Article in thejournal.ie : " The 9 worst councils in Ireland’s planning system"

bertie 56

" THE NATIONAL HERITAGE organisation An Taisce has rated 34 city and county councils on their planning systems – and given NINE of them an ‘F’ grade, branding them the “worst councils in Ireland’s planning system”.

The councils given the lowest grade are Donegal, Roscommon, Leitrim, Kerry, Mayo, Galway county, Cavan, Carlow and Waterford county."

Full article here :

http://www.thejournal.ie/the-9-worst-councils-in-irelands-planning-system-418903-Apr2012/

muffler

Finally, Donegal has won something

No6

I was talking to a planner I know in Donegal and congratulated them on being the best planning dept in the country, If An Tascie donst like you you must be good!!!:D

I note in all seriousness that most of the counties are on the western seaboard where the primary form of building housing is one off rural housing on Rural (unzoned according to An Tascie)

guess who would like to see them banned!!

Poor Uncle Tom

bertie 56 wrote: »

" THE NATIONAL HERITAGE organisation An Taisce has rated 34 city and county councils on their planning systems –

A more accurate quote would be

"An Taisce has rated 34 City and County Councils on the amount of planning applications for rural housing and linked it to performance at An Bord Pleanala Level to get a distorted view on their planning systems -

If An Taisce wants to be taken seriously it should address the areas where there is a present glut of housing stock, that certainly isn't in rural areas. An Taisce could direct it's 'might' towards exposing the local authorities who are polluting through sub standard or non existent treatment systems. Or lets find out who are performing at introducing policies in their own Development Plans. Lets get a top ten of the LA's who performed best at managing their budgets. Lets get a worst 10 of what LA's are value for money given that most City/County managers earn more than the President of Spain.

What has been printed gives very little credibility to An Taisce because of it's very warped view point. It's very interesting how the 10 worst given are among the 10 most 'rural' counties.

No6

Didn't you know Tom that the only rural houses the should be permitted are cute little cottages with leprecauns dancing in the garden!!!:D

Poor Uncle Tom

No6 wrote: »

Didn't you know Tom that the only rural houses the should be permitted are cute little cottages with leprecauns dancing in the garden!!!:D

Is dat dem twee oirish wans?
Where the thatch combs your hair as you bend to enter....:eek:
and the windows are the size of buttons on a waistcoat,
where the chimney belches more schmoke ore the half door than out the chimney and the stack of turf stops the gable tumbling into the bog?

1865

You should try reading the article before giving out about it

They used 8 indicators
1. Overzoning: Amount of Zoned Land as a Percentage of Population in 2011
2. Decisions Reversed by An Bord Pleanála 2005 – 2010
3. Decisions Confirmed by An Bord Pleanála 2005 – 2010.
4. Percentage of Vacant Housing Stock in 2011
5. Change in Vacant Housing Stock 2006 – 2011
6. Water quality: Urban Areas with Secondary Treatment failing to meet EPA Standards 2011.
7. Percentage of One-Off Houses Permitted as a Percentage of all Residential Planning Permissions 2001 – 2011.
8. Legal Proceedings Commenced Following Non-Compliance with Enforcement Notice 2005 – 2010.

The indicators are based on the councils failing to meet national regulations e.g. water quality, breaking their own rules, and massive overzoning.

An Bord pleanala upholds 80% of the appeals that An Taisce takes to it so it can hardly be called nimbyism. If someone is wrong 80% of the time how much credibility do they have? An Taisce is right 80% of the time.

muffler

1865 wrote: »

An Taisce is right 80% of the time.

They are, I understand, on record as saying that they have appealed 0.5% of planning decisions. So they have had an 80% success rate in their appeals to ABP which equates to 0.4% of all planning decisions.

This means that 99.6% of planning decisions are acceptable to An Taisce and/or ABP.

