• You are here:
• Home /
• Publications /
• Annual Reports /
• Annual Report of the Ombudsman 2004

Annual Report of the Ombudsman 2004

Chapter 3 - Galway County Council - Planning Objection Rejected

Galway County Council

Planning Objection Rejected

I received a complaint against Galway County Council in connection with its refusal to accept a third party objection to a planning application.

Galway County Council received and validated a planning application on 27 June 2003. Under Articles 18(1)(e) and 29(1)(a) of the 2001 Planning and Development Regulations, the last day for making any submissions or observations on the planning application was therefore Thursday, 31 July 2003. This happened to coincide with the Galway Races.

My complainant attempted to lodge an objection to the planning application on 31 July 2003 but the Council offices were closed when he arrived. The complainant then tried to lodge the submission the next day but he was refused as the valid period for receipt of objections had expired the previous day. When I took up this issue with the Council, it confirmed that, having regard to the Regulations, the last date for receipt of observations in this case was 31 July 2003. The Council pointed out that; “the offices remained open during restricted hours only on 30th and 31st July, the offices were opened on both those days and submissions or observations were possible during the requisite of those days.”

The Council told my Office that advance notice of the restricted opening hours during the two days of Race Week was given in the following way:

a) a notice was affixed to the Council’s headquarters, and b) notices were published in newspapers circulating throughout the County.

Finally, the Council told my Office that, whilst it regretted that it could not accept the complainant’s submission, it was satisfied that it met its obligations fully under the relevant planning codes.

Having considered the Council’s initial response, my Office was not entirely satisfied with its position. I drew the Council’s attention to the fact that the 2001 Planning Regulations came into force on 21 March 2001 and they replaced the 1994 Local Government (Planning and Development) Regulations. My Office pointed out that, under the 1994 Regulations, there was no deadline for making submissions or observations by third parties on planning applications. This is because, prior to 21 March 2001, an observation on a planning application could be made at any time up to the date of the decision by the Council on the application.

It is a tradition that Galway County Council offices are closed for a period during the Galway Races.

In the past, under the 1994 Regulations, this did not pose a problem for third party planning objectors as they could submit an objection to a planning application at any time up to the time the planning authority made a decision on the application. In addition, under the old regime, they could make an appeal to An Bord Pleanála, the independent planning appeals board, without having first submitted an objection to the County Council.

The Council made the point that its offices were open on both 30 and 31 July 2003 and that it was possible to lodge submissions on those days. My Office accepted that this was true to some extent given that the offices were open until 11am each day. However, my Office noted that the Site Notice for this planning application indicated that the Council offices would be open during the period 9am to 4pm, Monday to Friday (except Public Holidays). In the circumstances, I considered that my complainant could not be faulted for assuming that it was reasonable for him to approach the Council offices after 11am on Thursday 31 July 2003 and lodge his objection, within the statutory deadline. This is because 31 July 2003 was not a Public Holiday and my complainant approached the offices during the normal working hours, as specified on the Site Notice.

In summary, I took the view that my complainant, as a third party objector, could not lodge his submission within the five week period, because the Council offices were closed when he called. As a result he lost out on his statutory opportunity of appeal to An Bord Pleanála. In addition, having regard to Article 29(3) of the Planning and Development Regulations, 2001, his objection to the planning application was not entertained by the Council.

The core issue in this case was that the introduction of the five week deadline, under the 2001 Planning and Development Regulations, presented the Council with a difficulty which it did not have to deal with under the previous Regulations.

It appears that the Council did not foresee this difficulty or make alternative arrangements, during Race Week, to cater for the receipt of statutorily imposed, time critical planning documentation. As a result, my Office took the view that the complainant was adversely affected and lost his statutory right to lodge an objection to the planning application and, as a consequence, he was deprived of the opportunity to lodge an appeal with An Bord Pleanála, if he had so wished.

In the circumstances, I asked the Council to review its handling of the case. In addition, I asked the Council to outline the procedures it proposed to introduce to ensure that a similar situation would not occur in future.

In response the Council agreed that any public notices in newspapers or otherwise relating to the closure of County Hall during Race Week will include the following:

“In the event of any member of the public making any observations or submissions in relation to the Council’s Statutory functions notably planning applications, please note that such observations or submissions may be placed in the post box located beside the main entrance to County Hall and such observations or submissions will be deemed to have been received on that day.”

In addition, the Council agreed to offer €200, on a without prejudice basis and as a gesture of goodwill, to my complainant given that he was not able to lodge his objection to the proposed development when he called to the Council Offices on 31 July 2003.

I was satisfied that the Council’s response was reasonable. In coming to this conclusion, I had regard to the fact that the Council immediately revised its procedures once it became aware of the problem and offered redress to my complainant.

Back to contents