Motions 2 and 3

Councillors D. Keating and F. McCarthy

An Environmental Impact Study will be carried out on the Greater Lucan Area prior to the start of any construction specifically associated with any phase of Adamstown. This is to assess the impact of the total Adamstown SDZ planning scheme. It will also consider the Greater Dublin Area, in as much as it is directly impacted by the Adamstown SDZ Planning Scheme.

The recommendations from this EIS will be included in the development and phasing of the final Adamstown SDZ Planning Scheme.

The terms of reference of the Environmental Impact Study will be the subject of consultation and formal agreement with the councillors.

Response of the County Manager

The Draft Planning Scheme was prepared in accordance with the relevant legislative requirements under Part IX of the Planning and Development Act 2000.

Part IX, Section 168 (3) details the requirements for information required on any likely significant impacts on the environment for a Draft Planning Scheme for residential development, which is not an EIS. 

The Draft Planning Scheme includes an Environmental Appraisal in accordance with the requirements of Section 168 (3).  The Environmental Appraisal was prepared by Independent Consultants, Arup Consulting.

The technical and legislative purposes of an EIS are to assess the environmental impacts of a specific project or proposal, for which a full design has been completed, rather than for a masterplan such as the Draft Planning Scheme.

It remains the case that a full EIS will be required in respect of future planning applications for development above relevant minimum threshold size within the Adamstown SDZ.  For example, a housing development of 500 units or more will require a full EIS.

            Recommendation of the County Manager

For the above reasons it is recommended that motions 2 and 3 not be adopted.

Motions 4 and 5

Councillors D. Keating and F. McCarthy

Section 4.2.5, Phase 1A, Add an additional consideration which requires completion at this phase:

“Provision of an operational bus route servicing Adamstown at peak hours;”.

Response of the County Manager

The issue of ‘operational capacity of service’ has been given significant consideration as a result of public consultation, particularly with regard to the provision of public transport services such as bus routes.

In the legislative context of an SDZ Planning Scheme, it has been concluded that on balance, public transport provision must relate to the provision of land, facilities and/or infrastructure.

The inclusion of operational capacity (i.e. specification of a bus route) would render the Draft Planning Scheme highly difficult to implement and in particular, would introduce an element outside the control of the Planning Authority or commercial developers/landowners.

The detailed implementation of a key aspect of the Draft Planning Scheme would therefore be in the hands of third parties, who may not have any motivation or interest in the development of Adamstown.

The Motion would introduce a range of new variables and a major degree of uncertainty into the Draft Planning Scheme, which would severely reduce the ability of the Planning Authority to secure the implementation of the Draft Planning Scheme:-

·        The Draft Planning Scheme must be implemented through the operation of development control procedures (i.e. the submission of planning applications) within the existing physical planning system.

·        The proposal to require a bus service after 400 dwelling units does not balance a quantum of development with proposals for transportation in a viable manner.

·        Bus levels of service and routes vary and may be increased and withdrawn by operators in response to public demand or other factors.

·        It is possible that bus services could be provided to satisfy the phasing requirements of the Draft Planning Scheme and withdrawn on receipt of planning permission.

            Recommendation of the County Manager

For the above reasons it is recommended that motions 4 and 5 not be adopted.

Motions 6 and 7

Councillors D. Keating and F. McCarthy

Section 4.2.6, Phase 1B, insert the following condition to those requiring completion at this phase:

“Adamstown Rail Service, with a confirmed peak hour operational capacity for 600 embarking passengers per hour, in the direction of the peak traffic flow.

Response of the County Manager

The issue of ‘operational capacity of service’ has been given significant consideration as a result of public consultation, particularly with regard to the provision of public transport such as rail services.

In the legislative context of an SDZ Planning Scheme, it has been concluded that on balance, public transport provision must relate to the provision of land, facilities and/or infrastructure.

