Minutes of Special Planning Meeting of Kildare County Council on Monday 2nd November at 11am in Áras Chill Dara
Present were: Councillors C. Purcell (Mayor), S. Griffin, B. Weld, T. Lawlor, D. Scully, S. Lanigan, K. Byrne, J. McGinley, F. Browne, M. Wall, P. McEvoy, P. Kennedy, S. Moore, C. Murphy, S. Doyle, P. Kelly, L. Doyle, M. Heydon, M. Nolan, F. O’Loughlin, M. Miley
Apologies: Cllr. T. O’Donnell, Cllr. W. Hannigan
Also present: M. Malone Co. Manager, J. Lahart DOS, M. Kenny Snr. Planner, A. Sweeney Snr. Exec. Planner, M. Foley Admin. Officer
This was the second special meeting to consider the Manager’s Report on submissions received in relation to the review of the County Development Plan and to consider any directions that may be appropriate regarding the preparation of the Draft Development Plan.
Michael Kenny pointed out that, in issuing directions, the Members were restricted to considering the proper planning and sustainable development of the area to which the Development Plan relates in accordance with Section 11 (4)(f) of the Planning & Development Act 2000.He also referred members to the code of conduct which must be observed in making the Development Plan viz. “in making and adopting the development plan, the elected council, acting in the interests of the common good and the proper planning and sustainable development of the area, must, in accordance with the “Code of Conduct for Councillors” prepared under the Local Government Act 2001, carry out their duties in this regard in a transparent manner, must follow due process and must make their decisions based on relevant considerations, while ignoring that which is irrelevant within the requirements of the statutory planning framework. Equally, local authority employees involved in the preparation of the development plan should perform their duties objectively, should have no vested interest in the contents of the plan and should be in accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct for Employees “(Source: Development Plans Guidelines issued by DOEHLG)
Motion 82 - TWG
The development of a sustainable and comprehensive public lightingstrategy for the County is an urgent requirement. The safety factor alonethat public lighting gives especially to our rural communities but also tothose in our older estates make the development of a policy and a plan amajor objective for our new County Development Plan. The news that the ESB are to sell off this part of their organisation must mean that KildareCounty Council as the local authority must develop a sustainable policy onPublic Lighting ensuring the continued roll out of public lighting whereneeded in an acceptable time frame. The repair of Public Lighting must havea defined path and schedule ensuring that communities are not withoutlighting for more than a reasonable length of time.
Response:
Agreed.
Public lighting maintenance is an important item being considered by The Public Lighting Working Group. There are potential difficulties for the majority of councils carrying out repairs in the current economic climate. KCC will at all times endeavour to maintain the safest levels of public lighting throughout its area of responsibility. The Transportation Section and the Council’s Energy team will work together to ensure that only the best quality, energy effective design is used in future Public Lighting projects.
Motion 83 – TWG
That policy be developed to address issues of anti-social behaviourthrough passive security, and that best practice from experience both inKildare and elsewhere be examined to determine policies for walkways through estates.
Response:
Agreed.
The policies and objectives contained in the ‘Sustainable Residential Development in Urban Areas’ (2009) and the accompanying ‘Urban Design Manual’ (2009) reflect the sentiments expressed in this direction. The new CDP will include policies, objectives and design standards that reflect the requirements set out in these new national planning guidelines. A specific policy regarding passive surveillance of all walking routes within residential estates will be included.
Motion 84 – TWG
To consider an integrated approach to the residential, commercial,industrial and infrastructural development north of the Railway line atConfey, having regard to Neighbour Counties.
Response:
Agreed.
(i) Encouraging development close to existing rail corridors is in accordance with proper planning and sustainable development. With particular regard to development at Confey, a significant number of infrastructural improvements including the provision of a new bridge would be necessary prior to the development of lands north of the railway line.
(ii) A specific objective will be included in the CountyPlan to investigate the feasibility of developing lands north of Confey in conjunction with neighbouring local authorities and other statutory authorities where the demand for additional zoning is necessary to support the core strategy of the CDP.
Motion 85 – TWG
That residential estates, close to livestock, particularly theCurragh be conditioned with the provision of sheep/cattle grids.
Response:
Not Agreed.
This proposal gives rise to difficulties
(1) potential public safety / legal liabilities arising from accidents involving the grids,
(2) potential noise nuisance from vehicles driving over grids,
(3) grids are not appropriate for footpaths
Agreed unanimously on a show of hands, on the proposal of Cllr. S. Doyle, seconded by Cllr. O’Loughlin, to reject the Manager’s recommendation and adopt the motion.
Motion 86 – TWG
That all new residential estates in towns and villages beconditioned to provide comprehensive footpath links to town centre andschools and that where deficits exist in current housing developments thatthe Council prioritise the provision of these linkages.
Response:
Agreed subject to modification.
The Transportation Department endeavours to ensure that there is pedestrian connectivity in all new housing estates that will also link into the existing pedestrian facilities in the area. This can be reflected in development plan policy.
