Councillors Banner Councillors
Default text size Large text size Extra large text size High contrast text

Home : Corporate Services : Corporate Services : Council Meetings : Kildare County Council Meetings : 2010 : Minutes



Print this Document

KILDARE COUNTY COUNCIL

Minutes of Monthly Meeting
held at 2.00 p.m. on Monday, 25 January 2010 at
Áras Chill Dara, Devoy Park, Naas, Co Kildare

Members Present: Councillor C Purcell (Mayor); Councillors F Browne, K Byrne,
W Callaghan, R Daly, L Doyle, S Doyle, S Griffin, P Kennedy, P Kelly,
S Langan, A Lawlor, P McEvoy, J McGinley, P MacNamara, M Miley,
S Moore, C Murphy, M Nolan, T O’Donnell, F O’Loughlin, D. Scully,
M Wall and B Weld.

Apologies:  Councillor M Heydon.

Also Present: Mr M Malone, County Manager, Messrs J Boland, J Lahart, P Minnock (Director of Services), Mr M O’Leary (Acting Director of Services),
C Talbot (Meetings Administrator) and other officials.

_________________________


1/0110
Votes of Sympathy

In memory of the late former Councillor Jim Keane, the Mayor adjourned the meeting for 15 minutes.

The Mayor, group leaders, members and County Manager extended their sympathy to former Councillor Keane’s wife Helen and his family on their recent bereavement.  The members remembered Councillor Keane fondly and remarked on the work he had done for his constituents during his time as a member of the Council, adding that he will be sadly missed by his family, friends and neighbours. 

The Mayor and members expressed sympathy with Eileen Doyle, Corporate Services, on the death of her mother.


2/0110
Confirmation of Minutes

As not all members had an opportunity to read minutes of council meeting of 21 December 2009 and budget meeting of 7 December 2009, circulated by e-mail, it was agreed to defer this item to the February meeting.

3/0110
Committee Minutes

The Council considered the committee minutes which had been circulated with the agenda.

Celbridge Area – 3 December 2009
Naas Area – 17 November 2009 

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor Callaghan, seconded by Councillor Murphy, that the minutes be noted.


4/0110
Quarterly Report on Regional Authority

Councillor McGinley reported on the work of the Mid-East Regional Authority, which comprises representatives from Kildare, Meath and Wicklow.  He stated that the Authority meets on a monthly basis and has held joint meetings with the Dublin Authority with regard to the Regional Planning Guidelines.  It had been agreed that the Mid-East Regional Authority would prepare an Economic Strategy for the region as an appendix to the Regional Planning Guidelines.  He added that the draft guidelines had been agreed on 15 December 2009 and were currently on display and open for submissions from the public.  Councillor Kelly noted the increasing importance and influence of the Regional Planning Guidelines.  Councillor McEvoy and Councillor Griffin made reference to changes to the Transport Authority, which would impact on the region. 


5/0110
Recent Cold Weather Conditions
Anti-Flooding Measures

The Manager stated that he considered it important that these items be listed on the agenda for discussion as they had received a lot of public and media attention in recent weeks.  He informed the members that under normal circumstances a system is put in place to deal with winter maintenance from mid-October to mid-April.  He noted, however, that since 11 December staff had been dealing with unprecedented instances of floods, freezing conditions and snow, which had put pressure on resources.  He acknowledged the assistance provided by other agencies including the Civil Defence, Army, Gardai and HSE. 

Ms Patricia McNeela, Civil Defence Officer, made a presentation to the members in relation to the work of the Kildare Civil Defence.  She outlined the origins and structure of the Civil Defence and made reference to current membership numbers, the duties undertaken and the equipment at their disposal.  She referred in particular to how Kildare Civil Defence assisted in dealing with instances of flooding in the county over recent weeks.  She made reference to flooding events which had occurred in both Athy and Sallins and set out some of the duties carried out.  She acknowledged assistance provided by both Dublin and Laois Civil Defence in dealing with the flooding in Sallins. 

Mr Damien McNulty, Kildare Area Engineer, made a presentation to the members in relation to Winter Road Maintenance.  He set out the role of the duty engineer and noted the equipment available to assist in monitoring current and forecasted road conditions.  He advised the members that, based on information provided and best practice, decisions can be made on the treatment measures required.  He highlighted the salting routes throughout the county, which amount to 762 km of roads.  He outlined the resources available to deal with winter weather conditions, with particular reference to equipment.  He also advised the members in relation to current road conditions highlighting problems arising from recent bad weather.

Mr Joe Boland, Director of Services, updated the members in relation to anti-flooding measures being carried out throughout the county.  He referred to the fact that a separate unit had been established within the Water Services Section to deal with flood relief and also made reference to the 6 year flood relief programme which was in place and noted that a lot of this work had already been implemented.  He acknowledged the assistance provided to the team by the members and also noted the importance of local knowledge in dealing with matters relating to flooding.  He referred to the collaborative arrangements that were in place with other agencies, including the OPW, who had funded a major element of the capital programme.  Mr Boland also made reference to problems that had arisen with the water supply as a result of the recent freezing weather conditions.  He noted that a lot of advice had been made available on the Council’s website.  He highlighted the importance of water conservation and the need to focus on leak detection and repair.  He added that the Water and Environmental Services Strategic Policy Committee would be giving further consideration to the issue of water conservation.

In conjunction with this item the council considered the following motion in the names of Councillors Murphy, McEvoy, Moore and Kennedy:
This Council sets aside time to discuss the Council’s response to the recent flooding events  (some happened on 30 December) and the severe weather conditions over Christmas and the early new year. That we consider what was positive and negative about the interaction with other organisations/ agencies and which organisation had lead agency responsibility; what lessons can be learned; what resources were available as against what resources were required including infrastructure weaknesses and future investment needs; we consider how robust our emergency planning is and we encourage a debriefing of first line responders.

