Cllr Emer Costello has called on Dublin City Council to reverse its decision to terminate the employment of the two`local part-time Regeneration Workers at O’Devaney Gardens and one part time regeneration worker at Croke Villas, Ballybough, Dublin 3 by ceasing funding to the Regeneration Agency Community Technical Aid (CTA).
Speaking at the City Council meeting this evening, Cllr Costello stated that Dublin City Council had treated the workers, the Regeneration Board and the community with contempt. The Regeneration Board had not been consulted in relation to that decision. As Dublin City Council’s own representative on the O’Devaney Gardens Regeneration Board, she was stunned to learn second-hand of the decision to terminate the employment of the Regeneration Workers. Cllr Costello raised the issue at the September Central Area Committee and proposed the motion for the October City Council meeting calling on the City Manager to reverse the decision terminating the employment of the Regeneration Workers.
Cllr Costello stated that the Regeneration Workers provide an invaluable service to the communities. They provide essential linkages between the community and Dublin City Council. Following the collapse of the Public Private Partnership in May 2008, the Regeneration Workers from O’Devaney Gardens played a major role in calming the very volatile situation that existed there at the time. In addition, they worked with the local community to ensure the delivery of a viable new plan. Residents of Croke Villas, who were completely devastated by the collapse of that PPP, were not as fortunate as to have an alternative plan in place. However, Dublin City Council had agreed to develop a Local Area Plan for the area and the services of the Regeneration Officer in the community consultation would be pivotal in developing an inclusive and democratic plan. Over the past six years, the Regeneration Workers have devoted their lives to their communities, and in contrast the City Council’s treatment of them is completely cold and ruthless.
Cllr Costello stated that the figures in relation to costs of the workers produced by the City Manager were inaccurate. It was also very worrying that no effort had been made to negotiate with either CTA or the Workers on the costs involved prior to the decision being made. She called on the City Manager to withdraw the letter terminating the funding and to enter into negotiations with CTA, the Regeneration Board, the workers and the local councillors.
Cllr Costello completely rejected the Manager’s report that the work of the Regeneration Workers in O’Devaney Gardens is now complete as the Masterplan had been developed and a planning application would be sent to An Bord Pleanala in the coming weeks. She argued that the work of the Regeneration Workers at this crucial juncture was need more than ever. It would be crucial that the Regeneration Workers remain in place to guide the residents of O’Devaney Gardens through the public consultation process.
Moreover, the Regeneration Workers in both Croke Villas and O’Devaney Gardens made substantial inputs into the social regeneration necessary for the communities and that this work is still very essential in the communities.
The motion calling on the manager to reverse the decision to terminate the employment of the workers, proposed by Cllr Costello, was adopted overwhelmingly by the City Council. Cllr Costello is now calling for an Emergency Meeting of the O’Devaney Gardens Regeneration Board so that negotiations with the City Council can take place in a meaningful environment.
Tuesday, October 05, 2010
Thursday, September 02, 2010
Costellos seek radical changes to railway order for Dart Interconnector to protect East Wall residents
The Labour Deputy for Dublin Central, Joe Costello TD and Cllr. Emer Costello have raised a number of issues that are of concern to the residents of East Wall in a submission to An Bord Pleanála in relation to the railway order for the dart interconnector.
“We accept the principle of linking the mainline railway with the DART and LUAS lines and the proposed METRO. While we do not oppose the Interconnector project we have serious concerns about aspects of the proposals as detailed in the Railway Order.
“The Interconnector will cause major disruption at three points along its route – Inchicore, St. Stephen’s Green and East Wall.
“It appears that no consultation has taken place locally regarding St. Stephen’s Green; that minimal consultation has taken place with the community of East Wall and that Iarnród Éireann engaged in full and frank consultation with the residents of Inchicore.
“Indeed the original proposal for tunnelling along the route had been presented as tunnelling from both Inchicore and East Wall. Yet to the consternation of the residents of East Wall the public assertions of Iarnród Éireann were altered and the Railway Order applied for in July 2010 sought to tunnel only from East Wall.
