Avril Doyle
Ceist:3 Mrs. Doyle asked the Minister for the Environment if he has satisfied himself with the operation of zoning or rezoning procedures during the development plan reviews under the Planning Act, 1963.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Land Rezoning.
Eamon Gilmore
Ceist:7 Mr. Gilmore asked the Minister for the Environment if he has received an application from Dublin County Council for an extension of time to complete consideration of its development plan; if so, if he intends to grant any such extension; if, in view of his recent comments at the annual awards of the Irish Planning Institute regarding land rezoning in County Dublin, he intends to take any steps to communicate his views directly to the members of the Council; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Máirín Quill
Ceist:10 Miss Quill asked the Minister for the Environment his views on whether it would be advisable to have the same mechanism adopted for re-zoning motions as is used to propose planning section 4 motions.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 3, 7 and 10 together.
A number of applications for extensions of time to allow Dublin County Council complete the review of its development plan have been granted since the five year period for the completion of the review expired in 1988. The most recent extension, up to 31 December 1993, was granted by me on 14 May 1993. The urgent need to complete the review has been conveyed on a number of occasions to Dublin County Council.
The making, review and amendment of a development plan is a matter for the elected members of a local authority, having regard to the advice of its officials and having considered any objections or representations made to them with respect to the draft plan. The making and review of a development plan, as opposed to decisions on specific material contraventions of an existing plan, should be carried out on the basis of simple majority decisions, in common with most democratic decisions.
The Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1963 requires development plans to be reviewed at least once in every five years. This is a recognition that planning must cater for change and that zonings may need to be adjusted from time to time to cater for new development needs or to reflect policy variations of various kinds. Rezoning is therefore a necessary and essential exercise but it must be carried out in an orderly way, taking full account of all relevant planning considerations, including infrastructural and other resource implications.
In general, I believe that the zoning and rezoning process works quite well. Decisions on the zoning of specific areas of land are, of course, matters for the elected local council and are not subject to review or approval by me. I am not, therefore, in a position to make any comment on specific zoning decisions, and I have never done so.
My recent remarks about the situation in County Dublin arose from a concern about the public perception of the development plan review process in the country and the resource implications. It is, of course, quite proper and, indeed, essential, for councillors to take a view on the overall provision which should be made in particular areas for development of various kinds. If such issues were settled by the council, on the basis of an objective appraisal of all relevant considerations, the subsidiary question of which parcels of land should be zoned for different purposes could then be resolved with less controversy. As things stand, there is a danger that the wrong impression will be given and that the zoning process will be seen by the public as little more than a process of arbitrating on the claims of a limited number of individuals and companies who wish to develop particular lands.
On the question of resources, I would draw attention to the fact that, in the case of water and sewerage schemes alone, proposals in respect of Dublin city and county costing up to £500 million are already on record in my Department. In these circumstances, it is obviously essential that decisions about the location of possible new development must take very serious account of the availability of these and other essential services, and the cost of extending them to new areas.
I make no apology for drawing attention to matters such as the foregoing, arising from my general responsibility for the planning system and for infrastructural programmes. It is, however, a matter for all of those who are directly involved in the development plan review process to decide what changes, if any, should be made in the light of my remarks which, I am sure, are now well known to all concerned.
The review plan operates under the Local Government (Planning and Development) Act. Through familiarity we refer to the Act as the Planning Act, 1963, but it also deals with development and we are inclined to forget that aspect. I thank the Minister for the time he spent investigating the question and for his extensive reply. Is he still a supporter of the new town centre concept? I ask because some of the public disquiet resulting from the reporting of Dublin County Council meetings in recent times stems from the decisions to zone and service large tracts of lands in three areas made on the advice of planners in the 1970s by the then councillors. Thousands of public authority houses have been built with few facilities in those three areas. As a result there is no demand for private sector development there. To protect investment the officials and the manager do not recommend further zoning in other satellite towns or village and town in County Dublin. Will the Minister indicate his views on the new town centre concept and, with the wisdom of hindsight and the example in the UK, state whether it is a concept we should have followed?
Deputy Doyle, we must have regard to brevity, for obvious reasons.
I will try but I respect the Minister's excellent answer and this is a complex subject. Will he indicate how balance could be brought back to this issue? It appears that councillors, responding to natural demands to allow those areas to grow in the village and town centres around the county, are frustrated by the constant recommendations of the executive of the council not to extend zoning to those areas to protect the investment decisions taken 20 years ago.
Deputy Doyle, I ask for brevity. The Chair is anxious to dispose of the five questions before us. If each question takes up a disproportionate amount of time it is clearly to the disadvantage of other Members. I seek merely fairness and equity in the matter.
