Author Archives: david

Polasaí teangan do fograí

Tá mé ag iarraidh polasaí a chur i bhfeidhm chun cinntiú go mbeadh Gaeilge ar comharthaí an chomhairle conntae ar bonn cothrom leis an Béarla.   Beidh an rún seo ar an clár don cruinniú míosúil ar 14 Bealtaine.  Thainig an téacs ó dréacht ríalacháin a d’fhoilsigh an t-Aire Gnóthaí Pobail, Tuaithe agus Gaeltachta i 2006 ach nach bhfuil curtha i bhfeidhm go fóill.
That the Council adopt the following signage policy to apply to all new or replacement signs commissioned from 1st June 2007 onwards:

(1) Any sign placed by Fingal County Council at any location shall be in the Irish language or in the Irish and English languages.

(2)       Where the Council is of the opinion that, by reason of its containing text in both such languages the sign–

(a)       would be unduly big,
(b)       would be difficult to read,
(c)        could cause an obstruction, or
(d)       persons would, while reading it ,cause a danger to themselves or others (in the case of a proposal to place a sign at the side of or near a road),
the Council  may, instead, place 2 signs at that location, one containing the text concerned in the Irish language and the other containing the text concerned in the English language.

(3)       Where the Council proposes to erect not less than 20 identical signs, the Council may place –

(a)       signs in the Irish language,
(b)    signs in the Irish and English languages,
(c)        2 signs, one in the Irish language and one in the English language in each location.

(4)       Notwithstanding the generality above, a public body may erect signs that are in compliance with the International System of Units as adopted by the Bureau Internationale des poids et mesures, established by the Metre Convention signed at Paris in 1875.

(5)       The following provisions shall apply to a sign in the Irish and English languages placed by the Council:

(a)       the text in the Irish language shall appear first,
(b)       the text in the Irish language shall not be less prominent, visible or legible than the text in the English language,
(c)        the lettering of the text in the Irish language shall not be smaller in size than the lettering of the text in the English language,
(d)       the text in the Irish language shall communicate the same information as is communicated by the text in the English language, and
(e)       a word in the text in the Irish language shall not be abbreviated unless the word in the text in the English language, of which it is the translation, is also abbreviated.

(Note: Based on draft regulations published by the Minister for Community Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs.)

 
 

Green Party’s Dublin Bay Bill

{mosimage}Revitalisation of Dublin Bay should include Sutton-to-Sandycove cycleway and more water amenities

The Green Party has promised to revitalise Dublin Bay in an Oireachtas
bill that will soon go before the Dáil. The Party has proposed to
create a new authority to manage and protect the Bay and ensure that
Dubliners and tourists alike can benefit fully from the valuable
resource, which spans from Howth head to Dalkey island.

Launching the bill in Dún Laoghaire today, Green Party Environment spokesperson Ciarán Cuffe TD said: "Dublin Bay is a fantastic resource that has come under increasing development pressure in recent years. It is vital for us to ensure that future development is properly planned, and that water-related sports and leisure facilities are developed and provided for. Although Dublin Bay is getting cleaner, no one authority is in charge of what’s happening. The baths around the bay have been ignored and now lie derelict, and decisions on their future are being left to developers. We need vision, and that’s why we are proposing to create an authority empowered to conceive a master-plan for the conservation as well as the sustainable development of this valuable resource. We would task the authority to create a coastal zone management plan to ensure that flora and fauna are protected.

Green Party Dublin North East candidate Cllr David Healy said: "The authority will ensure that the Sutton to Sandycove cycleway is fast-tracked, in consulatation with local residents, and designed to the highest standards. Already the sections of the route which are in better condition are thronged on weekends and evenings. Ensuring quality design standards all along the route will open this linear park up the city and further stimulate the growing demand for active transport. People will walk or cycle much further and much more often in a pleasant environment.  In our overly sedentary society, the Sutton to Sandycove cycleway will significantly contribute to improving the health of Dublin’s citizens."

