Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 31 Mar 1999

Vol. 503 No. 1

Local Government (Planning and Development) Bill, 1998 [ Seanad ] : Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Ms Clune

Before the debate was adjourned, I was speaking about the interiors of buildings. I welcomed the fact that both the interior and curtilage of buildings were being included in the provisions of the Bill and were recognised as an essential part of the structure of buildings. Sadly, it is about 20 years too late to save many of the fine buildings in Dublin and elsewhere throughout the country. Nonetheless, the provision is a worthwhile inclusion in the legislation.

I wish to talk about the detail of the Bill and the practicalities of what is involved in the proposals, as well as what I see as the volume of work involved in producing a list of all relevant buildings and structures. The work involved in producing such an inventory has been greatly underestimated. For example, it took up to 14 years to list all the thatched cottages in the five eastern counties. While this is no reflection on those involved in the task, it demonstrates that it takes time to visit, inspect, photograph and document such sites as well as dealing with all the legal aspects. That is just an example of the time taken to prepare a list of one type of structure in one area of the country. It will take many years to list all the buildings and other structures that should be protected. We have no written knowledge or any idea of what we have in the country. While it will be an enormous task to draw up such a list, it is an essential one and every support must be given to the conservation officers the Government proposes to appoint.

I understand that some counties have no lists of protected buildings, nor have they made attempts to prepare such lists. It is high time that we began this work, even though we are coming from behind. Until such an inventory of protected buildings is documented we cannot begin to protect our architectural and cultural heritage. The resources necessary to complete this national inventory should be given priority.

I am concerned about the provisions in section 10 of the Bill whereby a planning authority can, if it deems that a protected structure will be endangered, serve a notice on the owner or occupier of such a protected structure requiring them to carry out works to prevent it from becoming, or continuing to be, endangered.

At its own discretion a local authority can provide financial assistance for these works but the money allocated for these grants does not seem to be much when one considers that a wing of Castletown House cost £3.5 million to preserve. I would be concerned that there would not be sufficient funds to match the requirements, particularly for private owners. While such people may recognise that they own a building or structure of architectural or historical importance and may genuinely want to comply with the legislation, they may not be able to afford to do so. Support will be available at the discretion of the local authority, but who will decide whether a structure of architectural importance or of social or scientific value is to be preserved? It is an impossible decision for one individual. The Bill's principles are commendable, but I have serious reservations about the funding allocated to conservation and to conservation officers.

Mr. McGuinness

I commend the Minister and the Department on this legislation. I support any effort to open up and develop the planning process. I have served in local government for 20 years, and I come from a city that sells its tourism package on the basis of the medieval buildings scattered through the city and county. During that period I have seen enormous weaknesses in the planning process.

The first weakness is a financial one. Local authority planning offices are badly understaffed, and due to the enormous uplift in the economy, various planning authorities have been inundated with new applications. Applications to Kilkenny County Council have risen by 75 per cent, but the staff levels in the local authority have not risen. The technology used in the processing of planning applications is from the dark ages, and when a city is confronted with an enormous number of applications which may impact upon heritage buildings, there is no way in the present system, unless technology is made available to officials, to work out the impact of new developments or buildings on existing sites and buildings. Perhaps a CD-ROM system would help.

There is a great need for new legislation in this area. There is also a need to upgrade the skills of staff working in planning offices. An ongoing increase in finance must also be made available to these offices for proper staffing. The policing of sites that impact on heritage structures leaves a lot to be desired. There probably is no such policing or very little of it, perhaps just enough to get by, and it is not enough to arrest the injury that has been inflicted on our heritage. I ask the Minister to take the inadequacies of the present system into consideration, especially given the pace of recent development.

People must also be educated. Perhaps we should begin by ensuring that there is a package in every school to tell children about their local heritage and to ensure that there is at least a basic knowledge and understanding of heritage. Sometimes we cannot see the wood for the trees and we may miss the precious heritage of our own counties. Business people should also be educated, though many large business institutions should know the heritage of their local areas well. I could give examples of financial institutions which have purchased properties alongside their own and which have destroyed listed properties with the sanction of An Bord Pleanála, to the annoyance of the local authorities. Tyler's, a listed building in Kilkenny's High Street, was torn down and replaced by an extension from a local financial institution. If that institution had been made aware of the value of the building, it had the resources available to give something back to Kilkenny. It could have given back a properly restored building.

