John Gormley TD recently held a public meeting in Ringsend Community Centre on the proposed framework plan for the Poolbeg peninsula. In general, he welcomes the preparation of a framework plan for the Poolbeg peninsula but feels that any development should only be allowed to take place if it meets the needs of the local community.

John Gormley says: “In the absence of a plan, we can expect the future of the Poolbeg area to be developer-led, which will be to the detriment of the local community and the needs of the city at large.”

The following is an extract from the submission made by John Gormley on behalf of the Green Party/Comhaontas Glas.

Presentation of plan
There is a lack of clarity in the plan as currently presented. It consists of two documents, the 2002 Strategic Development Framework, and the 2003 Poolbeg Framework Plan.

Recommendation: The plan should be revised to comprise a single document.

Public transport and traffic
The most obvious difficulty with the plan as it stands is that it provides no solution to the transport deficit that will arise with any new development in the area.

Recommendation: The scope of the plan should be widened to identify sources of funding for public transport solutions other than development levies. Input from central government and public transport agencies should be sought.

Proposed bridge between Britain Quay and York Road

No reference to a proposed bridge is contained in the 2002 plan, but in the 2003 plan, this bridge is shown as forming part of the “Main Route” into the area, also called the “Poolbeg Procession”. This bridge is included in the 2005 Dublin City Development Plan as a potential bridge for pedestrians, cyclists and public transport.

Recommendation: The plan should specify that any bridge at this location will be for pedestrians and cyclists and rail-based public transport only.
Flooding

Coastal communities in Dublin Bay are susceptible to serious flooding, and development on any part of the Bay will have an impact on the likelihood of floods.

Recommendation: A flooding impact study must be carried out and proposals for development amended accordingly.

Soil contamination
Given the history of the use of the area as landfill, it seems likely that problems will arise in terms of soil contamination. If the sites are not properly decontaminated, serious health problems will arise.

Recommendation: The plan should include an assessment of the issues surrounding soil contamination, and set appropriate standards for decontamination.

Community Gain
The plan as it stands has not attempted to identify the forms of community gain which should arise from any development. Although a portion of any levies derived from development should be used for community facilities, it would seem appropriate to attempt to identify what these facilities might be in the plan itself.

Recommendation: A separate exercise should be undertaken to seek input from existing communities on what new community facilities should be provided.

Social & Affordable Housing
The plan should have as one of its aims the provision of social and affordable housing, with a view to maintaining existing communities. The plan must specifically address how any new development will be integrated with existing communities.

Recommendation: The plan should include specific targets for the provision of social and affordable housing units.

Schools
Improvements of existing schools and the development of new school buildings should be part of the plan. In addition, the provision of playgrounds and sports facilities must be included.

Recommendation: Phasing of residential development must be explicitly tied to improvements in educational, sporting and play facilities. No development should go ahead before the issue of waiting lists in local schools is addressed.

Protection of wildlife
The importance of the wildlife in this area has been recognised by the designation by the EU of a Special Protection Area (SPA) for rare and threatened European bird species and their habitats and a Special Area of Conservation (SAC) for plants, animals and wildlife habitats of EU importance. The importance of these habitats indicates that conservation should form an integral part of any plan for the area.

Recommendation: The plan should not be adopted before a comprehensive ecological and conservation study has been completed.