This article is from page 14 of the 2006-01-31 edition of The Clare People. OCR mistakes are to be expected so download the original SWF or the rendered page 14 JPG
CLARE County Council increased its activity against suspected rogue developers by over 30 per cent last year, figures released yesterday by Clare County Council reveal.
According to the council’s Director for Planning, Bernadette Kinsella, the council’s Enforcement Unit took 311 separate actions in the field of enforcement – a rise of 31 per cent, or 75, on the 236 actions taken in 2004. Ms Kinsella also revealed that a number of homes across the county last year had to be partly demolished as a result of enforcement action taken against people who had been built without planning permission.
The figures show that the council’s enforcement unit served 168 Warning Letters, 115 Enforcement Notices and instituted 28 separate legal proceedings.
This compares to the 128 Warning Letters, 84 Enforcement Notices and 24 legal proceedings being instituted the previous year.
“Through the actions of the enforcement unit, the council is aware that some people still think it best to build first and think about planning later. This leads to a greater cost to all, a cost to neighbours, or those affected by a development, cost to the person of having to regularise, or demolish the development, pay the costs of the council and legal costs if the matter goes to Court,” Ms Kinsella said.
“In 2005, there have been cases where houses had to be partly demolished to comply with planning to remedy the matter, while remedial works have had to be done on site, a housing development had to be stopped and businesses had to close down, or move.
“It is therefore vitally important that before any work is started on any site that the need for planning permission be considered and that where a person has planning permission, that it is strictly complied with.
“During 2005, the council continued to take a very active role in the area of enforcement. Over 200 new cases came to the attention of the Enforcement Unit, many of which are still under investigation. Legal proceedings were commenced in 28 cases, with a number of convictions secured, while some cases have been finalised, with convictions and fines imposed. Many of the cases taken are still ongoing and some have been appealed to higher courts and are awaiting hearing.”
“The need to be able to respond to all complaints, investigate fully all sites and follow through each complaint to its conclusions is very resource intensive.”