DÚN LAOGHAIRE-RATHDOWN COUNTY COUNCIL

Minutes of the County Council held in the County Hall, Marine Road, Dun Laoghaire, Co. Dublin on Monday, 8 March 2004 at 5.00 pm

PRESENT

Councillors Councillors Boyhan, V. Ireland, K. Butler, L. Joyce, T. Coffey. B Kelly, T. Conway, B. Keogh, H. Corrigan, M Lowe, B. Cosgrave, Liam T. Marren, D. Culhane, A. Matthews, T. Dillon Byrne, J. Murphy, T. Dockrell, W. O’Callaghan, D. Elliott, M. O’Malley, C. Fox, T. Saul, B. Hand, P. Smyth, C. Horkan, G.

Apologies for inability to attend were received from Councillors N. Bhreathnach, Louise Cosgrave and E. Costello.

An Cathaoirleach, Councillor T. Matthews presided.

OFFICIALS PRESENT

Mr. D. Brady, County Manager; Mr. M. Gough, Deputy Manager; Mr. J. Fitzgerald, Ms. K. Holohan, Mr. C. MacNamara, Mr. E. O’Hare, Ms. M. Mallon, Directors of Services; Mr. D. Irvine, Senior Planner; Ms. T. Langan, Ms. B. O’Reilly, Senior Executive Officers; Mr. J. Richardson, Mr. B. Hannon, Senior Executive Architects, Ms M. Hickey, Mr. E. Condon, Mr. T. Mahon, Administrative Officers; Ms. M. Lyons, Senior Staff Officer.

C/132/04 Vote of Sympathy

A vote of sympathy was passed with the family of John O’Grady, R.I.P, Senior Staff Officer, Corporate Services.

A vote of sympathy was also passed with the family of Mrs. Sally Boland, R.I.P. who was involved in amateur dramatics in Dalkey and also with the family of Mr. Hubert Lavelle, R.I.P. former member of the Diplomatic Corps.

An Cathaoirleach, the Members, Manager and staff observed a minute’s silence.

C/133/04 Resolution pursuant to Section 140 of the Local Government Act, 2001, submitted by Councillors C. O'Malley, J. Dillon Byrne, N. Bhreathnach, D. O'Callaghan, C. Smyth and A. Culhane:

It was proposed by Councillor C. O’Malley and seconded by Councillor J. Dillon Byrne:

1 "We the Members of Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council pursuant to Section 140 of the Local Government Act 2001 hereby require and direct the County Manager to proceed immediately with the preparation of a Local Area Plan for Deansgrange, and strongly recommend that no further major developments be allowed in the area until the Plan has been completed."

The following report of the Manager, copy of which had been circulated to the Members, was CONSIDERED :

“A material amendment to the draft Development Plan 2003 has included an objective to prepare a Local Area Plan for Deansgrange.

A commitment has been given to prepare the plan within the first two years of the life of the new County Development Plan, to cover the area within half a kilometre radius of the Deansgrange crossroads. This material amendment along with all other material amendments to the draft plan will be considered at a series of meetings to be held during this month. Having regard to statutory deadlines, the final date for the adoption of the Development Plan is the 23 rd March, 2004. The Plan will come into effect four weeks after that date.

Work on Local Area Plans will commence in 2004 starting with Cherrywood-Rathmichael Area, Bray Environs, Kiltiernan/Glenamuck, Glencullen, Deansgrange, Stillorgan (to be done in first year after the Development Plan is adopted), Goatstown and Barnacullia. Each Local Area Plan will take a minimum total of 35 weeks to prepare, and longer if there is exhaustive public consultation. Work will also be required on two Special Amenity Area Orders and a series of Architectural Conservation Areas. It is considered that a Local Area Plan for Deansgrange is not a more urgent necessity in the light of other Local Area Plan and local planning commitments.”

A discussion took place during which the following amendment to the resolution was proposed by Councillor D. Marren:

“That the motion be amended by the deletion of word “immediately” and substitute “as soon as possible” with a commencement date in Autumn 2004.”

Mr. M. Gough, Director of Economic Development and Planning and Mr. D. Brady, County Manager, responded to Members queries.

The amended resolution was PUT and AGREED .

C/134/04 Resolution pursuant to Section 140 of the Local Government Act, 2001, submitted by Councillors K. Ireland, V. Boyhan, J. Dillon Byrne, C. O'Malley:

It was proposed by Councillor K. Ireland and seconded by Councillor V. Boyhan:

"We the Members of Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council pursuant to Section 140 of the Local Government Act 2001 hereby require and direct the County Manager to seek independent legal advice (from a person agreed by the Group Leaders) on the admissibility of Submission 555 and the County Manager's response to it.” The following report of the Manager, copy of which had been circulated to the Members was CONSIDERED:

“The relevant provision of the Local Government Act 2001 which enables the elected members to obtain a second legal opinion is contained under Section 132. It is a necessary pre-condition to the exercise by the elected members of that statutory

2 function that they have already received a legal opinion, through the Manager, for the purposes of Section 152 of the said Act.

In my opinion Section 132 does not permit the elected members of the Council to nominate the person from whom such a second legal opinion is to be sought, whether directly or indirectly. Therefore, in my opinion, because this motion purports to direct the procurement of a second legal opinion “from a person agreed by the Group Leaders” it is invalid. In my opinion the function of the elected members under Section 132 is confined to Directing the Manager to obtain the “second legal opinion” and no implication arises from the Section which would enable the Council by resolution to direct the Manager to obtain that “second legal opinion” from a particular source or indeed to have the input into that Managerial function in the manner contended for in this motion.

If a valid motion pursuant to Section 132 is adopted by the Council, having first considered the legal opinion provided by the Manager, then the statutory onus passes to the County Manager to implement the Council’s Direction, procure that “ second legal opinion” and to communicate it to the Council without undue delay.”

An Cathaoirleach, Councillor T. Matthews declared the resolution INVALID.

C/135/04 Confirmation of Minutes

(a) Minutes of County Council Meeting held on 9 February 2004 were ADOPTED .

C/136/04 Questions

It was proposed by Councillor L. Butler, seconded by Councillor B. Coffey and RESOLVED:

“That pursuant to Standing Order No. 105 question numbers 4 to 20 inclusive be APPROVED and ADOPTED.

C/137/04 (Details Withheld), Dalkey

Question: Councillor V. Boyhan “To ask the Manager to set out in detail on what grounds (details withheld) was included in the Manager’s Report Under Section 12(8) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 in relation to the Amended Draft Development Plan?”

Reply: “(details withheld) is listed as a listed building in the County Development Plan 1998. It is not indicated as a protected Structure in the Draft Development Plan, either in the Written Statement or on Map 4. It was reinstated as a protected structure by the elected members. Consequently it went out on the second public display as a material alteration, as required by Section 12 (7) of the Planning and Development Act 2000.”

C/138/04 Partial Waivers - Environmental Service Charges

Question: Councillor V. Boyhan “To ask the Manager to confirm how many applications are awaiting a response from this Council in relation to partial waiver status in connection with environmental service charges?”

3 Reply: “There are approximately 4,000 waiver applications on hand for 2003. Current waiver applications are usually made following the annual issue of Bills in March.

None of the applications on hand will attract a partial waiver as the waiver scheme for 2003 only provides for the granting of full waivers.

From January 2004 to date 3,180 waiver applications have been processed.”

C/139/04 High Court Judgement: Dublin City Council -v- Wright

Question: Councillor V. Boyhan “To ask the Manager to provide a copy of the High Court Judgement in relation to Dublin City Council –v- Wright re: E.U. Directives on Polluter Pays Principle and the 1996 Waste Management Act. The Judgement was delivered by Justice Quirke (21 January 2004) and can the Manager comment if there are issues arising from this case that Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council should note or take appropriate action?”

Reply: “The decision of Judge Quirke reaffirmed the Local Authority’s views that in adopting the Resolution the necessary powers were given by the Oireachtas and lawfully exercised by it at the relevant time under the then relevant legislation. Furthermore that the Protection of the Environment Act, 2003, has introduced an amendment to the Waste Management Act, 1996 under which the Oireachtas removed from the Elected Member’s functions in relation to the making of such a charge and prohibits Elected Members from adopting a Resolution giving the Manager a direction or requiring him to do any act, matter or thing inconsistent with the powers given to the Manager under that provision and any such Resolution which contravenes the provision shall be void.”

C/140/04 Council Archivist

Question: Councillor V. Boyhan “To ask the Manager who is currently responsible for the Council archive and will the Council employ a full time archivist?”

Reply: “Some of the Councils older material has already been archived and indexed and the records, which have been divided into five mini collections (in relation to the Urban District Council’s of Blackrock, Dalkey, Killiney-Ballybrack and Dun Laoghaire, and to the Dun Laoghaire Corporation) are kept in the strong room in the County Hall. Corporate Services is the department responsible for the archives and the index to the collections is held there.

There are records still waiting to be processed by an archivist and while it was hoped this year to employ the services of an archivist for a period of six months in order to further develop these records it was not possible due to budgetary and staffing restrictions. It would be the intention of the Corporate Services Department to consult with the Heritage Officer when any future development of the archives is being considered.”

