June 22, 2006 at 12:07 am #708715publicrealmParticipant
Irish Times Article – Milltown residents oppose Luas walkway
A legal challenge has been brought to a planning requirement that a public walkway to the Luas line pass through a private apartment complex at Milltown in south Dublin. …
Maybe this should be posted in the planning forum but there is a lot of crossover so here goes.
Example no. 1;
An article in today’s IT dealt with a High Court case involving residents in a private estate challenging the Boards right to impose two conditions on their estate, arising from the grant of permission for an adjacent (separate) estate. One condition purported to create a public right of way across the privately maintained communal gardens in the estate and the other required that those communal gardens be open to the public, for the hours of public parks, lighted, furnished and maintained in perpetuity by the owners of the properties in the estate.
The Board went to the wire and then settled the case – dropping the two conditions and agreeing to pay the (considerable) costs of the residents.
Example no. 2;
My niece has just purchased a starter home in a commuter belt housing estate. Characterised by the usual extensive cul de sac layout, ultimately to have between 500 and 700 standary ticky tackies. She is required, because of a planning Condition, to pay annual charges to a management company for the upkeep of the estate.
Previously such estates would have been taken in charge and maintained by the local authority.
The Question: Has the concept of ‘planning gain’ gone too far? In my view developers are in an invideous position. Commonly perceived as bad guys they have to suck up to the planner to obtain permission – which may be denied for any number of reasons. Yet the planner is conditioned by his education to seek ‘planning gain’ and is also involved in the provision of infrastructure. Is there a conflict of interest?
Certainly I have found cases where the demands of the planners have been unreasonable. Blackmail is far too strong a word but maybe gives some flavour of my current feeling.:mad:
June 22, 2006 at 12:19 am #778475huttonParticipant
pr, you and developers have my sympathies here. The problem is that post-’77, in the abscence of rates and proper govt financing, local authorities are 1) racing to a bottom of the barrel planning-wise in terms of trying to create a rates base, and so are 2) seeking to raise revenue on the backs of developers who then pass it on to buyers, and 3) LAs subsequently ignore the preveious practise of maintaining areas such as privately developed housing estate…All the time central govt refuses to even pay the commercial rates due on its own properties in DCC area. Nice one lads:rolleyes:
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.