An Bord Pleanála today reported a backlog in the planning system due to the volume of applications and criticised what it said was inefficient use of land and infrastructure.
Announcing the board’s annual report for 2007, chairman John O’Connor revealed that a record intake of 6,700 cases in 2007 left a “significant backlog” at year end that affected the timeliness of board decisions.
There remains a backlog of some 1,000 cases despite the number in the first ten months of 2008 falling 16 per cent on last year’s level, and the number of cases in hand by the end of October dropping to 2,780, 250 less than the peak seen last March.
An Bord Pleanála said that this year, just 25 per cent of appeals will be completed within the statutory time objective of 18 weeks but expressed the hope that progress can be made in this area next year.
Among other trends for 2007, 32 per cent of local decisions appealed were reversed by the board; first-party appeals against refusal resulted in grants of permission in 29 per cent of cases, up from 26 per cent in 2006; while third-party appeals against grants of permission resulted in 37 per cent refusals, down from 43 per cent in 2006.
The board also reported that it is “constantly” coming across zoned sites that are too far removed from developed areas, and too remote from public facilities such as footpaths and lighting, with no likelihood of public transport.
It stated that much of the development witnessed “does not represent the orderly expansion of settlements in conjunction with the efficient use of land and infrastructure”. Major public investment in transport and utility infrastructure must dictate where future development takes place, the board added.
“The idea that every place must get development no matter how thinly spread was never sustainable, but will be distinctly less sustainable in the future - either in the environmental or the economic sense.”
Mr O’Connor, chairman, said the board also had concerns about the frequency with which decisions on individual developments “do not reflect the policies in the Development Plan or the Local Area Plan”.
“The board can often be seen as a stronger defender of the Development Plan than the local authority who adopted it,” he said, adding: “This has serious implications for the credibility of the whole system . . . if councils are not seen to respect their own plans, developers and the general public are less likely to do so.”
The chairman also urged local government in the State to take into account the new realities of economic and climate change, increased concerns about heritage loss and about unnecessary sprawl into good agricultural land.
“This will inevitably mean de-zoning some of the indiscriminate and excessive zonings in existing Development Plans which are now completely out of line with current imperatives,” he said.
Mr. O’Connor went on to note he was determined that oral hearings held by the board into strategic infrastructure and planning appeals are conducted “expeditiously” and without “undue formality” as the Act requires.
Concern was expressed that some lawyers participating in hearings “are engaging in courtroom histrionics which may be good for the odd headline but have no place in a planning hearing”.
The report stated that while lawyers can make a valuable input to hearings, “this conduct tends to prolong hearings unduly, distract from the real purpose of the hearing and can also hinder the inspector in getting to the root of the planning and environmental issues involved and reporting the facts to the board”.
“These comments would also apply to certain non-lawyer participants on occasion.”
Responding to the report, Labour TD Dublin South Central, Mary Upton, welcomed An Bord Pleanála's observation that some decisions on individual developments by local authorities do not reflect the polices in the Development Plan or Local Area Plan.
"If local authorities observed the conditions of their own development plans, much time and money could be saved," Ms Upton said. "The planning process in Ireland has for decades been developer-led and designed so as to benefit the fat cats to the exclusion of the local residents who have to live and work every day in these areas.
She continued: "I would urge An Bord Pleanála to continue to hold local planning authorities to account for contravening their own development plans. The cost of an appeal to a community or an individual is substantial. The cost to a developer is buttons."