Speakers have said that heritage buildings in many towns and villages are being replaced by facades. Planning applications were submitted for two beautiful Georgian buildings in Kilkenny, and the only condition attached to the planning permission was that a superstore extending into the buildings would preserve the facades. We now have two facades with a modern structure behind them. The interiors of those buildings were taken out and sold to salvage yards. The finest examples of fireplaces and doors, even stone, are being taken out of these buildings, sold through scrap yards and ending up in houses where they do not belong and look out of place. There is no legislation to govern that and local authorities are almost powerless.

How powerless will this new legislation be to deal with multinationals or indigenous business if they do not care for or understand their environments? An Bord Pleanála recently issued a condition to a planning permission in Kilkenny to the effect that the shop front of a listed building should be taken down and erected elsewhere. What nonsense will it come up with next? That shows no understanding of a town or city trying to preserve its heritage and to understand its past. This is a bulldozer process used by individuals or institutions with the money to do so.

In 20 years of local government I have seen much of our local heritage lost or damaged. There is an over-gentrification of our heritage, especially with important vernacular buildings. Kells in County Kilkenny is an area that has not been cleaned up, to use the Irish term. It has been kept in its present form and the local community needs money to preserve it, but that community will not damage it and lose its character. That is a local community with no money that is trying its best for a heritage area it recognises as being important to the county and the country. There is a need for education and for people to understand that something can be done without money.

Tourists sometimes come to this country, not to see what we can create for them but what we have created for ourselves. They come to understand and appreciate our quality of life, our love for our past and our desire to preserve the buildings which represent the various periods of our history. Tourists do not necessarily want something created specifically for them. They want to enjoy our clean air and clear water and our historical buildings. Some of those buildings have been given some animation. Kyteler's Inn and the City Hall in Kilkenny are excellent examples of this development. Kilkenny Castle is being restored to incorporate an interpretative centre and a conference centre. Such developments give life to historical buildings and this is what tourists come to see.

Interesting things happen in the planning process. Local authorities have frequently asked Dúchas to comment on historical or interesting buildings. Does Dúchas have the staff or the time to ensure that their comments on the impact of developments on heritage sites and buildings are communicated to local authorities? The Lock House in Carlow is a very important Georgian building which was lived in until recently. A developer received planning permission to develop the adjoining property and destroyed the character of the Georgian house. That development was disgraceful. I asked a parliamentary question about this development and received a reply which was not very helpful because it was given in the context of the current law, which I respect. We must work with local authorities to ensure that what happened to the Lock House in Carlow does not happen again.

In Kilkenny we asked about the impact on Kilkenny Castle of a new riverbank hotel. The reply from Dúchas was quite scant, yet local authority representatives such as I are anxious to receive educated comments from bodies such as Dúchas so that we can apply their expertise to applications under consideration. There is a need for a planning process which will include bodies such as Dúchas.

I welcome the funding of £5 million with £3.5 million for grants. However, this is a very small sum of money. In Leighlinbridge there is a building which was a courthouse in 1798 and is now a shop. The shopkeeper wants to renovate her home but she is conscious of the historical importance of the building in which she lives. How far will the grant allocation take that woman who does not have the funds to restore a listed building properly? Local authorities and the State have an obligation – reflected to a degree in the Bill – to come to the aid of people such as this woman and to ensure that people who live in historical buildings are given every possible assistance in renovating and preserving their homes. Houses such as that in Leighlinbridge should be restored and maintained to the best advantage of the State and of the family who live in them with the help of the fund established by the Bill. There is a need to increase the fund over the coming years. Buildings for which formal applications have not yet been made should be given priority, included in a pilot scheme and the householders given every encouragement to complete restoration projects as quickly and efficiently as possible.