It remains the case that Phase 1B requires the completion of a railway station at Adamstown.  Initial capacity at the Station is projected to be 600 passengers per hour in each direction. 

The inclusion of operational capacity (i.e. specification of rail capacity) in phasing would render the Draft Planning Scheme highly difficult to implement and in particular, would introduce an element outside the control of the Planning Authority or commercial developers/landowners.

The provision of land, fixed infrastructure and/or facilities is a more tangible and therefore workable measure of control, particularly where development is balanced with proposals for transportation in a viable manner.

            Recommendation of the County Manager

For the above reasons it is recommended that motions 6 and 7 not be adopted.

Motions 8 and 9

Councillors D. Keating and F. McCarthy

Section 4.2.6, Phase 1B, insert the following condition to those requiring completion:

“A bus route servicing the Adamstown Railway Station with a confirmed peak hour operational capacity of at least 400 people per hour in the direction of the peak traffic flow. ”

Response of the County Manager

The issue of ‘operational capacity of service’ has been given significant consideration as a result of public consultation, particularly with regard to the provision of public transport services such as bus routes.

In the legislative context of an SDZ Planning Scheme, it has been concluded that on balance, public transport provision must relate to the provision of land, facilities and/or infrastructure.

The inclusion of operational capacity (i.e. specification of a bus route) would render the Draft Planning Scheme highly difficult to implement and in particular, would introduce an element outside the control of the Planning Authority or commercial developers/landowners.

The provision of land, fixed infrastructure and/or facilities is a more tangible and therefore workable measure of control, particularly where development is balanced with proposals for transportation in a viable manner.

            Recommendation of the County Manager

For the above reasons it is recommended that motions 8 and 9 not be adopted.

Motions 10 and 11

Councillors D. Keating and F. McCarthy

Section 4.2.7, Phase 2, amend the following condition, which requires completion of Primary School #1 to the following:

Permanent construction of Primary School #1 with a minimum of 18 no. classrooms and with a capacity for at least 544 children, and to facilitate pupil teacher ratios not exceeding standards specified by the Department of Education, and with an operational capacity to service the number of pupils at Adamstown, as calculated from Central Statistics Office statistics for family sizes and children of schoolgoing ages.

Response of the County Manager

The issue of ‘operational capacity of service’ has been given significant consideration as a result of public consultation, particularly with regard to school provision.

In the legislative context of an SDZ Planning Scheme, it has been concluded that on balance, school provision must relate to the provision of land, facilities and/or infrastructure to a standard acceptable to the Department of Education.

It remains the case that Phase 2 of the Draft Planning Scheme requires the provision of the first school at Adamstown.  The Draft Scheme therefore requires that a site be secured and a school established.

The location and size of proposed school sites is acceptable to the Department of Education.

The inclusion of operational capacity (i.e. specification of greater than an initial minimum number of classrooms or pupil-teacher ratios etc.) in phasing would render the Draft Planning Scheme highly difficult to implement and in particular, would introduce an element outside the control of the Planning Authority or commercial developers/landowners.

The provision of land, fixed infrastructure and/or facilities is a more tangible and therefore workable measure of control, particularly where development is balanced with proposals for school provision in a viable manner.

            Recommendation of the County Manager

For the above reasons it is recommended that motions 10 and 11 not be adopted.

Motions 12 and 13

Councillors D. Keating and F. McCarthy

Section 4.2.8, Phase 3, insert an additional condition which requires completion:

“The upgrade of the N4 including the R120 Newcastle Road N4 junction, and the upgraded N4-M50 junction;”

Response of the County Manager

Improvements to the N4 and the M50 are part of the National Road network and are under the control of the National Roads Authority.  The development of Adamstown is not dependent on improvements to the National Road network.

