Development Plan Update: Success & Failure

The last few days of debating & voting on the draft Development Plan has been part positive and part disappointing. The most positive aspect has been the lobbying by the Community& Residents across the city which has made many Councillors more conscious of their decisions. As one veteran Councillor said “this has been the most intense and vigorous debate on the development plans in years”.
I was happy to be involved with the joint submission from 22 Community & Resident groups from across the Central area of Dublin. Our strategy of concentrating on 5 key issues was vindicated with 3 of our 5 motions being agreed. The issues of Density, Urban Design statements and especially the removal of residential options from institutional lands will help residents in their future campaigns against unsustainable and over development.
One of the contention results was the decision by local Labour and Fine Gael councillors to vote against the Communities wish for 5 storey low rise and instead vote for 6 storey as preferred by developers and city management. I hope all residents remember this decision the next time they are faced with an overpowering development on their doorstep.

The most successful motions we submitted were:

• Agreement was given for Local Area Plans for East Wall and the Stoneybatter/Smithfield area. Also, consideration is to be given for the inclusion of the Navan Road into the proposed Pelletstown LAP.

• The LUAS development at Royal Canal & Broombridge policy text is to include reference to the existing environmental heritage

• The Hendron building is to be rezoned Z3 as requested by local residents

• The zoning on the complete site of the Dominican Lands, including the Riverston Abbey side, is to remain Z15

• Agreement that 50 units per hectare be the minimum density as compared to manager’s recommendation of 75.

• An Urban Design Statement must be prepared where a new development is 2 or more storeys above an existing dwelling

• Agreed to include new objective with regard to temporary usage of vacant commercial units and lands to allow for items such as art galleries, street markets and allotments etc..,

• Agreed to amend policy GC003 to include the extention of Mt Bernard Park and the immediate provision of a major playground there as a specific objective

• Agreed the minimum 25% open space on Z15 Institutional lands cannot be split into sections and the integrity of this space shall be a priority in the consideration of development of these sites

• Agreed to remove the term "residential" from the Z15 zoning. This was a great success and came about after some fierce opposition from the City management and planners. I insisted on a recorded vote so as to see who supported us and in the end 31 voted for us and 8 against. The management had the nerve to tell us that their concern lay with the financial welfare of the owners of these institutional lands. This is a great success and may protect our remaining green & sporting lands.

• A map of all public right of ways to be produced

• Agreed to include the prohibition of further expansion of off licenses and part off licenses except in areas where a compelling case can be made including the stipulation that any application for an off license be accompanied by a map of all existing off licences within a 1km radius.

• The reduction in the transport hub from 1km to 500m. This will reduce the height potential of several sites.

Finally, for the record, the following is the local voting record on the motion in relation to the definition of low rise. City Council management had approached the Labour Party and Fine Gael (the two largest parties ) to agree on a so-called compromise. Several meetings took place and the result was not what we were seeking. It would allow 6 storey residential and between 6-7 storey office heights in our areas. This would not be a change from the managers current proposal so I therefore proposed a counter motion to reduce the height to 5 storeys as all the 22 combined Community & Residents groups had agreed. This single vote of all the councillors would have reduced the low rise to a realistic height but in an unbelievable move, the following local councillors voted AGAINST 5 storeys and FOR 6 storeys.
Councillors Mary O'Shea, Emer Costello, Aine Clancy, Clare O'Regan and Ray McAdam voted for 6 storeys.
Councillors Perry, Metcalfe, McGrattan and Ring voted for 5 storeys. Councillors Burke & Fitzpatrick were absent. As the motion was the same as the manager’s proposal, this issue cannot be discussed at future development plan meetings. Please remember which Councillors stood with the Community when you next see them.