“Thus East Wall will become the hub of the Interconnector Project and bear the brunt of the works for the entire duration of the project.
“The proposed development will take almost a decade to complete. East Wall will be visited with disruption from spoil removal, noise, dust and traffic congestion for the duration of this major development.
“In return East Wall will receive absolutely no benefit – not even a DART station to improve public transport which is woefully inadequate in the East Wall area.
“East Wall is a small, urban community of about 3,500 people. The original houses are almost entirely two storey, built on land reclaimed from the sea. East Wall lies within the curve of the railway line and is isolated from the rest of the City.
“Due to its low-lying location it has been subjected to flooding, the most recent being last year, 2009. Householders find it difficult and expensive to get home insurance.
“East Wall needs sensitive treatment from planners and community benefit from major projects that impact on the area.”
Deputy Joe Costello and Cllr. Emer Costello in their submission today appeal to An Bórd Pleanála for a fair hearing for the East Wall community
“We accept the principle of linking the mainline railway with the DART and LUAS lines and the proposed METRO. While we do not oppose the Interconnector project we have serious concerns about aspects of the proposals as detailed in the Railway Order.
“The Interconnector will cause major disruption at three points along its route – Inchicore, St. Stephen’s Green and East Wall.
“It appears that no consultation has taken place locally regarding St. Stephen’s Green; that minimal consultation has taken place with the community of East Wall and that Iarnród Éireann engaged in full and frank consultation with the residents of Inchicore.
“Indeed the original proposal for tunnelling along the route had been presented as tunnelling from both Inchicore and East Wall. Yet to the consternation of the residents of East Wall the public assertions of Iarnród Éireann were altered and the Railway Order applied for in July 2010 sought to tunnel only from East Wall.
“Thus East Wall will become the hub of the Interconnector Project and bear the brunt of the works for the entire duration of the project.
“The proposed development will take almost a decade to complete. East Wall will be visited with disruption from spoil removal, noise, dust and traffic congestion for the duration of this major development.
“In return East Wall will receive absolutely no benefit – not even a DART station to improve public transport which is woefully inadequate in the East Wall area.
“East Wall is a small, urban community of about 3,500 people. The original houses are almost entirely two storey, built on land reclaimed from the sea. East Wall lies within the curve of the railway line and is isolated from the rest of the City.
“Due to its low-lying location it has been subjected to flooding, the most recent being last year, 2009. Householders find it difficult and expensive to get home insurance.
“East Wall needs sensitive treatment from planners and community benefit from major projects that impact on the area.”
Deputy Joe Costello and Cllr. Emer Costello in their submission today appeal to An Bórd Pleanála for a fair hearing for the East Wall community
Copy of Full Submission on Dart Interconnector to An Bord Pleanala
Dear Sir/Madam,
We accept the principle of linking the mainline railway with the DART and LUAS lines and the proposed METRO. While we do not oppose the Interconnector project we have serious concerns about aspects of the proposals as detailed in the Railway Order.
The Interconnector will cause major disruption at three points along its route – Inchicore, St. Stephen’s Green and East Wall.
It appears that no consultation has taken place locally regarding St. Stephen’s Green; that minimal consultation has taken place with the community of East Wall and that Iarnród Éireann engaged in full and frank consultation with the residents of Inchicore.
Indeed the original proposal for tunnelling along the route had been presented as tunnelling from both Inchicore and East Wall. Yet to the consternation of the residents of East Wall the public assertions of Iarnród Éireann were altered and the Railway Order applied for in July 2010 sought to tunnel only from East Wall.
Thus East Wall will become the hub of the Interconnector Project and bear the brunt of the works for the entire duration of the project.
The main tunnelling works will initiate in East Wall; the spoil will be excavated and transported from there; the operational Control Centre, Management Suite and traction sub-station and Intervention shaft will all be located there if the Draft Railway Order is approved in its present form.
The proposed development will take almost a decade to complete. East Wall will be visited with disruption from spoil removal, noise, dust and traffic congestion for the duration of this major development.
