Murphy Urges Donaghcumper Developer to Withdraw Both Planning Applications.

• Master plan a collaboration between Developer and Council

• Significant new information received by Council on Devondale application

Cllr Catherine Murphy has been told by Kildare County Council,  that the Master plan for Donaghcumper which will be finalised by the end of the year,  will be a collaboration between the Council and the Land owner.

The Master plan was to precede any planning application on this  very sensitive site,   however,   two major planning applications were lodged in the name of Devondale Limited;   they sought a mix of  apartments,  houses,  office,  retail,  leisure etc.  together with  major road and bridge infrastructure. (438 & 439/08).   The scale,  height (up to 8 stories), and bulk of the development took many by surprise and there were significant numbers of objections lodged.

A Master plan is  a guidance document which sets the framework for development within a specified period of time,  any planning application should accord with the principles contained within that document.  Master plans  are however,  not statutorily based.

Significant additional information has been supplied to the Council in relation to application number 439/08 which relates to residential.   Objectors have recently  been notified and have  5 weeks to make comments.

Given that the Developer has entered into the Master plan process and there is an obvious dialogue between   Council Officials  and the Land owner,   it is difficult to fathom how such a process can proceed while planning applications are currently live.   I am now urging Devondale to withdraw both planning  applications in the interest of proceeding in a more harmonious way.

My Objection to the Devondale Planning Applications.

Planning Application 438/08  Donaghcumper Demesne,  Donaghcumper,  Celbridge.

The development is comprised   648 residential units (72 No 1 bed apartments,  476 No 2-bed apartments,  79 No 3 bed apartments,   14 No.  3bed townhouse unit and 7 No 2 bed work/live units.)
Overall commercial floor space of 47,304 square m (excluding basement car parking…) a crèche of 650 sq.m and civic centre of 1,400 sq.m..

There are 9 blocks proposed ranging in height from 2-8 storey’s.
Street Layout includes a new spine road and bridge linking Dublin Road to Main Street close to Castletown Gates.

Planning Application 439/08 Donaghcumper Demesne,  Donaghcumper,

Celbridge.Residential Development comprising 108 houses to the east of Donaghcumper House.

I wish to object to the above two linked planning applications on the following grounds;

The subject lands were zoned Retail/Commercial and low density housing (4 houses to the acre)  in the 2002 Celbridge Local Area Plan.  The Celbridge Plan is linked to the County Development Plan which includes a Strategy for Development approved by the Minister for the Environment  Noel Dempsey,  this strategy set out the extent of rezoning that should take place in each major settlement of the County;  the zoning requirement for Celbridge  was set at Zero for the duration of this plan.

Celbridge had been the subject of significant housing growth which was set to continue with substantial amounts of  lands zoned residential,  not as yet built on.  While the town had experienced significant housing growth other aspects of the towns development did not keep pace,  the town  was under severe pressure from traffic congestion,  shortage of school places,   inadequate leisure facilities,  poor road/footpath infrastructure etc.  as is acknowledged in the 2002 Celbridge Plan   Section 2.6.3 the number of primary school going children in Celbridge has increased by 108% since 1982….School accommodation and recreational facilities are inadequate or barely adequate in most cases.

The Celbridge Area Committee dispensed with  the zero zoning and  proposed the rezoning of  c100  acres in addition to 10.8 acres low density housing  at Donaghcumper.  Further lands at  Donaghcumper were zoned Retail/Commercial. (Minutes KCC 31st July 2001)    Because of the Sensitivity of these lands in close proximity to protected structures, some designated of International Importance together with the location of the site which had significant access difficulties,  it was decided to do a detailed plan which considered  in greater detail what should be developed on the site and how it should be accessed.   An Action Area Plan was therefore a precondition prior to any development being allowed.

Bridge at Castletown Gates

County Development Plan 3.10 Section 3 States

“Between Dublin Road and Main Street (including new bridge over the River Liffey at Castletown gates “The Slip”)  if then deemed to be required.

Leinster Leader 10th August 2000 quoting the Late Kathleen Walsh who expanded on the above:   “ She said she is pleased about the wording concerning a second bridge over the Liffey at Castletown Gates.  When all the infrastructure is complete,  only then if it is deemed to be required will there be a bridge at Castletown Gates.”

