Catholic Church organisations are threatening legal action over a proposed amendment to Dublin planning regulations which they say will substantially reduce the value of their property portfolios.
The proposed amendment in the draft city development plan will prevent development other than social and affordable housing on land zoned for long-term institutional use.
The Conference of Religious in Ireland (CORI) and the Archbishop of Dublin's property trust claim the proposed restriction is unconstitutional.
Their concern follows a decision made by Dublin city councillors last September to remove housing as one of the possible types of development allowed on Z15 or "long-term institutional" land.
The change will have to be confirmed by councillors before the next development plan for the city is finalised early next year.
The Irish Times has seen more than 30 objections to the proposed change from CORI and individual orders, as well as the St Laurence O'Toole Diocesan Trust, which is the legal vehicle for the Archbishop's properties.
According to the trust, if the change is not reversed, the Archbishop wants 68 different church properties around the city rezoned for residential use.
Most of these sites are contiguous to churches and schools; the list includes lands in Finglas, Ballymun, Drumcondra, Killester, Artane, Donnycarney, Edenmore, Raheny, Kilbarrack, Ballyfermot, Cabra, Walkinstown and Terenure.
Other owners of Z15-zoned land have also objected to the change, including the Office of Public Works (OPW), the Irish Home Builders' Association and Ballymun Regeneration.
However, religious-owned lands are those primarily affected.
Concern among religious congregations about the proposals is not limited to those owning property in Dublin, according to the secretary general of CORI, Father Michael Drennan.
He says the proposals appear to exclude all future development of religious lands and limits their future use to social/affordable housing or community use.
Father Drennan accuses the council of trying to devalue institutional property and to obtain their land indirectly at less than market value.
"If the proposals are adopted, and the future use of our lands become limited and subsequently devalued, we will have no option but to consider it our right to test their constitutionality."
Some congregations had given land to the council in the past, he says, but this had been done at their discretion. At a time of great change, the orders needed to provide smaller buildings for their members and some needed to dispose of land to provide for this, and to continue charitable activities.
If the council wished to provide more social housing, that "burden" should be shared out across the community, and not fall disproportionately on one sector.
The St Laurence O'Toole Diocesan Trust says the proposal will have "major implications" for the value of the Archbishop's "extensive body of properties" and negative knock-on effects for community facilities and services.
Its effect will be to restrict all residential development on institutional lands solely to social, affordable and sheltered housing, the trust claims in a submission.
Many individual religious orders have also lodged objections with the council. The Religious Sisters of Charity, which owns 10 tracts of land in the city, describes the change as "offensive", "hostile" and "discriminatory".
In a submission prepared by Prof Yvonne Scannell of TCD, the order says the council has singled out a "discrete and limited order of persons", that is, the orders, for providing community services and social and affordable housing.
"This appears hostile to the institutions concerned and is unconstitutional."
The orders generally argue they need the freedom to sell off parcels of land to fund ongoing activities and the care of elderly members.
The Carmelites, for example, say they may need to sell land at Terenure College to pay for new classrooms, repair the roof of the school and refurbish a swimming pool.
Similarly, Alexandra College (under Church of Ireland management), which has clashed with parents over plans to sell a hockey pitch, argues that it may occasionally need "exceptional funding" from land sales.
As the school's submission puts it: "No value means no disposal, no disposal means no funds, no funds mean no educational investment and indeed some struggle to maintain current levels and educational standards. In the end the community is the ultimate loser."
In its submission, the OPW claims the change could create a "social housing ghetto" on the site of Mountjoy Prison when it is redeveloped. Building only social and affordable housing would be "inimical" to the social mix of the area, it says.
