asked the Minister for Local Government when his Department proposes to resume the planning appeal hearing in connection with Artane school grounds, Dublin, which began on 21st December, 1971, and which has not been concluded.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Planning Appeals.
137.
The oral hearing referred to by the Deputy opened on 21st December, 1971, and was completed on that date. Consideration would not be given to the reopening of the hearing unless a party to the appeal produced some new relevant information not previously available.
Is the Minister aware that his statement that this appeal hearing was completed on the date in question is flatly contradicted not merely by the residents representatives there present but also by the Press representatives there present at that open hearing?
The inspector's report on the hearing makes it clear that it was not a question of adjournment but that it was concluded. I understand that at the hearing the objectors produced an alternative plan for the development of the site and that Senior Counsel on behalf of the developers expressed interest and said the developers were prepared to examine this new plan and see if it would provide a reasonable alternative to the proposed development. However, he made it clear that he did want the appeal resolved. The Gallagher Group, who were the appellants in this case, had appealed against conditions in their grant of permission and they wanted a decision on those conditions. The hearing was not adjourned but was completed. It is possible that the objectors felt their proposals would be accepted and are disappointed that the revised plans have not been accepted. But as far as my inspector is concerned the hearing was completed, and if they wish to re-open it they must introduce new information which is relevant to the appeal.
Further arising out of the Minister's reply which, I am afraid, will be received as unsatisfactory by the residents and will be received with surprise by the Press who were present, would the Minister agree that in a case in which a political colleague of his has an interest in the outcome it is important not merely that justice be done but that it be seen to be done, and that it is not being seen to be done either by the residents or by the Press present?
The implications in Deputy Dr. Cruise-O'Brien's statement are despicable, to say the least of it. Any person who has an appeal to make before my Department can be assured of a fair and reasonable decision and that I will not be unduly influenced by whether that person is a colleague of mine or not.
That is what the Minister has got to demonstrate, not just to say.
I think I have demonstrated this quite clearly over the past two years, and insinuations by Deputy O'Brien are just trying to introduce political footballing into a very important matter. The residents and objectors in this case can be assured that when this matter finally comes before me for decision it will be dealt with in a fair and just manner.
I hope so.
138.
asked the Minister for Local Government (a) the number of planning appeals before his Department during each of the years 1968, 1969, 1970 and 1971; (b) the number which were third party appeals; (c) the number of third party appeals which were successful; and (d) the number of all other appeals which were successful.
The reply is in the form of a tabular statement and I propose with the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, to have this statement circulated with the Official Report.
Following is the statement:
PLANNING APPEALS UNDER THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT (PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT, 1963.
|
YEAR |
APPEALS RECEIVED |
APPEALS DECIDED |
||||||||
|
Total number of appeals (including those subsequently withdrawn) |
Number of third party appeals received (including those subsequently withdrawn) |
Appeals by third parties refuse permission or approval received |
Appeals by proposers against decisions to grant permissions or approvals subject to conditions |
Appeals by proposers against decisions to grant permissions or approvals subject to conditions |
||||||
|
Permission or approval granted in accordance with decisions of the planning authority |
Permission or approval granted subject to conditions or additional or revised conditions |
Permission or approval refused |
Permission or approval granted on appeal with or without conditions |
Permission or approval refused |
Permission or approval granted subject to same conditions as planning authority |
Permission or approval granted subject to revised or conditions |
Permission or approval refused |
|||
|
(1) |
(2) |
(3) |
(4) |
(5) |
(6) |
(7) |
(8) |
(9) |
(10) |
|
|
1968 |
1,729 |
220 |
27 |
58 |
16 |
316 |
424 |
16 |
49 |
2 |
|
1969 |
2,291 |
290 |
36 |
55 |
20 |
364 |
605 |
20 |
55 |
5 |
|
1970 |
2,375 |
305 |
59 |
78 |
22 |
498 |
682 |
25 |
60 |
5 |
|
1971 |
2,718 |
315 |
62 |
112 |
33 |
779 |
1,091 |
33 |
59 |
7 |
NOTES.
1. The statement gives the number of planning appeals received and decided in the calendar years in question. The appeals decided in a year are not necessarily those received in that year.
2. The records kept in the Department do not give the information in the form requested by the Deputy at (c) and (d) of the question.
3. The figures in columns 5 and 6 show the number of appeals which were wholly successful.
4. The figures in columns 3, 7, 8 and 10 show the number of appeals which were unsuccessful.
5. The figures in columns 4 and 9 include appeals which were successful in whole or in part. It is not possible to segregate these figures. Cases a where there may be an appeal from one or more third parties against the whole development or a part of it, or against one or more of the conditions imposed by the planning authority. Different third parties may have different grounds of appeal. At the same time the developer may also appeal against one or more of the conditions. In the total number of appeals any such multiple appeal is only counted as one, i.e., relating to one development. If the third party appeal is the first received, as it generally is in view of the shorter time available for such appeals, it is counted as a party appeal. If the first appeal is from the proposer, it is counted as an appeal by the proposer.
139.
asked the Minister for Local Government how many planning appeals are awaiting decision in his Department at the present time.
The total number of planning appeals awaiting decision in my Department on 31st January, 1972 was 1,607.