C/141/04 Public Relations Contract

Question: Councillor V. Boyhan

4 “To ask the Manager for a report on the current public relations contract and the total cost for same in 2002 and 2003?”

Reply: “Mary Murphy Associates were awarded the media consultancy contract from May 2003 to May 2004 on a retainer basis of €20,250 per year. Services are provided to all departments in relation to press releases, publicity campaigns, crisis management and provision of “on call” advice.”

C/142/04 Leaking Sewage

Question: Councillor E. Costello “To ask the Manager to investigate the cause and provide a remedy for the leaking of sewage from the manhole cover in the garden of (address supplied)?”

Reply: “The leaking of sewage from this manhole, which is on a private drain, is due to the ongoing blocking of the broad's trap on the drain. A cost estimate for the removal of the broad's trap by DLRCC Drainage Section is currently being prepared for the residents involved. Responsibility for the maintenance of the private drain lies with the owners of the properties connected to the drain. Should the residents decide to proceed with the removal of the broads trap, they will be reponsible for the costs of carrying out this work. Alternatively they may employ a private contractor to carry out this work.”

C/143/04 Right-of-Way on Public Lands

Question: Councillor E. Costello “To ask the Manager what are the conditions required for a party to establish a claim to a right-of-way on public lands?”

Reply: “The question raised is dealt with generally below.

A private right of way can arise by a direct grant or a reservation of a right of way in a Deed or by implication of law. It can also arise from Statute law i.e. where the right comes into existence as the result of works carried out by a local authority. Such a right also can arise by prescription that is by the actual user of the right contended for. In his book “The Law of Easements and Profits A Prendre”, Mr Peter Bland B.L describes the law in relation to the use of a right of way acquired by prescription in the following terms:-

“ the mode, purpose and quantity of the use which can be made of a right of way arising by prescription is determined by the actual user as a right, however, a public right of way is not acquired by prescription”.

A public right of way includes a “public road “as defined in the Roads Act 1993” (as amended) although it can have a wider meaning and a “public road” is a public right of way established by Statute. A public right of way is a right of way which is “enjoyed” by the public as of right (i.e. without consent). To establish a public right of way in law it would be necessary to establish that it was used as such in an open and unconcealed manner. A “way” could also be dedicated to public use expressly or by implication by the owners of the ground provided that same was accepted as such by the public.

5 A right of way is a right to use another person’s property for a particular purpose and therefore can be circumscribed by Deed or by usage. The extent of these limitations depends on the circumstances and facts of each case.”

C/144/04 Right-of-Way on Private Land

Question: Councillor E. Costello “To ask the Manager what are the conditions required for a party to establish a claim to a right-of-way on private land?”

Reply: “The question raised is dealt with generally below.

A private right of way can arise by a direct grant or a reservation of a right of way in a Deed or by implication of law. It can also arise from Statute law i.e. where the right comes into existence as the result of works carried out by a local authority. Such a right also can arise by prescription that is by the actual user of the right contended for. In his book “The Law of Easements and Profits A Prendre”, Mr Peter Bland B.L describes the law in relation to the use of a right of way acquired by prescription in the following terms:-

“ the mode, purpose and quantity of the use which can be made of a right of way arising by prescription is determined by the actual user as a right, however, a public right of way is not acquired by prescription”.

A public right of way includes a “public road “as defined in the Roads Act 1993” (as amended) although it can have a wider meaning and a “public road” is a public right of way established by Statute. A public right of way is a right of way which is “enjoyed” by the public as of right (i.e. without consent). To establish a public right of way in law it would be necessary to establish that it was used as such in an open and unconcealed manner. A “way” could also be dedicated to public use expressly or by implication by the owners of the ground provided that same was accepted as such by the public.

A right of way is a right to use another person’s property for a particular purpose and therefore can be circumscribed by Deed or by usage. The extent of these limitations depends on the circumstances and facts of each case.”

C/145/04 Infringement of Right-of-Way

Question: Councillor E. Costello “To ask the Manager under what circumstances can a party claim that their right-of-way has been infringed?”

Reply: “The question raised is dealt with generally below.

A private right of way can arise by a direct grant or a reservation of a right of way in a Deed or by implication of law. It can also arise from Statute law i.e. where the right comes into existence as the result of works carried out by a local authority. Such a right also can arise by prescription that is by the actual user of the right contended for. In his book “The Law of Easements and Profits A Prendre”, Mr Peter Bland B.L describes the law in relation to the use of a right of way acquired by prescription in the following terms:-

6 “the mode, purpose and quantity of the use which can be made of a right of way arising by prescription is determined by the actual user as a right, however, a public right of way is not acquired by prescription”.

A public right of way includes a “public road “as defined in the Roads Act 1993” (as amended) although it can have a wider meaning and a “public road” is a public right of way established by Statute. A public right of way is a right of way which is “enjoyed” by the public as of right (i.e. without consent). To establish a public right of way in law it would be necessary to establish that it was used as such in an open and unconcealed manner. A “way” could also be dedicated to public use expressly or by implication by the owners of the ground provided that same was accepted as such by the public.

A right of way is a right to use another person’s property for a particular purpose and therefore can be circumscribed by Deed or by usage. The extent of these limitations depends on the circumstances and facts of each case.”

C/146/04 Unlocked Gate along Right-of-Way

Question: Councillor E. Costello “To ask the Manager if a gate is erected along a right-of-way that remains unlocked at all times, is this an infringement of a right-of-way?”

Reply: “The question raised is dealt with generally below.

A private right of way can arise by a direct grant or a reservation of a right of way in a Deed or by implication of law. It can also arise from Statute law i.e. where the right comes into existence as the result of works carried out by a local authority. Such a right also can arise by prescription that is by the actual user of the right contended for. In his book “The Law of Easements and Profits A Prendre”, Mr Peter Bland B.L describes the law in relation to the use of a right of way acquired by prescription in the following terms:-

“ the mode, purpose and quantity of the use which can be made of a right of way arising by prescription is determined by the actual user as a right, however, a public right of way is not acquired by prescription”.

A public right of way includes a “public road “as defined in the Roads Act 1993” (as amended) although it can have a wider meaning and a “public road” is a public right of way established by Statute. A public right of way is a right of way which is “enjoyed” by the public as of right (i.e. without consent). To establish a public right of way in law it would be necessary to establish that it was used as such in an open and unconcealed manner. A “way” could also be dedicated to public use expressly or by implication by the owners of the ground provided that same was accepted as such by the public.

A right of way is a right to use another person’s property for a particular purpose and therefore can be circumscribed by Deed or by usage. The extent of these limitations depends on the circumstances and facts of each case.”

C/147/04 Reclassification of Speed Limits in the County

Question: Councillor D. Marren “To ask the Manager to clarify the position with regard to the proposed reclassification of speed limits throughout the County and to indicate the costs involved?”

7 Reply: “A broadly based Working Group was established early in 2003 to carry out a review of the present speed limits structure. The Working Group addressed all of the major issues relating to speed limit policy including the range of speed limits deployed on roadways and in relation to particular categories of vehicles, the policy in relation to signage used to indicate speed limits and the implications of the adoption of metric values for speed measurement in 2004. The report of the Working Group has been presented to the Minister and the Government with a view to proceeding with the metrication of speed limits before the end of this year. The legislative changes and other measures needed to provide for the implementation of the recommendations made in that report are being pursued at present.

a) Built-up Speed Limit: 30 mph b) Special Speed Limit: 40 mph/50 mph c) General Speed Limit: 60 mph d) Ordinary Speed Limit: 50 mph/40 mph e) Motorway Speed Limit: 70mph

The working group have made their recommendations in relation to the following speed limit structure on four roads throughout the country as set out below: -

a) a default speed limit of 120 km/h on motorways; b) a new category of default speed limit of 100 km/h to be introduced for national roads; c) a new category of default speed limit of 80 km/h to be applied on non-national roads; d) a default speed limit of 50 km/h to be applied to roads in urban areas (the Built- up Area speed limit); e) special speed limits of 100 km/h, 80 km/h and 60 km/h to be available for application by the local authorities as deemed appropriate on road safety grounds; f) special speed limit of 30 km/h to be applied at areas of pedestrian/cyclist concentration where appropriate speed reduction measures are deployed in conjunction with Traffic Calming Measures; g) new structure to provide for the application of special speed limits in the vicinity of schools (the value to be determined having regard to the circumstances) at selected restricted times.

In addition, there is a new structure designating maximum speed limits for selected vehicle classes on motorways and dual carriageways.

While the operative date has not been decided yet it is expected to be towards the end of this year. The cost of implementation cannot be evaluated until full details of the scheme are received. It is, however, anticipated that the Department of Transport will meet fully the implementation costs.”

C/148/04 Costs Incurred in Operating Electronic Voting System

Question: Councillor D. Marren “To ask the Manager what costs are likely to be incurred by the County Council in operating the proposed electronic voting system this year and what training costs are involved?”

Reply:

8 “A figure in the sum of €50,000 is included in the 2004 Budget for the June Local Elections. This will defray the cost of staff, information technology and communications, staff development and facilities management.”