The development of Adamstown is dependent on the following key transportation elements:-

·        Adamstown Link Road (Adamstown – Outer Ring Road);

·        Celbridge Link Road (Adamstown – Celbridge Road);

·        Improved links at the two points where Tandy’s land currently enters and exits the SDZ lands;

·        A new link from within the Adamstown SDZ direct to the rear of the Superquinn District Centre;

·        Improvements to the R120 Newcastle Road;

·        A new railway station with transport interchange facilities;

·        Four tracking of the Dublin-Kildare Railway Line;

·        Two new QBCs (Adamstown – N4 QBC and Adamstown - ORR QBC);

·        A comprehensive network of roads, busways, pedestrian and cycle routes, including road crossing points, car and bicycle parking, within the SDZ lands.

The required up-front provision of transportation infrastructure has been balanced with a viable quantum of development permissible at each stage of proposed phasing.

            Recommendation of the County Manager

For the above reasons it is recommended that motions 12 and 13 not be adopted.

Motions 14 and 15

Councillors D. Keating and F. McCarthy

Section 4.2.9, Phase 4, insert the condition which requires completion:

            “Adamstown Railway Station, with a confirmed peak hour operational capacity for, in the region of 3000 passengers, in the direction of the peak traffic flow, together with park and ride facilities to a finished standard”

Response of the County Manager

The issue of ‘operational capacity of service’ has been given significant consideration as a result of public consultation, particularly with regard to the provision of public transport such as rail services.

In the legislative context of an SDZ Planning Scheme, it has been concluded that on balance, public transport provision must relate to the provision of land, facilities and/or infrastructure.

It remains the case that Phase 5 requires the completion of the four-tracking of the railway line serving Adamstown Station. After four-tracking, capacity at Adamstown is projected to be 3,000 passengers per hour in each direction. 

The inclusion of operational capacity (i.e. specification of rail capacity) in phasing would render the Draft Planning Scheme highly difficult to implement and in particular, would introduce an element outside the control of the Planning Authority or commercial developers/landowners.

The provision of land, fixed infrastructure and/or facilities is a more tangible and therefore workable measure of control, particularly where development is balanced with proposals for transportation in a viable manner.

            Recommendation of the County Manager

For the above reasons it is recommended that motions 14 and 15 not be adopted.

Motions 16 and 17

Councillors D. Keating and F. McCarthy

Section 4.2.10, Phase 5, amend the condition which requires completion of the QBC on Loop Road #2 to the following:

“The dedicated QBC busway on Loop Road #2 with a confirmed peak hour operational capacity of 600 people per hour, in the direction of the peak traffic flow.”

Response of the County Manager

The issue of ‘operational capacity of service’ has been given significant consideration as a result of public consultation, particularly with regard to the provision of public transport such as bus services.

In the legislative context of an SDZ Planning Scheme, it has been concluded that on balance, public transport provision must relate to the provision of land, facilities and/or infrastructure.

It remains the case that Phase 5 requires a dedicated QBC busway on the central spine road/loop road #2.  The busway will have a capacity that is significantly in excess of 600 people per hour in each direction.

The inclusion of operational capacity (i.e. specification of bus capacity) in phasing would render the Draft Planning Scheme highly difficult to implement and in particular, would introduce an element outside the control of the Planning Authority or commercial developers/landowners.

The provision of land, fixed infrastructure and/or facilities is a more tangible and therefore workable measure of control, particularly where development is balanced with proposals for transportation in a viable manner.

            Recommendation of the County Manager

For the above reasons it is recommended that motions 16 and 17 not be adopted.

Motions 18 and 19

Councillors D. Keating and F. McCarthy

Section 4.2.7, Phase 2, amend the following condition which requires completion:

“Permanent construction of at least the first phase of a Secondary School with a minimum of 18 no. classrooms, with a capacity for at least 544 children and to facilitate pupil teacher ratios not exceeding standards specified by the Department of Education, and with an operational capacity to service the number of pupils at Adamstown, as calculated from Central Statistics Office statistics for family sizes and children of schoolgoing ages.

Response of the County Manager

The issue of ‘operational capacity of service’ has been given significant consideration as a result of public consultation, particularly with regard to school provision.