Green Party Dublin-North Central candidate Cllr Bronwen Maher said: "The Authority would also look at re-opening the sea water baths around the bay. The Clontarf Baths for example could become a major feature along the cycleway.  Sea-water swimming is an extremely popular activity all year round and these baths would be a great addition to Dublin. Dollymount Strand and Bull Island need a fresh approach too, and we are proposing that cars be removed from the beach. The number of cars on the beach in summer is now a safety issue. Last week-end’s ‘boy racer’ epidemic, which continued throughout the Easter bank holiday, shows that we cannot allow indiscriminate usage by cars any longer. As part of this plan we would also implement increased public transport between Clontarf DART station, the baths and onto Dollymount Strand via the causeway."

Green Party Dublin Central candidate Patricia McKenna said: "We must develop the south docks and Poolbeg peninsula as high amenity residential areas as the first phase of Dublin Port’s eventual removal from the city centre. The docklands area has huge potential to be developed for sustainable, family-friendly accommodation which will provide good quality homes for many generations of Dubliners. The Green Party also sees the Dublin Port Company’s application to infill a further 52 acres in the Bay as unnecessary and inadvisable. The port area has expanded enough and we must ensure that any development in the Port and along the Bay must take into consideration environmental, amenity and community interests, as well as commercial usage."

Green Party Chairman and Dublin-South East candidate John Gormley TD said: "We want to ensure that proposals for high-rise development aren’t treated in a piecemeal fashion, and that there is better co-ordination between councils in Fingal, Dublin City and Dún Laoghaire/Rathdown, as well as the various agencies that control both the shoreline and the bay. We also need to end the discharge of raw sewage into the Bay, while resolving the capacity and odour problems at the Ringsend plant."

The Party set out the following points to come under the remit of a new Dublin Bay Authority. These include:

  • Regenerating the public baths around the Bay such as Dún Laoghaire, Blackrock and Clontarf
  • Fast-tracking the proposed Sutton to Sandycove cycleway, which has been stuck at planning stage for nearly five years
  • Providing greater access to the water for anglers, swimmers and boat users
  • Protecting low-lying coastal areas from the risks of flooding due to climate change or natural events
  • Developing the south docks and Poolpeg peninsula as high amenity residential areas as the first phase of Dublin Port’s eventual removal from the city centre
  • Creation of a Marine Park initially in the area between Sandycove and the East Pier in Dún Laoghaire
  • Extending the Luas into Poolbeg Peninsula
  • Utilising the heated water from the Poolbeg power plants to provide district heating for apartments along the Liffey
  • Ending the discharge of raw sewage into the Bay from the small number of remaining outlets while also resolving the capacity and odour problems at the Ringsend Plant
  • Phasing out the parking of cars on the beaches of Bull Island

 

Proposed Seagrange Park Playground

{mosimage}Following the successful provision of a playground in Howth last year and the agreement to provide another playground at Bayside Park, the local Area Committee has agreed to put a proposal for a playground at Seagrange Park on public display.  The location is at the north end of the park near Ss. Peter and Paul’s School.  The formal consultation notice is below.

PROVISION OF PLAYGROUND ON PUBLIC OPEN SPACE AT SEAGRANGE ESTATE, BALDOYLE, DUBLIN 13

As part of the 3 year Capital programme the County Council intends to provide playgrounds in each electoral area of the County in 2005, 2006 and 2007.

The proposed playground will be approximately 400 square metres in area   (20m x 20m) and will be equipped with play equipment suitable for children under 8 years of age only. Playground equipment will normally be of all metal construction. The playground boundary will be secured with a railing 1.35 to 1.5 metres high. The area will be surfaced in tarmac with safer surface (rubber tile, rubber wet pour, loose rubber or wood fibre) provided within the critical fall areas.

The playground is intended to serve the needs of children living locally and should not be seen as a regional facility.  Though there may be visitors from other estates when the playground opens, over the life of the programme additional playgrounds will be provided so that children will not have to travel long distances to avail of Council provided play facilities.

Fingal County Council will seek, by public tender, qualified contractors to design and construct the playgrounds including all surfacing, boundary treatment and play equipment. The provision of each playground will cost approximately €125,000. The playground will be maintained by Fingal County Council. Local community groups will be invited to assist in the inspection, supervision and maintenance of the facilities.