C/149/04 Housing in Dun Laoghaire Rathdown

Question: Councillor C. O’Malley “To ask the Manager (a) how many residential units have been granted planning permission since January 2003 in the following categories:- (i) total number of residential units; (ii) social housing units to be built on Council owned land, unrelated to any Part V agreement; (iii) social housing units to be provided on foot of a Part V Agreement with a private developer (iv) housing units to be provided as part of an Affordable Housing scheme and (b) how many housing units under each of the above headings it is projected will be built over the foreseeable future?”

Reply: “a) i) Planning permission was granted for 2313 residential dwellings in 2003. ii) Development of Social Housing Units on Council owned land does not require planning permission. However the construction of 42 no dwellings were approved under the Part 8 Public Consultation Process during 2003. iii) To date there are three preliminary agreements with developers for the provision of Social Housing under Part V. These agreements will deliver a 3 bay halting site and 62 units of accommodation. iv) Under the Affordable Housing Scheme, introduced by the Department of the Environment Heritage and Local Government, new dwellings can be provided by Local Authorities on land which they own, at discounted prices, to eligible applicants who meet the income criteria set out in the scheme. Dwellings provided under this scheme do not require planning permission but require approval under Part 8 Public Consultation Process. Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council has not operated the scheme to date, as all of the sites in its ownership which are currently under development are required to meet the Councils own multi-annual building programme. b) i) Each grant of permission under a) i) above has a duration of 5 years from the date of grant, but it is not possible to say how many of the above granted units will actually be built.

ii) At present there are 79 dwellings under construction, which are due for completion during 2004.

There are 329 dwellings due to commence in 2004, however it is not possible to confirm how many dwellings will be completed within the year, as commencement on site will be dependent upon a number of factors including Part 8 approval and early approval being received from the Department of the Environment Heritage and Local Government. iii) It is not possible to state with certainty how many social housing units will be provided under Part V, as the Council will have no control over when a development will commence and consequently when units will be delivered.

9 iv) Consideration will be given to making a percentage of dwellings available for purchase under the Affordable Housing Scheme in future developments of larger sites in council ownership.

A preliminary agreement has been reached with a developer under Part V to provide 24 shared ownership and 61 affordable dwellings. It is anticipated that these units will be completed in 2004.”

C/150/04 Introduction of Electronic Voting - Events/Sessions Taking Place

Question: Councillor C. Smyth “To ask the Manager in conjunction with the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, what events/sessions will take place for the introduction of electronic voting?”

Reply: “The Council has been working with the DoEHLG in assisting the Department with the nationwide road show to launch awareness of the Electronic Voting System. The roadshow will be visiting sites in Ballybrack, Dun Laoghaire, Dundrum, Blackrock and Stillorgan over a four-week period beginning on the 26 th April next. The final dates and locations will be announced in the coming weeks. The County Council will work closely with the media to promote this road show.

Also, the Council intends to install two electronic voting machines in County Hall and Dundrum on dates to be confirmed to familiarise the public with the system.

The Culture, Community Development & Amenities Department is rolling out an awareness campaign through their network for older people on electronic voting on dates to be confirmed in March.”

C/151/04 Coastal Erosion

Question: Councillor C. Smyth “To ask the Manager the following regarding coastal erosion: (a) Has there been any study commissioned by the Council? (b) If there has been a study, could you furnish me with the findings/report? (c) If there has been no study, do you expect to complete a study? (d) If there is to be a study, when do you expect this study to begin, the format and who will carry out the study? (e) What measures have been carried out in the past to protect our coast from erosion? (f) What measures are currently carried out to protect our coast from erosion? (g) What future measures will be carried out? (h) If a private residence is suffering from coastal erosion what measures will the Council take to protect them?”

Reply: (a) “In 1995, Malachy Walsh and Partners in association with Posford Haskoning (formerly Posford Duvivier) were commissioned by Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council to carry out a study dealing with erosion of the coastline from Sorrento Point south to the county boundary with Wicklow. The report was carried out in three stages:

Report No. 1 Vico Road Report No. 2 Killiney

10 Report No. 3 Shankill

The Coastal Erosion – Review of Report No. 3 – Shankill was completed in December 2002

(b) Copies of the above reports are currently being compiled and will be made available for inspection.

(c) In addition to the above reports already completed, Consultants, Posford Haskoning, are in the process of being engaged to set up a Coastal Asset Survey Database..

(d) Is is anticipated that the study by Posford Haskoning will commence immediately following Managers Order. The format of the study will be the production of a database that will also include records from previous reports (listed above), where monitoring is carried out or where there may be specific environmental issues. The database will be of considerable assistance, as an engineer will input the information in relation to existing and future coastal defence and remedial works along the coastline.

The database study is expected to commence as soon as possible and will involve the undertaking of a coastal inspection and preparation of a database by Posford Haskoning, Consultants, to include the following:

Ø the collection of all relevant data through site inspections of the coastline Ø the classification of coastal areas around the coastline and the discrete defence units within those areas Ø the entry of recorded data for these areas and defence units into the database Ø the provision of a user manual to aid installation and use of the database

(e) Responsibility for Coastal Protection transferred from the Transportation to the Culture, Community Development & Amenities Department in May 2001. Since taking over responsibility, two projects have been completed at Killiney Beach.

Coastal Protection Works - Vico Road Project was undertaken in August 2002 with Iarnrod Eireann acting as Agents, COWI as Consultants, and Ascon as the Contractor and consisted of rock armouring to protect the railway embankment and Vico Road. The work was completed in December 2002 at a cost of €234,491, 75% of which was recouped from the Department of Communications, Marine & Natural Resources.

Minor works due to a cliff slide at Killiney Beach were carried out in 2003 which consisted of the erection of a wooden post and rail fence to protect members of the public from falling debris. Grading of cliffs at this location had taken place some years previously to prevent such cliff slides but at this particular location the Council had been unable to carry out the necessary works due to local objections by landowner.

Prior to transfer of responsibility to this Department, works have been carried out at various locations such as the coastal protection works fronting Newtownsmith Park.

(f) The Council is currently carrying out a number of measures to identify coastal protection works to protect all publicly owned land along the Council. The examination of coastal protection works by the Culture, Community Development & Amenities Department, who now have responsibility for Coastal Protection and

11 the setting up of a database to identify critical areas will enable the Council to identify projects which can then be assessed and submitted for funding to the Department of Marine.

(g) Future measures to be taken will be based on the submission made on 6 th November 2001 to the Department of the Marine & Natural Resources in respect of applications for funding under the 2002-2006 Coastal Protection Programme which are as follows:

1 Vico Road Coastal Protection Scheme (completed December 2002). 2 2 Between Shanganagh and the County Boundary with Bray UDC 3 Sandycove Harbour 4 Bulloch Harbour 5 Coliemore Harbour 6 Provision of a continuous footpath beside the sea from Sandycove to Booterstown (a) Dun Laoghaire Baths (b) Beach Gardens (East Pier to Dun Laoghaire Baths) (c) Blackrock Baths.

(h) The Council will take measures to protect publicly owned land where resources allow. Responsibility for a private residence affected by coastal erosion is the responsibility of the owner of such property who, prior to acquiring a property, should arrange to have professional advice from suitably qualified surveyors / consultants.”

C/152/04 Provision of Fire Service

Question: Councillor C. Smyth “To ask the Manager: (a) The amount of money requested by Dublin City Council for the provision of the Fire Service in the Dun Laoghaire Rathdown area and the actual amount contributed. (b) How is the figure calculated? (c) What do we receive for this money? (d) How frequently are “fire engines” replaced with current year models?”

Reply: (a) “The total cost of the fire service in this county for 2004 is €12,368,230 which represents 15.172% of the total cost of the services in the four Dublin local authorities. There is provision of €12,368,300 in the Council’s Budget 2004 for payment for this service.

(b) The new apportionment of the costs of the operation of the Fire Service was agreed by the Managers of the four Dublin local authorities and came into effect from 1 st January 2001. It was agreed that the three County Councils shall contribute annually to Dublin City Council based on the ratio of

1. Gross commercial rateable valuation (for November Valuation List),

2. Population (latest census),

3. Households (Dept. of the Environment and Local Government Quarterly Bulletin of Housing Statistics – September)

12 in each of the three County Councils as a proportion of the total of the above for the three County Councils and Dublin City Council.

(c) The performance of the powers, functions and duties of this county as Fire Authority is carried out by Dublin City Council in accordance with an agreement under Section 85 the Local Government Act 2001. The sum outlined in (a) above is paid to Dublin City Council to cover the cost of the service to this county.

(d) During the last seven years an average two new fire appliances have been purchased each year. The service currently has 22 No. front line appliances from 1 to 18 years.”

C/153/04 Waste Enforcement

Question: Councillor C. Smyth “To ask the Manager have they examined the introduction of : (a) A “Waste Enforcement Unit” (b) What provisions are in place for waste enforcement? (c) What is the Council’s future waste enforcement strategy? (d) Of the €7 million allocation for waste enforcement what proportion did Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council receive?”

Reply: (a) “The Council made an application to the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government on 11 th October, 2002 for landfill levy funding for additional staffing to augment the Council’s existing Waste Enforcement Unit in support of improved waste enforcement measures.