 
Councillor Murphy stressed the need to capture and analyse local information arising from the recent severe weather conditions in order to make improvements for the future.  She added that, in considering proposals for any future development in the county, information was needed with regard to the availability of water to facilitate such development.  She requested that in future all bus routes be included in the salting route and asked that an assessment of damage to roads be carried out.  She added that the availability of resources was a key issue for the local authority, suggesting that current resources could not meet public expectations.

The council also considered the following motion in the name of Councillor Nolan:
We seek a report to this council, on how roads were gritted over the Christmas and New Year period which roads in County Kildare were prioritised for this programme and namely which roads were not treated at all. We also seek an update as to how often the road network in the county was gritted over this period of time, and if the council had enough supplies of grit for the project.

Councillor Nolan noted that weather conditions during the winter of 2008/09 were also severe at times and asked as to whether this had been taken into account when preparing for winter 2009/10.  He requested clarification as to whether salt can be stockpiled going forward for next winter.

Councillor McGinley condemned insurance companies who advised their customers to leave taps running and proposed that a letter be sent to the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government recommending that such action be made illegal.  This proposal was seconded by Councillor MacNamara.

The members thanked the staff for the work that had been done to deal with the freezing weather conditions, snow and floods.  Mr Talbot was also thanked for the PR job he had done to keep people informed.

The following issues were raised during the course of the discussion:

Road Conditions
• Legal position with regard to clearing of footpaths outside an individual’s home or premises needs to be clarified.
• Provide salt at locations throughout the county in order that communities can salt secondary roads themselves.
• Estimate cost of road repairs arising from recent bad weather conditions.
• Can additional funding be sourced from the NRA for the motorways.
• What impact is there on the work programme for 2010 arising from the costs associated with increased requirements for salt and the road repairs required as a result of the bad weather.
• Consider use of salt boxes in housing estates.
• Consider use of quad bikes with blades and gritters to de-ice footpaths.
• Put information re salting routes on website.
• Use of motorway advisory signage should be introduced.
• Engage with agricultural contractors to assist with gritting of roads.

Water
• Incorporate more information on website advising people how to save water and how to deal with a situation where they have no water, including information with regard to unfreezing the water at the stopcock.
• Water pipes in some instances, particularly in new developments, are located too close to the surface which caused them to freeze.  This matter should be checked by Building Control prior to taking estates in charge.
• Look at mechanisms for encouraging rainwater catchment schemes where non-treated water could be utilised.
• What effect will the Barrow Abstraction Scheme have on dependency for water from other local authorities and when will this scheme be up and running.
• Use of telemetry systems to capture data, particularly to provide early warning of possible flooding.
• Lack of maintenance of drains and watercourses on lands throughout the county needs to be addressed.  Need to consider reintroduction of Drainage Boards.
• Consider use of floodgates.

Miscellaneous
• Consider use of twitter to provide pubic information.
• Provide training to local voluntary groups, possibly through the Civil Defence, to help people help themselves if similar situations arise in the future.

Councillor Weld stated that he had difficulty contacting the Council by telephone and suggested that consideration needed to be given to improving the telephone system.  In reply, Mr Talbot made reference to the volume of telephone calls handled during the freezing weather conditions and resulting water shortages. 

Mr O’Leary replied to queries raised in relation to roads stating that there would be de-briefing both at a local and high level and that any changes considered necessary as a result will be incorporated into the Emergency Plan and other areas.  He informed the members that an assessment of costs incurred to date was currently being carried out together with an assessment of road repairs now required to be carried out. 

Mr Boland replied to queries raised in relation to water.  He updated the members in relation to the Barrow Abstraction Scheme and advised the members that he was hopeful of presenting a draft programme for flood relief measures in February.  He added that emergency arrangements were being reviewed and any necessary improvements would be made.

6/0110


To consider the Manager’s Report on the proposed amendments to the
Draft Collinstown Local Area Plan 2009

The Manager’s report dated 18 December 2009 had been circulated to the members, noting that two submissions had been received during the display period of the amendments to the Collinstown Local Area Plan.  The amendments were on display from 29 October 2009 to 25 November 2009 in accordance with Section 20 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended).  The report outlined a summary of the issues raised in the submissions received as follows:

Submission No 1 – Councillor Catherine Murphy
(i) It is noted that Amendment 4 proposes lower densities adjacent to Glen Easton.  It is submitted that the lower densities should be at all perimeters of the site increasing with proximity to the train station.
(ii) Amendment 12 notes densities should be lower at the perimeter of the entire site – amend objective MTC1 to reflect this.
(iii) Clarity around number of units required.
Manager’s Response
(i) It is considered that the wording of the proposed amendment is adequate to address concerns of increasing densities at the boundaries of existing estates. It is not considered reasonable to request lower densities at all perimeters of the site as to do would not be in accordance with the principles of proper planning and sustainable development. 
(ii) As per 1) above
(iii) The number of units in this objective (MTC1) reflects the number of units to be provided on the entire site i.e. 851. The change is as a result of the omission of the various zonings – i.e. the original zoning ‘C’ proposed a number of residential units but because the entire site is now zoned ‘A’ the number of units within the zoning ‘A’ comprises the numbers originally proposed in both ‘C’ and ‘A’.
Manager’s Recommendation
No change.

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor Murphy, seconded by Councillor McGinley, with all members present in favour, to accept the Manager’s recommendation.

Submission No 2 – McGill Planning on behalf of Bennett Construction
(i) Welcome the inclusion of warehouse and light industrial uses within the permissible uses for zone ‘A’ but suggest that direction is provided on the location of industry and warehousing as per the original Draft Plan.
(ii) Phase 1 Railway station – it is suggested that the specific reference to requiring the development of the railway station as part of phase 1 is removed as there is concern that Irish Rail are unlikely to agree to a train station in the short term.
(iii) Prescribed building height – 2-4 storey height is overly restrictive and it should be left to Masterplan stage to determine the overall height.
Manager’s Response
(i) The specific location of these uses shall be agreed as part of the preparation of a Masterplan.
(ii) The development of the train station will ensure the principles of sustainable mobility are fully adhered to from the outset.
(iii) The identification of heights provides the public and developers alike clarity about the height of development considered appropriate in certain areas of the plan lands.
Manager’s Recommendation
No change.

