DOC

Forward Planning Template Version 1

By Edward Miller,2014-04-05 02:42
7 views 0
That a policy statement be included that will permit the Council to take an Investment in infrastructure will be related to the settlement hierarchy in

Minutes of Special Planning Meeting of Kildare County

    Council on Monday 12th October at 10am in Áras Chill Dara Present were: Councillors C. Purcell (Mayor), S. Griffin, B. Weld, T. Lawlor, D. Scully, S. Lanigan, K. Byrne, J. McGinley, F. Browne, M. Wall, P. McEvoy, P. Kennedy, S. Moore, C. Murphy, S. Doyle, P. Kelly, L. Doyle, M. Heydon, M. Nolan, F. O‟Loughlin, M. Miley, R. Daly, W. Callaghan

Apologies: Cllr. T. O‟Donnell

    Also present: M. Malone Co. Manager, J. Lahart DOS, M. Kenny Snr. Planner, A. Sweeney Snr. Exec. Planner, M. Foley Admin. Officer

1. Proposed Adjournment

    Cllr. Lawlor proposed that the meeting adjourn at 11.45 to allow the members participate in the farmers‟ protest march. Cllr. Weld seconded the proposal. Cllr. Murphy disagreed and Cllr. Griffin made a counter proposal that a representative from each group attends the march and the meeting continue. The latter proposal was seconded by Cllr. Kelly and agreed.

2. Change of Time for Council Meeting on 19/10/09 thCllr. Murphy proposed that the Council meeting on 19 October commence at

    11am due to the volume of items to be dealt with and that the first three items be the consideration of the Manager‟s Reports on Leixlip, Celbridge & Collinstown LAPs. Cllr. Kelly seconded the proposal and it was agreed.

3. Consideration of Manager’s Report on pre-draft stage of CDP Review

    John Lahart referred to the list of motions submitted by the members and the Technical Working Group and circulated at the meeting. Cllr. Griffin suggested that due to the volume of motions, the members confine themselves to discussing only those ones where the Manager‟s response differed from the motion. The members agreed.

    Ms. Sweeney noted that in issuing directions, Section 11 (4)(f) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 states that Members shall be restricted to considering the proper planning and sustainable development of the area to which the Development Plan relates. She also referred members to the code of conduct which must be observed in making the Development Plan viz. in making and adopting the development plan, the elected council, acting in the interests of the common good and the proper planning and sustainable development of the area, must, in accordance with the “Code of Conduct for Councillors” prepared under the

    Page 1 of 23

    Local Government Act 2001, carry out their duties in this regard in a transparent manner, must follow due process and must make their decisions based on relevant considerations, while ignoring that which is irrelevant within the requirements of the statutory planning framework. Equally, local authority employees involved in the preparation of the development plan should perform their duties objectively, should have no vested interest in the contents of the plan and should be in accordance with the Council‟s Code of Conduct for Employees (Source: Development Plans Guidelines issued by DOEHLG)

Cllr. Murphy sought clarification on three items:

    Would the Draft Plan be published before the Strategic Environmental Report? Is there a compensation issue if land with flooding potential is down zoned and what piece of legislation refers?

    Will the RPG review be complete before the Draft CDP is published?

    John Lahart replied that the SEA process was a parallel process to the CDP review process and that the Environmental Report and the Draft Plan would become available at the same time. He undertook to provide information on the compensation issue and he said the RPG review would likely be available in draft form before the draft County Development Plan is published but would not be completed.

Motion 1 - TWG

    That the diversity of the County as clearly illustrated in the KCC publication „Rural-

    Urban Dynamics in Kildare: Socio- Economic Patterns and Trends‟ be addressed

    through the CDP in developing a range of diverse policies that acknowledge the different and often conflicting needs reflected in this document.

Response:

    Agreed.

    The Development Plan Guidelines require that the CDP gives spatial expression to the economic, social and cultural aims of the CDB Strategy. The referenced document prepared for the CDB relating to co-ordinating service delivery will be reviewed among other documents including national and regional guidelines and will inform the formulation of appropriate policies and objectives for the forthcoming draft plan.

Motion 2 TWG

    Notwithstanding our obligation to comply with the RPG‟s, that an assessment of basic infrastructure to support the targeted population growth be undertaken and advice sought from the department as to the degree of flexibility the Council have in preparing the CDP if it proves that the projected growth is not achievable in light of infrastructure deficits.

Response:

    Agreed.

Motion 3 TWG

    2

That a policy statement be included that will permit the Council to take an

    alternative course of action through the preparation of LAPs should it prove

    impossible to comply with the CDP due to deficits in infrastructure.

Response:

    Not Agreed.