In its application, the Council undertook to provide increased waste management, litter and other environmental initiatives in support of the waste hierarchy and to discourage fly-tipping and illegal dumping.

(b) The current Waste Enforcement Section has a staff complement of three technical staff reporting to a Senior Engineer and six Litter Wardens carry out litter and waste enforcement duties.

(c) The Council has developed a comprehensive Planned Programme of Action for Enforcement of Waste Management Legislation with a greater emphasis on regulation and enforcement of the waste and litter legislation including enforcement of regulations such as the Waste Management (Packaging) Regulations 2003. With active enforcement of legislation, including prosecution of offenders in the courts, the Council will be taking a pro-active approach towards improved levels of waste management compliance in the county.

(d) By Circular WIR 10/03 dated 12 th August, 2003 the Department of the Environment and Local Government confirmed the allocation of a block grant of €480,000 in relation to the costs of additional enforcement staffing and related overheads in year 1 (year ended 31/12/2004). Funding will be provided for four further years on a sliding scale Year 1 - 100% Year 2 - 80% Year 3 - 60% Year 4 - 40% Year 5 - 20% The Council is awaiting the sanction of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to approve these additional staff posts. Staff will be recruited on receipt of this sanction.”

13

C/154/04 Conferences

The following conference, copy of which had been circulated to Members, was CONSIDERED:-

(a) Dublin and Mid-East Regional Authorities Information Seminar, Croke Park Conference Centre, Croke Park, Dublin 3, 12 th February (b) Confederation of European Councillors, Rural Communities and their Future Needs”, Hillgrove Hotel, Monaghan, 18 th – 19 th March (c) “Enhancing Local Democracy – The Role of Local Councillor in Ireland”, Boole 2 Lecture Theatre, University College Cork, 26 th March (d) Sports and Leisure Facilities for 2020, Design, Funding and Management, Clontarf Castle Hotel, Dublin, 1 st – 2 nd April (e) “Knowledge Based regions in the Information Society – The Role of Broadband Technology in securing a vibrant eSociety”, Great Southern Hotel, Killarney, Co. Kerry, 5 th – 6 th April (f) 3rd Joint Irish North/South Conference, Building Roads – Problems and Solutions, Heritage Hotel, Portlaoise, Co. Laois, 29 th April (g) Local Government 1999 – 2004, How did we do?, Clonlea Strand Hotel, Dungarvan, Co. Waterford, 7 th – 8 th May.

It was AGREED that the County Council be represented at conferences (a) to (g) above.

C/155/04 Approval of Nominations

The following report of the Manager, copy of which had been circulated to the Members, was ADOPTED. and APPROVED:

“Approval of the Council is now sought in respect of the attendance of the delegates listed hereunder at the following approved conferences:

Association of Municipal Authorities of Ireland, Spring Seminar, The Holiday Inn, Letterkenny, Co. Donegal, 13 th – 14 th February

- Councillor Carrie Smyth - Councillor Jane Dillon Byrne - Councillor Gerry Horkan

Fingal County Council and Les Rescontres, “Arts and Culture – The Role of Local Authorities”, Swords, Co. Dublin, 29 th – 31 st January

- Councillor Niamh Bhreathnach

Mid-West Regional Authority, 10 th Annual Conference, Abbey Court Hotel, Nenagh, Co. Tipperary, 30 th January

- Councillor Carrie Smyth - Councillor Tony Fox - Councillor Pat Hand

National Conference on Renewable Energy, The Riverbank House Hotel, Wexford, 4 th – 6th February

- Councillor Louise Cosgrave

14 - Councillor Pat Hand - Councillor Bernie Lowe - Councillor Tony Kelly

Dublin & Mid-East Regional Authorities Information Seminar, Croke Park Conference Centre, Croke Park, 12 th February

- Councillor Tony Fox”

C/156/04 Report submitted in accordance with Part 8, Article 81 of Planning and Development Regulations, 2001

The following report of the Manager, copy of which had been circulated to the members, was CONSIDERED:

Proposed Housing Development of 105 dwellings at Hollywood Drive, Goatstown, Dublin 14 File No. PC/1/04

“This report is submitted pursuant to Article 134 of the Local Government (Planning and Development) Regulations 1994 and section 2(7) of the City and County Management (amendments) Act 1955. In accordance with Article 131 the County Council gave notice of the proposed development on 07/01/04 in The Irish Independent. Plans and particulars of the proposed development were available for inspection at the council’s offices in Dun Laoghaire and Dundrum up to and including 05/02/04. Submissions and observations in respect of the development were accepted up to 19/02/04.

Nature and Extent of the Development The proposal consists of the development of 105 no dwelling houses at Hollywood Drive, Goatstown. The site is located off the main Goatstown Road, to the rear (east) of Hollywood Drive and St Aidan’s Drive. The site is irregular in shape, with a narrow frontage onto Hollywood Drive between Nos. 23 and 29. The site then stretch’s northwards bounded on the east by the rear gardens of Heidelberg. The site is approx. 2.47ha. Access to the site will be via Hollywood Drive between no.s 23 and 29 Hollywood Drive. To the north east are a number of sports grounds through which the St. Helen’s Link Road will run and a large interchange is proposed.

The development proposes 105 no. dwellings and a community centre: • 6 one-storey one bed units, (house type N, P, O and H) • 67 two bed units, (house type D, D1, E, G1 all two- storey and house type L special needs: one storey), • 31 three bed units, (house type A: two-storey, house type M special needs: one storey) • and 1 two-storey four bed unit. (house type K) • community centre with community facilities and a creche at ground floor and an IT room, offices, kitchen, WC’s and interview room at first floor.

On a site of 2.47 ha, this results in a density of 42.5 units per ha.

Access to the site is via Hollywood Drive where a carriageway with an average width of 5m runs east. At this stretch of the road three units are proposed with four on street car parking spaces. At the end of these units to the south there is a gateway to the Dun Laoghaire / Rathdown County Council Parks recycling facility.

15 As the road veers north, there is a terrace of five units with on-street car parking and a triangular section of landscaped open space. A curved terrace of two storey units then follows the shape of the site. Along the western boundary of the site a set of four terraces with off street car parking fronts onto a further area of landscaped open space. To the east of this open space, the south-eastern corner, it is proposed to locate the community centre and nine dwelling units, two of which are special needs units.

Further rows of terraced units adjoin both the eastern and western boundaries of the site. On street car parking in communal groups is proposed for these units. At the northern tip of the development, the site narrows with two storey units located along the western boundary. These units have off-street car parking with front gardens. The eastern boundary of the site is soft landscaped at this location. This landscaped strip is directly overlooked by the houses. The development ends with a hammerhead cul-de- sac with two terraces grouped around a communal parking area.

All the proposed dwellings including those first floor units have a private open space to the rear. In addition 46 no. units have a private front garden.

The roadway will include two section of cobble-lock type paving, to assist with traffic calming within the Scheme. The proposed finishes of the houses include brickwork and smooth render on the front elevations with concrete roof tiles and timber windows. The proposed community centre is to be located in the south-eastern corner of the site adjacent to the road reservation. The Centre is to be finished in brickwork and smooth render, timber cladding and glass block on the elevations with powder coated aluminium windows and a flat roof.

121 car parking spaces are to be provided on site. Of these 46 are to be off-street car parking in the front gardens of the dwellings. These spaces are to be provided in front of house types A (three bed two storey) and E (two bed two storey). The remaining 75 spaces are on-street communal parking in front of a terrace of houses. In the south- eastern corner of the site where the community centre and two special needs apartments are to be provided, additional spaces are provided at the edge of an area of open space. Two spaces directly outside the special needs units should be reserved for parking for people with disabilities.

The site is to be bound by a 2.4m high wall. This wall will be clad in stone, with stone coping where the wall is visible to the public.

Implications with respect to the proper planning and development of the area In the 1998 Dun Laoghaire / Rathdown County development plan the site is zoned ‘A’ with the stated objective “to protect and / or improve residential amenity.” In the 2004 – 2010 this zoning is retained and a specific objective designating the site for a ‘County Council Housing Programme Site’ has been added.

The subject site is located in a mature suburban area. The area is largely characterised by large two storey detached and semi-detached single family residences on generous sites. The area is served by Dublin Bus with a bus stop at the entrance to the Hollywood Park Estate. The site is within walking distance of the Taney / Goatstown crossroads. There are a number of commercial activities concentrated at this crossroads, including a public house, an off-licence, a filling station with associated shop, men’s clothing store and furniture store.

Submissions / Observations 279 submissions have been received. In the main, the submissions are made up of a number of circular letters. These letters have been identified by a number, and are recorded below. Following the identification number are the issues raised, and the names and addresses of each signatory.