When complete it will create a visual intrusion on the landscape and an extra volume of noise from the increased activity along the new Interconnector and old mainline railway.
In return East Wall will receive absolutely no benefit – not even a DART station to improve public transport which is woefully inadequate in the East Wall area.
It is a bleak prospect, and no wonder the closely knit residential East Wall community is angry and feels discriminated against by Iarnród Éireann.
East Wall is a small, urban community of about 3,500 people. The original houses are almost entirely two storey, built on land reclaimed from the sea. East Wall lies within the curve of the railway line and is isolated from the rest of the City.
Due to its low-lying location it has been subjected to flooding, the most recent being last year, 2009. Householders find it difficult and expensive to get home insurance.
In 2004 wishing to be considered as a distinct community within the Dublin Docklands and impatient with the lack of community gain from the burgeoning Docklands development the East Wall Area Action Plan was drawn up with the Dublin Docklands Development Authority.
Most recently in the present Draft Dublin City Development Plan (2011 – 2017) East Wall succeeded in persuading the City Council that it should be granted a Local Area Plan (LAP). When complete the LAP will provide East Wall with a statutory framework for future development. This plan will enable East Wall to protect its amenities, heritage and character and establish appropriate height and density for future developments.
The Railway Order is silent on both plans for East Wall and Iarnród Éireann has not included them in any way in the Interconnector Project.
East Wall needs sensitive treatment from planners and community benefit from major projects that impact on the area.
In our submission today we appeal to An Bórd Pleanála for a fair hearing for the East Wall Community.
We wish to raise the following issues of concern to the residents of East Wall.
A project as large as the DART Underground Interconnector requires an oral hearing so that citizens, communities and businesses along the route can express their views and concerns.
The residents of East Wall have already incurred substantial costs in preparing their submission and will incur ongoing costs for the duration of the project. Iarnród Éireann should pay the bill for all reasonable costs incurred by communities along the route.
The Interconnector will benefit the people of Dublin. However, it will seriously discommode the people of East Wall and Inchicore during its construction. It is unreasonable that the benefit of a local station should accrue to Inchicore while East Wall will suffer a double whammy of not getting a local station but becoming the tunnelling hub of the entire project. East Wall should be provided with a local station and the tunnelling should be shared equally between both Inchicore and East Wall. Moreover, if four Tunnel Boring Machines (TBMs) were employed instead of two, the work could be carried out much more quickly and efficiently and with far less adverse impact on both communities.
A comprehensive survey of the health and homes of people in the vicinity of the tunnel should be carried out prior to tunnelling. Damage to health and property should be monitored throughout the duration of the project.
There are serious question marks about the entire alignment along West Road. It is unclear why the new proposed bridge needs to be taller and wider than the old bridge; why a cycle lane is part of the proposal; what purpose the so-called “emergency”/evacuation footbridge at West Road serves; and why a permanent retaining wall is necessary.
The proposed works at and behind Abercorn Road are substantial and would impact heavily on the local residents particularly in relation to truck movements. The backup travel route proposed to the rear of Abercorn Road and Irvine Terrace should not be permitted, as it would cause noise, dust and disturbance.
Likewise Blythe Avenue, Hawthorn Terrace and Church Road are likely to experience disruption and disturbance during the construction and tunnelling phase with residents’ enjoyment of their homes being severely curtailed.
An Independent Arbitrator should be appointed to resolve any dispute that might arise with the main contractor during the lifetime of the project.
The main contractor for the project must produce in consultation with Iarnród Éireann the following documents: The Construction Code of Practice, A Noise and Vibration Plan, An Environmental Management Plan, A TBM Mitigation Plan, A Traffic Management Plan, and a Dust Minimisation Plan. These documents should be supplied to the residents as soon as possible and included in an agreement with the contractor. This should be a condition of the Railway Order.
There should be a Charter of Rights drawn up between the residents of East Wall and Iarnród Éireann. It would be enforced by the Independent Arbitrator.
A liaison committee should be established between the East Wall Action Group and Iarnród Éireann for the duration of the project to monitor progress and to address potential crises or emergencies.