Liffey Champion 5th August 2000 states;  “Further bridges” may be needed the plan states.  Councillors say that when the M4 Interchange due 2003) and the Relief Road (now due end 2000) are completed,  they will use  consultants to look at how traffic is moving.  If there are still problems,  a second bridge will be recommended,  possibly at Castletown Slip.

I understand a Traffic Survey was conducted Summer 2007 which presumably measured existing flows of traffic,  there appears to have been no public process to determine if a new bridge was required and if it was where should it be located.

The sheer scale of the current planning application’s at  Donaghcumper calls into question the  Traffic Survey,  in accessing this application it will be necessary to conduct a robust analysis of the effects not just of a new bridge but also the impact the proposed development will have.

Inadequate Public Consultation

The Minutes of 31st July 2001 at which the Celbridge Plan was adopted states.

“Referring to Donacomper he said (Council Official)  the intention was to prepare an Action Plan.  The land would be zoned in four parts one of which would allow for the extension of the town centre,  a large amount would be zoned amenity,  there would be agricultural zoning near Donaghcumper house and the remainder would be low density residential of not more than four houses to the acres.”

The above together with the   safeguards contained in the Celbridge Plan in relation to the requirement for a Bridge outlined above; led to an expectation of modest development at Donaghcumper,   there was also an expectation of   further public consultation which did not materialize.

There was no public expectation of  a further 756 housing units on the site or that the heights and density would be as they are proposed.   While acknowledging an Action Area Plan is not a statutory plan and includes  no requirement for public consultation the very significant time lag between the adoption of the Celbridge Local Area Plan and the major development proposed in the Action Area Plan I believe warranted further consultation.

What seems to have occurred is the Action Area Plan was prepared by Shaffrey Associates Architects on behalf of the Council,   presented to the  Celbridge Area Committee in the Autumn of 2006 some months later it was  presented to the full council (25th June 2007) with little or no amendment,   the minutes record the Action Area Plan was simply noted.  It then became publicly available when there was no chance of amendment.

The Environmental Impact Assessment  accompanying  the planning application’s addresses the issue of public consultation on Page 10 as follows.

2.4  Public Consultation “The development proposal was presented in a major Public Consultation event at the Setanta House Hotel,  Celbridge on 15th January 2008.   This event was organised by Devondale Ltd., who with members of the design team explained and discussed various aspects of the scheme with members of the public.”

I attended this event;  as is stated above the presentation was of  the developers proposals not a comparison between the Council’s Plans and the developers proposals.   The 2002 Celbridge Local Area Plan was adopted with a significant gap the preparation of an Action Area Plan was deemed to be essential prior to any development taking place there. The absence of public consultation during the Action Area Plan process  in my opinion was wrong.     While the Council may be legally correct they were in my opinion morally wrong.

Scale Height and Character of Development

The scale of planning application 438/08 is such that it is not an extension of Main Street  in fact it dwarfs both the buildings and retail component’s of Main Street..   The Heights up to 8 stories are out of character with the area.   The County Development Plan acknowledges  the Castletown and Donaghcumper Area as follows:   “this area is situated north-east of the Main street and comprises Castletown House and Demesne,  Donaghcumper and St. Wolstans.  The area is of National and International importance.

Blocks of high rise modern apartments do not sit well beside the many protected structures in close proximity to these lands.   The density of the developments are out of keeping with the current Main Street;  sufficient reason to reject the current application.

Traffic & Junction at Castletown Gates.

The proposed new spine road and bridge close to Castletown Gates  will draw traffic into an area where there are obvious constraints.  It is currently inadequate to meet the traffic flows;  there is also no footpath provision on the Maynooth Road beside Jasmine House.  Parents concerned about the safety of their children sought some improved pedestrian facilities at this location   the Council  responded in the negative,  stating the area was too dangerous for such facilities,  adding to traffic flows will add to problems here.  The girls school is located on the Main Street,   the already dangerous conditions will be made infinitely worse for children arriving on foot from housing estates east of the school,  parents in a position to drive their children to school because of the serious safety inadequacy are likely to do so leading to an unsustainable pattern of traffic movements.