Three questions have been taken together. Could balance be brought into this matter because there have been excesses in terms of councillors' wishes to push motions through? The review is a councillors' plan. They are endeavouring——
I must ask the Deputy to bring her question to finality.
I will make a third attempt to put the question to the Minister. I asked the Minister's advice in regard to how balance may be brought back to this matter which is causing such disquiet. We must allow for the natural growth of satellite towns and respect the investment, but private sector investors do not want to build in the three designated areas.
I must insist that the Minister reply.
Will the Minister indicate how we can bring balance back into this matter?
I call on the Minister to reply.
One cannot turn back the clock. The question of how the population growth in the capital city and the greater Dublin area is out of kilter with most capital cities as a percentage of the total population was in many ways caused by centralisation and the manner in which our Government systems worked, it was something we inherited. We must now concentrate on what is in place and ensure we do not have ad hoc planning arrangements. The planning and development plan is not just a councillors' plan, it is a people's plan.
The 1963 Act incorporated consultative processes which have been lost because they have grown too complex. We must simplify that process so that the public can have confidence in what is happening and that the resources necessary in terms of infrastructural development are limited to what we can afford.
Deputy Doyle is correct concerning areas zoned for private devlopment but because of extensive local authority housing development, they do not have amenities and are no longer attractive. As in Gardiner Street and other inner city developments the ability to restore these areas and achieve the right mix must be encouraged. That will only be done when we have the range of facilities, not just in terms of housing but infrastructures such as shopping centres and other amenities that may be required.
I wish to concentrate on the central core areas where there is still a lot of land, much of it blighted but which we can, as demonstrated in the docks and other areas, inject with new life and resolve the environmental and transport difficulties in these peripheral developments.
I now call Deputy Gilmore whose Priority Question No. 7 refers to this matter.
I refer the Minister to his speech to the Irish Planning Institute on 11 May in which he described some of the recent decisions of Dublin County Council as displaying a frightening degree of irresponsibility. Is he familiar with the RTE radio interview a few days later by the leader of the Fianna Fáil group on Dublin County Council who stated that the Minister had apologised to her and to other members of the group for his contribution at the IPI conference? Did the Minister apologise? Has he withdrawn — or is he considering withdrawing — any of the statement made by him to the IPI conference? Does he stand over that statement?
I had hoped that our discussion concerning the planning process and how we would improve it would be the only matter I would be required to discuss. Since a more relevant matter has arisen for the Democratic Left which is a priority for the Deputy, I have no hesitation in saying that I stand over every single word.
I want to bring these two questions to finality. It is only fair to remind the House that these two questions have taken more than half the time available for the completion of the five questions.
I have a very brief question for the Minister. I was glad to hear his reply to my first question from which I conclude there is no question of an apology to the Fianna Fáil group on Dublin County Council. Is he aware that some of the recent decisions by the county council are now creating a legal quagmire, including a bizarre site meeting which was held yesterday in Baldoyle on a decision which has already been made? Dublin County Council will be replaced by three new county councils on 1 January and if legal challenges resulting from decisions by the council are not disposed of by that date or any subsequent decision which is required of the county council——
I appeal for brevity, Deputy.
——arising from those legal challenges is not disposed of by 1 January, will the Minister accept it will put the entire development plan at risk? Has the Minister given any consideration to what might be done after 1 January?
No political party has a monopoly on virtue in these matters. In relation to possible legal challenges to decisions already taken by the county council it is clearly not a matter to which I can refer today. In view of the fact that the three new councils will be established as and from 1 January next year, there is an urgent need to ensure that work on the development plan is completed before that time. Otherwise we will be faced with further delays while the new councils complete work on the development plan. As the House knows, the present plan is five years out of date and is desperately in need of updating. I am extremely anxious to ensure that this work is completed well in advance of the establishment of the new councils and I will avail of all avenues open to me to do this. These councils can make their amendments to the plan in their own time. I am according the highest priority to having this work completed before the establishment of the new councils.
Question No. 4, please.
May I——
Order, please. I have called Question No. 4.
May I ask the Minister a final question?
If it is a brief question, Deputy.
It is only one sentence.
Otherwise we may not reach the Deputy's next question.
Does the Minister not think there is something very wrong with a system which so overwhelmingly disregards professional and executive advice? This is now the norm and I should like to know how we have reached this stage.
I am giving very careful consideration to these matters at present. I realise that there may be some distance, so to speak, between the executive and technical advice given to the council and the action it takes. I want the council and the corporation to work efficiently. Therefore I do not want this practice to continue. I will avail of all avenues open to me to replace the present system with a more developmental management system.