The East Wall community should benefit from a local employment clause of 20% of the workforce and apprenticeships and should also benefit from Community Gain funding for local community-based projects and scholarships during the construction period and the subsequent operation of the Interconnector.
The spoil from the tunnelling should be transported out of the area by means of the existing mainline railway so as to minimise pollution and road traffic disruption.
Car and truck parking for the large number of on site workers should be planned in such a way that the streets of East Wall and North Strand would not be clogged with vehicles for years to come.
Hours of working should be determined by An Bórd Pleanála and should be in accordance with the wishes of the residents.
The proposed Operational Control Centre, Management Suite and Eastern Intervention Shaft should be located outside of East Wall as they would be visually intrusive.
Flooding has taken place as recently as last year in East Wall. The Railway Order should include a comprehensive plan to deal with the low water table and the likely
flooding of the tunnel during construction and the eventuality of flooding in the tunnel and in East Wall in the future.
Finally, when the project is complete Iarnród Éireann should provide a thorough landscaping of all the areas affected with a view to reducing adverse visual impact and improving the environment. This should be a condition of the Railway Order, as on a previous occasion in 2002, Iarnród Éireann failed to carry out its commitment to landscape its property in the North Strand Area.
In conclusion, we support the submission made by the East Wall Community through the East Wall Action Group.
They have requested an oral hearing and we earnestly request that it be granted.
Should it be granted we would welcome the opportunity of making an oral submission.
We accept the principle of linking the mainline railway with the DART and LUAS lines and the proposed METRO. While we do not oppose the Interconnector project we have serious concerns about aspects of the proposals as detailed in the Railway Order.
The Interconnector will cause major disruption at three points along its route – Inchicore, St. Stephen’s Green and East Wall.
It appears that no consultation has taken place locally regarding St. Stephen’s Green; that minimal consultation has taken place with the community of East Wall and that Iarnród Éireann engaged in full and frank consultation with the residents of Inchicore.
Indeed the original proposal for tunnelling along the route had been presented as tunnelling from both Inchicore and East Wall. Yet to the consternation of the residents of East Wall the public assertions of Iarnród Éireann were altered and the Railway Order applied for in July 2010 sought to tunnel only from East Wall.
Thus East Wall will become the hub of the Interconnector Project and bear the brunt of the works for the entire duration of the project.
The main tunnelling works will initiate in East Wall; the spoil will be excavated and transported from there; the operational Control Centre, Management Suite and traction sub-station and Intervention shaft will all be located there if the Draft Railway Order is approved in its present form.
The proposed development will take almost a decade to complete. East Wall will be visited with disruption from spoil removal, noise, dust and traffic congestion for the duration of this major development.
When complete it will create a visual intrusion on the landscape and an extra volume of noise from the increased activity along the new Interconnector and old mainline railway.
In return East Wall will receive absolutely no benefit – not even a DART station to improve public transport which is woefully inadequate in the East Wall area.
It is a bleak prospect, and no wonder the closely knit residential East Wall community is angry and feels discriminated against by Iarnród Éireann.
East Wall is a small, urban community of about 3,500 people. The original houses are almost entirely two storey, built on land reclaimed from the sea. East Wall lies within the curve of the railway line and is isolated from the rest of the City.
Due to its low-lying location it has been subjected to flooding, the most recent being last year, 2009. Householders find it difficult and expensive to get home insurance.
In 2004 wishing to be considered as a distinct community within the Dublin Docklands and impatient with the lack of community gain from the burgeoning Docklands development the East Wall Area Action Plan was drawn up with the Dublin Docklands Development Authority.
Most recently in the present Draft Dublin City Development Plan (2011 – 2017) East Wall succeeded in persuading the City Council that it should be granted a Local Area Plan (LAP). When complete the LAP will provide East Wall with a statutory framework for future development. This plan will enable East Wall to protect its amenities, heritage and character and establish appropriate height and density for future developments.
The Railway Order is silent on both plans for East Wall and Iarnród Éireann has not included them in any way in the Interconnector Project.
East Wall needs sensitive treatment from planners and community benefit from major projects that impact on the area.