The attached drawing shows the location where it is proposed to provide a playground in Seagrange Estate, Baldoyle, Dublin 13.

Submissions and Observations with respect to the proposed development dealing with the proper planning and sustainable development of the area in which the development would be situated, may be made in writing to:

Ms Siobhán Mulvey
Staff Officer
Parks Division
Fingal County Council
County Hall, Swords
Fingal, Co Dublin

Submissions may also be made via e-mail to siobhan.mulvey@fingalcoco.ie

On or before Monday 30th April 2007 at 4.00 pm

I oppose the proposal to refuse allotments to Dublin City residents

Green Party Candidate for Dublin North-East Cllr David Healy has
condemned the proposal by Councillors on Fingal County Council to
refuse allotments in the Fingal area to people not resident within
Fingal’s boundaries.  
Cllr Healy said: "Last year the council unanimously agreed to my motion to reopen the waiting lists and provide more allotments. Numbers on the waiting list have continued to increase since then to over 300. This is despite Fingal County Council not publicising the allotments.  

"Unfortunately, some of the councillors seem to feel that the solution to long waiting lists is to disqualify people from the list. At yesterday’s meeting they proposed to ban Dublin City area residents from inclusion on the waiting list. This is parochial and begrudging. Fingal residents are equally entitled to use Dublin City’s swimming pools (of which Fingal Counry Council has none), libraries and art gallery. The idea that people on one side of an imaginary line running down Kilbarrack Road are entitled to an allotment and people on the other are not is nonsense.

"There has been a surge in interest in allotments because of the increase in apartment living and tiny back gardens both in the Dublin City area and in the Fingal area. Unfortunately, Fingal County Council has looked on allotments up to now as a temporary use of surplus land. We should be providing permanent allotments in the large parks on the north of the city."

[ENDS]

Information
Cllr. David Healy: 087 617 8852
Nicola Cassidy, Press Office: 01 618 4088 / 087 914 8175

The discussion at the Council is on the Council meeting web broadcast at item 27.

 

 

 

 

Observations on Greater Dublin Strategic Drainage Study

A major study in relation to sewage and drainage has been put to Strategic Environmental Assessment  as a result of a Green Party motion.  At this stage a scoping document has been producedfor public consultation. Our response is below.
We wish to make the following observations on the Scoping Report for the Greater Dublin Strategic Drainage Study Strategic Environmental Assessment:

The SEA criteria should include                                                                                                   
•    rough calculations of total gross and net energy demand of various options
•    rough calculations of energy recovery potential
•    rough calculations of total greenhouse gas emissions associated with various options
•    rough calculations of potential for meeting energy demands from renewable sources
•    rough calculations of capital and operating costs of various options
•    recovery of phosphates for return to agriculture
•    transport by pipeline in preference to rail and by rail in preference to trucks.

Options studied should include
•    living machines and other innovative wastewater treatment methods
•    anaerobic digestion and other energy recovery techniques, including the potential for adding other organic materials derived outside the wastewater system to maximise the efficiency of these techniques
•    measures to reduce volumes of wastewater requiring treatment
•    measures to reduce volumes of organic matter in wastewater (e.g. banning sink macerators, etc.)
•    measures to reduce concentrations of substances in wastewater (e.g. heavy metals, pesticides) which pose particular difficulties in treatment or which contaminate sludges or other treatment products limiting their usefulness
•    bye-laws to address above issues
•    other management and control measures

Note that these some of these options are not necessarily alternatives to each other or to various infrastructural options, but that they do impact on the relative pros and cons of infrastructural options and therefore need to be considered at this stage.

There are a number of elements of the draft which are not correct in particular the following claims (pp 24 and 25):

Air
The strategy option with the lowest number of wastewater treatment plant sites will perform better against this objective, as there will be a relatively lower number of potential odour sources.

and

Climatic Factors
The strategy option should minimise energy consumption and thus greenhouse gas (GHG) production, which contributes to climate change.
While it is not possible to determine the actual energy demand for each strategy option, the relative amount of energy required for the each strategy option in comparison to the other strategy options, will be assessed.
There is no specific target for this objective. The strategy option with the lowest number of wastewater treatment plant sites will perform best against this objective.