The junction will require traffic lights its difficult to see how the road and footpath design standards (footpath & road widths) contained the Celbridge Plan can be met.   It is also difficult to see how new traffic signals such as those  proposed at Castletown Gates (a protected structure of International Importance)   will allow this junction to flow freely,   in addition to several vehicular phases, physical constraints entering Castletown Estate/Demesne,   pedestrian phases will be an absolute requirement.   Peak time delays are highly lightly.   Given the previous history with traffic signals at the bridge in Celbridge residents will want to be convinced traffic signals will improve rather than disimprove traffic flows close to Castletown Gates.

Education

The residential component expected at  Donaghcumper was 10.8 acres at 4 houses to the acre this  would have produced a requirement for some additional school facilities.  A total of 756 residential units are now proposed there seem to have been no account taken of the educational need 648 apartments will produce.   The school provision  experience in Celbridge in recent years has been difficult.   Boards of management juggle with limited spaces and are forced to  strictly apply enrolment policies.  The additional housing development in the Hazelhatch/Ardclough area’s was not accompanied by a new school,  only a crisis in under provision at primary level led to agreement by the Department for a new school which has now commenced in temporary facilities.

Car Parking

2.3.3.      Celbridge Development Plan 2002

Off-street car parks both in the town centre and adjacent to the town are essential to improve the traffic situation in Celbridge…The need for further car parking will be further examined particularly adjacent to the main trading centre of the town and in close proximity to the bridge.

The Celbridge Plan sets out the car parking requirements for residential and non residential developments.   Planning application 438/08 seeks to reduce the non residential car parking requirement by 48%. (Page 23 Environmental Impact Assessment.)

“It is considered that the new bus service and planned commuter rail upgrade at Hazelhatch Railway Station,  shared parking between land uses with different peak movements,  multi/internal trips between outlets,  by-pass trips,  provision of phased development and the introduction of an advanced parking system for management movement would provide scope for reducing the non-residential car parking standards.”

The EIS further states.  “this level of additional car parking could result in an over provision of car parking in the town,  which in turn will have negative implications for reducing car dependence and increasing the non car modal share.   The concept of reducing car dependence and providing transport choice is central to Kildare County Councils sustainability policies.

The expectation was that the extension of the Town Centre into Donaghcumper would provide new off street car parking facilities addressing  the current inadequate provision on Main Street.   Should permission be granted  viability of retail outlets on the Main Street would be undermined if current shortage of off street car parking was not provided.  The reduction sought should be considered in relation to the overall town centre need not just the needs of the proposed new non residential developments.

Public Transport

The high level of car dependence in Celbridge does not suggest there is adequate public transport choice or frequencies.   Hazelhatch Railway Station and the Kildare –Heuston Line is undergoing major redevelopment which should produce improvements.   The station is a considerable distance and certainly not within walking distance of the proposed developments,   the interconnector which will connect the Kildare line with Spencer Dock is not due to be completed until at least  2015.  Increased frequencies expected on the  Kildare line prior to the connection with the rest of the suburban rail network are unlikely to  produce significant shifts in modes of transport used for two reasons (a) the distance from housing estates in Celbridge (b) the service terminates at Heuston Station.

The bus services currently  provided by Dublin Bus and Morton’s while good services there is scope for significant improvements.  The Department of Transport issues licenses under the 1932 Transport Act to private operators.  Morton’s is the most significant non Dublin Bus providers in the system.  The effects of this licensing system  has resulted in a more limited service than should be available to commuters in Celbridge,  this will only be resolved when the long promised Dublin Transportation Authority is established.   Celbridge is currently not  adequately served by public transport.

Liffey Valley Park

Following considerable pressure from community groups along the Liffey Valley for the preservation of the Valley and its development as a National/Regional Park similar to the Lagan Valley Park;  Government set up a steering group to examine its potential,  how it could be  managed in an integrated way in respect of its amenity,  recreational and heritage resources.   The steering group comprised representatives from OPW,  Fingal,  South Dublin and Kildare County Council’s  and Dublin City Council,   the group were assisted by people with professional expertise.