16

Letter No. 1 Issues raised: • Ghetto • Traffic • Additional exit needed • Premature pending road decision • Congestion

(Names & addresses withheld)

Letter No. 2 Issues: • Traffic • Not in compliance with Development Plan • Insufficient local infrastructure • No LAP • Premature pending interchange decision • Density too high • Social/affordable mix • Lack of open space • Too small rear gardens • Too small units

(Names & addresses withheld)

Letter No. 3 Issues: • No LAP • Mix of social/affordable • Gardens too small • Lack of private open space • Road too narrow • Insufficient car parking • Boundary wall too low • No QBC nearby

(Names & addresses withheld)

Letter No. 4 Issues: • Traffic • Density • Ghetto • Interchange decision

(Names & addresses withheld)

Letter No. 5 Issues: • Ghetto effect • Density too high • No details on environmental services

(Names & addresses withheld)

Letter No. 6 Issues: • Social/affordable mix • Lack of parking • Rear gardens too small • Road too narrow

17 (Names & addresses withheld)

Letter No. 7 Issues: • In breach of guidelines • Traffic • Amenity use of site • QBC

(Names & addresses withheld)

Letter No. 8 Issues: • Traffic • Density • Social/affordable mix

(Names & addresses withheld)

Letter No. 9 Issues: • Density • Ghetto effect • Premature pending interchange decision • Traffic

(Names & addresses withheld)

Letter No. 10 Issues: • Overlooking • Traffic • Ghetto effect • Layout for interchange not finalised

(Names & addresses withheld)

Letter No. 11 Issues: • Plan is premature • LAP needed • Traffic

(Names & addresses withheld)

Letter No. 12 Issues: • Layout does not conform to Development Plan • Access for emergency vehicles difficult • Development not to Development Plan standards • Too high density • Premature pending decision on QBC • Social/affordable mix • Open space • Rear Gardens too small

(Names & addresses withheld)

Letter No. 13 Issues: • Density too high • Traffic • Premature pending interchange decision • Ghetto effect

18

(Names & addresses withheld)

Miscellaneous Letters: Issues as above

(Names & addresses withheld)

Summary of Issues Raised during Public Consultation Process. § Density: 105 houses on 2.47ha equals 42.5 units per ha § Ghetto effect: § Mix of social and affordable housing: § Lack of a Local Area Plan: § Inadequate rear gardens § Overlooking: § Inadequate house sizes: § Green area is too small: § Too little Parking provided: § Amenity use of site, § No details of environmental services: § Boundary wall too low: § Insufficient local infrastructure: § Traffic / congestion: § Rat-running through St. Aidan’s Drive § Need for a second exit: § Access road is too narrow: § Interchange / development is premature pending road / QBC decision: Design Philosophy: Prior to dealing with the individual objections, it is useful to consider the basic design philosophy which informed the Scheme.

Primarily, the Scheme is designed to avail of a piece of Council owned land to provide housing for the growing number of people in our County who are without homes, while respecting the privacy of neighbouring dwellings.

Given that the site in question is long and narrow, the design philosophy throughout has been to provide security to the neighbouring gardens by having the new houses back onto them as far as possible. In addition, houses have been arranged to overlook the public open space. It was particularly important to protect the site access by locating houses alongside the entrance road. Although this meant that some rear gardens would be shallow (approximately 4 m), these houses (D1 type) have no rear windows at first floor level, thereby protecting the privacy of adjoining dwellings.

RESPONSE TO OBJECTIONS

Density: The scheme density is 42 units per hectare. This is not a low density, and it is accepted that it differs from existing housing in the vicinity. However, the site is largely self- contained, and the proposed scheme does not relate directly to the existing development. Therefore it will not detract from the appearance or layout of the surrounding residential development.

The proposal complies with the Residential Density Guidelines. In referring to “Inner Suburban/Infill” developments, the Guidelines state that the provision of additional dwellings within inner suburban areas of towns or cities, proximate to existing or due to be improved public transport corridors, has the potential for revitalizing areas by utilizing the capacity of existing social and physical infrastructure”. (Para 3.3.)

19 The Guidelines further state that potential infill residential sites may range from small gap infill, unused or derelict land and backland areas, up to larger residual sites assembled from a multiplicity of ownerships. In residential areas whose character is established by their density or architectural form, a balance has to be struck between the reasonable protection of the amenities and privacy of adjoining dwellings, the protection of established character, and the need to provide residential infill. The design approach should be based on a recognition of the need to protect the amenities of directly adjoining neighbours and the general character of the area and its amenities, ie, views, architectural quality, civic design, etc. However, subject to reasonable conformity with these, developments on infill sites, particularly those in excess of 0.5 hectares (1.2 acres) should be capable of proposing their own density and character.

It is considered that the proposed scheme for a self-contained backland site complies with these Guidelines by virtue of the layout, height, and house design. In addition, the density achieved in the design is balanced against the need to reduce the County’s growing list of people who urgently require housing. Overlooking: The houses where overlooking might have occurred have been designed without windows in the upper levels. No overlooking will be caused.

Social and Affordable Housing: The site has been zoned in the Draft Review of the Development Plan with the specific objective to provide “County Council Housing Programme Site.

Houses of Inadequate Size: All houses comply with required standards.

Ghetto. The Oxford English Dictionary definition of a “ghetto” is a part of a city, especially a slum area, occupied by a minority group. It is not accepted that this proposed development will result in a “ghetto”. The mix of housing units of varying size will accommodate a wide variety of families and individuals including people with disabilities, which will result in a community from diverse backgrounds. The Council in association with other organisations will provide a comprehensive pre tenancy/home advice training course for all new tenants in this development, which will cover areas such as their rights and responsibilities under the tenancy agreement, interior design, gardening, home and fire safety and personal development/adult education.

The provision of a community centre in this development, which will be supported by the Council’s Community Development Department, will assist the new and existing residents to develop a socially inclusive and vibrant community.

Drainage Issues. It has been commented that drainage details were not provided. In fact, drainage layout was illustrated during the Part 8 Public Consultation Process on Drawing No. 651/02, 03, and 09. In accordance with standard practice, all drainage works would be carried out under the supervision of the Environmental Services Department of the Council.

Lack of Car Parking: The Draft Review of the Development Plan sets out a requirement for 1-2 car parking spaces per residential unit. The basic requirement would therefore be 105 spaces. 121 spaces have been provided, and therefore the proposal is deemed to accord with the Draft County Development Plan.

Private Open Space/Inadequate Rear Gardens:

20 The “Residential Guidelines for Planning Authorities” state that for 1 and 2 bedroom houses an area of 48 sq. m. private open space should be provided; approximately 12 of our 2-bedroom units have rear gardens of approximately 40-45 sq. m. This marginal reduction in private open space in 12 of the 105 units has been justified by the necessity to provide secure overlooked open space as described above.

In reassessing the Scheme during the Part 8 Public Consultation process, particular attention was drawn to the limited garden space in three G1 type houses. Following discussions, it has been decided to recommend that these gardens be increased by the following method:

a) Reduction of length of terrace by removal of one mid-terrace D-Type unit to rere of No. 13 Heidelberg. This will allow the street layout and corner unit to be retained, while the space gained can be used to increase garden size of the G1 corner unit. b) Reduction of length of terrace by removal of one mid-terrace unit at rere of 72 St. Aidan’s Drive. Again, this will allow the street layout and corner unit to be retained, while the space gained can be used to increase garden size of the G1 Corner unit. c) Change layout in cul de sac, (at rere of 24 Heidelberg) to achieve greater distance from No. 24 Heidelberg. d) Amend boundaries of G1 house at rere of No. 9 Heidelberg to provide more rational layout. e) The effect of these changes would be the loss of two units from the scheme.

Height of Boundary Wall : The height of the wall has been mentioned as being insufficient. The wall would be 2.4 metres high, and it is considered that to provide a wall higher than that would be unduly oppressive.

Deficit in Public Open Space: The provision of public open space in the Scheme is slightly less than the generally required 10%. However, this is offset to a degree by the provision of a Community Centre, can provide alternative opportunities for recreational activity. Given our climatic conditions, the provision of buildings are of paramount importance in the encouragement of recreational activity. Active recreational activities based on open space are often limited among certain sectors of our population, for example, women, the elderly, the less physically able. Buildings offer more opportunity for recreational activities based on social interaction which in turn contribute to the building of community and identity.

Current Use of Site: The current uses on the site have always been recognised as temporary, given that the site was previously intended to be used as a road line. That objective was removed from the Development Plan by Council, who subsequently approved the objective “County Council Housing Programme Site”.

Lack of Local Infrastructure:

21 The site is in an inner suburb of the urban area, and the suburb has always existed satisfactorily with the degree of local infrastructure available to it. As noted already in the Residential Density Guidelines, it is entirely possible that the proposed development may generate additional community facilities in the area. It should be noted that the Draft Development Plan carries a revised zoning at the junction of Taney Road and Goatstown. This zoning would have the objective to “protect, provide for and improve Neighbourhood Centre Facilities”. It would be anticipated that additional local services would evolve at this junction. However, the development of local services/infrastructure depends on population growth, and in this context it is worth noting that the population of the Clonskeagh-Roebuck D.E.D. is practically static, and therefore militates against the development of local infrastructure.

Clonskeagh-Roebuck D.E.D. 1996 2002 Increase 1,789 1791 + 2 people (0.1%)

The D.E.D.’s gross population density is now 24 persons per hectare, or 9.7 persons per acre. Such population densities will be unable to deliver sufficient critical mass to sustain important urban functions – including public transport and retail use. The population reflects a general reduction in household size, which is falling from 3.37 persons per dwelling in 1996. It is likely that household size will continue to fall to European levels, ie., below 2 persons per dwelling, over the next twenty years. This predicted decline in household size will further reduce the gross population density to 14 persons per hectare - or 6 persons per acre.