    The Development Plan will set out a core strategy for the county with policies and objectives reflecting national and regional guidance. The LAPs must be in

    accordance with the CDP. In the event that the core strategy becomes

    unachievable due to infrastructural constraints the Council will have to consider a variation of the development plan to adopt an approach other than that provided for in the forthcoming plan and this will be a matter for consideration and adoption by the members of the Council at that time.

The Manager reminded the members that there is provision for a mid term review

    of the CDP which provides the members with an opportunity to vary the CDP if

    required.

    Motion 4 Cllr. McGinley That the starting point for the Draft Plan should be 2005 Plan.

    Briefing Note There are some very good policies in the existing plan and we

    should ensure that these are carried forward, updated if necessary. I will be

    referring to some of these in later motions.

Response:

    Agreed.

    Motion 5 Cllr. McGinley That the Plan should be consistent with the Development Plan Guidelines (2007). Briefing Note These Guidelines set out matters which should be dealt with in

    county development plans. The wording “consistent with” is taken from the new

    draft Planning Bill. The Guidelines are a laudable attempt by the DOE to try to get more standardisation of county plans.

Response:

    Agreed.

    The Development Plan Guidelines were published under Section 28 of the

    Planning and Development Act 2000. The Planning Authority will have regard to

    these Guidelines in the preparation of the forthcoming draft development plan.

    Motion 6 Cllr. McGinley That the Plan be consistent with the National Spatial Strategy and the Regional Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area 2010 2022.

    Briefing Note - This again would be in line with the draft Planning Bill.

Response:

    Agreed.

    The development plan is part of a hierarchy of land use and spatial plans, including the NSS and RPG‟s. The RPG‟s are currently under review and the proposed draft

    county plan will have regard to the draft RPG‟s.

    3

    Motion 7 Cllr. McGinley That the Plan should take full account of the existing plans in adjoining counties

    and those within the Greater Dublin and Mid- East Areas.

    Briefing Note - The need to consider plans in adjoining counties is a requirement

    of the Planning Acts. I suggest that this should also be extended to those counties

    within the GDA-ME Region.

Response:

    Agreed.

    The development plans for adjoining areas and within the GDA provide an

    important context, for the development of Co. Kildare and will be considered in the

    preparation of the forthcoming draft plan.

    Motion 8 Cllr. McEvoy That the Plan should be consistent with the Development Plan Guidelines (2007) in

    order to reflect the DoE draft Planning Bill and the attempt to standardise the

    approach of county development plans.

Response:

    Agreed.

    As per no. 5.

    Motion 9 Cllr. McEvoy That the CDP should take full account of the existing plans in adjoining counties

    and those within the Greater Dublin and Mid- East Areas.

Response:

    Agreed.

    As per no. 7.

    Motion 10 Cllr. McEvoy That the projected growth figures, which do not seem to be consistent with recent

    depopulation trends, the oversupply of residential development be reduced to

    minimise the negative impact of large scale housing development.

Response:

    Agreed.

    Updated population and housing allocations which will result in a reduction in the

    projected growth figures which were presented in the Issues Paper for each council

    in the GDA will be allocated as part of the review of the RPG‟s. These allocations

    will inform the core strategy of the draft development plan.

    Motion 11 Cllr. McGinley That the Council will liaise with the planning authorities in DLR, Fingal, South

    Dublin & Wicklow whose plans are also under Review.

    Briefing Note These counties are all either adjoining or within the GDA-ME

    Region. It is desirable that Kildare‟s plan should be broadly similar.

Response:

    4

Agreed.

Motion 12 Cllr. McGinley

    That the Plan includes appropriate sections from other county plans.

Response:

    Agreed subject to modifications.

    The development plans of adjoining areas provide an important context, which will be considered in the preparation of the plan. However, the incorporation of

    sections of other county plans should only be included where co-ordination of

    objectives or policies across the administrative areas need to be explicitly outlined.

    In response to a query from Cllr. Griffin, it was pointed out that the members had been circulated with submissions received from neighbouring local authorities.

    Motion 13 TWG (i)That a policy of promoting the use of serviced sites within the settlement theme boundaries be developed

    (ii)and that the restrictions around eligibility and occupancy are reduced.

Response:

    Agreed.

    (i) Where demands are anticipated in the settlements the provision of a mix of units would be appropriate together with the provision of serviced sites.

Not Agreed.

    (ii) It is considered premature at this stage to make any determination on policy regarding the rural settlements in the absence of a core strategy which will reflect national and regional planning guidance. All towns, villages and settlements will be reviewed to include analysis of take up over the period of the plan, the success or otherwise of the current policy and an estimate of potential demands arising over the period of the plan, availability of resources and infrastructure and

    environmental protection needs.