In our submission today we appeal to An Bórd Pleanála for a fair hearing for the East Wall Community.
We wish to raise the following issues of concern to the residents of East Wall.
A project as large as the DART Underground Interconnector requires an oral hearing so that citizens, communities and businesses along the route can express their views and concerns.
The residents of East Wall have already incurred substantial costs in preparing their submission and will incur ongoing costs for the duration of the project. Iarnród Éireann should pay the bill for all reasonable costs incurred by communities along the route.
The Interconnector will benefit the people of Dublin. However, it will seriously discommode the people of East Wall and Inchicore during its construction. It is unreasonable that the benefit of a local station should accrue to Inchicore while East Wall will suffer a double whammy of not getting a local station but becoming the tunnelling hub of the entire project. East Wall should be provided with a local station and the tunnelling should be shared equally between both Inchicore and East Wall. Moreover, if four Tunnel Boring Machines (TBMs) were employed instead of two, the work could be carried out much more quickly and efficiently and with far less adverse impact on both communities.
A comprehensive survey of the health and homes of people in the vicinity of the tunnel should be carried out prior to tunnelling. Damage to health and property should be monitored throughout the duration of the project.
There are serious question marks about the entire alignment along West Road. It is unclear why the new proposed bridge needs to be taller and wider than the old bridge; why a cycle lane is part of the proposal; what purpose the so-called “emergency”/evacuation footbridge at West Road serves; and why a permanent retaining wall is necessary.
The proposed works at and behind Abercorn Road are substantial and would impact heavily on the local residents particularly in relation to truck movements. The backup travel route proposed to the rear of Abercorn Road and Irvine Terrace should not be permitted, as it would cause noise, dust and disturbance.
Likewise Blythe Avenue, Hawthorn Terrace and Church Road are likely to experience disruption and disturbance during the construction and tunnelling phase with residents’ enjoyment of their homes being severely curtailed.
An Independent Arbitrator should be appointed to resolve any dispute that might arise with the main contractor during the lifetime of the project.
The main contractor for the project must produce in consultation with Iarnród Éireann the following documents: The Construction Code of Practice, A Noise and Vibration Plan, An Environmental Management Plan, A TBM Mitigation Plan, A Traffic Management Plan, and a Dust Minimisation Plan. These documents should be supplied to the residents as soon as possible and included in an agreement with the contractor. This should be a condition of the Railway Order.
There should be a Charter of Rights drawn up between the residents of East Wall and Iarnród Éireann. It would be enforced by the Independent Arbitrator.
A liaison committee should be established between the East Wall Action Group and Iarnród Éireann for the duration of the project to monitor progress and to address potential crises or emergencies.
The East Wall community should benefit from a local employment clause of 20% of the workforce and apprenticeships and should also benefit from Community Gain funding for local community-based projects and scholarships during the construction period and the subsequent operation of the Interconnector.
The spoil from the tunnelling should be transported out of the area by means of the existing mainline railway so as to minimise pollution and road traffic disruption.
Car and truck parking for the large number of on site workers should be planned in such a way that the streets of East Wall and North Strand would not be clogged with vehicles for years to come.
Hours of working should be determined by An Bórd Pleanála and should be in accordance with the wishes of the residents.
The proposed Operational Control Centre, Management Suite and Eastern Intervention Shaft should be located outside of East Wall as they would be visually intrusive.
Flooding has taken place as recently as last year in East Wall. The Railway Order should include a comprehensive plan to deal with the low water table and the likely
flooding of the tunnel during construction and the eventuality of flooding in the tunnel and in East Wall in the future.
Finally, when the project is complete Iarnród Éireann should provide a thorough landscaping of all the areas affected with a view to reducing adverse visual impact and improving the environment. This should be a condition of the Railway Order, as on a previous occasion in 2002, Iarnród Éireann failed to carry out its commitment to landscape its property in the North Strand Area.
In conclusion, we support the submission made by the East Wall Community through the East Wall Action Group.
They have requested an oral hearing and we earnestly request that it be granted.
