Skip to main content
Normal View

An Bord Pleanála Applications

Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 16 January 2018

Tuesday, 16 January 2018

Questions (1719)

Éamon Ó Cuív

Question:

1719. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Housing, Planning and Local Government the reason for the delay by An Bord Pleanála in dealing with applications from quarries and other entities for substitute consent, with some cases taking more than two years to decide; if he has received a request from An Bord Pleanála for further resources to clear this backlog of cases in view of the fact these delays are hampering economic development in many areas; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [54575/17]

View answer

Written answers

Substitute consent is essentially a form of retrospective development consent for development requiring environmental impact assessment (EIA), screening for EIA or appropriate assessment (AA). The substitute consent procedure is set out in Part XA of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) and related provisions specifically for quarries are set out in section 261A of that Act.  These provisions were inserted into the 2000 Act, following a 2008 Judgment of the European Court of Justice, which found that, generally speaking, provisions of the 2000 Act permitting applications for planning permission to retain existing developments requiring environmental impact assessment (EIA) or appropriate assessment (AA) were contrary to EU law.  

The substitute consent process involves the preparation of a remedial environmental impact statement or a remedial Natura impact statement, or both as appropriate, stating the significant effects of the development on the environment or the European site concerned, the remedial or mitigation measures taken or proposed to be taken in relation to those effects and a timescale for the taking of such proposed measures. 

Since the introduction of these provisions, the Board has received a total of 141 substitute consent applications of which 131 have been determined, leaving a total of 10 such cases on hand at the end of 2017.  Nine of these cases relate to quarry developments and one relates to temporary holiday accommodation.  The fact that 8 cases on hands have been extended beyond the statutory objective period for a decision is indicative of the generally complex nature of these applications, involving EIA or AA, or both, and often complex site-specific circumstances.  In certain cases, this has resulted in the Board seeking further information from applicants and engaging in correspondence with relevant participants in the cases. 

The Board is now focused on making a determination on the remaining substitute consent cases as soon as possible and I am satisfied that it has sufficient resources in this regard.

Top
Share