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor Murphy, seconded by Councillor McGinley, with all members present in favour, to accept the Manager’s recommendation.

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor Kelly, seconded by Councillor Murphy, with all 18 members present voting in favour, that the Collinstown Local Area Plan 2009 is hereby made, pursuant to Section 20 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended), as agreed by the members of Kildare County Council at their meeting of 25 January 2010. 


7/0110
To consider the Manager’s Report on the proposed amendments to the
Draft Leixlip Local Area Plan 2009

The Manager’s report dated 18 December 2009 had been circulated to the members, noting that eight submissions had been received during the display period of the amendments to the Leixlip Local Area Plan.  The amendments were on display from 29 October 2009 to 25 November 2009 in accordance with Section 20 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended).  The report outlined a summary of the issues raised in the submissions received as follows:

Submission No 1 – Michael Ryan
Copy of submission received in July 2009, which requested that the proposed new road to connect Captains Hill to Mill Lane is reconsidered as it could undermine the Main Street of Leixlip and would better serve the community if zoned for a green area or park.
Manager’s Response
This submission does not refer to any of the proposed amendments and therefore cannot be considered at this stage
Manager’s Recommendation
No change.

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor McGinley, seconded by Councillor Griffin, with all members present in favour, that the Manager’s recommendation be accepted.

Submission No 2 – Sean McNamara, Tom Downey, Pete Shinners
Supports the amendment proposed to include lands identified as ‘C4’ for low density residential housing.
Manager’s Response
Noted.
Manager’s Recommendation
No change to the Draft Local Area Plan with the subject lands remaining outside of the Draft LAP boundary and remaining under the control of the County Development Plan.

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor Griffin, seconded by Councillor Nolan, with all members present in favour, that the Manager’s recommendation be rejected and that the subject lands be zoned “C” (New Residential) to accommodate low density housing only.

Submission No 3 and 4 – Jacobs International on behalf of Intel

Submission 3 raises concerns that lands proposed as ‘T’ allows for residential development.  (Amendment L7a refers).
Manager’s Response
Noted.  Land uses either ‘permitted in principle’, ‘open for consideration’ or ‘not permitted’ under land use zoning ‘T’ shall be reviewed having regard to the submission received.
Manager’s Recommendation
Retain the ‘T’ zonings in Table 16 of the Draft Local Area Plan with respect to the subject lands except for the following changes:
‘N’ (Not permitted) – Dwelling, guesthouse/hotel/hostel, nursing home, comparison shop, cinema/dancehall/disco.
‘O’ (Open for consideration) – Garages/panel beating and car repairs, workshops, restaurant, school, convenience shop, warehouse (wholesale), repository/store/depot, industry (light)

Submission 4 requests that a small parcel of land be included for zoning as part of proposed amendment L6 i.e. ‘H’ (Industrial & Warehousing).  (See Appendix A)
Manager’s Response
This submission requests that the lands comprising L6 be extended in a south-easterly direction to include a small parcel of land in this direction. To do so would reflect the existing industrial uses on the site. It is considered reasonable to include those lands as requested given the very limited extent of the area and to reflect its current use as part of an industrial development.
Manager’s Recommendation
To amend the Land Use Zoning Map to include the subject lands.

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor Murphy, seconded by Councillor McGinley, with all members present in favour, that the Manager’s recommendation be accepted in relation to both submissions 3 and 4.

Submission No 5 – Declan Brassil on behalf of the Liffey Valley House Hotel and Submission No 8 – David Mulcahy on behalf of Mr John Waldron and Ms Maureen Chaloner-Smith

Submission number 5 relates to the lands that the Liffey Valley House Hotel are located on. The proposed change to the zoning to ‘T1 – General Development’ is noted but request that permitted uses include ‘Nursing Home and Assisted Living’.
Manager’s Response
Land uses considered ‘Open for Consideration’ are uses that are not considered acceptable in principle in all parts of the relevant use zone.  Hence a list of uses ‘Open for Consideration’ was proposed for the land use. It is considered acceptable that a Nursing Home is added to the list of uses that are ‘Open for Consideration’ but due to site access constraints ‘assisted living’ units are not recommended.
Manager’s Recommendation
Recommend including ‘Nursing Home’ as a use ‘Open for Consideration’ for Land Use T1 and amending Table 16 to reflect this change.  Due to site access constraints ‘assisted living’ units are not recommended as part of the T1 zoning.
Given the location of lands zoned ‘T1’ in relation to the wastewater treatment plant to the south east, the footprint of any proposed developments will only be considered in the vicinity of the Liffey Valley House Hotel or to the south west of the site in the area north of the existing dwelling units to the north of Mill Lane.  Development on lands zoned ‘T1’ shall have due regard to the preservation of amenities in the area and shall be appropriate in scale and form having regard to the sensitive location of the lands.
In addition, it is proposed to amend the ‘offices’ as listed in the Zoning Matrix for lands zoned ‘T1’ to indicate that offices shall only be permissible where they are ancillary to the main uses of this site as either a hotel or a nursing home

Submission number 8 requests that a portion of their land be zoned ‘E – Community and Education’ for the uses of a Nursing Home as per the original Managers Report. It is noted within the submission that the location of the WWTP should not be a reason to prevent the use of the land for the purpose of a Nursing Home.
 