Go figure :cool:

No6

"by way of illustration of its poor performance, Donegal had approximately 2,250 hectares of residential zoned land in 2010, sufficient for an additional population of 180,000 people. Despite this, approximately 50 per cent of all residential planning permissions in Donegal over the past decade were granted on unzoned land. These trends are symptomatic of a wider systems failure in which counties Donegal, Roscommon, Leitrim and Kerry perform worst"

This is part of the problem, zoned land in the western seaboard counties is loacted around the towns, the rural areas are unzoned, hence the 50% of housing is being built on "unzoned" land, If for example all the area of every Country outside of the towns was "zoned" as suitable for one off housing then this supposed system failure would not arise. They are misrepresenting zoned and unzoned land in my opinion leading to very skewded performance indicators.

1865

muffler wrote: »

They are, I understand, on record as saying that they have appealed 0.5% of planning decisions. So they have had an 80% success rate in their appeals to ABP which equates to 0.4% of all planning decisions.

This means that 99.6% of planning decisions are acceptable to An Taisce and/or ABP.

Go figure :cool:

Way to spin Muffler, they take on the worst .5% of the decisions. An Taisce have to pay for planning appeals (I think it is a reduced rate but they still have to pay) also they have to get someone to research and write an appeal. I've done a few and it takes 20 - 30 hours work to do a proper appeal so you don'tr take them on lightly. There are plenty of bad decisions that are let go because of lack of resources or pressure of work.

The fact is that on the limited resources that they have they win 4 out of 5 of the appeals that they take. As their report says, they estimate the saving they mad for Ireland at €500,000,000. Imagine how much they could have saved if they were properly resourced and funded.

Poor Uncle Tom

You should try reading the article before giving out about it

They used 8 indicators
1. Overzoning: Amount of Zoned Land as a Percentage of Population in 2011
2. Decisions Reversed by An Bord Pleanála 2005 – 2010
3. Decisions Confirmed by An Bord Pleanála 2005 – 2010.
4. Percentage of Vacant Housing Stock in 2011
5. Change in Vacant Housing Stock 2006 – 2011
6. Water quality: Urban Areas with Secondary Treatment failing to meet EPA Standards 2011.
7. Percentage of One-Off Houses Permitted as a Percentage of all Residential Planning Permissions 2001 – 2011.
8. Legal Proceedings Commenced Following Non-Compliance with Enforcement Notice 2005 – 2010.

I did read all the article and I believe it to be biased, unbalanced and misleading and I believe it paints a jaundiced picture of the performance of the planning departments mentioned in light of the broad scope of the banner headline.

I believe every planning department has failings, some have very serious flaws but to attempt to take a snapshot of a counties performance at An Bord Pleanala level in relation to appeals by An Taisce and present this as being "the worst counties in Ireland's planning systems" is grossly misleading and self serving on behalf of An Taisce.

If, as you say, all 8 headings were taken into account before deciding on the list, item 4 alone would have brought another planning department onto that list and should be rateing it very very lowly as a result.

In short, An Taisce supports rural development, though not one-off housing development in the countryside.

So what type of rural development does An Taisce support? Development of farmyards, animal housing, horticultural enterprises, etc., but not one-off rural housing so this is an ideal opportunity to score points from a biased article.

That is my opinion having read all of the article.

No6

You wouldn't be a member 1865 you seem to know a lot about them.

Personally it think http://www.nama.ie/about-our-work/properties-enforced/terms-of-use/ this gives a far better picture of where to much development was permitted, and it wasnt Donegal by a long chalk!! (or Mayo, Sligo, Letrim etc!!)

muffler

1865 wrote: »

Way to spin Muffler

No spin whatsoever. Facts were stated and if you wish to dispute that feel free to post up relevant links.

1865 wrote: »

Imagine how much they could have saved if they were properly resourced and funded.

And imagine the cost to the rural dwellers of Ireland if An Taisce were afforded any more concessions or funding as they seek to depopulate the rural communities at numbers equivalent to the great famine.


Oh and just so we have a level playing field can I ask what is your association with the organisation.

No6

muffler wrote: »

Oh and just so we have a level playing field can I ask what is your association with the organisation.