Where deficits exist in existing housing developments the rectifying of these will be considered subject to the availability of resources and prioritisation.
Cllr. Murphy clarified that she was referring not only to pedestrian linkages within housing estates, but between estates and schools, town centre, facilities etc.
Motion 87 – TWG
That policies be developed to promote the primacy of town centresand encourage consolidation of appropriate retail activity within towncentre.
Response:
Agreed.
Motion 88 – TWG
That out of town centres be restricted for the purposes of largeretail space that cannot be accommodated within town centre.
Response:
Agreed subject to modification.
Retail Planning Guidelines issued by the DOEHLG refer to the Sequential Approach which must be used in the assessment of retail applications. This is considered the most appropriate method by which to assess retail development proposals. In the interests of proper planning and sustainable development, appropriate sites must be identified in the core area first and foremost and where sites cannot be developed, for clearly stated reasons, edge of centre sites further away from the retail core area may then be considered and only then can out of town centres be considered. At all times, the vitality of the town centre and the effect particular retail proposals would have on the town centre must be considered in order to retain and enhance the retail offer in a town as much as possible before other options are considered.
Motion 89 – TWG
Acknowledging the strategic importance of the location of a multiplewithin a town and the ability of said multiple to determine the centre ofretail activity within a town, a specific zoning should be identified formultiples and applied through the LAPS to the most advantageous andappropriate locations within towns.
Response:
Not Agreed.
Lands for retail / commercial development are identified in the various LAPs. The identification of sites for multiples is not supported in the Retail Planning Strategy for the Greater Dublin Area 2008-2016.
Cllr. S. Doyle argued for a specific zoning for multiples on a range of locations within a town but John Lahart recommended that retail should be considered in town centre first, subject to the sequential test and it would be undesirable to strangle the planning process by being more prescriptive. Michael Kenny said this was an issue which could be considered in the Retail Strategy.
The members accepted the Manager’s response.
Motion 90 – TWG
That the development of the retail strategy for the County look toestablishing a tourist destination centre within the County that willenhance our ability to attract disposable income to the County.
Response:
Agreed subject to modification.
The Tourism Chapter of the current CDP includes a significant number of objectives specifically relating to the promotion of tourism in the County. A review of these objectives will be undertaken as part of the review of the CountyPlan and these will be supplemented /omitted/ amended as appropriate.
The feasibility of including an additional, specific objective to establish a tourist destination centre within the County will be investigated in preparing the objectives of the Draft County Plan.
Motion 91 – TWG
That policies which promote and support the development ofindependent retail be developed.
Response:
Agreed.
The development of a vibrant independent retail sector should be supported.
Motion 92 – TWG
That policies be developed to have regard for minimum floor spacerequirements for economic sustainability and ancillary space necessary tosupport particular retail activities.
Response:
Agreed subject to modification.
Guidance on floor space caps / thresholds are specified in the Retail Planning Guidelines for both convenience and comparison goods. These figures will be reviewed as part of the County Retail Strategy.
Motion 93 – TWG
That planning applications have regard to the quantum of existingretail space in the area and the ability of the County to absorb & sustainfurther space in this sector.
Response:
Agreed.
A detailed survey of planning permissions granted in the County will inform the review of the County Retail Strategy.
As part of the retail strategy it is envisaged that guidance will be provided with respect to the quantum both of new convenience and comparison floor space in the County.
Motion 94 –TWG
To encourage the utilisation of derelict buildings and protectedstructures in town centres, acknowledging the increased costs of developingsame and the benefits of re-generation, this may be achieved through areduced levies rate for this type of activity.
Response:
Agreed subject to modification.
(i) It is considered reasonable to include objectives to encourage the utilisation of derelict buildings and protected structures in the town centres in order to improve the vitality and vibrancy of these centres while maximising the potential of available, built structures.
(ii) Reducing development levies may not be addressed as part of the review of the CountyPlan. The Planning Authority adopted the current Development Contribution Scheme in 2004. A reduction in development levies must be addressed by way of a review of this scheme in accordance with Section 48 of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended).
Motion 95 –TWG
That extra parking spaces be prioritised as part of any potentialretail developments, essential for the regeneration of town centres and thedevelopment of such.
Response:
Agreed.
The car parking requirements contained within the County Development Plan seek to ensure that satisfactory levels of car parking consistent with encouraging more sustainable modes of transport are provided when development takes place. The Transportation Dept. gives appropriate consideration to the necessary demand and potential cross usage when assessing the car parking requirements of retail / commercial development in the course of the planning process.
Car parking standards will be reviewed as part of the preparation of the proposed Draft Development Plan.
Motion 96 – TWG
That a report be made on each sector of retail operating in thecounty, to ascertain current supply, spatial delivery and level of supportnecessary to sustain same. The analysis of this data should be used in theDetermination of any future planning applications to ensure that the localretail economy is sustained and to protect the rate base necessary to fundlocal government. This data should also inform the preparation of the newCDP.