In order to sustain existing population levels, it is therefore crucially important that the best use be made of those few remaining opportunities for residential infill development. Such considerations, along with the chronic housing shortage, constitute the social context within which the housing proposal should be viewed.

Roads Studies: Two Studies have been carried out in recent years to assess the potential of the site for use as a bus corridor. a) “Goatstown Area Bus Priority ”, Feasibility Report, by Colin Buchanan and Partners. September 2002. In its recommendations, the site is referred to as “abandoned highway alignment”, and the report states that “The abandoned highway alignment is not considered suitable for use as a bus link, particularly as this increase in highway network capacity will not be matched by improvements closer to the city centre. b) “Goatstown Bus Corridor Study ”, Dublin Transportation Office, Final Report. July 2003. This study was commissioned by DTO to identify the feasibility and economic basis for retaining the Abandoned Highway Alignment for use as a bus-only route forming part of the Quality Bus Network for the Greater Dublin Area. The study found that § The adoption of the AHA as a bus only link is not justified on economic grounds representing a net present year economic loss in excess of 7 M. Euro and a Benefit Cost Ratio in the region of 0.24. § The key conclusion is therefore that the proposal to adopt the AHA as a bus only route, although presenting an attractive concept, is not warranted from an economic perspective.

22 Quality Bus Network Transportation Department advises that the DTO “A Platform for Change” Strategy 2000- 2016 set out the proposed transportation strategy to meet the traffic requirements up to 2016. Part of this strategy includes the expansion of the bus network in the County. In the context of the proposed development, the implementation of bus priority measures on Clonskeagh, Lower Kilmacud, Mount Anville, Taney Roads and Fosters Avenue will increase the numbers of people using public transport.

Width of Road Within Development. A report from Transportation Department indicates that the proposed development comprises 105 dwellings. Much of the road network has housing on one side only. The carriageway width varies from 5 – 6 metres wide and provides for the safe movement of traffic entering and exiting the development.

Single Access The provision of a single access as shown on the proposed site layout drawing is acceptable to Traffic Section together with the completion of junction narrowing at Hollywood Drive and Hollywood Park, and the provision of traffic calming measures on Hollywood Park.

Wider Road Network. It is the opinion of the Department of Transportation that the traffic generated by the proposed development will not significantly increase the traffic on the public road network and will give rise to a minor increase in traffic congestion during the peak traffic periods.

Sandyford to St. Helen’s Link Road Scheme and Associated Interchange. The proposed development does not impinge on the proposed road alignment for the Sandyford to St. Helen’s Link Road Scheme and the associated interchange.

RECOMMENDATION This proposal is considered to accord with the proper planning and development of the area and is acceptable to the planning authority. It is recommended that the proposal is accepted subject to the following: • That the proposed changes to garden areas, boundaries and layout outlined above shall be implemented. • That adequate car parking space be reserved for residents with disabilities. • That adequate traffic calming measures shall be provided.”

Following discussion it was AGREED to DEFER consideration of this matter to the April meeting of the County Council.

C/157/04 Proposed Disposal of Properties

The following notice, copies of which had been circulated to the Members was CONSIDERED:

“COMHAIRLE CHONTAE DHUN LAOGHAIRE-RATH AN DUIN (D UN LAOGHAIRE -RATHDOWN COUNTY COUNCIL ).

TO EACH MEMBER OF THE DUN LAOGHAIRE-RATHDOWN COUNTY COUNCIL. LD 968

Proposed Disposal of Leasehold Interest in land at Rathsallagh Drive, Shankill, Co. Dublin to Oldbridge Properties Ltd .

23 An application was received from Oldbridge Properties Ltd. to acquire an area of land measuring circa 0.23 acres at Rathsallagh Drive, Shankill, Co. Dublin as shown delineated and highlighted on Drawing No. BS. 3002/225. The land is registered in the Land Registry, Co. Dublin to the Council under Folio No. 3171F. The land was acquired from Riall Estates and Broomfield Estates in 1973 for Residential and Industrial purposes.

The matter was then referred to the Chief Valuer who entered into negotiations with Oldbridge Properties Ltd. and agreed the following terms and conditions: -

1) Payment of the sum of €300,000 (three hundred thousand euro) by Oldbridge Properties Ltd. for the site, payable as follows:

i) 15% on the date of signing of the contract for this agreement payable within 1 month of Council’s approval. ii) 85% within 3 months of the date of signing of contract. Interest at the rate of 20% per annum shall apply to outstanding sums in the event of failure to comply with any of the above dates.

2) The property to be disposed of is shown outlined in red on Drawing No. BS. 3002/225.

3) The Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council Law Agent will forward an agreement for lease and Draft lease to Oldbridge Properties Ltd. within three months of the issuing of the requisite approvals and consents to the proposed disposal.

4) That the proposed development shall be in strictly accordance with planning permission already granted by order no. P/2890/02, which comprises the following:

i) To demolish the existing convenience store and the replacement of same with an enlarged shop and 11 no. apartments, consisting of three no.1 bedroom, seven no.2 bedroom and one no.3 bedroom apartments.

5) The proposed development which includes the subject site and the adjoining site owned by Oldbridge Properties Ltd. The applicants shall undertake not to use the site and adjoining land for any other purposes other than that of carrying out a development approved by the Planning Authority, which shall include commercial space on the ground, and not more than 11 apartments on the balance.

6) Building works must commence within three months of the Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council’s approval to dispose of the site and must be completed within a period of 18 months, from the date of entry on site. In the event of works not proceeding within the prescribed time period, then Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council shall have the right to terminate the agreement and any purchase monies shall be refunded without payment of interest.

7) Oldbridge Properties Ltd. shall at their cost, within 18 months of the date of entry on site, cover in complete fit for occupation, the approved development which shall be in conformity in every aspect with the plans, elevation sections and specifications with planning approval.

24 8) Oldbridge Properties Ltd. shall be liable for all fees, charges or contributions incidental to the undertaking and completion of the proposed development and all site preparation development associated costs incurred in the delivery of the entire development, particular regard being had to the services and archaeological requirement set out by the Planning Authority.

9) Oldbridge Properties Ltd. shall be responsible at their cost for the laying of the sewer pipe, as shown on enclosed drawing prepared by Terence Sweeney & Co.

10) The agreement for lease is not to operate as a lease, and shall not be transferable, save in the case of a financial institution which has entered into a mortgage with Oldbridge Properties Ltd., which mortgage must be approved by Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council in writing, and must have been entered into specifically for the purposes of financing Oldbridge Properties Ltd to undertake the approved development.

11) Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council reserves the right to re-enter on the site and assume possession thereof should Oldbridge Properties Ltd fail to commence and complete the development works within the specified period or in the event of the bankruptcy or in insolvency of the Oldbridge Properties, save in the case of a financial institutions which has entered into a mortgage with Oldbridge Properties for the purpose of financing the development of the site.

12) During the development period and pending the granting of the lease, Oldbridge Properties will insure the premises against fire and all other insurable risks with an approved insurance company and pay all necessary premiums.

The insurance shall be in the name of Oldbridge Properties and Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council and will be for such an amount as will provide cover for the full reinstatement value of so much of the building as is erected at any time together with a sum of professional fees and remove of debris charges.

13) Oldbridge Properties shall indemnify Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council against any claim for compensation which might/may be made by any third party arising out of building works being carried out to the property. Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council shall be indemnified and kept indemnified against all and any expenses, costs, claims, demands, damages and other liabilities whatsoever, in respect of injuring or death of any person or damage to property however arising directly or indirectly out of any work to be carried out to the subject sites to include site investigation works, excavation works and construction works by Oldbridge Properties, his servants, agents licensees and in relation to the user of the demises land.

14) As soon as developments have reached roof level stage with front elevation completed, and if the work has been carried out to the satisfaction of Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council, the County Council will grant Oldbridge Properties a lease of the property. The lease shall be for a term of 999 years (commencing from a date to be agreed upon), subject to a rent of €100 per annum.

On satisfactory completion of the development, Oldbridge Properties shall have an option of purchasing Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Councils

25 interest in the property for a sum of €1,000 (one thousand euro) plus legal costs of transfer.

15) That Oldbridge Properties shall satisfy Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council that sufficient funds are available for both the payment and the completion of the proposed undertaking agreed development. This information is required by 30 th July 2004.

Consents will not be given to requests following the receipt of the Councils necessary approvals and prior to the execution of contracts to changing the name of the purchaser to an associate non trading company or newly formed company.

16) Each party shall be responsible for their respective professional fees in this case.

17) The building covenant shall be complied with when the entire development has been completed in accordance with approved plans for which planning permission has been granted.

18) That no agreement enforceable at law is created or is intended to be created until an exchange of contract has taken place.

This proposed disposal will be tabled at the Dun Laoghaire Area Committee Meeting (Transportation, Economic Development and Planning) to be held on Monday 1st March 2004.

