Validity of Meath county plan challenged

The High Court today begins hearing a test case which could arrest Dublin's sprawl, writes Frank McDonald , Environment Editor…

The High Court today begins hearing a test case which could arrest Dublin's sprawl, writes Frank McDonald, Environment Editor

Freelance decisions by councillors to rezone land for development in defiance of the Greater Dublin Area Strategic Planning Guidelines could be rendered invalid if the President of the High Court, Mr Justice Finnegan, upholds an action that comes before him today.

The judicial review proceedings are being taken by Mr Michael Smith, national chairman of An Taisce, and Mr Tony McEvoy, an independent Kildare county councillor and member of the Mid-East Regional Authority, which covers Meath, Kildare and Wicklow.

They are challenging the validity of the Meath County Development Plan, which was adopted in March of last year, on the grounds that councillors had failed to "have regard to" the 1999 strategic planning guidelines (SPGs) in making decisions on land rezoning.

READ MORE

Mr Smith pointed out that the SPGs were given statutory force on January 1st last year under the 2000 Planning Act. However, the former minister for the environment, Mr Dempsey - a Meath TD himself - had refused to intervene when the guidelines were flouted.

"Two private individuals are now being forced to assert the policy through the courts. This is a crucial test case as to whether Government policy will give the spatial strategy teeth or leave it to be determined by developers and over-lobbied councillors."

Explaining why he and Mr McEvoy had initiated their legal action, Mr Smith said: "All citizens, from choking Dublin to dormitory Meath, Wicklow and Kildare to the underdeveloped west, have an interest in arresting the unchecked spread of Dublin."

He noted that the SPGs, as revised in April 2000, envisage a population of 164,000 for Co Meath in 2011, an increase of 33 per cent on the 1999 figure. However, the county plan "is aiming for a population of 235,000", an increase of just over 90 per cent.

He added that Mr Michael Grace, of Brady Shipman Martin, which compiled the SPGs for the seven local authorities in the greater Dublin area, had been sub-poenaed and would give "strong evidence" that the guidelines were breached in fundamental ways.

Mr McEvoy, in his affidavit, says he was elected to Kildare County Council to represent "the concerns expressed by my constituents in relation to urban sprawl and arbitrary or ad hoc developer- led planning with token or no public consultation".

He notes that the SPGs were designed to "provide a coherent strategic planning framework for development plans and for the provision of major transportation, sanitary services and other infrastructure" in the greater Dublin area.

One of the fundamental principles underlying the guidelines was that future growth should be concentrated in the Dublin metropolitan area and in designated centres within its hinterland (mainly Meath, Wicklow and Kildare), other than for local needs.

Instead of consolidating future growth, Mr McEvoy claims that the Meath development plan disperses it throughout the county to 33 towns and villages, only three of which (Navan, Kentstown and the environs of Drogheda) are identified in the SPGs.

He also insists that the population increases envisaged for these towns and villages are significantly in excess of what would be required to meet local needs and that they were clearly intended to cater for commuters working in the metropolitan area.

An affidavit from Mr Conor Tormey, chairman of Meath County Council at the time it adopted its development plan, concedes that members were advised by council officials that some rezoning proposals were in excess of what was required to meet future needs.

When told that these proposals were not in accordance with the SPGs, "the members had regard to , they also took into account their own knowledge of the needs of their constituents as conveyed to them in their capacity as their elected representatives".

In effect, the county council has admitted that the SPGs were breached. Its defence is expected to rest on the meaning of the phrase "have regard to", arguing that it was sufficient for councillors merely to advert to the SPGs before deciding to breach them.

If the High Court rules that Meath County Council had to adhere to rather than merely advert to the SPGs, it would cast serious doubt on the validity of rezoning decisions made not just by councillors in Meath, but also by others throughout the greater Dublin area.