It seems one arm of the State is considering the importance of the Liffey Valley and another arm is producing an Action Area Plan which invites  high rise apartment developments practically on the River Bank.   The Environmental Impact Assessment does not address the issue of the Liffey Valley and how the proposed development impacts, indeed the only reference in the application  to Liffey Valley I could find was that of the shopping centre.  The applicants should be required to rectify this omission prior to a decision being made.   (View 9 Environment Impact Assessment adequately makes the point)

Retail

The Council adopted a County Retail Strategy in 2005 which identified a site at Collinstown, close to the Celbridge Interchange as the location for a major retail outlet.   Sequential testing was done in Celbridge,  Maynooth,  Leixlip and Kilcock  to assist in the selection of a site capable of accommodating a high level of activity such an outlet would bring.   This did not exclude additional retail outlets in any of the towns however they were to be confined to local needs.    A considerable amount of the  47,304 square m  proposed in this application is for retail; when considered in addition to current retail space what is proposed goes way beyond local Celbridge needs;  it could be argued it seeks to undermine the Collinstown proposal.

Drainage

Given the difficulties with flooding further downstream in Leixlip Village run off into the River Liffey requires to be considered against this problem.   Despite the proposal to drain both Zone A and B to attenuation ponds before discharging into the River Liffey, recent  floods 2000 and 2002  did significant damage to many  homes.   The Office of Public Works are charged with financing remedial measures which require a cost benefit analysis.    Additional run off upstream is a valid concern that requires the most careful attention in the context of this problem.

Water Supply

The Celbridge Plan stated in 2002 “Celbridge is served by the Ballygoran Resevoir with water from Fingal County Council Treatment Plant in Leixlip.   The town is adequately supplied at the moment with spare capacity for the immediate future.”  Despite this statement there have been serious problems with water provision indeed the Ballygoran reservoir failed to cope with demand on a number of occasions over recent summers to the point where householders were without water for several days in succession.   A new connection with Castlewarden Reservoir  will hopefully end that problem,  however  water is a finite resource that must be shared between all users in this case  within Liffey Catchment.    Clearly there was a failure to anticipate a problem with inadequate supplies when the Celbridge Plan was adopted,  I request therefore that the adequacy of water supplies is again  considered.

Water Quality

I noted petrol interceptors are proposed in the basement area’s and a separate drainage system is proposed and this is welcome.   The Fingal Water Treatment works which is downstream of the site supplies water to North Kildare;  North Dublin and parts of Meath.   The quality of the water abstracted obviously determines the extent of chemical treatment required at the Fingal Plant.    I have two sets of concerns,   the first relates to the construction phase.   This site is sloped and in wet weather there will be materials stored on the site run off into the river could be a problem depending on weather conditions.   I have concerns about water quality during that phase.   The second issue is the proximity of the buildings to the river and ongoing run off into the river should the permission be granted.   Just about a mile downstream at the Dam close to the Canoe Club development is restricted in order to protect the water source.

Pedestrian Bridges

A number of pedestrian bridges are proposed,  the experience with the existing pedestrian bridge off Main Street has been mixed.   While the proposal appears good on paper there are valid concerns being expressed that relate to public order issues.  This is not a problem unique to Celbridge and  Council policy has responded by seeking passive security of open spaces and the avoidance of public open space provision at the rear and side of  properties.    Despite the high level of growth in recent years in Celbridge the number of Gardai have not increased in line with that growth,  it is essential therefore that public order issues are considered  in their totality and not exclusively as  enforcement issues.

It is impossible to separate aspects of the  two applications even though they are vastly different,  for example both require road/bridge infrastructure to access the site. Clearly  application  438/08 is a more substantial proposal and  many of my stated concerns relate to this application only.   While I am seeking the rejection both applications I am aware that a ten year permission has been sought with a proposal for the development to be phased,    should permission be granted it should be specific about what elements are to be phased for example the Cinema should not be left to  the final phase.    The Celbridge Local Area Plan  did not contain a clear objective about the location of a new bridge and the process and while there may have been a traffic study/survey done such a major piece of infrastructure should have had a public component to its decision.  The scale of the apartment development in Zone A together with the road’s aspect between them are a major change to the original Celbridge Plan for that reason I am questioning why a Material Contravention was not deemed to be required.

Despite the extensive development that has occurred in Celbridge over the past 20 years no development can compete with the one proposed in terms of its dominance.    I don’t believe it respects the unique character of the town as a consequence it should be refused.

Share This Post

Tweet

Posted by catherinemurphy on December 12, 2008. Filed under Celbridge,Planning & Development. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.