These are not valid assumptions. You cannot suppose that multiple small plants automatically release more greenhouse gases; nor can you suppose the opposite. These emissions needs to be calculated/estimated.

The following is not an environmental objective as described (p.23):

Deliverability and Planning Risk
There is no explicit objective for deliverability and planning risk. Rather, the relative likely deliverability of each Strategy will be examined.
A major risk to any drainage infrastructure is the risk that it will not obtain appropriate development consent. Delays can also arise during the planning system which can delay the overall implementation of the chosen Strategy.

Even if it was an environmental objective, the following assumption (p. 26) is not correct:

There is no specific target for this objective. A key factor under this objective is the number of waste water treatment plant sites which are required under each strategy option. The greater the number of sites, the greater the planning risk and the lower the relative deliverability of the strategy option.

One could as easily say that fewer sites increase risk as the consequences of any non-delivery is much greater.

We hope this is of assistance and would be glad to elaborate further on any of the points above if that would be useful.
 
Is sinne, le meas,

Cllrs. David Healy, Joe Corr, Robbie Kelly
Green Party /Comhaontas Glas,
Comhairle Contae Fine Gall/Fingal County Council 

Objection to 5 storey building at Harbour Rd./ 53 Church St.

I have submitted the following objection to the planning application to build an extra 2 stories onto the Porto Fino building between Harbour Road and Church St.
30th March 2007

Planning Department,
Fingal County Council,
Main St.,
Swords,
Co. Dublin

Re: Planning application F07A/0266

A chairde,

I hereby object to the above application on the following grounds:

The primary objection is the fact that the proposal would block the views of the Harbour and out to sea from the public realm of St. Lawrence’s Road, Howth Terrace, and Dunbo Hill.

The views out from the residential streets of Howth to the Harbour and the sea are an essential element of the character of Howth.  For residents as well as visitors they are vital views, opening the tightly-built streets of the village to the sea. They are of practical significance for people watching activity in the Harbour.  As someone who lives on St. Lawrence’s Road, I know how important the views down to the Harbour are to the local community.   We notice which fishing trawlers are in the Harbour, note the comings and goings of the Asgard 2.  We note the shifting tide levels against the Harbour walls, and the condition of the seas beyond.

The view across no 53 Church St. from Howth Terrace / St. Lawrence’s Road is the only similar view in Howth. Other views down to the Harbour are from a greater distance and don’t look down into the Harbour as steeply.  Abbey St. the other main access route down to the Harbour has no such views.

This view is recognised and protected in the Statement of Character for the Howth Architectural Conservation Area. There is a photograph of it in Figure 10 and it is marked on the annotated map in Figure 14 as a panoramic view.

The Statement of Character says (page 24)    
•VIEWS
Preservation of views. The key views out of the village such as those at Howth Terrace, Church Street, Thormanby Road, Main Street Upper and from the Martello Tower should be preserved and any works within the ACA should not adversely impact or block these views.

It is notable that the application contains no assessment of the impact of the proposal on these views.  However, it’s impact is clear and it is in direct breach of this objective.

The Council has already recognised the importance of views from the town to the Harbour in relation to the St. Lawrence Quay apartment development to the east of this site.  In that instance, the Council required that the developer put a break in the building at the location traditionally used as a viewing point out over the Harbour.  (This application is possibly F94A/0362, although I cannot get into this file on the web-based planning system.)

Is mise, le meas,

Cllr. David Healy

 

Detailed comments for Howth Traffic Management

As part of the input to the consultants working on the traffic and parking management for Howth, I have made comments in particular in relation to ensuring the streets are pedestrian-oriented.  I would be interested in any feedback.  My comments, are below, generally working from West to East and then North to South along the main bus route through the town. 30 km/hr speed limit  

This should start at the Dart Station, at Nashville Park/Thormanby Rd. Junction, and  at Balkill Rd./Balkill Park junction.  This should also be the area within which the roads are examined for design changes.  

