Michael Healy-Rae (Kerry South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 260: To ask the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government his views on correspondence (details supplied) regarding re-zoning; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16389/11]

Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I received a copy of the correspondence in question on 10 June and issued a reply on 16 June.

In my capacity as a statutory consultee in respect of certain planning functions under the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended), Westport Town Council has recently submitted a draft variation to its Development Plan 2009-2015 which concerns the historic setting in question. Given that the statutory process is currently under way, it would not be appropriate to comment further on the matter until the Council has had an opportunity to consider my Department's observations on the draft variation. I expect that the statutory comments provided in the Department's submission will be addressed in due course as part of the Manager's Report to the Council on all the submissions received.

Notwithstanding the above, it remains the case that I will continue to act in the public interest at all times in ensuring proper development, including in relation to the protection and preservation of our rich cultural heritage.

Patrick O'Donovan (Limerick, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 261: To ask the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government if he is satisfied that planning authorities are facilitating the extension of planning applications in accordance with the terms of SI 406 of 2010, to those persons who have been affected by the economic recession and are as a result unable to avail of the permission within the original timeframe granted; if his attention has been drawn to the fact that planning authorities are introducing new conditions to the original grant of permission; if he will assess the implementation of the statutory instrument; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16408/11]

Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Section 28 of the Planning and Development (Amendment) Act 2010 amended Section 42 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 to provide that the duration of a planning permission may be extended where substantial works have not been done, or where the development has not even commenced, in cases where the planning authority is satisfied that there were considerations of a commercial, economic or technical nature beyond the control of the applicant which substantially militated against either the commencement of development or the carrying out of substantial works, pursuant to the planning permission (again provided that an application complying with the relevant Regulations was made before the expiration of the initial period). This latter provision is, however, subject to the following qualifications -

· that the planning authority is satisfied that there have been no significant changes in the development objectives in the development plan or in regional development objectives in the Regional Planning Guidelines for the area of the planning authority since the date of the permission such that the development would no longer be consistent with the proper planning and sustainable development of the area,

· that the planning authority is satisfied that the development would not be inconsistent with the proper planning and sustainable development of the area, having regard to any guidelines issued by the Minister under section 28, notwithstanding that they were so issued after the date of the grant of permission in relation to which an application is made under this section, and/or

· that the planning authority is satisfied where the development has not commenced, that an environmental impact assessment, or an appropriate assessment, or both of those assessments, if required, was or were carried out before the permission was granted.

In extending the duration of permission under the new provision, a planning authority may attach conditions requiring the giving of adequate security for the satisfactory completion of the proposed development, and/or may add to or vary any conditions to which the permission is already subject under section 34(4)(g ).

Planning authorities are required to implement section 42, as amended. I am not aware of any instances of their not doing so.