This article is from page 8 of the 2006-01-03 edition of The Clare People. OCR mistakes are to be expected so download the original SWF or the rendered page 8 JPG
CLARE’S top planning official has hit back at criticism by the county’s leading architects that the system is not working and needs to be radically overhauled.
In a letter to the architects, Clare County Council’s Acting Director of Service for Planning, Liam Conneally, stated that the contents of their letter prior to Christmas “undermines the working trust” that existed between the architects and the council’s planning department.
The architects had written, “We are totally frustrated by lack of consistency, poor management structure, lack of productive dialogue, poor communication and absence of a rational coherent, consistent and common-sense approach to planning within the council.”
They told Mr Conneally that they see little point in holding any further Agents Liaison Group meetings with the department “until there has been a significant and tangible overhaul of the present system which, in our view, is clearly not working.”
Now, Mr Conneally has responded, “I am disappointed at the negative tone and content of the letter. The planning service provided by the council is of a high standard and the commitment of staff to serving the public is beyond question.
“While extensive negative aspects of the ALG concept and planning service are opined, no constructive solution is put forward.
“I think your letter indicates a fundamental misunderstanding of the role of the council as planning authority and its function to act as an independent assessor of proposals for development.”
He continued, “The council fully recognises that there is scope for improvement and continuously works towards creating a better situation. The content and circulation of your correspondence has, I feel, undermined the working trust that I thought existed between the ALG members and the Planning Department of Clare County Council.
“The only way to get work done in a constructive manner is to address the concerns of the group through the group forum itself. Unfortunately, the group as it existed became an isolated planning clinic where the individual concerns of the small group of agents in attendance were the main focus for discussion.
“I believe that the ALG idea and concept is good and that, subject to a mature common-sense approach, wider buy-in by the county’s agents and to the preparation of an agreed protocol for the group, it can have a future.
“What we need to work towards is a situation whereby the group is representative of all those engaged in the planning process and where both sides recognise that each has a major role to play.”
Mr Conneally said that he is happy to arrange a meeting of the ALG “early in the New Year to see how matters can be constructively addressed”.