Entry to Howth area.

The previous design contained a gateway feature just to the west of the Dart Station. This was removed when a Garda vehicle travelling at speed collided with it.  I note similar complaints are made about the buildout beside the West pier junction, which I refer to in more detail below.  There appears to be a particular issue with the start of any deliberate road narrowing leading into a slower area.  Nonetheless, a design is required which will bring the narrower, slower, more pleasant and pedestrian friendly environment which starts on Harbour Rd at the West pier junction back to the west of the Dart Station.  This will then lead to logical road layout changes outside the Station itself.

Dart Station

A preliminary design needs to be worked up for the open area with bus interchange outside the station for discussion. Technical input on design and landscaping would be of use.  I feel that the kind of open pedestrian oriented layout seen outside the GPO or in Georges’ St. in Dún Laoghaire would be appropriate for an area which as we all know on summer weekends is thronged with pedestrians.

I welcome the information from the Department of the Marine that they are also unhappy with the design of the road/parking to the south of the  platform extension.  The design here now leads to pedestrians walking behind cars parked nose to kerb and distinctly ignores the needs of pedestrians.  This area should be included in the design for in front of the Station.

West pier

I feel that the delineation proposed is likely to increase speeds  At the moment the lack of marking and open layout leads traffic to slow as it travels through the Pier area.  It is clear to all road users including trucks and pedestrians that this is an area of mixed character (fishing trucks, shops, markets, leisure access by foot and by car for walking, visiting restaurants, sailing, angling, viewing seals etc). and that therefore all road users need to exercise caution.

I think that there should be better indication from the design of the entrance to the West Pier that this is the Harbour Area and that a 30km/hr speed limit would be appropriate.

West pier/Harbour Rd. junction

There have been suggestions that existing buildout at Harbour Rd/. West Pier should be removed.and replaced with a curve radius of 15m.  This buildout is the start  (going east) of the slower environment on Harbour Road.  It narrows the carriageway and slows the traffic.   The narrowness is maintained as you move east by parked cars.  This is of particular value to cyclists as it requires cyclists to occupy the lane and thereby facilitates them in turning right up Church Street.  This right turn would be the means of access for cyclists to the main residential areas of Howth.

Harbour Rd. from West Pier to Church St.

At Findlaters, there are tables and chairs on the footpath. This is very welcome, and is exactly what we should be encouraging.   (Of itself, it slows traffic.)  However, the footpath at this location is busy and is too narrow between tables and chairs on one side and car side mirrors on the other.  I suggest it be widened.

Between Findlaters and El Paso, the footpath is wide enough, although there is a terrible slope at one section.  The parking is nose to kerb and I’m concerned about the risk here, particularly as it must be very difficult for someone trying to reverse a car from a parking space to see and judge the speed of traffic coming down the hill on Church St as well as traffic coming around the corner on Harbour Road.  (Is this layout in compliance with the planning permission for this development?)  I wouldn’t like to see a wider carriageway here.

Harbour Rd. from Church St. to East Pier

I feel that this area is mostly a success.

Harbour Rd./Abbey St. junction

I note that the roundabout idea involved– raised pedestrian platforms (not crossings or rights of way?) at entrance to car park and across Harbour Rd. east of roundabout, but nothing on Abbey St.

I feel that the current layout contributes to reducing speeds and preventing motorists turning the corner in a manner which would lead them to collide with anyone crossing the road or with any vehicle stopped in the road.  I think it does this in two ways:

  • requiring traffic coming down the hill to yield to traffic from its left
  • requiring traffic both coming down and going up the hill to negotiate with traffic coming in the opposite direction
  • The proposed design would maintain the requirement to yield.  However, by separating downhill from uphill traffic it would remove the second feature and therefore I think lead to increased speeds and risk.

The main pedestrian route which needs to be provided for at this junction is along the South side of Harbour Road crossing Abbey St.  I’m sure that traffic counts including pedestrian traffic would substantiate this.  The proposed roundabout would deny pedestrians right of way as they cross and further increase by facilitating increased speeds as outlined above.