Manager’s Response
Land uses considered ‘Open for Consideration’ are uses that are not considered acceptable in principle in all parts of the relevant use zone.  Hence a list of uses ‘Open for Consideration’ was proposed for the land use. It is considered acceptable that a Nursing Home is added to the list of uses that are ‘Open for Consideration’ but due to site access constraints ‘assisted living’ units are not recommended.
Manager’s Recommendation
Given the proposed location of the nursing home in a valley that is vulnerable to flooding and also due to its proximity to the wastewater treatment plant and the area proposed for the extension of this plant, it is not considered appropriate to support the development of a nursing home at this location. 

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor Kelly, seconded by Councillor Murphy, with all members present in favour, that the Manager’s recommendation be accepted in relation to submissions 5 and 8.

Submission No 6 – Councillor Catherine Murphy and
Submission No 7 – Kieran Rush, Ballymore Group

Submission number 6 requests that:
(i) Objective H1 is amended to remove ‘Offices’ as a use ‘Permitted in Principle’ for land zoned C2.
(ii) Amendment 11 and amendment 13 are condensed into one amendment.  Both amendments refer to traffic calming with amendment 11 specifically referring to Riverforest and amendment 13 referring to Leixlip
Manager’s Response
(i) This submission does not refer to any of the proposed amendments and therefore cannot be considered at this stage
(ii) Amendment 13 as proposed should suffice for all traffic calming measures throughout Leixlip and Amendment 11 is already addressed therein
Manager’s Recommendation
(i) No Change
(ii) Amend TR6 as proposed by Amendment 13 and omit Amendment 11.

Submission number 7 welcomes the insertion of the proposed objective to carry out a study on lands north of Cope Bridge under amendment number 8.  They also request:
(i) Amended wording ‘It shall be an objective of the Council to liaise with Fingal and Meath Local Authorities and within two years of the adoption of this Local Area Plan to complete undertake a study for those lands north of Cope Bridge with a view to identifying suitable land uses for this area, given their proximity to Confey Station'.
 

(ii) They request that the following additional objectives are added ‘It shall be an objective of the Council to upgrade Captains Hill road through the introduction of traffic calming and other measures so as to enhance its capacity and safety for all road users', and
(iii) 'It shall be an objective of the Council to upgrade Cope Bridge so as to enhance its capacity and improve safety to cater for possible future development north of the
Manager’s Response
(i) As this study involves the close co-operation of other Local Authorities and other public bodies, it would not be possible to place a completion time frame on this study.
(ii & iii) The key item that affects capacity on Captains Hill is the signalised junction with Main Street, the differences in level on Captains Hill, the presence of two schools on Captains Hill and a number of large housing estates.
The provision of traffic calming measures and infrastructure improvements on Captains Hill and Cope Bridge will not result in a capacity improvement of sufficient magnitude to incorporate the volumes of pedestrian and vehicular traffic that will be generated by development north of Cope Bridge.
Development of lands north of Cope Bridge would result in additional traffic being added to the road network that would further detrimentally affect the capacity of the road network.
The likely cost involved in the provision of all the measures that will be required is significant and is beyond the current financial capabilities
Manager’s Recommendation
No change.

Councillor Murphy noted that there would be staff commitment required in order to ensure that timescales were not overrun.  Mr Kenny agreed and stated that this will be reflected in the County Development Plan.

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor Murphy, seconded by Councillor Kelly, with all members present in favour, that the Manager’s recommendation be accepted in relation to submissions 6 and 7.

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor McGinley, seconded by Councillor Murphy, with all 18 members present voting in favour, that the Leixlip Local Area Plan 2009 is hereby made, pursuant to Section 20 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended), to incorporate the amendments proposed and agreed by the members of Kildare County Council at their meeting of 25 January 2010. 

 

8/0110
To consider the Manager’s Report on the proposed amendments to the
Draft Celbridge Local Area Plan 2009

The Manager’s report dated 18 December 2009 had been circulated to the members, noting that twenty five submissions had been received during the display period of the amendments to the Celbridge Local Area Plan.  The amendments were on display from 29 October 2009 to 25 November 2009 in accordance with Section 20 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended).  The report outlined a summary of the issues raised in the submissions received as follows:

Submission No 1 – Councillor John McGinley
Submissions refers to Map Amendment M1: The road objective between St Wolstans Secondary School and the River Liffey should be removed.
Manager’s Response
It is considered appropriate and in the interest of the proper transportation infrastructure of the town to retain the proposed roads objective shown as Map Amendment M1.  That this objective could facilitate the development of an inner relief road for the town from the Clane Road to the Ardclough Road.
Manager’s Recommendation
No change.

Councillor McGinley proposed that the road objective between St Wolstans secondary school and the River Liffey be removed.  This proposal was seconded by Councillor MacNamara.  Mr O’Leary advised the members that, in the interests of keeping all options open to the Transportation Department for the future improvement of the road network in Celbridge that the proposed road objective should be retained.  Councillor Griffin proposed that both road objectives be retained in accordance with the Manager’s recommendation and Councillor Murphy agreed. 

Councillor McGinley’s motion was defeated with 4 members in favour of removing the proposed road objective and 14 members against.  Accordingly the proposed road objective was retained.

Submission No 2 – Cliona Murphy
The submission proposes the extension of Map Amendment M4 to include additional lands for Existing Residential purposes.  As outlined in submissions map.
 
Manager’s Response
It is considered appropriate to propose the zoning of these lands as per Map Amendment M4 as the development in this area is consistent with a low-density residential area. However a further extension of this zoned land into an agricultural area outside the Local Area Plan boundary is not in the interests of the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
Manager’s Recommendation
No change to proposed Map Amendment M4

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor Byrne, seconded by Councillor McGinley, with all members present in favour, that the Manager’s recommendation be rejected and that map amendment M4 be extended to include additional lands as “B” (Existing Residential).

