The planning system performs an important function. It should lead to pleasant and appropriate built environments. It ensures that structures are not built where they shouldn’t be and that they conform to the relevant legislation and regulation. And that someone who feels they will be detrimentally affected can make their case.
It is also cumbersome and lengthy. There are several reasons for this: the sheer number of proposed developments; the limited capacity of the system; structural problems at An Bord Pleanála; and finally the delays associated with taking any legal action that might ensue.
The result is the creation of opportunities for arbitrage, as outlined in a recent RTÉ PrimeTime programme and reports in its wake. These focus on allegations of one particularly egregious practice that capitalises on delays in the hearing of appeals by An Bord Pleanála.
By this practice, spurious appeals are made to An Bord Pleanála and then compensation sought from the developer behind the project, in return for withdrawing the appeal.
Your top stories on Friday: Warnings issued as Storm Bert set to batter Ireland; the false election promises being made to under-40s
Johnny Watterson: Conor Niland’s The Racket is a seminal book in the sports genre
Ballsbridge mews formerly home to Irish musician for €1.95m
‘I could have gone to California. At this rate, I probably would have raised about half a billion dollars’
The leader of the Labour Party Ivana Bacik told the Dáil this week that she was aware of a case in which a property developer was asked to pay €500,000 in return for the withdrawal of an appeal to An Bord Pleanála. She said the matter had been brought to the attention of the board, but no action was taken at the time. The Minister for Housing Darragh O’Brien – who is responsible for An Bord Pleanála – responded that he had heard of similar cases but proffered no solutions.
The problem is clearly widespread. Changes to the planning legislation to try to head off spurious objections – such as the need to prove a genuine interest in the application – should be considered. But care is needed to avoid unintended consequences. At the extreme they could in themselves constitute a barrier to organisations and individuals legitimately exercising their right to object. It could also make it difficult for legitimate objectors to come to an agreement with a developer.
In theory the existing laws against fraud and extortion should be sufficient to deter individuals from trying to exploit the flaws in the existing system for personal gain, but in some cases they clearly are not. The investigation of alleged fraud is expensive and time consuming, but the problems is fundamentally one of Garda resources not law. The Revenue Commissioners will also, correctly, examine the cases that have come to light.
Likewise, the most effective way to prevent the sort of practices highlighted by the recent RTÉ documentary and mentioned in the Dáil last week is to remove the opportunity for arbitrage; the many causes of delays in the planning process. This is a government priority as things stand. It is fundamental to resolving the housing crisis. But progress has been painfully slow.