New car park at East Pier

There have been suggestions of a car park on the green space at the start of the East Pier.  I think that there is adequate total car parking and what is required is parking management.  The green space in question is compacted and the Parks Department has committed to ploughing and reseeding it as well as wider landscaping measures in the area as part of the Promenade Renovation.  The current parking area seems generally appropriate to me.  The only exception are the few spaces just to the east of the current green space which form a bit of a barrier between the open area where the Pier ends and the open space beside it.

In particular the design shown would significantly come across the access to the East Pier.  This area should be included in the plan for renovation as a pedestrian-oriented area ensuring openness to the green space/promenade, the Pier, Balscadden Rd. and the carparking area in front of the Pier House.

Abbey St.

Abbey St. is problematic.  Vehicles which have travelled slowly along Harbour Rd often speed up on Abbey St.  Footpaths are particularly narrow making it somewhat unpleasant for pedestrians and difficult for pedestrians to walk side by side.  I wonder do they comply with accessibility standards for wheelchairs.  I would be interested in proposals for this area.

Abbey St./Church St. junction

Pedestrians coming up Abbey St. find themselves crossing a wide carriageway junction here.  I wonder is there any need to facilitate a left turn from Church St. to Abbey St?  Could the pavement be extended and a pedestrian platform provided here?

Core of Howth

The proposed design was described as “delineating the traffic movements through the area in order to provide a safer environment”.   

There seems to be good evidence (references below) that delineating traffic movements encourages greater speed and less consideration between road users.

A contrary approach would be to assert that this is a pedestrian-oriented area and motorists, cyclists, buses etc. should all be expecting pedestrians to be using the road.  This leads to removing markings etc.

If I understand it correctly this is the design principle behind recent pedestrian-oriented street design such as outside GPO, at George’s St., Dún Laoghaire.  

But it goes further than making a good environment for people to walk through.

The purpose of the streets in the core of Howth is not primarily for movement.  It is a place and the core of the community.  Most times that I am in the centre, I bump into people and stand and talk.  I always see people standing and talking in the centre of Howth.  (This interaction, of course, is the “Social Capital” the Taoiseach is rightly concerned about.)  Contributing to this of course is outdoor seating in front of the Baily Court Hotel (although somewhat obscured by parking.)

The Council cannot and should not look on the centre of the town as primarily a place for moving through or parking vehicles.  It is a place to be in.  It is the shared living room of the community and needs to be treated as such.

At the moment, pedestrians cross Main St. and Thormanby Rd. in a range of locations depending on their destinations.  I am struck by how well Harbour Rd. works:  a combination of zebra crossings and a narrow carriageway leads traffic to travel at a low enough speed so that although most pedestrians use the zebra crossings, it is also possible to cross the carriageway between them.  It would great to have that kind of environment in the core of Howth.

The issue of the nose-to kerb parking outside the Baily Ct. Hotel and lack of a safe pedestrian route at this location also needs to be addressed.

Some references in relation to the above thoughts:
SharedSpace (pdf)
Naked Streets (London Times)
Shared_space (Wikipedia)
Notes on Kensington High Street 1  2,  3

Church of the Assumption

If there is to be an alteration to the current design with the minor carriageway in front of the church, then provision needs to be made for hearses at this location.

Nashville Pk./Thormanby Rd.

Lights at this junction seem appropriate. This is the other entrance to the village and traffic should be made to slow at this location.  More than lights will probably be necessary.  Possibly a narrowing of the carriageway on Thormanby Rd. between Asgard Rd and Nashville Pk. would also be a good idea.  Hatching in the middle of the road does not seem to have much of an effect.

Baldoyle Community Strategy

{mosimage}On 7th March, I formally accepted a copy of the Baldoyle Community Strategy from the Baldoyle Needs Analysis Steering Committee.

The study is comprehensive, coming from a door-to-door filling out of a very detailed questionnaire by the Committee and Philip Land their researcher.  The two main elements I would draw from it are firstly the need for better information flow in the community and secondly the need for better community facilities.  In a number of instances, existing facilities do exist but need to be improved and made available. 