Response:
Agreed.
A detailed review of planning permissions granted in the County to inform the review of the County Retail Strategy.
As part of the emerging Strategy it is envisaged that guidance will be provided with respect to the spatial delivery and quantum of new convenience and comparison floor space throughout the County. The distribution of floor space will be determined by the Retail Hierarchy.
Motion 97 – TWG
That KCC liaise with Irish Rail with a view to upgrading andre-locating, where practicable, train stations throughout the County in order to provide appropriate facilities for a 21st century commuter county.
Response:
Agreed.
KCC actively liaises with Irish Rail on a range of issues and will continue to do so in the preparation of the draft CDP .
Motion 98 – TWG
That the location of Cherryville Junction be examined for theprovision of an inland port.
Response:
Agreed.
In conjunction with the consideration of other locations.
Motion 99 – TWG
That the Southern Distributor Route be prioritised in Athy asessential infrastructure to the South of the County and the future potentialof the town.
Response:
Agreed.
The Athy Southern Distributor Road is a key priority project in CountyKildare.
Motion 100 – TWG
Much more emphasis needs to be placed on the rail system given the
potential delivery of the Spencer Dock Interconnector. This will network
all the suburban services and is expected to deliver an additional 75
million journeys each year (many will originate or end in Kildare). We
need to view this in the County Development Plan as an opportunity - the
public transport system becomes much more financially viable when it has
peaks in both directions. Once the Interconnector is delivered (est; 2015)
the next phase of suburban rail includes electrification this will mean we
need to include in our CDP modifications to bridges, should we, for example,
be protecting them as structures when they will require a rebuild in some
cases, recommend the routes are examined, the bridges that require
rebuilds are listed and we plan for electrification.
Response:
Agreed.
The Transportation Department will liaise with Irish Rail in relation to the bridges and will refer the matter to the Conservation Officer for comment.
Motion 101 – TWG
The CDP should capture the public transport superstructure whichshould include, bus stops, turning circles, park and ride facilities,interchange facilities (preferably close to railway stations) includedshould be an objective to open dialogue with bus and taxi providers aboutpotential re routing, feeder buses, new routes etc. There may also becommercial/industrial opportunities at or close to railway stations. The
CDP needs to capture such opportunities and include a strategic approachto development based around public transport in a way that has not beendone before. While it is not realistic now the future may include largescale delivery of goods by rail this requires at least exploring this as anopportunity.
Response:
Agreed.
Motion 102 – Cllr. McEvoy
That the CDP address the need to enhance road safety for walkers,pedestrians and cyclists.
Response:
Agreed.
Motion 103 – TWG
Private Car Parks are appearing in many of our towns and villages, the
variety of fees and penalties is causing widespread confusion, they are also being enforced in a predatory way. The County Development Plan needs to allow for private car parking but only if an enforcement scheme is agreed first.
Response:
Agreed with modifications.
Private car parks are usually associated with private development that has an associated car parking demand. The Development Plan can include an objective regarding the use of these parks. However the “predatory” behaviour mentioned in the Direction is not a matter for the Plan.
A brief discussion took place during which the following points were made:
- Imposition of standards within car parks; cleanliness, signage etc.
- Use of by-laws to regularise car parks
- Use of barriers rather than clamping
It was agreed to liaise with Transportation Department regarding these issues.
Motion 104 – Cllr. Scully
The Council should promote a “safe routes to school” system for all the County’s schools to help promote walking, cycling and car-pooling.
Response:
Agreed.
Motion 105 – Cllr. Scully
That all new estates granted planning for more than ten houses will automatically have anti-speed measures installed to Council specifications by the developer.
Response:
Agreed subject to modification.
It is the policy of the Council to require developers to incorporate passive traffic calming measures into the layout of all new residential /commercial schemes which should be demonstrated as part of the overall design concept of the scheme at planning submission stage. Where it is determined by the Transportation Department that following construction of a scheme that there are safety issues with the layout the Transportation Department will consider appropriate measures to deal with same and may require the provision of vertical traffic calming as a last resort.
At the last meeting it had been agreed to revisit this motion. John Lahart reported that a “Manual for Streets” prepared by the Dept. of Transport was due to be published in January and that could be incorporated into the Draft CDP. It goes further than speed control and deals with layout, on-street parking, accessibility, pedestrian & cyclist movement. It was agreed that this should be incorporated into the Draft CDP.
Motion 106 – Cllr. McGinley
That the issues raised in the final paragraph on page 32 be addressed in the Plan. Briefing Note: The Manager’s Opinion in the last paragraph on page 33 doesn’t mention road safety for walkers, pedestrians and cyclists.
Response:
Agreed.
The need to enhance road safety for walkers,
pedestrians and cyclists are recognised as a key priority and will be reflected in the draft plan.
Motion 107 – Cllr. McGinley
(i) That there is a policy on Renewable Energy and that it be subdivided into wind energy and hydro power