Submission No 3 – Mairead Byrne, Celbridge Community Council
The submission proposes:
(i) That change number 2 (which describes the future parameters for development at Donaghcumper in relation to proposed residential development in the area) be removed and replaced with “based upon a population of 20,970 by 2016 no additional residential zoning is required”.
(ii) That proposed change number 5 (which is a description of the Transportation situation in the town proposed to be included in Part A of the LAP) be altered to omit objective TR 3 (proposed road between Main Street and the Dublin Road with an associated bridge over the River Liffey) of the Draft LAP, as there is no technical evidence to support this.
(iii) That proposed change number 18 (objective to provide a pedestrian bridge across the Liffey) be removed, as there is no logical reason for it.
(iv) That proposed change number 21 (objective to utilise the lands at Celbridge Abbey as an Amenity Park) is weak.
(v) That proposed change number 25 (to delete text relating to the treatment of the lands adjacent to the River Liffey in Donaghcumper) is unnecessary without technical evaluation of the possible implications
Manager’s Response
(i) It is considered reasonable to retain proposed change number 2 as it describes the requirements for residential development on the Town Centre Extension lands in Donaghcumper.
(ii) TR 3 of the Draft LAP is not the subject of an amendment and therefore cannot be
altered or removed at this stage.  Proposed change number 5 provides and up to date picture of the transportation situation in the town and it is proposed to retain this change.
 

(iii) Proposed change number 18 requires the inclusion of objective “PC 7 To facilitate the
provision of a pedestrian bridge across the River Liffey”. It is considered appropriate to propose this objective in order to provide pedestrian linkages between the Main Street and the proposed Town Centre Expansion Area in tandem with the future development of this area.
(iv) Proposed change number 21 proposes objective “AR 13 To investigate the possibility of utilising the lands around Celbridge Abbey for an Amenity Park”. It is considered that this objective is sufficient to commence a process with the relevant stakeholders to investigate whether it is possible and agreeable to develop the lands for this use.
(v) Proposed change number 21 proposes the deletion of text detailing the treatment of lands along the riparian zone of the Liffey at Donaghcumper.  It is considered appropriate to retain this deletion as proposed changes number 10, 12, 13 and 27 provide for the appropriate treatment of development along the river corridors in relation to ecology and flood risk.
Manager’s Recommendation
(i) No change.
(ii) No change.
(iii) No change.
(iv) No change.
(v) No change.

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor Byrne, seconded by Councillor McGinley, with all members present in favour, that the Manager’s recommendation be accepted.

Submission No 4 – Brady Shipman Martin on behalf of O’Flynn Construction Co Ltd
The submission proposes the inclusion of the following text in section 8.3 of proposed change number 3 “The Council will, therefore prepare an Action Area Plan for the undeveloped part of the Toni River catchment within the town boundary at Oldtown.  The Action Area Plan will make provision for future development within the town boundary while ensuring that surface water attenuation is provided in the most efficient and sustainable way”
Manager’s Response
Proposed change number 3 provides an up date description of water and wastewater infrastructure in Celbridge. It is proposed to include this in Section A.  This section does not provide objectives for the appropriate development of Celbridge.  Part B Objectives of the LAP includes the specific objectives. It is therefore not considered appropriate to include an objective for the development of land in this section of the LAP. In addition it is recommended that these lands should not be considered for future development until flooding issues have been resolved in the area and until there is a need for residential development in the town, which is not the case at present.
 
Manager’s Recommendation
No change.

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor Byrne, seconded by Councillor McGinley, with all members present in favour, that the Manager’s recommendation be accepted.

Submission No 5 – Ben and Carol Briscoe
(i) The submission is concerned with the proposed density of the New Residential lands on the Ardclough Road.  It references proposed change number 30, however proposed change number 33 is the relevant change.  The submission proposes a reduction in residential density to 5/6 houses in total due to flooding concerns.
(ii) The submission proposes that proposed change number 13 include the Pausdeen Stream.
(iii) The submission states that proposed change number 19 (objective AR 4 to investigate the possibility of providing walkways and boardwalks along both banks of the river etc) would interfere with ecology of the area.
(iv) The submission proposes that proposed change number 33 be amended to also provide for footpaths from Dangan Corner to Chelmsford.
Manager’s Response
(i) The residential density proposed for this site is in line with the relevant Planning Guidelines: “Sustainable Residential Development in Urban Areas” and the “Urban Design Manual A Best Practice Guide” and is therefore considered appropriate.  Proposed Changes No 10, 12, 13 and 27 provide for the appropriate treatment of development along the river corridors in relation to ecology and flood risk.
(ii) Noted.  It is considered appropriate to reword objective FL1 proposed change number 13.
(iii) It is considered that this objective AR 4 proposed change number 19 is appropriate to investigate the provision of boardwalks along the Liffey as this proposed change and Proposed Change 26 and 27 provide for proper ecological assessment prior to development taking place.
(iv) Noted.  It is considered appropriate to amend the first sentence of proposed change number 33 and proposed change number 34.
Manager’s Recommendation
(i) No change.
(ii) To reword FL 1 proposed change number 13 as follows: “FL1 Buffer Zones shall be created between all watercourses and new development, including the River Liffey. The extent of these buffer zones shall be determined in consultation with a qualified ecologist and following a Flood Risk Assessment. Any hard landscaping proposals shall be located outside of any buffer zone areas.”
(iii) No change
 

(iv) To reword the first sentence of proposed change number 33 and proposed change number 34 as follows: “No development shall take place on the zoned land on the Ardclough Road prior to the reconstruction of the Ardclough Road where necessary from the LAP boundary to the Town Centre, including the provision of satisfactory footpaths and public lighting”

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor Byrne, seconded by Councillor McGinley, with all members present in favour, that the Manager’s recommendation be accepted.

Submission No 6 – Terry & O’Flanagan on behalf of Celbridge Golf and Leisure Co Ltd
The submission proposes the zoning of lands currently outside the LAP boundary along the Dublin Road at Ballyoulster for “E” ‘Community and Educational’ purposes to reflect its existing use as a recreational facility.
Manager’s Response
As this submission does not relate to a proposed amendment it cannot be considered at this stage in the Local Area Plan process.  The submission relates to lands well outside the LAP boundary and may be considered as part of the review of the County Development Plan.
Manager’s Recommendation
No change.