    The population allocation to the county by the DOEHLG and the Regional Planning Guidelines will also be an important consideration.

    A lengthy discussion took place during which the following points were raised:

    ? Appropriateness of over zoning

    ? Need for information on population projections, water availability, waste

    water facilities

    ? Look at policies of neighbouring planning authorities

    ? Reduce restrictions on local need/local growth criteria; 5 year stipulation

    should apply to all categories

    ? 8km radius of urban centres needs to be relaxed

    ? Settlement policy needs to be relaxed, if only for existing stock; quotas could

    control it

    ? Why so much emphasis on growth

    ? What is our core strategy; zoning is not a matter for the CDP 5

    ? Policy required to deal with damage caused by unfinished developments in

    villages

    ? Need to give adequate consideration to population in south of the county

    ? Need to consider rural heritage

    ? Need to protect sons/daughters right to build on family land

John Lahart replied that it was population growth which determined the need for

    housing and the core strategy of the CDP should deal with how that growth is

    distributed. The draft RPG figures would be available in the near future and they

    would feed into the preparation of the Draft Plan. He predicted they would provide

    for population growth divided evenly between the metropolitan area in the north

    east, the large settlements and the other settlements. This distribution of

    population will be one of the main issues in the Draft Plan. He said 2,500 to 3,000

    units per annum were required to meet housing need, the drivers of which were

    birth rate, inward migration, reduction in household size and overspill from Dublin.

    He said the policy theme boundaries needed to be examined particularly in the

    area of infrastructure provision. There was an in-built requirement for over zoning

    as construction to completion can take two years.

The members agreed to Mr. Lahart‟s proposal that a paper be prepared on the

    policy theme boundaries which would assist further debate and it could be

    considered either by the Technical Working Group or the full Council.

    Motion 14 TWG That a policy encouraging socio economic diversity within settlements be

    developed for the CDP.

Response:

    Agreed with modification.

    The policy must be in accordance with the RPG‟s.

    Motion 15 TWG That the Council immediately deliver the sewerage plants promised as part of

    planning under previous settlements and that such temporary solutions not be

    allowed under future applications.

Response:

    Not Agreed.

    This appears to relate to WWTP either planned or constructed by private

    developers as part of planning process and it is the responsibility of those

    developers to carry out the infrastructural requirements to facilitate their

    developments.

Plants constructed and commissioned:

Coill Dubh WWTP for 2000 P.E

    Rathangan WWTP for 4000 P.E

    Kilmead WWTP for 600 P.E (not in charge)

    Two Mile House for 500 P.E (private)

    6

Plants currently under construction

Ballitore WWTP currently under construction by Barrack Homes

Plants at planning stage (planning permissions granted with WWTP)

Stapelstown

    Ardclough

    Kilberry

    Investment in infrastructure will be related to the settlement hierarchy in accordance with the RPGs especially where national funding is required from the DOEHLG and to the Council‟s own finances. In addition new waste water regulations require councils to ensure that no deterioration of water quality occurs in receiving waters.

The members accepted the response

Motion 16 TWG

    That the current policy of local need and local growth for lands within the settlement theme boundaries be replaced with a simple restriction of eligibility on the basis of having lived or worked within the County for 5 consecutive years.

Response:

    Not Agreed.

    As per 13(ii) above. Paper to be prepared.

Motion 17 Cllr. Griffin

    What is the status of settlements at this stage? Do they continue as per the outgoing plan! What is the life span of the settlements? Have the planners any suggestions to advance the settlements as put forward in the previous plan? It should be noted that the settlements came from the planners of the day.

Response:

    Agreed with modifications.

    The current status of the settlements remains as per their designation under section 6.7 of the current CDP 2005-2011. The role of the settlements in the rural areas will be reviewed and considered in the context of their future role as identified in the overall strategic settlement hierarchy for the county which will be informed by the forthcoming draft RPG‟s, the appropriate level of development for these areas together with the availability of community facilities and infrastructure over the life of the plan.

    It is noted that that there was significant increase in the amount of land included in the settlement areas between the publication of the last Draft Development Plan and its eventual adoption in 2005 by the Council.

    Guidelines for Planning Authorities on Sustainable Residential Development in Urban Areas published by the DoEHLG in May 2009 will also inform the 7

    preparation of policies / objectives regarding the scale and location of new developments in villages and settlements and their ability to absorb this development.

Motions 18 to 26 deferred to 2/11/09

Motion 27 TWG

    That the potential for employment generation be a priority consideration in the processing of all planning permissions.

Response:

    Agreed.