In the legislative context of an SDZ Planning Scheme, it has been concluded that on balance, school provision must relate to the provision of land, facilities and/or infrastructure to a standard acceptable to the Department of Education.

It remains the case that Phase 4 of the Draft Planning Scheme requires the provision of a second school at Adamstown.  The Draft Scheme therefore requires that a site be secured and a school established.

The location and size of proposed school sites is acceptable to the Department of Education.

The inclusion of operational capacity (i.e. specification of greater than an initial minimum number of classrooms or pupil-teacher ratios etc.) in phasing would render the Draft Planning Scheme highly difficult to implement and in particular, would introduce an element outside the control of the Planning Authority or commercial developers/landowners.

The provision of land, fixed infrastructure and/or facilities is a more tangible and therefore workable measure of control, particularly where development is balanced with proposals for school provision in a viable manner.

            Recommendation of the County Manager

For the above reasons it is recommended that motions 18 and 19 not be adopted.

Motions 20 and 21

Councillors D. Keating and F. McCarthy

Section 4.2.9?, Phase 4, insert the condition which requires completion of the following condition:

“Permanent construction of Primary School #2 with a minimum of 18 no. classrooms and with a capacity for at least 544 children, and to facilitate pupil teacher ratios not exceeding standards specified by the Department of Education, and with an operational capacity to service service the number of pupils at Adamstown, as calculated from Central Statistics Office statistics for family sizes and children of schoolgoing ages

Response of the County Manager

The issue of ‘operational capacity of service’ has been given significant consideration as a result of public consultation, particularly with regard to school provision.

In the legislative context of an SDZ Planning Scheme, it has been concluded that on balance, school provision must relate to the provision of land, facilities and/or infrastructure to a standard acceptable to the Department of Education.

It remains the case that Phase 6 of the Draft Planning Scheme requires the provision of a third school at Adamstown.  The Draft Scheme therefore requires that a site be secured and a school established.

The location and size of proposed school sites is acceptable to the Department of Education.

The inclusion of operational capacity (i.e. specification of greater than an initial minimum number of classrooms or pupil-teacher ratios etc.) in phasing would render the Draft Planning Scheme highly difficult to implement and in particular, would introduce an element outside the control of the Planning Authority or commercial developers/landowners.

The provision of land, fixed infrastructure and/or facilities is a more tangible and therefore workable measure of control, particularly where development is balanced with proposals for school provision in a viable manner.

            Recommendation of the County Manager

For the above reasons it is recommended that motions 20 and 21 not be adopted.

Motions 22 and 23

Councillors D. Keating and F. McCarthy

Section 4.2.11, Phase 6, amend the condition which requires completion of Primary school #2 to the following:

 “Permanent construction of Primary School #3 with a minimum of 18 no. classrooms and with a capacity for at least 544 children, and to facilitate pupil teacher ratios not exceeding standards specified by the Department of Education, and with an operational capacity to service service the number of pupils at Adamstown, as calculated from Central Statistics Office statistics for family sizes and children of schoolgoing ages.

Insert the condition which requires completion of the following condition:

Permanent construction of an extension to Secondary School #1(or additional building) to provide an additional  minimum no of  classrooms with capacity to service the number of pupils at Adamstown, as calculated from Central Statistics Office statistics for family sizes and children of schoolgoing ages.

Response of the County Manager

The issue of ‘operational capacity of service’ has been given significant consideration as a result of public consultation, particularly with regard to school provision.

In the legislative context of an SDZ Planning Scheme, it has been concluded that on balance, school provision must relate to the provision of land, facilities and/or infrastructure to a standard acceptable to the Department of Education.

It remains the case that Phase 8 of the Draft Planning Scheme requires the provision of a fourth school at Adamstown.  The Draft Scheme therefore requires that a site be secured and a school established.

The location and size of proposed school sites is acceptable to the Department of Education.