Should it be granted we would welcome the opportunity of making an oral submission.
Friday, July 30, 2010
Making a Strong Vision Statement for Dublin City - The Dublin City Development Plan 2011 - 2018
The Dublin City Development Plan (2011-2017), currently being finalised by the City Council, sets out strategies to protect and enhance sustainable residential communities, to foster and enhance the city’s culture and heritage, to develop Dublin as a clean, green connected City, to revive the City’s economy in order to create conditions to generate new jobs and protect existing employment and to establish Dublin City as the premier retail venue in the country.
Dublin City Council met on 26, 27 and 28 July to consider the submissions from the public and the City Manager’s recommendations. The Labour Group on Dublin City Council took on board the many public submissions and proposed progressive motions and amendments to the Draft Plan. Issues such as height, density and plot ratio, the creation of Statutory Local Area Plans, the protection of the City’s heritage, green spaces and environment, zoning, the restriction of certain uses within residential areas, and the development of a vibrant Core City Centre, were at the heart of Labour Party amendments to the City Manager’s proposals.
The amendments adopted by the City Council at the meetings in July will be on public display until the 15th of September in the Civic Offices, Dublin City Library and on the City Council website www.dublincity.ie. Submissions will be invited from
the public. The submissions and City Manager’s recommendations will be considered at a final meeting at the end of October before the plan comes into effect in January 2011. Vigilance will be required to ensure that there is no attempt to row back on the hard-won community gains.
COMMUNITY ISSUES
Off-licenses: A very important Labour Party motion was adopted to prohibit the further expansion of off licenses or part off-licenses except in areas where a compelling case can be made. Any application for an off-license must include a map of all the off-licenses located within a 1km radius of proposed development.
Institutional Lands Zoned Z15: The Labour motion to delete residential development on institutional lands as a use which could be “open for consideration” was adopted. Moreover, any future development of institutional lands must “have regard to the prevailing height” in the neighbourhood.
Vacant Lands: Labour Party motions and the recommendations of Cllr Emer Costello’s Lord Mayor’s Commission on Employment have led to the adoption of a new policy in relation to temporary use of vacant properties/sites for creative/cultural/social entrepreneurs/ community sectors.
Homeless & Social Services: These will require detailed planning applications to avoid a proliferation / concentration of institutional services in residential areas.
Public Realm/Advertising: The City Manager has agreed to put the public realm advertising strategy out to public consultation (e.g. JC Decaux street advertising).
LOCAL AREA PLANS (LAP’S):
Labour proposals for statutory Local Area Plans for the following areas were agreed:
-Manor Street/Stoneybatter/Smithfield Area
-East Wall
-Ballybough/Croke Park Area
-Pelletstown which will also include the Navan Road area
AREA SPECIFIC ISSUES
Dominican Convent Lands, Cabra:
The Labour motion rejecting the City Manager’s proposal to rezone part of the lands bordering Riverston Abbey from Z15 (institutional) to Z1 (residential) was adopted thus reinstating the Z15 zoning in accordance with the wishes of the residents.
Luas BXD line Royal Canal/ Broombridge:
Our proposal for a new policy was adopted: “That the proposed Luas BXD line in the vicinity of the Royal Canal and Broombridge will have full regard to the heritage and amenity value of the area and this should be reflected in any Environmental Statement”
Hendron’s Site, Broadstone:
The Labour proposed a motion to reject the City Manager’s proposal to rezone to Z10A (Inner Suburban) and the Z3 (neighbourhood use) zoning was adopted in accordance with the wishes of the residents.
Prussia Street:
The City Manager’s recommendation to rezone land on Prussia Street from Z6 (enterprise and employment) to Z4 (District Centre) was rejected and Z6 zoning retained pending adoption of Local Area Plan on foot of a Labour proposal.
Mount Bernard Park:
The lands north-west of Mount Bernard Park, Phibsborough, between the park and the Royal Canal were rezoned from Z1 {residential} to Z9 {amenity}. The extension of the park and the provision of a playground in the park were included on the insistence of Labour Councillors.