This matches with the results from a similar study done in Howth last year.

The full report is here (hosted by Brian Greene) and Brian’s own comments are here.

Sorry for the delay in posting this; election organising meant it slipped my mind until the likelihood of the facilities in the Pastoral Centre being lost (see next article) reminded me

Concerns about design of new older people housing in Baldoyle

The Council recently agreed to put on public display proposals for residential accomodation for older people and a medical primary care centre, both on Dublin Street, Baldoyle.  Both elements of the development are very welcome.  However, some elements of the design are worrying.  My submission in relation to the design is below, followed by the officials’ summary of the proposal.

In addition, the Pastoral Centre on the site which will be displaced by this development provides space to a range of community facilities. I will be raising the shortage of space in Baldoyle for community and voluntary groups with the Area Committee.
From: David Healy / Daithí Ó hÉalaithe [mailto:verdire@eircom.net]
Sent: 22 March 2007 15:21
To: Corporate Services; ‘Planning Department’

Subject: Comments in relation to Primary Care Centre and Residential Development, Baldoyle

A chairde,

Unfortunately, I don’t seem to have received a notice of the above going on public display.  I wish to make the following comments and would be grateful to have them forwarded to the relevant person in the Council.

Comments in relation to proposed proposed Primary Care Centre and Residential Development, Baldoyle

I very much welcome the proposed Primary Care Centre and Residential Development. I have a few questions in relation to some of the impacts the proposed design would have on neighbouring areas.

In order to give an adequate understanding of the proposal and of its impact of the proposal on neighbouring houses, the following should be provided:

  • Photomontages of views and overlooking from Turnberry.
  • Photomontages of views from Dublin St.
  • Shadow calculations for Dublin St.
  • Calculations giving basis for the carparking level proposed

 

Design changes to be considered:

  • 2 storey to North and South edges, 3 storey in centre, in order to minimise overbearing on both sides, overshadowing on North side and overlooking on South side
  • Planting/landscaping on Dublin Street frontage
  • Should Dublin Street frontage run parallel to the street instead of being stepped?
  • Colours – the proposal is for a boring cream façade with grey window frames.  Can this be made more cheerful/interesting?
  • Service road/access ramp should go down asap maximising open space etc.  A grassed road or similar could give emergency/maintenance access to rear of site and around to east

 
Is mise, le meas,

David Healy

 

Councillor David Healy
Green Party/Comhaontas Glas
Howth ward / Dublin North East
www.davidhealy.com
01 8324087
54, Páirc Éabhóra, Beann Éadair
54, Evora Park, Howth

The summary of the proposal is below.

Proposed development at Dublin Road, Baldoyle
for Cowper Care Centre.

A comprehensive range of residential accommodation for older people and a Primary Care Centre is proposed for the site at Dublin Road, Baldoyle, previously developed and operated by the Christian Brothers.

Cowper Care Centre is a registered not-for-profit organisation which currently operates 5 nursing homes in Dublin and is constructing other developments for older people, including sheltered housing.

The main new buildings form a three-storey complex of three linked blocks.

•    72 Assisted Living bedsitting rooms in 12 groups with communal facilities.
•    Entrance block with atrium incorporating communal facilities on the ground floor and 24 Independent Living apartments, 12 two-bedroom and 12 one-bedroom. on the first and second floor. 12 apartments are two-bedroom and 12 single bedrooms.
•    A series of communal gardens are provided.

The existing St. Mary’s buildings which are proposed for inclusion in the Record of ‘Protected Structures’, will be retained, renovated and converted to 4 apartments and communal accommodation. Other buildings, apart from St. Patricks, will be removed to make way for the new development.

To the rear of St Patrick’s, 14 single-storey two-bedroom houses are proposed, 12 for older people and 2 for people with severe disabilities. The residents will be supported by the facilities and services of the complex.

The main section of the existing St. Patrick’s nursing home will be converted by Cowper Care Centre to accommodate a Primary Care Centre to be leased to the HSE. The Primary Care Centre would have an extensive range of health and community services.  
The existing chapel and mortuary chapel will be retained to serve the residential development