The Bill must ensure that the activity of developers under cover of darkness and at weekends is controlled. Part of Kilkenny wall was removed, outside working hours, by a bulldozer which appeared to be driverless. The city wall was never properly reconstructed. The ceiling of Bridge House in Kilkenny is listed. However, a contractor chose to ignore the conditions of a related application and left the ceiling exposed to the weather. Local people are extremely concerned about such cases but the law contains too many loopholes and does not carry sufficient weight. Kilkenny people want to see the building restored sensitively but we have neither the time nor the resources to do so.

Too often, very short answers are given to parliamentary questions. The concerns of the public, articulated by their representatives, should be taken seriously. Replies to parliamentary questions should be adequate and should be pursued to the point where tangible action is taken.

A building known in Kilkenny as the Hole in the Wall is a fine example of a Tudor ale house. When I knew it as a child it was a fine building. Over the years it came into private ownership and is now falling down. The building is of immense value to the State. A civic trust, in partnership with the State, could purchase the site and restore the building which is not only interesting but also of enormous value to the State. The financial and planning problems presented by buildings such as this must be faced.

Whole villages can become important to our heritage. I can think of vernacular buildings side by side in a little area in Callan. We must encourage local authorities to be proactive in encouraging the owners of such buildings to keep them intact and to hand them on, little damaged by the course of time. There is a need for an overall stated policy in this regard so that the State and local authorities can co-operate with owners and developers. Even in the medieval city of Kilkenny we want to see development but we do not want to see development at any cost. The reckless onslaught of building and development in tax designated areas has been a great blow to the character of towns and cities. We have rushed into development without thinking and we have allowed questionable planning permissions because our focus has been on jobs. In a few years time we will be sorry that we destroyed the characters of our cities, towns and villages in our mad rush for development. I am not opposed to development but it must be done sensibly.

There is a great need to examine the question of parking by-laws. Within the Department of the Environment and Local Government, a mechanism must be found to give back power to local authorities. Local authorities must be allowed to implement their own parking by-laws to protect the environs of a castle or heritage building and the rights of residents in a city like Kilkenny with its narrow streets and lanes. We should not have to come back to the Minister and find some circuitous route to prevent parking outside a heritage building on a narrow street or lane in order to protect the environment. I refer, in particular, to Kilkenny. I ask the Minister in the context of not only this but future legislation to look at this issue.

I support the Irish Georgian Society in relation to section 4 and its call for an historic buildings advisory council. I point the Minister in the direction of sections 10 and 38 and ask that the serious submission made by the Irish Georgian Society on this Bill be taken on board and that we do our best to incorporate some of those comments. The Irish Georgian Society, among others, has done immense work to ensure this country is protected and is prepared to play its part in its development in a sensible way while at the same time protecting our heritage.

Mr. Cosgrave

May I share my time with Deputy Ring?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Cosgrave

I welcome this Bill which, when passed, should make a real contribution to the conservation and protection of buildings and the heritage they reflect. Each one who cares in any way for the built environment will, time and time again, lament the loss of structures on the streetscape which they formed and mourn the loss of special interior features of importance.

It is not good enough simply to put legislation in place. The concept in this Bill of providing expert support to local authorities is of real value. This, like all generations, is only a caretaker of the natural and built environments which we must leave in better shape than when we arrived. Unfortunately, we have to date allowed too many important built structures, works of art in their own right, to be lost. The Bill recognises that architectural heritage may well be the clustering of buildings which complement each other, and that this is also important. The move forward abandoning the notion of listed building for that of protected structures sends a new and powerful message.

We, in the developed countries, are particularly aware of the need for conservation and to ensure that a sense of locality is maintained. This Bill will help those of us who are at the drawing board creating the new residential areas needed to meet the demands of the expanding population of the greater Dublin region, ensuring focus and opportunity for people to identify with new districts. Not only is it important that buildings of great architectural merit are supported by the Bill, but it is also important that buildings which have played a role in history are also protected as all are part of the heritage of this nation.

I am particularly pleased that a common policy will be applied throughout the State, that a team of conservationists will be readily available to advise local authorities on drawing up lists of protected structures and that Dúchas will be there with practical advice. This will give a new moral authority, removing the view held by some developers that listed buildings are nothing more than an irritant. The public will become more aware and, in turn, more supportive of the notion of structural conservation. Every opportunity must be taken to ease the cost factor, thereby encouraging property owners to be proactive in the protection and restoration of important buildings. The enablement of local authorities to step in and acquire buildings will be of great value.

