Housing objections over ‘character of an area’ has to change, Chambers says

By Cillian Sherlock, PA

A mindset around objecting to housing developments based on the character of a given area “has to change”, the Minister for Public Expenditure has said.

Jack Chambers said he had heard from many young people that others living in an area for decades had sought to block developments based on the “character of an area”.

However, Mr Chambers said such objections can be “nebulous” and “block” the broader social and economic goal of increased housing supply.

He made the comments after the Government approved a series of actions designed to accelerate the delivery of strategic infrastructure.

This includes a review of the National Development Plan, the establishment of a new infrastructure division which will second experts from key delivery agencies, and the creation of a taskforce to accelerate infrastructure delivery.

The Minister said “provocative zeal of reform” will be the “core focus” of the division, as he criticised objections to housing delivery.

The Government is also preparing an evidence-based assessment of the “barriers impeding timely infrastructure development”, which will inform an action plan of “high-impact reform measures” to be considered.

Asked if there was room to change planning regulations to prevent objections from slowing down delivery, Mr Chambers said: “Anything that can achieve faster and more accelerated infrastructure delivery has to be on the table.

“And the last number of years have shown how too many individuals have had too much of a say in impeding infrastructure and housing across our economy.”

The Minister said there were “countless examples” of people in housing trying to “frustrate” and “undermine the broad public good”.

He added: “There’s too much tolerance for this in how systems are designed. I’ve seen examples in recent months of housing getting stopped because it undermines the character of the area. What does that mean?

“And you know, for me, it’s about housing. It’s about infrastructure and cutting through some of the nonsense which is just impeding the broader economic and social objective.”

The minister has previously said he had seen examples of “eminently sensible proposals” for housing supply in Dublin which were refused on aesthetic grounds.

Asked if he did not believe that an area could have a “character”, Mr Chambers replied: “An area absolutely can have a character – but to think that an area doesn’t accept housing, or doesn’t accept more housing when people are in existing housing, I don’t think it impedes the character of an area.

“I think additional housing, people, new people living in an area enhances the diversity and character of an area – and the fact that people think they have a veto on more people living around them, I think is a mindset that has to change.

“Its just a frustration I see and hear from many young people who would like to live in many urban areas, but they have people who’ve lived in places for decades objecting to housing on the basis of a character of an area – which I think is a nebulous reference that just seeks to block and object the broader social and economic objective.

“And in fact, of course, areas have enormous character across cities and towns and villages and but that shouldn’t impede some additional housing or community infrastructure, which I think would enhance the character of an area. And I think that that’s the context.”

Asked if he was signalling an era of the deregulation with the new approach, Mr Chambers said it was an attempt to “balance regulation”.

He added: “If the regulation doesn’t fit the the broader public interest or objective, then it should be assessed – and we just need to have a balanced approach around that.

“And endless regulation which constrains infrastructure or housing delivery on our economy isn’t, in my view, in the long term economic or social interests of the State.

“And I suppose it’s having a balanced approach to that is what’s ultimately important, protecting – obviously – certain standards that we have which are important for for people who would like to live in, in particular, housing, for example, and but we need to have a balanced approach to that.”