|
Telling It Like It Is
The recent media frenzy regarding planning reflects divided opinions across Ireland . The publication this year of the Draft Guidelines on Sustainable Rural Housing has been seen as symptomatic of a political preoccupation with short term popularity rather than long term infrastructural development.
Iain Douglas, President of the Irish Planning Institute reveals his views on the state of planning in Ireland, and the factors which could not only damage the environment in Ireland, but also cause social segregation, and aid unsustainable development across Ireland.
At
the present time there is some considerable disillusionment
with planning, its achievements and potential. The development
of this attitude has run parallel to the progressive alienation
of the public from a system of government which is apparently
unable to cope with many of the most serious problems it faces.
In the current debate it seems that only planning as a profession
and planning practitioners are under intensive scrutiny –
why is this?
What is planning all about?
In dealing with the future planners are trained to t hink
in all dimensions, balancing local and regional strategies
within global trends. They must strive to protect the integrity
of the natural environment, promote the excellence of urban
design and endeavour to conserve the heritage of the natural
and built environment for future generations. They have to
develop alternative potential solutions for specific problems
and challenges, measuring carrying capacities and impacts,
enhancing local identities, and contributing to their implementation
programmes and feasibility studies. Planners must develop
spatial visions showing opportunities for the future development
of cities or regions, and in the case of the National Spatial
Strategy, the nation. They must identify linkages and relationships
of a spatial plan or scheme within the relevant international
networks of cities and regions. They must also expand choice
and opportunity for all, recognising a special responsibility
for the needs of disadvantaged groups and persons.
The
distinctive factor of spatial planning is that it focuses
primarily on the interests of society as a whole, the settlement
or the region as an entity, and the longer-term future. This
immediately contradicts the standpoint of the developer -
whose sole motivation is quick and easy profits; the politician
- whose motivation is to get elected & stay there for
the next four years and the public - whose view is confined
to their own needs. One cannot question the validity of these
view points but we need to reconcile them somehow.
The
vision and the promotion of the “common good”
is what sets planners apart from the other actors involved
in the development process and for far too long the “common
good” has been relegated or downright ignored in our
planning system.
Just
as the first attempt at long term national planning, the Buchanan
Report in the 1970’s, was sacrificed on the altar of
political expediency so too the latest attempt at long term,
national planning – the National Spatial Strategy (NSS)
– has become a devalued currency because the Government
is clearly equivocating it’s commitment to the NSS.
Two cases in point are the decentralisation of the civil service
to numerous locations outside the “hubs” identified
in the NSS, and the Draft Guidelines on Sustainable Rural
Housing. Neither will help balanced regional development.
By undermining the NSS the commitment of Government to long
term strategic planning has to be questioned and with it the
political will to redress regional imbalance in Ireland today.
Why,
after 40 years of planning is the planning agenda still being
driven by short-term perspectives and political expediency?
Is our democracy not mature enough to take a long term view
of society and the environment when we can somehow manage
medium – long term planning for the economy? Why can’t
we as a society and as individuals rise above base self interest?
If long term national spatial planning works for other countries
why not Ireland?
The
Draft Guidelines on Sustainable Rural Housing are a case in
point. It seems to me that these guidelines were railroaded
through before the June election in reaction to pressure from
a few highly vocal interest groups. This, in my opinion, is
not the way for such an important issue to be handled and
shows little regard for the facts of the matter.

The
Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government’s
own investigation into the area of rural planning reported
the following;
-
An average of 75% of applications for single rural houses
were granted
-
The highest grant rates are in the westernmost planning
authorities with grant rates falling somewhat in the more
urbanised areas to the east.
-
Most planning authorities in the western half of the country
grant around 4 out of 5 applications.
-
Where permission is refused, the reasons for refusal generally
relate to land use issues such as traffic safety, public
health or protection of the natural and cultural heritage
including landscape.
It
is acknowledged that these figures are at county level and
may not pick up on particular areas of development pressure
or areas where planning issues are more complex and where,
correspondingly, the numbers of permissions granted may be
lower.
It
is worth noting that the lobby groups appear to have had free
access to the Minister in the preparation of the guidelines
while the same courtesy was not extended to the Irish Planners
Institute (IPI) which is the Country’s largest organisation
representing professional planners.
As
a result of both pandering to lobby groups pursuing their
own narrow agenda and by publishing these guidelines for a
political “quick fix” sight has been lost of the
bigger issue - that the rural housing dilemma is a symptom
of a much larger problem related historically to the poor
quality of much of our urban fabric and urban residential
development, the lack of investment in infrastructure of our
smaller towns and villages and the extraordinary cost of building
land in serviced centres.
Has
anyone examined the hypothesis that the possibility of 250,000
new single houses built in the countryside over the next 20
years and propounded by the guidelines could lead to social
segregation with social housing concentrated in the towns
and villages through the provisions of Pt V and the middle-classes
in one-off housing in the countryside?
- The lack of an overall planning perspective at national
level is exemplified by a programme of substantial investment
in rural water & sewerage infrastructure through the
CLAR Programme, yet this is being negated by the free for
all of housing in the countryside serviced by septic tanks
promoted by the guidelines.
No-one can dispute the fact that there are serious issues
confronting the growth and development of rural Ireland but
simply building houses will not solve those problems. The
guidelines contribute little by way of meaningful examination
of the problems of rural Ireland . In short they represent
political expediency at its worst which does nothing to advance
planning or politics in this country.
However
planning is not solely concerned with plan preparation, it
is also part of a political process aiming to balance all
relevant interests - public and private – and resolving
conflicting demands on space, place and the environment.
The
local government system is based to a large degree on the
cooperation and trust between elected members & the executive.
It is obvious in some counties that trust has completely broken
down and urgent measures have to be taken to restore a working
relationship.
Planners
too must also look to themselves and acknowledge that the
other actors in the development process have roles to play
and that there is the reality of everyday business to be conducted.
In
dealing with the political aspect planners need to acknowledge:
-
the principles of solidarity, subsidiarity and equity in
decision-making,
-
the need to clearly inform politicians, the public of proposals,
objectives, targets, impacts, problems, and provide them
with plans and solutions
-
the need to facilitate meaningful public participation and
involvement
-
the need to work towards consensus or resolve conflict
-
the need to communicate our point of view well
This
points to the importance of the role of the planner as a mediator
and communicator but also the need for greater resources to
be put into planning if we are offer to the public, politicians
and developers alike an efficient and reliable level of service.
The
current imbalance within local government arises because the
elected members have lost sight of or do not wish to acknowledge
the “common good”, in seeking to advance the claims
of a particular constituent. The controversy surrounds particular
planning decisions that were refused, with no cognisance given
to the vast majority of applications granted. In 2002 nationally
only 15.9% of all planning applications were refused . E lected
members need to accept that they have a wider obligation than
simply pursing votes.
The
distinct lack of civic responsibility demonstrated by the
abuse of Section 140 motions in some county councils around
the country brings no credit to the practice of politics and
is in marked contrast to the good working relationships that
exist between councillors and planners in the majority of
other counties.
Planning
in Ireland has become the complete antithesis of what it should
be. Nothing seems to have changed in 40 years of planning
and development in this country at all. It is an alarming
situation.
|
|
|