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor Byrne, seconded by Councillor McGinley, with all members present in favour, that the Manager’s recommendation be accepted.

Submission No 7 – Group Design Architects on behalf of Longport Developments
The submission proposes the alteration of proposed Map Amendment M5 (proposed change number 29 also applies to this site) as follows: To increase the extent of Map Amendment M5 to include all “H” ‘Industrial & Warehousing’ lands in the locality and to zone these lands “R” ‘Retail & Commercial’ or another zoning appropriate for providing a high quality gateway. The submission also states that other lands zoned appear erroneous and would likely render the plan liable to legal challenge on the grounds of administrative unreasonableness.
Manager’s Response
It is not considered necessary to zone this site as it is contrary to the Retail Planning Guidelines published by the DOEHLG for Planning Authorities and the Kildare County Development Plan 2005-2011.  In addition there is no justified need for additional Retail/ Commercial zoned land at this location far removed from the core retail area.  A considerable amount of Retail/Commercial zoned land in Celbridge which are contiguous to the existing core retail area are not yet developed.  Other areas zoned Retail/Commercial are to facilitate neighbourhood centre developments and there is already a site to facilitate this purpose on the Maynooth road which is deemed more appropriate
Manager’s Recommendation
To reject Map Amendment M5 and to revert the zoning of these lands to H” ‘Industrial & Warehousing’ and to reject proposed change number 29 and proposed change number 32.

Ms Shinners read the following briefing note for the information of the members:

Sequential Approach
Development of the nature proposed at the location proposed would be contrary to the objectives of the Sequential Approach, which is a key principle in the Retail Planning Guidelines, the Retail Strategy for the Greater Dublin Area (2008), The Draft Regional Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area 2010-2022 and the strategic policy framework underpinning retail planning in the Kildare County Development Plan 2005-2011.

Specifically, sections 58 & 59 of the Retail Planning Guidelines state the following:
‘The preferred location for new retail development where practicable and viable, is within a town centre…where it is not possible to provide the form and scale of development that is required on a site within the town centre then consideration can be given to a site on the edge of the town centre so as to encourage the possibility of one journey serving several purposes. An edge of centre site, for the purposes of these guidelines, is taken to be one which is within an easy and convenient walking distance from the primary shopping core of a town centre. The distance considered to be convenient will vary according to local circumstances but typically is unlikely to be much more than 300-400 metres from the edge of the prime shopping area. Having assessed the size, availability, accessibility, and feasibility of developing both sites and premises, firstly within a town centre and secondly on the edge of a town centre, alternative out of centre sites should be considered only where it can be demonstrated that there are no town centre or edge of centre sites which are suitable, viable and available. This is commonly known as the sequential approach to the location of retail development’.

In accordance with the Sequential Approach as clearly outlined in the Retail Planning Guidelines, the zoning of lands at a distance of 2.5 kilometres or 2,500 metres from the centre of Celbridge far exceeds the Guidelines recommended approach of between 300-400 metres and is not recommended.

‘NRA Policy Statement on Development Management and Access to National Roads’ (May 2006)
Retail development at the location proposed would also be contrary to the national policy where there is a presumption against large retail centres located adjacent or close to existing, new or planned national roads/motorways. The proposed lands are located close to a motorway interchange on the M4 Motorway.

Suitably zoned town centre lands
Regard must also be had to c. 9ha of land at Donaghcumper, which are currently zoned ‘Retail/Commercial’. These lands are suitably located in close proximity to the town centre and are as yet undeveloped. The development of these lands would accord with the Sequential Approach and the development of these lands should occur in the first instance. The zoning of additional lands for retail development should only be considered ‘only where it can be demonstrated that there are no town centre or edge of centre sites which are suitable, viable and available’ (Planning Guidelines). This has not been demonstrated in the case of the subject lands and as such the zoning of these lands is not recommended.

Conclusion
Having regard to all of the above, it is not considered necessary to zone the subject lands for ‘Retail/Commercial’ purposes as there is no justified need for such development at a location far removed from the core retail area. Furthermore, in accordance with all of the aforementioned planning related documents including the ‘Retail Planning Guidelines’ published by the DoEHLG, the Sequential Approach will have been ignored should the subject lands be zoned for the proposed land use. It is strongly recommended that the proposed rezoning is not adopted.

Councillor Murphy proposed that 5.5 acres to the front of the lands (submission number 7) identified on the attached map, be zoned Retail and Commercial.  In the context of the Local Area Plan we removed Retail and Commercial in close proximity.  That this site is in close proximity to a school with in excess of 800 students and is in close proximity to in excess of close to 1,000 houses.  It is also in an area in close proximity to what is now the major entrance to Celbridge, a town that has underperformed in terms of retail space.  This proposal was seconded by Councillor Kelly.  Councillor Byrne stated that he was in agreement with Councillor Murphy’s proposal and that additional retail space was required in Celbridge.

Mr Kenny reiterated the points raised in the briefing document read to the members by Ms Shinners stating that the proposal was contrary to national guidelines.  He also referred to land which had been zoned on the Lucan Road for retail/commercial development.  He advised strongly that the proposal to zone land for retail/commercial development on the edge of the town not proceed.

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor Murphy, seconded by Councillor Kelly, with all 18 members present in favour, that the Manager’s recommendation be rejected and that 5.5 acres to the front of the lands referenced in submission number 7 be zoned Retail and Commercial.