It is proposed to dispose of the Leasehold Interest in an area of land measuring circa 0.23 acres at Rathsallagh Drive, Shankill, Co. Dublin, as shown delineated and highlighted on Drawing No. BS. 3002/225, to Oldbridge Properties Ltd. in accordance with Section 211 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 and subject to the provisions of Section 183 of the Local Government Act 2001 on the Chief Valuer’s terms and conditions as aforementioned.

Dated this day of 2004. ______Derek Brady, County Manager”

It was proposed by Councillor L. Butler, seconded by Councillor B. Coffey and RESOLVED:

“That the disposal of the leasehold interest as set out in the above schedule be carried out in accordance with terms specified in the foregoing report.”

C/158/04 Proposed Disposal of Properties

The following notice, copies of which had been circulated to the Members was CONSIDERED:

“COMHAIRLE CHONTAE DHUN LAOGHAIRE-RATH AN DUIN (Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council).

TO EACH MEMBER OF THE DUN LAOGHAIRE-RATHDOWN COUNTY COUNCIL.

Proposed disposal of interest in area of land at Irish Christian Brothers lands at Monkstown (releasing of restrictive covenant)

26

An application was received from the Irish Christian Brothers, Monkstown for the release of a restrictive covenant held by the Council on an area of land measuring circa 0.55 hectares/1.4 acres at Monkstown, Co. Dublin, as shown delineated and highlighted on Drawing No. LD 1047/1. The land is the subject of a Deed of Exchange dated 29 th December, 1958 between the former Dun Laoghaire Corporation, the trustees of the Irish Christian Brothers and the persons who were then the fee simple owners of the Longford/de Vesci Estate.

The matter was referred to the Chief Valuer who entered into negotiations and agreed the following terms and conditions: -

1) The Christian Brothers hold the land, together with other land by deed of exchange dated 29 th December 1958, and the title contains a covenant restricting the use for the purposes of a school only.

2) The proposed release from the restrictive covenant is in respect of the land shown outlined in red on the attached map.

3) As consideration for the above release from the restrictive covenant, the County Council and the Longford and de Vesci Estate, who also hold an equal restrictive covenant on the land, shall share equally one third of the disposal price of the land in the open market, after professional fees incurred in applying for planning permission are deducted from the full open market value.

4) It is agreed between the parties that the subject land shall be put up for public sale and be fully marketed and advertised, in order to achieve the full market value of the land, which shall then be allocated after these enhancement costs are deducted in the proportions of two thirds to the Christian Brothers, and one third to be shared equally between the Council and the Longford and de Vesci Estate.

5) Each party shall be responsible for their respective professional fees incurred in the implementation of this proposal.

6) These terms are subject to satisfactory proof of title.

7) Please note that no agreement enforceable at law is created or is intended to be created until an exchange of contract has taken place.

The relevant Council service departments have no objections to this disposal. This proposed disposal will be tabled at the Dun Laoghaire Area Committee Meeting (Transportation, Economic Development and Planning) to be held on Monday 1 st March 2004.

It is proposed to release a restrictive covenant held by the Council on an area of land measuring circa 0.55 hectares / 1.4 acres at Monkstown, Co. Dublin, as shown delineated and highlighted on Drawing No LD 1047/1 in accordance with Section 211 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 and subject to the provisions of Section 183 of the Local Government Act 2001 on the Chief Valuer’s terms and conditions as aforementioned.

Dated this day of February 2004. ______Derek Brady, County Manager”

27 Following discussion it was proposed by Councillor B. Coffey seconded by Councillor H. Keogh and RESOLVED:

“That the Manager defer the disposal of interest in land owned by the Christian Brothers at Monkstown indefinitely to ensure that discussions take place with all relevant parties affected by this disposal.”

C/159/04 Proposed Disposal of Porperties

The following notice, copies of which had been circulated to the Members was CONSIDERED:

“COMHAIRLE CHONTAE DHUN LAOGHAIRE-RATH AN DUIN (D UN LAOGHAIRE -RATHDOWN COUNTY COUNCIL )

TO EACH MEMBER OF THE DUN LAOGHAIRE-RATHDOWN COUNTY COUNCIL

LD 1057

Proposed Disposal of dwelling at (Address Withheld)

The dwelling at (Address Withheld) is a Council owned property. During the period 1998/1999 it was necessary to carry out substantial structural works to this property as a result of movement of the structure of the dwelling. While the work was being carried out at (Address Withheld), the owners of the adjoining property, (Address Withheld), instituted legal proceedings on the grounds that the structural faults at no. 1 had caused problems of a structural nature to occur at their property. The claim against the Council included damages for breach of duty, structural repairs to no. 2, further or other relief, costs etc.

Following negotiation with the legal representatives of the owners of (Address Withheld), it was recommended by the Law Department that the most effective way to resolve the issue was for the Council to acquire the dwelling at (Address Withheld), and this proposal was acceptable to the owners of the property.

Accordingly, the dwelling was acquired by the Council from (Names Withheld) in September 2001, for market value pertaining at the time of acquisition i.e. €273,000 (£215,000). It is registered to the Council in Land Registry, Co Dublin under Folio No. 70019F. The site is shown delineated on Drawing No. 3457-03.

The property was referred to Maher Gleeson Estates Ltd. for private treaty sale in June 2003 in order to recoup costs to the Council. An offer of €275,000 had been accepted by the Council, on the advice of the auctioneers. This proposed disposal was passed by resolution of the Council on the 8 th December 2003. However, the purchaser, (Name Withheld), declined to proceed with the sale.

An offer of €280,755 has now been received from (Name and Address Withheld) and our auctioneers, Maher Gleeson Estates Ltd. recommend acceptance of this offer.

It is, therefore, proposed to proceed with the sale of the Council’s Interest in (Address Withheld), at a sale price of €280,755 to (Name Withheld).

It is proposed to dispose of a dwelling at (Address Withheld), as shown delineated and highlighted on Drawing No. 3457-03, to (Name Withheld) at a sale price of €280,755, in accordance with Section 211 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 and subject to the provisions of Section 183 of the Local Government Act 2001.

28

Dated day 2004 ______Derek Brady, County Manager”

A discussion took place during which Councillors D. O’Callaghan and C. Smyth expressed their opposition to the disposal of this dwelling. Mr. E. Condon, Administrative Officer and Mr. D. Brady, County Manager responded to Members queries.

A roll call vote on the disposal was called for the result of which was as follows:

COUNCILLORS: FOR AGAINST ABSTAINED Bhreathnach, Niamh Boyhan, Victor √ Butler, Larry √ Coffey, Betty √ Conway, Barry √ Corrigan Maria Cosgrave, Liam T. Cosgrave, Louise Costello, Eoin Culhane, Aidan Dillon Byrne, Jane √ Dockrell, William √ Elliott, Mary √ Fox, Tony Hand, Pat Horkan, Gerry √ Ireland, Kealin √ Joyce, Tom √ Kelly, Tony √ Keogh, Helen √ Lowe, Bernie √ Marren, Donal √ Matthews, Trevor √ Murphy, Tom √ O’Callaghan, Denis √ O’Malley, Chris √ Saul, Barry √ Smyth, Carrie √ 16 4

It was proposed by An Cathaoirleach Councillor T. Matthews, seconded by Councillor L. Butler and RESOLVED:

“That the disposal of the leasehold interest as set out in the above schedule be carried out in accordance with terms specified in the foregoing report.”

C/160/04 Proposed Disposal of Properties

The following notice, copies of which had been circulated to the Members was CONSIDERED:

“COMHAIRLE CHONTAE DHUN LAOGHAIRE-RATH AN DUIN

29 (Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council)

TO EACH MEMBER OF THE DUN LAOGHAIRE-RATHDOWN COUNTY COUNCIL LD 816

Proposed Disposal of 39.48 square metres of land at the rear of (Address Withheld)

An application was received from (Names Withheld) to acquire an area of land measuring circa 39.48 square metres at the rear of (Address Withheld), as shown delineated and highlighted on Drawing No. 330/02. The land is registered in the Land Registry, Co. Dublin to the Council under Folio 56774F. The land was acquired from (Name Withheld) and McGovern Estates in 1973 for housing purposes. The matter was then referred to the Chief Valuer who entered into negotiations with (Names Withheld) and agreed the following terms and conditions: -

(1) That full and final settlement shall be in the sum of €2,000 (two thousand euro) (2) That the plot of ground to be disposed of comprises 39.48 square metres as shown coloured red on Drawing No. 330/02. (3) That the title to be conveyed shall be the Fee Simple Interest. (4) That each party to this transaction shall be responsible for their own legal costs. (5) That each party to this transaction shall be by way of contract subject to a payment of 10% deposit of the disposal price within 21 days of notification of the ensuing requisite approvals and consents to the disposal. The balance of the purchase price to be paid within two months from the date of signing the contract. (6) No agreement enforceable at law is created or intended to be created until exchange of contracts has taken place.

It is proposed to dispose of the Fee Simple Interest in the area of land measuring circa 39.48 square metres at rear of (Address Withheld), as shown delineated and highlighted on Drawing No. 330/02, to (Names Withheld), in accordance with Section 211 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 and subject to the provisions of Section 183 of the Local Government Act 2001 on the Chief Valuer’s terms and conditions as aforementioned.

