Dublin Docklands Development Authority Motion -
That Dublin City Council calls upon the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to revoke the planning powers of the Dublin Docklands Development Authority under the Dublin Docklands Development Authority Act 1997 and that those planning powers are transferred to Dublin City Council.
“First of all, I wish to welcome the motion, and consider it appropriate that we are discussing these matters here. A couple of years ago, such a motion would have been laughed out of the council chamber, and anyone proposing it would have been branded as a crank. Similar to much of the rubbish that was directed at the likes of ourselves who have attempted to protect our communities during the current Draft Development Plan. It is now a matter of public record how the DDDA operated and no right minded person could consider it acceptable for such a body to retain such responsibilities after the abuses we have seen.
In welcoming the motion, I would also like to point out that it represents a vindication for community activists in the Docklands, who spent many years challenging the abuses by the DDDA and trying to draw attention to what was taking place. It is a pity for all of us that residents like Joe Mooney, Marie O Reilly and others in East Wall and North Wall were not listened to, as far back as 1999 when they started voicing their concerns, but I’m sure they feel it’s better late than never .
I am proposing the amendment because I do not want any misunderstanding of what is intended. The DDDA had excessive planning powers – there was no transparency, decisions were fast tracked, residents and others were excluded from commenting and there was no appeals process. I am assuming that the intention is not to transfer draconian and discredited powers from one body to another, but rather that the Docklands area should be subject to the same planning standards as apply to the rest of the city, administered by Dublin City Council.
I believe the removal of the planning powers of the DDDA should be part of a disbanding of the DDDA in its entirety. However, it must be remembered that the re-development promised so much to the community and much of this has still not been delivered. We cannot throw the baby out with the bath water either, and if the DDDA is disbanded there must be a guarantee the promised community gain will be protected.”
Press Release on this motion