Submission No 8 – Paul C Mealy Architects on behalf of David Behan
This submission relates to Map Amendment M9 and associated proposed change number 28.  It is requested to prepare an Action Area Plan for the development of the lands outlined in Map Amendment M9 and the adjoining lands to ensure that any future development does not prejudice the future development of adjoining lands.  The submission proposes additional consultation with adjoining landowners in relation to the development of the lands subject to Map Amendment M9 if an Action Area Plan is not acceptable to the Council.
Manager’s Response
It is not considered appropriate to prepare an Action Area Plan or provide for additional consultation in relation to the lands in this locality as proposed change number 28 ensures that the development potential of adjoining lands will not be impinged upon by the development of lands incorporated in Map Amendment M9 as consultation with the Transportation Section of Kildare County Council is required with respect to access on and through the site.  On foot of submission number 22 in relation to said Map Amendment a design brief similar to the ones included in the Draft LAP has been prepared for this site and is included in Appendix 1.  This design brief will inform the appropriate development of the site.
Manager’s Recommendation
No change.

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor McGinley, seconded by Councillor Kelly, with all members present in favour, that the Manager’s recommendation be accepted.

Submission No 9 – Fiona Gallagher
Submission No 10 – Kevin Duffy
Submission No 11 – Mickey Armstrong
Submission No 12 – Paul O’Rafferty
Submission No 13 – Lorcan Ryan
Submission No 14 – Yevonne Norris
Submission No 15 – Maura Farrell
Submission No 16 – Patsy Farrell
Submission No 17 – Tina McDonald
Submission No 18 – Thomas Byrne
Submission No 19 – Valerie McCabe
Submission No 20 – Denis Sloyan
Submissions number 9-20 all relate to Map Amendment M5 and proposed change number 29.  The submissions consider that the land use zoning “H” ‘Industrial & Warehousing” is inappropriate in this location and that it would be better suited to retail.
Manager’s Response
See response to submission number 7.
Manager’s Recommendation
See recommendation to submission number 7.

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor Murphy, seconded by Councillor McGinley, with all members present in favour, that the Manager’s recommendation in relation to submissions 9 –20 be rejected in favour of the resolution agreed by the members in relation to submission number 7.

Submission No 21 – Douglas Hyde & Associates on behalf of Martin Donovan
The submission relates to proposed change number 34.  The submission proposes that the following wording be included in the proposed change in relation to future development at Simmonstown.  “The Provision of a safe access from the Grove area to the zoned lands at S town lands at Simmonstown, together with the provision of satisfactory footpaths and public lighting are necessary requirements for the development of the Simmonstown Lands”
Manager’s Response
It is considered that the Manager’s Recommendation provided as a result of submission number 5 is sufficient to cater for the concerns raised in this submission. .
Manager’s Recommendation
Recommendation in relation to Submission number 5 (iv) applies in this instance

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor Murphy, seconded by Councillor Griffin, with all members present in favour, that the Manager’s recommendation be accepted.

Submission No 22 – Councillor Paul Kelly
The submission proposes that a detailed design brief be carried out for Map Amendment M9 (proposed change number 28 also applies)
Manager’s Response
Agreed.
Manager’s Recommendation
The detailed Design Brief Associated with Map Amendment M9 and proposed change number 28 is included in Appendix 1 and is proposed to be included in Section 3 of Part C of the Local Area Plan.

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor Kelly, seconded by Councillor Murphy, with all members present in favour, that the Manager’s recommendation be accepted.

Submission No 23 – Jeanne Meldon, Celbridge Action Alliance
(i) The submission supports the following proposed changes, 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21 and 22.
(ii) The submission proposes that the following text be included at the start of proposed change number 13: “As a minimum, an 80m buffer Zone”.
(iii) Proposes that “but” be changed to “and” in objective PC 2, proposed change number
16.
(iv) In relation to proposed change number 19, provision should be made by the inclusion
of the following wording: “are fully compatible with the maintenance of private space”. In order to ensure that private residential use remains a feature of Celbridge Main Street.
 

(v) The submission strongly objects to the deletion of text as part of proposed change number 25, these lands were ceded to Kildare County Council to facilitate a park and therefore should remain zoned Open Space and Amenity and should not permit development in future.
(vi) The submission proposes that the second sentence of proposed change number 29 be omitted and that proposed change number 32 be omitted in its entirety, as the uses open for consideration are unacceptable at this location
Manager’s Response
(i) Noted
(ii) The recommendation and proposed rewording of objective FL1 (noted above in submission No 5) are deemed sufficient to cater for the treatment of buffer zones along the watercourses as these zones are decided upon following an ecological and flood risk assessment.
(iii) Agreed.
(iv) It is not considered necessary to alter proposed change number 19 in this instance as it caters adequately for ecological considerations and also the rights of private landowners in the vicinity will be protected when the possibility of providing boardwalks is being investigated.
(v) It is considered appropriate to retain this deletion as proposed changes number 10,
12, 13 and 27 provide for the appropriate treatment of development along the river corridors in relation to ecology and flood risk.  The Land Use Zoning of these lands will remain Open Space and Amenity and all proposed development on these lands shall be consistent with the land use zoning objective.
(vI) Agreed. “H” ‘Industrial and Warehousing’ is considered to be the appropriate Land Use Zoning for this site
Manager’s Recommendation
(i) No change
(ii) Recommendation in relation to submission number 5 (ii) applies in this instance.
(iii) To change “but” to “and” in objective PC 2 of proposed change number 16.
(iv) No change
(v) No change
(vi) To revert the zoning of these lands to H” ‘Industrial & Warehousing’ and to reject proposed change number 29 and proposed change number 32

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor McGinley, seconded by Councillor Murphy, with all members present in favour, that the Manager’s recommendation be accepted.
 