Dated this day of 2004. ______Derek Brady, CountyManager”

It was proposed by Councillor L. Butler, seconded by Councillor T. Kelly and RESOLVED:

“That the disposal of the fee simple interest as set out in the above schedule be carried out in accordance with terms specified in the foregoing report.”

C/161/04 Proposed Disposal of Properties

The following notice, copies of which had been circulated to the Members was CONSIDERED:

“COMHAIRLE CHONTAE DHUN LAOGHAIRE-RATH AN DUIN (Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council)

30 TO EACH MEMBER OF THE DUN LAOGHAIRE-RATHDOWN COUNTY COUNCIL LD 1096

Proposed discharging of Deed of Covenant between Dublin County Council and (Name Withheld) on lands of (Address Withheld)

(Name Withheld) was granted planning permission under the Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1963 for the building of three dwellings on his lands at (Address Withheld). As a condition of the grant of planning permission, (Name Withheld) was required to submit to the Planning Authority, a legally binding Indenture that the lands in his ownership, as shown delineated and highlighted on Drawing No. B.S. 3334/6, would be sterilized from further building. To implement this condition, a Deed of Covenant was executed on the 6 th April, 1967 between Dublin County Council and (Name Withheld). Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council is the successor in title to Dublin County Council.

Dunloe Ewart Ltd. purchased (Name Withheld) interest in the subject lands which are now zoned E1-‘to provide for the development of a Science and Technology Park’ in the Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council Development Plan 1998. Dunloe Ewart Ltd. who are developing a Science and Technology and Office Park on its lands, including the subject lands, at Cherrywood have requested a discharge from the Deed of Covenant

In a High Court Judicial Review between Langrath Properties Limited and Bray Urban District Council, the Justice ruled, inter alia, that ‘ when the proper planning of the area no longer requires that the restriction be retained the land must be freed of the impediment to development’.

The Council’s Law Agent has advised that the Council has no option but to formally discharge this Covenant. All costs and expenses of the Council to be recovered from Dunloe Ewart Ltd.

Accordingly, it is proposed to formally discharge the Covenant on the subject lands at (Address Withheld), as shown delineated on Drawing No. B.S. 3004/6 in accordance with Section 211 of The Planning and Development Act 2000 and subject to the provisions of Section 183 of The Local Government Act, 2001.

______Dated this day of 2004 Derek Brady, County Manager”

It was proposed by An Cathaoirleach, Councillor T. Matthews, seconded by Councillor L. Butler and RESOLVED:

“That the disposal of the fee simple interest as set out in the above schedule be carried out in accordance with terms specified in the foregoing report.”

C/162/04 New Works, Acceptance of Tenders, etc.

18 units at St. Anne’s Park, Shankill, Co. Dublin.

The following report of the Manager, copy of which had been circulated to the Members, was AGREED :

“Tenders were invited by public advertisement for the construction of 18 houses at St. Anne’s Park, Shankill, Co. Dublin.

31

By the closing date for receipt of tenders, 12 th November, 2003, 6 no. valid tenders had been received.

Following examination of the tenders by the Consultant Quantity Surveyor for the scheme, the lowest tender, in the sum of €2,623,640.00 including VAT from William F. Rowley Ltd., 4A Villa Park Road, Blackhorse Avenue, Dublin 7 was approved subject to the approval of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.

Sanction was received from the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government on the 26 th January, 2004.

Negotiations are being finalised with the Contractor and it is expected that the contract will be signed and work will commence in the coming weeks.”

C/163/04 STRATEGIC POLICY COMMITTEES - REPORT OF CHAIRPERSONS

The reports of the Chairpersons of the Strategic Policy Committees were NOTED.

C/164/04 Strategic Policy Committees - Report of Chairpersons and Recommendations of SPC

Water Conservation for Future Housing Programmes

The following recommendation from the Strategic Policy Committee copy of which had been circulated to the members was CONSIDERED;

“That this County Council through it’s Environment Policy Committee recommend that in all future building house programmes, that a dual flushing system be included in all toilet designs from here on in.”

The following report of the Manager, copy of which was circulated to the Members, was AGREED:

“The Water Section are currently progressing the drafting of Water Bye-Laws which would provide for a range of water conservation measures, including reduced flush WCs. Such Bye-Laws are likely to be more effective than recommendations. Water Bye-Laws introduced recently by Dublin City Council will be used as a model for the new Bye-Laws in the interest of regional uniformity and more effective implementation.

The Architects Department of this Council have advised that the introduction of reduced flush WCs is a worthy conservation measure. They support the proposal that the specification of all housing produced by this Council will in the future incorporate this innovation. The introduction of a Bye-Law supporting it’s introduction will assist the Council’s Architects Department in pursuing the matter.”

C/165/04 Ministerial/Departmental Correspondence

It was NOTED there was no business under this heading.

C/166/04 Other Correspondence

32 The following items of correspondence, which had been circulated to the Members, were CONSIDERED and NOTED:

(a) Letter from Cashel Town Council, dated 9 February 2004, regarding a notice of motion that Irish be recognised as an official language of the E.U. (b) Letter from Clones Town Council, dated 9 February 2004, regarding a notice of motion on the extension of voting rights in the 2004 Presidential Election to citizens living in the North of Ireland. (c) Letter from Ennis Town Council, dated 9 February 2004, regarding a notice of motion on the status of the Irish language within the enlarged E.U. (d) Letter from Wicklow County Council, dated 9 February 2004, regarding the Draft Wicklow Heritage Plan. (e) Letter from Galway City Council, dated 11 February 2004, regarding a notice of motion on the introduction of an access certification process for buildings. (f) Letter from Fingal County Council, dated 12 February 2004, regarding a notice of motions on the human rights of Falun Gong practitioners. (g) Letter from South Tipperary County Council, dated 12 February 2004, regarding a notice of motion on a regulation for non-party candidates for the Local Elections. (h) Letter from Clonmel Borough Council, dated 16 February 2004, regarding a notice of motion on financial donations from the corporate sector to political parties. (i) Letter from Kilkee Town Council, dated 17 February 2004, regarding a notice of motions on: the Hanley Report; and the recognition of Irish as an Official Language of the E.U.

C/167/04 Policy Motion - Minuting of Pre-Planning Meetings

It was proposed by Councillor V. Boyhan and seconded by Councillor D. O’Callaghan and RESOLVED:

“That the Council review/examine policy in relation to establishing that all pre-planning meetings be minuted and that these minutes/memos would be attached to the public planning file on same prior to the determination of the planning application.”

C/168/04 Jackson Way lands at Carrickmines

It was proposed by Councillor D. O’Callaghan and seconded by Councillor A. Culhane:

“That this Council agrees that any compensation payment due under the arbitration hearing on the acquisition by the Council of a portion of the lands for the M50 motorway known as the Jackson Way Lands at Carrickmines be withheld by the Manager pending the Flood Tribunal report on the matter.”

The following report of the Manager, copy of which had been circulated to the Members, was CONSIDERED :

“The Arbitrator’s award was issued on the 14 th of November 2003, in the total sum of €12,860,700. The landowner is required to prove his/her title to the satisfaction of the Council and the Council is required by law to discharge the award.

Furthermore, the National Roads Authority has indicated that no payment is to be made until it is also satisfied that the beneficial owners have been properly identified and the financial implications of the covenant on the land have been decided either by the Court or by the Property Arbitrator.

Title has recently been submitted and is currently being examined by the Law Agent.”

33 Councillor D. O’Callaghan proposed an amendment to his motion to replace the word ‘Flood’ with ‘Mahon’.

A discussion took place following which Mr. D. Brady, County Manager gave a comprehensive account of the background to this case.

Councillor O’Callaghan then put forward an addendum to his motion to read as follows:

“….That the Manager seek Ministerial Direction on the matter regarding payment of the award, that any payment be made in public in the Council Chamber and that no payment takes place until the report of the Mahon Tribunal on the Jackson Way lands is made public.”

Mr. Brady advised the Members that the remedy would be a High Court Order rather than Ministerial Direction. He agreed to brief the Council before any payment is made.

The motion was NOT PUT . The Manager’s report was AGREED .

C/169/04 Official Status of Irish in the EU

It was proposed by Councillor C. Smyth and seconded by Councillor D. Marren:

“That this Council supports the campaign for the official status of Irish in the European Union and that we will communicate this to the Taoiseach, Minister Brian Cowen (Minister for Foreign Affairs), Minister Eamon O Cuiv (Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs), and Minister Dick Roche (Minister of State with special responsibility for European Affairs).”

The following report of the Manager, copy of which had been circulated to the Members, was NOTED .

“If the motion is passed, a letter conveying details of the motion, will be sent to the Taoiseach, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Minister for Community, Rural & Gaeltacht Affairs, and the Minister of State for European Affairs.”

C/170/04 Extension of Meeting

As it was not 8.00pm it was agreed to extend the meeting to finalise consideration of this item.

C/171/04 Official Status of Irish in the EU continued

The motion was PUT and AGREED .

C/172/04 Re-Entering of Items

It was agreed to re-enter Item Nos. 23 and 33 to 53 inclusive for the April meeting of the County Council.

C/173/04 Conclusion of Meeting

The meeting concluded at 8.03 p.m.

34