Mountjoy Square:
As a result of a Labour motion, the City Manager agreed to commence statutory assessment to designate Mountjoy Square an Architectural Conservation Area without delay
Lands at Alfie Byrne Road:
The Labour motion to reject the manager’s proposal to rezone these lands and the Z9 (amenity) zoning has been retained.
Castleforbes Road:
The Labour motion to commence procedure to remove Castleforbes Road from the Record of Protected Structures to allow resurfacing take place there, was agreed.
HEIGHT & DENSITY
The Labour Group ensured the curtailment of the City Manager’s proposals for high rise throughout the City. Under the current City Development Plan(2005-2011) there is no restriction on the permitted height of buildings in any part of the City. The new plan (2011 – 2017) sets out maximum limits for height across the City. Moreover, there is now a strict requirement that all proposed new buildings, two storeys or more, above the prevailing height in the area must be accompanied by a detailed Design Statement to justify the new height proposed. The draft height policies for the City are now as follows:
Low Rise:
Inner City Area
6 storey residential (19m)
7 storey office (29m)
Rail Hubs
i.e. within ½ kilometre(or 500 metres)of mainline train & Dart stations (but not including Luas stops)
6 storey residential (19m)
6 storey office (25m)
Outer City
4 storey residential (13m)
4 storey office (17 m)
Mid-rise & High Rise
A number of areas have been designated for mid-rise and high rise buildings. Labour Councillors insisted that in these cases a statutory Local Area Plan (LAP) must be in place before any high buildings can be granted permission and the areas treated as low rise areas pending the adoption of a LAP.
Areas designated as mid-rise (up to 16 residential and 12 Office – 50M max) include
Phibsborough, the Local Area Plan has been adopted and high building can only be located in areas designated for such under the LAP, e.g. Mater Hospital site.
Grangegorman, which is to be the subject of a special statutory Strategic Development Zone (SDZ) for the new unified campus for the Dublin Institute of Technology (DIT) and HSE Facility.
Pelletstown, which will be treated as a low rise area pending the adoption of a Local Area Plan.
Areas designated as High Rise – (Over 16 Storeys 50m) include
Docklands- the City Development Plan must be consistent with the Dublin Docklands. Development Authority’s Masterplan and vice versa.
Connolly Station – a new Local Area Plan will be drafted for the area.
Dublin City Council met on 26, 27 and 28 July to consider the submissions from the public and the City Manager’s recommendations. The Labour Group on Dublin City Council took on board the many public submissions and proposed progressive motions and amendments to the Draft Plan. Issues such as height, density and plot ratio, the creation of Statutory Local Area Plans, the protection of the City’s heritage, green spaces and environment, zoning, the restriction of certain uses within residential areas, and the development of a vibrant Core City Centre, were at the heart of Labour Party amendments to the City Manager’s proposals.
The amendments adopted by the City Council at the meetings in July will be on public display until the 15th of September in the Civic Offices, Dublin City Library and on the City Council website www.dublincity.ie. Submissions will be invited from
the public. The submissions and City Manager’s recommendations will be considered at a final meeting at the end of October before the plan comes into effect in January 2011. Vigilance will be required to ensure that there is no attempt to row back on the hard-won community gains.
COMMUNITY ISSUES
Off-licenses: A very important Labour Party motion was adopted to prohibit the further expansion of off licenses or part off-licenses except in areas where a compelling case can be made. Any application for an off-license must include a map of all the off-licenses located within a 1km radius of proposed development.
Institutional Lands Zoned Z15: The Labour motion to delete residential development on institutional lands as a use which could be “open for consideration” was adopted. Moreover, any future development of institutional lands must “have regard to the prevailing height” in the neighbourhood.
Vacant Lands: Labour Party motions and the recommendations of Cllr Emer Costello’s Lord Mayor’s Commission on Employment have led to the adoption of a new policy in relation to temporary use of vacant properties/sites for creative/cultural/social entrepreneurs/ community sectors.
Homeless & Social Services: These will require detailed planning applications to avoid a proliferation / concentration of institutional services in residential areas.