I'd like an answer to that too!!!

muffler

Donegal County Council aren't accepting the report and we even have Council members demanding apologies and threatening legal action.

Anyhow management have issued an initial statement but the matter is to be debated further.

Response to An Taisce Report
Statement by Donegal County Council

Initial Response to An Taisce Report


Donegal County Council has not had the opportunity to input to the report published by An Taisce nor has it had an opportunity to give detailed consideration to the report as published as yet. The criteria used to compare authorities and develop a “league table” appears unbalanced, ambiguous and biased against rural and peripheral areas of the country.

The report as published presents an assessment of the relative performance of 34 local authorities in a generalised way from An Taisce’s perspective. The generalisations presented in the report are put forward as national performance indicators but do not reflect the significant different considerations that must be taken into account in framing planning policy that exist between peripheral rural counties and other more urbanised parts of the country. It does not reflect the distinct national and regional policy frameworks that guide rural and urban development.

The rural population profile of County Donegal (circa 75%) contrasts strongly with the urban character of areas listed in the upper range of the results depicted in the
An Taisce report. Having regard to the demographic profile of Donegal it is not surprising that between 2000 and 2010 85% of applications were in the rural areas of the county. A balanced consideration and representation of development in rural areas should reflect this. Rural areas are by the nature of our planning system not specifically zoned residential as inferred by the report. To state that approximately 50 % of all residential planning permissions in Donegal were on unzoned lands clearly does not acknowledge that these were largely applications for single/rural family dwellings, considered under the context of distinct rural housing policies and are not on lands zoned in an urban context.

The generalised indicators for zoned lands presented in the report do not recognise the regional differences across the country. The planning process during An Taisce’s review period, provided for a local policy framework in the form of successive County Development Plans, made within the context of national and regional legislation and guidelines. It is not evident that the regional and local considerations that have a relative significance in a place like Donegal received appropriate consideration in the report published.

In the context of regional and national policy, the complexity of planning for rural and urban communities in County Donegal has been reflected in the objectives of the County Development Plan due for adoption this summer. The supply of urban housing within the county, to reflect the demands in a county that has grown by 13,873 people since the last census (9.3%), has been addressed within the core strategy of the County Development Plan. This clearly identifies suitable locations within the county’s towns and villages where future development may occur and sets out a policy framework for housing providing for some 497 hectares of suitable housing land to meet demand over the plan period.

The assertion that councils continue to ignore national and regional planning policy is not borne out in practice with regular and detailed consultation at a regional and national level occurring through both the policy and decision making areas of the councils work. Consequently the ‘general picture of relative performance’ in the report is considered to be a distorted representation of the planning process in Donegal, ignoring its dominant rural character and its quite unique geographic location and demography.

Source

1865

No6 wrote: »

You wouldn't be a member 1865 you seem to know a lot about them.

Personally it think http://www.nama.ie/about-our-work/properties-enforced/terms-of-use/ this gives a far better picture of where to much development was permitted, and it wasnt Donegal by a long chalk!! (or Mayo, Sligo, Letrim etc!!)

Of course I'm a member Muffler.

Re the statement from Donegal Council, what did you expect them to say: "Its a fair cop guv"?

No6

1865 wrote: »

Of course I'm a member Muffler.

Re the statement from Donegal Council, what did you expect them to say: "Its a fair cop guv"?

So any comment on the gross overdevelopment permitted in eastern and southern counties and which are now in NAMA? to which our country has been "bailed out" by the EU/IMF and because of which our grandchildren will still be in hock because of??

muffler

1865 wrote: »

Of course I'm a member Muffler.

Re the statement from Donegal Council, what did you expect them to say: "Its a fair cop guv"?

Donegal County Council's statement is more acceptable that An Taisce's.

Lets see what your crowd have to say in response.

sydthebeat

an taisces report is completely undermined when they refer to zoned v unzoned lands to describe rural development. Of course rural development is on unzoned land.. any one with half interest in planning knows this.
They seem to completely dismiss the 'rural housing guidelines' as the country's national policy for rural development.