Submission No 24 – Councillor Catherine Murphy
(i) The submission suggests in relation to proposed change number 2 that the LAP express its desire to downzone the lands at Donaghcumper.
(ii) In relation to proposed change number 12, that in the absence of the Liffey Catchment Flood Risk and Management System Study (Liffey CFRAMS) that a preliminary report is produced identifying problem areas.
(iii) In relation to proposed change number 24, that Celbridge’s position in the retail hierarchy be clearly stated in the LAP.
(iv) Proposed changes number 33 and 34 should be altered to provide for road improvements, footpaths and lighting from Chelmsford to The Liffey Bridge.
Manager’s Response
(i) It is considered reasonable to retain proposed change number 2 as it describes the requirements for residential development on the Town Centre Extension lands in Donaghcumper.  The residential and retail/commercial zoned land in Donaghcumper cannot de downzoned as this may leave the Council open to a compensation claim as the provision in the Act for downzoning is more robust for actual development plans.
(ii) This is not considered necessary as the Flood Map included in the Draft LAP which has been informed by the OPW website identifies areas of previous flooding. Also the reworded objective FL1 recommended on foot of submission number 5 provides for appropriate development in proximity to watercourses.  
(iii) This is not considered necessary, as the Kildare County Retail hierarchy will be
detailed in the County Retail Strategy to be included in the new County Development Plan, which is currently being prepared.
(iv) Agreed it is considered appropriate to amend the first sentence of proposed change number 33 and proposed change number 34 as follows.
Manager’s Recommendation
(i) No change
(ii) Recommendation in relation to submission number 5 (ii) applies in this instance.
(iii) No change
(iv) Recommendation in relation to submission number 5 (iv) applies in this instance.

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor Murphy, seconded by Councillor Byrne, with all members present in favour, that the Manager’s recommendation be accepted.

Submission No 25 – Michael J McCann
The submission relates to Map Amendment M5 and proposed change number 29.  The submission feels that the land use zoning “H” ‘Industrial & Warehousing” is inappropriate in this location and that it would be better suited to retail or residential.
Manager’s Response
See response to submission number 7.
Manager’s Recommendation
See recommendation to submission number 7.

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor Byrne, seconded by Councillor Murphy, with all members present in favour, that the Manager’s recommendation in relation to submission number 25 be rejected in favour of the resolution agreed by the members in relation to submission number 7.

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor Murphy, seconded by Councillor Kelly, with all 19 members present voting in favour, that the Celbridge Local Area Plan 2009 is hereby made, pursuant to Section 20 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended), to incorporate the amendments proposed and agreed by the members of Kildare County Council at their meeting of 25 January 2010. 


09/0110
Water Supply Agreement with Naas Town Council

The council considered a report dated 21 January 2010 from the Water Services Department, recommending that Kildare County Council enters into an agreement with Naas Town Council, pursuant to Section 85 of the Local Government Act 2001, for the purpose of enabling Naas Town Council to carry out the functions of a Sanitary Authority in relation to water supply and sewerage services in its administrative area for the period 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2010.

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor Nolan, seconded by Councillor Moore, that Kildare County Council enters into an agreement with Naas Town Council, pursuant to Section 85 of the Local Government Act 2001, for the purpose of enabling Naas Town Council to carry out the functions of a Sanitary Authority in relation to water supply and sewerage services in its administrative area for the period 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2010.


10/0110
Water Supply Agreement with Athy Town Council

The council considered a report dated 21 January 2010 from the Water Services Department, recommending that Kildare County Council enters into an agreement with Athy Town Council, pursuant to Section 85 of the Local Government Act 2001, for the purpose of enabling Athy Town Council to carry out the functions of a Sanitary Authority in relation to water supply and sewerage services in its administrative area for the period 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2010.
 

Resolved on the proposal of Councillor Nolan, seconded by Councillor Moore, that Kildare County Council enters into an agreement with Athy Town Council, pursuant to Section 85 of the Local Government Act 2001, for the purpose of enabling Athy Town Council to carry out the functions of a Sanitary Authority in relation to water supply and sewerage services in its administrative area for the period 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2010.


11/0110
Correspondence

The council noted receipt of the following correspondence:

• Letter from the Dublin Regional Authority requesting agreement to attend the February meeting of the Council to consult the members in relation to the Regional Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area.  Agreed.
• Letter from the Department of Education and Science acknowledging receipt of our letter regarding the processing of application s for higher education grants.  Noted.
• Letter from Limerick County Council referring to our letter dated 14 October 2009 regarding the transfer of control over the allocation of roads funding, confirming the support of the members of Limerick County Council to the sentiments expressed in the letter.  Noted.
• Letter from the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs in response to our letter regarding the Community Development Programme.  A copy of the letter was circulated with the Progress Report.  Noted.


12/0110
Conferences

The meetings administrator advised the members that the Protocol Committee, together with the Group Leaders, had discussed notice of a number of conferences.  It had been agreed that members should be represented at the Local Authority Members Association, Association of Municipal Authorities of Ireland and Association of County and City Councils Conferences.  The Protocol Committee will consider this matter further at their meeting in February.

 12-13 February 2010
AMAI Spring Seminar
Perspectives on National Recovery
Venue: Sligo Park Hotel
Cost per delegate: €600
Nomination: Councillor Kevin Byrne.

 4-5 March 2010
ACCC Annual Conference
Rebuilding confidence in urban and rural communities
Venue: Ballykisteen HotelLimerick Junction
Cost per delegate: €600
Nomination: Councillor Kevin Byrne, Councillor Anthony Lawlor.

9-10 April 2010
LAMA Annual Conference
Councillors Role in Changing Climate
Venue: Sligo Park Hotel, Sligo
Cost per delegate: €600
Nomination: Councillor Kevin Byrne.

 

13/0110
Other Business

Councillor S Doyle stated that she was dissatisfied with the response from the Planning Department, contained in the Progress Report, in relation to commencement of preparation of the Kildare Local Area Plan.  She added that this response was contrary to a previous report received from the Department.  It was agreed that a further report be prepared by the Planning Department and incorporated into the Progress Report for the next meeting.

Councillor Callaghan informed the members that former Councillor Frank English was ill at present and was joined by the Mayor and fellow members in wishing him well.

____

The meeting concluded.