asked the Minister for Local Government if, on the 3rd March, 1953, he issued a sealed Order upholding the corporation's refusal of a special permission to proposed alterations to the premises No. 27 Tyrconnell Road, Inchicore, viz., to convert a dwelling house into a shop; and, if so, if he will state why he issued a sealed Order on the 13th March, 1954, reversing his previous decision and granting permission for the conversion of this house into a shop, the proposal having been again rejected by the Dublin Corporation as district planning authority.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Dwelling House: Conversion.
By an Order dated 3rd March, 1953, the decision of the planning authority refusing permission for proposed work in this case under the Town and Regional Planning Acts was confirmed. The permission which was granted, on appeal, on 12th March, 1954, was for a modified proposal which was not considered to be unsuited to, or out of keeping with, the general character of development in the district.
May I ask if the Minister is aware that there was no appreciable difference in the plans that were submitted the second time and that the objection of the town planning authority was in connection with the changing of a dwelling house into a shop on a main thoroughfare? There are three houses in the terrace —Nos. 23, 25 and 27. No. 25 is my house. These houses were purchased 20 years ago by the three present owners. They had the same or a similar type of lease—a lease which provided that none of the houses was to be used for trade or business purposes. Is the Minister determined to override the town planning authority in matters of this kind?
I take it that an individual whose application is refused by a local authority has a right of appeal to my Department. There would be no purpose in his having that right unless the Department and myself could, if we thought it necessary, reverse the decision of the authority concerned. It is always possible for an applicant whose application has been rejected, even on appeal, to amend the plans which were originally submitted. Then, if they are found to conform with the general principles that are followed, a decision in the applicant's favour can always be given.
I suggest to the Minister that the plans, as amended, made no difference whatsoever and that it is merely a camouflage to get away with it. I suggest that this is a political case.
Because of the Deputy's own interest in this particular case, I actually went myself to see the house in question. I am completely satisfied that it would be an absolute injustice to a private citizen if the appeal lodged by him against the decision of the local authority were refused.
If the Minister were resident in one of the houses beside it, would he permit the value of the houses all over the whole place to be depreciated as a result of that?
I have replied to the Deputy's question. I have seen this place myself. I could not find justification in the slightest degree for refusal of the appeal.
I beg to ask the Taoiseach if he approves of this political trickery and somersaulting by his Minister?
He does.