I congratulate my council, the former Dublin County Council, which purchased buildings such as Newbridge House and the Ardgillan estate in the north county Dublin area. The wonderful job it has done in the conservation and protection of these buildings and in making them available to the nation is to be admired and should continue. We should look to the future, and I take this opportunity to look at my constituency and the buildings therein which may be in need of protection. I am particularly interested in Howth Castle, which is in private ownership. The owner of the castle has been very good as regards the protection of the environment. He had the opportunity lately to put his case before Fingal County Council on the draft development plan and perhaps to make a killing in getting some of his land rezoned, but he resisted doing so. To his credit, much of the lands are there for future generations, as they should be. I will suggest to Fingal County Council that it should put it to him that he should enter into some arrangement with the council and the State to bring that excellent building into the ownership of the State.

There are other excellent buildings in the Howth area, such as the Mariners' Hall at the west pier and some of the wonderful facades will have to be looked after for future generations. Most of the west pier is in the ownership of the Department of the Marine and the Government would have a say in what happens there from time to time. Every effort should be made to retain and preserve these buildings because of the tradition of fishing in Howth.

We have read about the much lamented Turvey House in Donabate, which was ruined and torn apart by developers to make way for housing. That type of activity should be curbed. Developers should not be able to tear down a house of great importance and historic value in this fashion. Some years ago developers moved in and destroyed the house over a weekend. That type of vandalism by developers must be stopped.

I congratulate the Office of Public Works, which does not get much praise, on the wonderful work it has done over the years. I was in Tralee last weekend and visited the old workhouse which is now council offices. Much work was done by Kerry County Council in preserving the building and all those involved should be congratulated. It is a building worth looking at and is a model at which we may look in the future when trying to preserve buildings. Clare Hall, in my constituency, is a marvellous building on which work needs to be done. Today Dublin Corporation informed me that it would do something about it. Buildings of this nature should be preserved for future generations.

Mr. Ring

I thank Deputy Cosgrave for sharing his time. I hope this Bill will help young couples to provide their own homes. I am delighted to see powers to take on the rogues in the building trade. I am talking about builders who, in the past, got major planning permission in towns but who walked away without putting in footpaths, sewers or green areas and who went back to local authorities six months later and got special treatment from them. We know why some got special treatment, that is, because they brought bags of sweets.

I remember a housing estate in my town of Westport where a builder got planning permission but walked away leaving young couples stranded and bringing their children to school through large potholes. The local authority could not do anything because the estate had not been taken over by the council. The builder, however, got special treatment from the council.

I hope the Minister will be able to shorten the length of time people must wait for planning permission. Local authorities have started an outrageous scheme whereby on the last day the planning is due, they write to say they will refuse permission if they do not get a time extension. That is because some of them have not even looked at the planning application within the two month timeframe, which is outrageous. If the local authority looks for a time extension, it should say why it is looking for it and state how many times someone from the council has examined the planning application instead of playing for time and holding back young couples. That will not happen to big builders, they will be looked after. They can get planning permission and do what they like.

In another case, builders from Galway came to Westport, blocked a road and abused the public who had to travel it every day. We made representations to the local authority and the Garda but no one seemed able to do anything. The builders put up two fingers to everyone who came down that road, including business people who travelled it on a regular basis. It is time that these cowboys were tackled. Other builders dig holes in roads on Saturdays or Sundays and might fill them two or three weeks later. People who drive on these roads are having their cars damaged. If they complain to the local authority, it says it must ask the builder to do something.

It is time the activities of these builders were regulated and I agree they should have to pay a bond. However, they should pay it not when they start building but on the day they receive planning permission. The bond must be received by the local authority before the builder puts a block or a machine on the site, not during construction, as happened in the past. In one case, a builder was three quarters of the way through a scheme, rumours started that he might not be able to finish it because he was not making as much money as he thought, and not until then did the local authority ask for a bond. How did it expect to get a bond from someone who had no money? The bond should be paid to the council before the builder starts work.