The inclusion of operational capacity (i.e. specification of greater than an initial minimum number of classrooms or pupil-teacher ratios etc.) in phasing would render the Draft Planning Scheme highly difficult to implement and in particular, would introduce an element outside the control of the Planning Authority or commercial developers/landowners.

The provision of land, fixed infrastructure and/or facilities is a more tangible and therefore workable measure of control, particularly where development is balanced with proposals for school provision in a viable manner.

            Recommendation of the County Manager

For the above reasons it is recommended that motions 22 and 23 not be adopted.

Motions 24 and 25

Councillors D. Keating and F. McCarthy

Amend Adamstown Castle & Somerton development areas, characterised as low density to be controlled and characterised as follows:

·        Min-Max perimeter building height: 2-3 storeys in total, with up to 3 storeys in total at corner/feature buildings.

·        Landmark buildings no higher than 4 stories in total.

Amend all tables and figures associated with detailing these development areas accordingly.

Response of the County Manager

Proposed building height in the Draft Planning Scheme is related to the scale of streets and public space adjoining and to the need for a satisfactory ratio of built enclosure in the public realm according to the principles of urban design. 

It is necessary for the Draft Planning Scheme to detail minimum and maximum building height.  This does not mean that maximum permissible building height is required in all cases.  Building height will be assessed in the context of residential amenity as part of any future planning applications for development.

It has already been proposed in the Manager’s Report on Submissions received (March 2003) to adjust maximum storey heights in all Development Areas immediately adjoining existing housing as follows:-

The maximum height of courtyard buildings shown hatched on the attached map (March 2003 report) is reduced to a maximum of two storeys at any point and the maximum height of perimeter buildings shown hatched on the attached map is reduced to not more three storeys with four storeys at corners and/or feature buildings.

The proposed change addresses the areas where maximum building height may be an issue and relates to part of five separate Development Areas.  The proposed Motion relates to two entire Development Areas, without regard for the internal design and layout of streets and spaces.

            Recommendation of the County Manager

For the above reasons it is recommended that motions 25 and 26 not be adopted.

Motions 26 and 27

Councillors D. Keating and F. McCarthy

Amend all phases to require that:  Prior to the commencement of a phase, an EIS be completed, taking into account the totality of development detailed in the DPS for that phase.

Response of the County Manager

Planning and Development legislation clearly specifies the types and thresholds of development for which an EIS may be required.

It remains the case that a full EIS will be required in respect of future planning applications for development above relevant minimum threshold size within the Adamstown SDZ.  For example, a housing development of 500 units or more will require a full EIS.

            Recommendation of the County Manager

For the above reasons it is recommended that motions 26 and 27 not be adopted.

Motion 28

Councillor F. McCarthy.

That the proposed site for the Fire Station be moved to a location in closer proximity to the Railway Station and away from existing housing.

            Report of the County Manager

There is no confirmed requirement for a fire station in this area at present.  Should a site be required in the future, Dublin Fire Brigade are satisfied that the proposed site at Adamstown would be a suitable location.

A fire station in Adamstown would serve the wider Lucan-Clondalkin area in addition to the SDZ lands.  The fire station site is therefore located proximate to the main road network and the existing built-up area.

Any future fire station building on the identified site would be approximately 100m from the nearest dwellinghouse and must be subject to a full planning application.

It is proposed in the Manager’s Report on submissions of March 2003 that the draft planning scheme be amended to specify that:-

The proposed fire station site shall be levelled, grassed and seeded to form an area of public open space, pending determination of the need for a fire station in this area and selection of this site for such a facility.  This work should comprise part of the development of the adjoining ‘Somerton’ development area and phased accordingly.  Should it be determined by Dublin Fire Brigade and the Planning Authority that the site is not required for a fire station, it may be developed for ‘courtyard’ housing in accordance with this Planning Scheme.

            Recommendation of the County Manager

For the above reasons it is recommended that motion 28 not be adopted.