of greater compliance with the planning controls.

Senator Cummins highlighted the issue of vehicles being used to display advertising on roadsides. If a vehicle is left in one location for long periods and is in use as an unauthorised advertising structure, it is difficult to see why it should be exempt from planning enforcement. The erection of unauthorised advertising structures other than road traffic signs is regulated, as the Senator should know. A licence is issued under section 254 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 for a structure on, under, over or along a public road. Planning permission under section 34 of the 2000 Act is required for signage on private property. My Department is preparing statutory guidance with the Department of Transport and the National Roads Authority, NRA. It is intended that the issue of road signage and the practice of parking large truck trailers off the road as a means of advertising hauliers will be addressed in these guidelines which I hope to issue in draft form for public consultation early next year.

A number of Senators referred to the national spatial strategy which is designed as a 20-year strategic document and has been endorsed by the Government. In the context of the Bill, the ongoing review of the regional planning guidelines, which translate the strategy's principles into concrete objectives and have been adopted by each regional authority, will have a major influence on how future development plans are drafted, thus improving local and regional responsibility and accountability for ensuring all parts of the country develop in a sustainable manner.

The issue of what constitutes a draft development plan was raised by Senator Walsh, for whose contribution I was in attendance. The short answer is that the manager is tasked with preparing the draft plan in accordance with any directions given to him or her by the council. The council is free to make any amendments to the draft which then goes on public display.

I am greatly encouraged by the generally supportive and constructive contributions by Members on Second Stage and I look forward to dealing with the detail of the Bill on Committee Stage. I thank Senators for their contributions.