One person in my town, who owns a listed building, has presented plans to the local authority on three occasions. The local authority has raised objections and asked for certain work. Although this building is listed, the buildings on either side of it are not, although they are similar. Listed buildings should be protected but if that is what the State wants, it should assist the owner of such a building when he seeks planning permission. That person may find it is not commercially viable to do the work because the local authority wants it done a certain way.

If people working in local authorities spent some time in the private sector they would soon find out how it works. Many people in the private sector have to wait over the weekend to get paid, but local authority workers get paid every Thursday and if the money was not there the workers would be on strike the next day. People who set up their own businesses have to work hard and get little assistance but a lot of hassle from local authorities.

It is time this Government looked at the power of county managers. Maybe the last Government should have done this. They have too much power and it should be given back to councillors and the local authority. An outside agency could adjudicate on this also. It is outrageous that one person has the power to grant or refuse permission. If he does not like someone, he will refuse permission but if he likes the person, he will grant it. We know what happened in this city – if the manager really likes the applicant, he will get as much as he wants, even a loan from the manager. That should stop. Local authority members and the manager should be involved in planning decisions and an outside agency should adjudicate on all applications and zoning.

If a person builds an extension to his house without planning permission, the local authority will get their law agent to drag him into court, even on a Saturday. He will be threatened and put under such pressure that he will do whatever the local authority asks. However, if a big builder breaks the law, knocks a listed building or works at weekends, the local authority has neither power, commitment nor will to tackle him. Local authorities attack people who build small extensions and let big builders do what they want. I am delighted that the Bill will introduce a bond system so that builders can be taken on and will have to pay a bond before they start work.

My county has one of the most beautiful of the few estates left in Ireland, Westport House. Its owner, Lord Altamont, received little assistance from this State, and every obstacle was put in his way by the local authority. He has done more for tourism in Westport, Mayo and the west of Ireland than Bord Fáilte, Ireland West or any State agency in the last 20 years. All they have done is travel the world at the taxpayers' expense, eating big dinners in America. This man has tried to save the features of his estate and to keep it open, but the best Mayo County Council could do for him was put a sewage treatment plant in the middle of it. This was outrageous and I was glad the Minister of the day was able to restrict the local authority to a certain extent. When a beautiful estate such as that exists, it is terrible that instead of assisting its owner, the local authority does him damage.

This Bill is not concerned with An Bord Pleanála but we passed legislation on it recently. Instead of that body improving, it is getting worse – people are now waiting longer for decisions on planning appeals. One speaker mentioned the Georgian Society and An Taisce, who have an important role to play. An Taisce has held up three major development in my county by raising objections. Who belongs to An Taisce in Westport or Mayo? Perhaps the objections are from people in Dublin 4.

If a person makes an objection, he should not be able to hide behind the banner of An Taisce or a State agency. We should know the name, address and telephone number of the person who made the objection. If the local authority thinks a development is needed in a rural area, these people should not be able to hold it up, but An Taisce has delayed development in Mulrany, Westport and Newport in the last few years. Who is in An Taisce? I never saw their names on ballot papers or heard how many votes they won. They never stand for Europe, the county council or the UDC. Legislation should be introduced so that we know who objects to a planning application. They should at least have the courage to make themselves known.

This reminds me of letters to newspapers. If a person criticises politicians, we read that his name and address is with the editor, but if someone writes to praise politicians, the editor will not publish him. If a person does not have the courage to put his name to a letter to the editor or to a planning objection, the letter should not be published and the objection should not be heard, even if the money is paid. They should provide a name and address so we know who they are and where they come from. Perhaps we could amend the Bill on Committee Stage to deal with this problem, rather than allowing faceless and nameless people to put their name to planning appeals.

I am delighted this Bill will deal with builders because they have caused a lot of headaches to families and cost local authorities a lot of money. In some housing estates where developers did not provide proper services, local authorities had to put them in. It is time that builders obeyed the law like everyone else. If they dig a hole in the road or damage property they should pay. They should not be able to intimidate people because they are developers or to get away with murder with local authorities.

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment and Local Government (Mr. Molloy)

I thank Deputies who contributed and assure them that the points they raised will be given careful consideration before Committee Stage, when many of these issues will receive closer scrutiny.

Question put and agreed to.