    It is the policy of the Council to notify Economic Development Section of all Planning Applications with employment potential. The objective of this policy is to support the applicant through the planning process and for the Economic Development Section to act as a single point of contact for the applicant in dealing with the various service departments.

Motion 28 TWG

    That a flexible approach, through a weighted matrix, be taken to the zoning of lands suitable for entrepreneurial start up business and small scale light industrial and employment generating activities, where it can be demonstrated that the proposed use would have minimal impact on adjoining uses, primarily residential property.

Response:

    Agreed with modification.

    The promotion of a strategic, sustainable economic strategy is a priority in the preparation of the draft plan. The importance of economic development will be reflected in the economic strategy and in the preparation of an appropriate framework for the zoning of land in accordance with the criteria as outlined in the DoEHLG Development Plan Guidelines.

Motion 29 TWG

    That the potential for job creation through tourism be examined and policies to promote this activity in appropriate locations be devised.

Response:

    Agreed.

    This is consistent with the policies and objectives set out in Section 13 of the existing CDP. The Council will also have regard to national tourism policies e.g. those set out by Fáilte Ireland.

Motion 30 TWG

    That the Council consider an area of enterprise for which we may have a natural advantage and seek to develop an area of expertise in this sector through co-operation with local and cross County 3rd level education centres and established successful industrial leaders within the County.

Response:

    8

Agreed.

    The Council is working with NUI Maynooth to assist and support the strategy of the

    college to develop joint ventures between the college and leading firms within the

    county. The council will support the college with its many R&D joint venture

    projects with world class firms in the areas of IT and Bio Pharmacy. The council

    will work with the college in preparing submissions for EU and National funding to

    promote projects under the “Smart Economy” funding programme.

(ED 14 of the existing CDP will be expanded to cover this topic).

    Motion 31 TWG That Kildare County Council develop the position currently held by Mr. Pat Whelan

    as a means of assisting potential employers with Council issues such as planning,

    rates, infrastructure and the entire local government process.

Response:

    Agreed.

    See response to No 27.

    Motion 32 TWG That the Council consider ways of zoning potential lands for start up business and

    potential employment creating opportunities where it can be demonstrated that

    such zonings will not affect residential or existing zoning.

Response:

    Agreed.

    This is consistent with policies ED25 & 26 in the current CDP

    Motion 33 TWG That Kildare County Council examine ways of developing contacts with

    existing large scale multinationals to explore the reasons they set up in

    the County with a view to expanding and developing these reasons to attract

    potential employment.

Response:

    Agreed.

    This is consistent with the Council„s Economic Strategy document “Competing in a

    Globalised Market” with the key objectives of competing to attract and retain

    employment creating investment into the county. The Council actively engages

    with existing large scale employers and possible future ones also.

    Motion 34 TWG That Kildare County Council develop the whole area of Angling Tourism and the

    spin off such tourism could create with regard to employment, considering the huge

    potential for such Development within the entire county.

Response:

    Agreed.

    9

The council will work with the key stakeholders in Tourism including Kildare Fáilte

    and Fáilte Ireland to further develop the tourist potential in the County including

    angling tourism.

    Motion 35 TWG That Kildare County Council negotiate with the IDA with regard to the vacant

    advanced factories and sites within the county, seeking potential employment,

    offering every assistance and investigating the potential for start up units within

    these factories.

Response:

    Agreed.

    This is consistent with existing policies ED 25 and 26.

    Motion 36 TWG That Kildare County Council provide assistance to FAS as the National training

    agency with regard to vacant premises and expertise to ensure that the opportunity

    is there for up-skilling and training of potential employment.

Response:

    Agreed.

    In line with policy ED 15 of the existing CDP the council will continue to work with

    the education and training agencies to develop skill sets to match current and

    emerging labour market needs.

    Motion 37 TWG That Kildare County Council investigate with Maynooth University the possibility of

    an outreach programme for the South of the County to develop skill set and

    enhances the skill base of potential employees.

Response:

    Agreed.

    See response to 36 above, the council will continue to develop its working

    relationship with NUI Maynooth to support the ongoing development of the college

    and to work in partnership with the college to use the resources and capabilities of

    the college to create and support employment and enterprise.

    Motion 38 TWG That Kildare County Council develop the thoroughbred brand for the County in

    association with relevant Parties and develop the potential for further employment

    within this sector.

Response:

    Agreed.

    This is broadly covered by the policies set out in section 13.4.4 and policy ED 31 of

    the existing CDP.

    Motion 39 TWG That Kildare County Council ensure the roll out of Broadband throughout the entire

    County including to all the rural areas, the potential for residents to work from

    10

Report this document

For any questions or suggestions please email
cust-service@docsford.com