Public Realm/Advertising: The City Manager has agreed to put the public realm advertising strategy out to public consultation (e.g. JC Decaux street advertising).
LOCAL AREA PLANS (LAP’S):
Labour proposals for statutory Local Area Plans for the following areas were agreed:
-Manor Street/Stoneybatter/Smithfield Area
-East Wall
-Ballybough/Croke Park Area
-Pelletstown which will also include the Navan Road area
AREA SPECIFIC ISSUES
Dominican Convent Lands, Cabra:
The Labour motion rejecting the City Manager’s proposal to rezone part of the lands bordering Riverston Abbey from Z15 (institutional) to Z1 (residential) was adopted thus reinstating the Z15 zoning in accordance with the wishes of the residents.
Luas BXD line Royal Canal/ Broombridge:
Our proposal for a new policy was adopted: “That the proposed Luas BXD line in the vicinity of the Royal Canal and Broombridge will have full regard to the heritage and amenity value of the area and this should be reflected in any Environmental Statement”
Hendron’s Site, Broadstone:
The Labour proposed a motion to reject the City Manager’s proposal to rezone to Z10A (Inner Suburban) and the Z3 (neighbourhood use) zoning was adopted in accordance with the wishes of the residents.
Prussia Street:
The City Manager’s recommendation to rezone land on Prussia Street from Z6 (enterprise and employment) to Z4 (District Centre) was rejected and Z6 zoning retained pending adoption of Local Area Plan on foot of a Labour proposal.
Mount Bernard Park:
The lands north-west of Mount Bernard Park, Phibsborough, between the park and the Royal Canal were rezoned from Z1 {residential} to Z9 {amenity}. The extension of the park and the provision of a playground in the park were included on the insistence of Labour Councillors.
Mountjoy Square:
As a result of a Labour motion, the City Manager agreed to commence statutory assessment to designate Mountjoy Square an Architectural Conservation Area without delay
Lands at Alfie Byrne Road:
The Labour motion to reject the manager’s proposal to rezone these lands and the Z9 (amenity) zoning has been retained.
Castleforbes Road:
The Labour motion to commence procedure to remove Castleforbes Road from the Record of Protected Structures to allow resurfacing take place there, was agreed.
HEIGHT & DENSITY
The Labour Group ensured the curtailment of the City Manager’s proposals for high rise throughout the City. Under the current City Development Plan(2005-2011) there is no restriction on the permitted height of buildings in any part of the City. The new plan (2011 – 2017) sets out maximum limits for height across the City. Moreover, there is now a strict requirement that all proposed new buildings, two storeys or more, above the prevailing height in the area must be accompanied by a detailed Design Statement to justify the new height proposed. The draft height policies for the City are now as follows:
Low Rise:
Inner City Area
6 storey residential (19m)
7 storey office (29m)
Rail Hubs
i.e. within ½ kilometre(or 500 metres)of mainline train & Dart stations (but not including Luas stops)
6 storey residential (19m)
6 storey office (25m)
Outer City
4 storey residential (13m)
4 storey office (17 m)
Mid-rise & High Rise
A number of areas have been designated for mid-rise and high rise buildings. Labour Councillors insisted that in these cases a statutory Local Area Plan (LAP) must be in place before any high buildings can be granted permission and the areas treated as low rise areas pending the adoption of a LAP.
Areas designated as mid-rise (up to 16 residential and 12 Office – 50M max) include
Phibsborough, the Local Area Plan has been adopted and high building can only be located in areas designated for such under the LAP, e.g. Mater Hospital site.
Grangegorman, which is to be the subject of a special statutory Strategic Development Zone (SDZ) for the new unified campus for the Dublin Institute of Technology (DIT) and HSE Facility.
Pelletstown, which will be treated as a low rise area pending the adoption of a Local Area Plan.
Areas designated as High Rise – (Over 16 Storeys 50m) include
Docklands- the City Development Plan must be consistent with the Dublin Docklands. Development Authority’s Masterplan and vice versa.
Connolly Station – a new Local Area Plan will be drafted for the area.
Monday, July 26, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)