Ireland’s Planning System Is “Not Planning – It’s Writing Text”
“We can’t even agree on the numbers… but what we can agree on is that we have a major challenge.”
Tony Reddy of Reddy Architecture & Urbanism talks about the incoming Urban Development Zones (UDZs) and a fresh approach to plan-led development. He acknowledges reforms underway but cautions that further planning improvement is needed: “More like Europe, and less like Britain”, concluding: “If we continue as we are, we will fail utterly to meet our targets.” Watch back: https://youtu.be/7mlfX2IcuWs?si=udq7WWzSH70k5saJ
Ireland’s planning system is unfit to meet the country’s housing crisis and must undergo a fundamental transformation modelled on continental European practice, according to Tony Reddy, founding director of Reddy Architecture + Urbanism, who delivered a forthright address to industry peers.
Reddy, a former chair of the Academy of Urbanism, argued that the scale of Ireland’s housing shortfall is far greater than official figures suggest, and that the planning apparatus underpinning delivery is structurally incapable of responding.
The Numbers Don’t Add Up
“The first thing to remember is we can’t even agree on the numbers,” Reddy told the audience. While the government’s projected figure stands at 50,000 units per year, ESRI has estimated a requirement of 80,000 per year between 2023 and 2040, while Davy has placed the figure at 93,000. “In a way, all that’s saying is we have a major challenge, and we need a planning system that can deliver – and it’s not doing so now.”
Reddy acknowledged recent government initiatives – including the VAT change on residential construction, the Land Value Sharing and Urban Development Zones provisions, and investment in electrical infrastructure and transport – as genuinely positive steps. However, he was emphatic that a critical gap remains. “There’s one last piece of the agenda that really needs to move.”
On the supply side of permissions, Reddy was blunt: “We need of the order of 100,000 permissions to hit the government’s 50,000 figure. We need even more to hit the figures the ESRI and others showed. So we have a major issue ahead of us.”
A System Designed for Lawyers, Not Cities
At the heart of Reddy’s critique is Ireland’s continued reliance on a discretionary planning system – one in which every application is determined on a site-by-site basis. “Britain and Ireland are now the outliers in the planning system,” he said. “We have what’s called a discretionary planning system, which means that every site is a site-by-site decision. Much of the former British Empire, and indeed the United States, had a similar system for a while. They’ve all ended it.”
He pointed to Ireland’s development plan documentation as emblematic of the dysfunction. “Our development plan for Dublin is 1,200 pages of text, which is just an opportunity for lawyers to make a lot of money interpreting it and debating it.” By contrast, he noted that cities such as Hamburg and Stockholm publish their city plans in accessible, visual, three-dimensional formats online. “A person moving to an area will know what the transportation system is, what the heights of the buildings will be, what type of accommodation is planned, where the schools are. That’s the proper way to plan.”
His verdict on Ireland’s current approach was unambiguous: “It’s not planning. It’s writing text, and it’s a manifesto for lawyers to interpret.”
The Copenhagen and Helsinki Benchmark
Earlier this year, Reddy travelled to Helsinki and Copenhagen with colleagues from the Irish Cities Group to study planning practice at first hand. The contrast with Irish practice, he said, was stark – and the lesson was as much about resource allocation as it was about methodology.
“When you look at the size of Copenhagen relative to a city the size of Dublin, they have something in the order of 1,900 planning staff. Only about two-fifths of that number are working on development control.” In Ireland, he said, the inverse is true: “95% of the planners are working on development control. So hardly anyone has time to plan.”
One particular exchange in Helsinki crystallised the challenge. “All of the planners, engineers, architects, and landscapers got together because there was a problem in the plan for August 2030 – and they spent two or three days resolving service problems for something that didn’t yet exist.” When the Helsinki team acknowledged they were behind programme and would need to bring in external help, Reddy and his colleagues asked what that meant in numbers. “They said around 1,900. Because that’s the reality.”
Cork’s Tivoli Docks: A Cautionary Tale of What Shouldn’t Be Necessary
Reddy cited the Tivoli Docks regeneration in Cork as a case study in what successful planning can achieve – but also in why the current system is inadequate. The scheme, located 1.5 kilometres from Cork city centre and incorporating a new rail station, came about only after extensive negotiation.
“We first went to the planning authority five years ago, and the planner said the map was coloured – you get eight houses per acre. There was no prospect that the Port of Cork were going to leave, and all of the industries that were there had moved.” It took sustained engagement with the local authority and eventual involvement from the Department of the Environment to unlock a comprehensive regeneration framework. “We persuaded the local authority, and eventually a whole new community is planned.”
But Reddy was clear that such outcomes should not depend on individual advocacy: “We don’t need persuasion. We need the local authorities to be doing it of their own initiative.”
A Practical Programme for Change
Reddy outlined a concrete short-term programme. He called on government to commit to 20 Urban Development Zones and 30 Local Area Plans in the immediate term. “That’s not going to happen without the right resources – right now, planning authorities do not have the staff to do it.”
His proposed solution draws directly from the Helsinki visit: bringing in national and international consultancy capacity to support local authorities, rather than bypassing them. “We need to teach our planners how to do this work. We need to free them up to do it. And we’re suggesting that national and international funding be given by government to get these plans done by the local authorities – not by others – with the support of external consultancy.”
Given the scale of the task, Reddy acknowledged that domestic capacity alone will be insufficient. “There are not enough people, even in Britain and Ireland, to do this. So we’re suggesting bringing in international help.”
A Generational Shift, Starting Now
Reddy was realistic that the trajectory he is describing extends well beyond any single electoral cycle. “This transcends this government – this is three to four governments into the future and beyond.” The reforms he is advocating, he conceded, will not produce results immediately: “It will only begin to have effect in 2027.”
But the cost of inaction, he argued, is already quantifiable. “If we continue as we are, we’re going to fail utterly to meet our targets.” The goal, he said, is a gradual but irreversible shift: “That in time, the favoured way and the general way we plan our cities and towns is more like Europe and less like Britain – and that we begin to realistically hit the targets we need to hit.”
Tony Reddy is founding director of Reddy Architecture + Urbanism and a former chair of the Academy of Urbanism: Watch back at https://youtu.be/7mlfX2IcuWs?si=udq7WWzSH70k5saJ
