The magazine Construct Ireland included in their most recent issue a detailed article on the new energy standards which the Green Party have convinced Fingal Councillors to include in local area plans.

The following motion which I submitted was voted down at the monthly Council meeting.

"That all new residential areas be designed as 30km/hr zones and have a 30km/hr designation and, if it is necessary to give effect to this for all future planning permissions, that the appropriate Variation to the Development Plan be put on public display, and that the report which the Manager undertook to bring to the September 2005 meeting of the Council in relation to designating 30km/hr zones be brought to the Council without delay." To be honest, I ‘m still not sure why this was voted down.

The Manager’s report referred to the designation of 30km/hr zones in existing areas.  It didn’t refer to the issue of new areas which the motion referred to.

I still don’t know if the motion would need a Variation to the Development Plan to take effect.

Nor do I know if it’s possible to decide to implement a 30km/hr zone when the development is still at planning stage. 

However, I will not let this go.   I still haven’t gotten an answer as to whether the new housing in Stapolin can be designated a 30km/hr zone, which I raised in January.

I have submitted the following question:

"To ask the Manager whether the permitted road designs in the new residential areas in Stapolin, which I understand were granted following inspection of the planning file by the Transportation Department, meet the conditions of the mandatory guidelines published by the Department of Transport, which must be adhered to in the case of 30 km/hr speed limit zones."

Additionally, I will be asking one of the Green TDs to ask the Minister for Transport whether it is intended that new residential areas could be designated before they are built.

The Council agreed new beach bye-laws today.  By a majority of 11 (including all 3 Greens) to 7 the Councillors removed the rather draconian ban on dogs on the beaches during the summer.  We replaced it with a requirement that dogs be on a leash during the summer when they’re in the "Reserved Bathing Areas" on the beaches.  Councillors were unanimous in calling for proper enforcement of the Litter Act against those who fail to pick up after their dogs.

The other Bye-laws which came up were the Jet-ski and fast power boat bye-laws.  These require jet-ski users to get permits and restrict where they can use jet-skis.  These bye-laws have been approved for public display and will be on public display soon with a view to adopting bye-laws at the May Council meeting. 

Many local residents and community organisations participated in the survey carried out late last year in relation to the needs for community facilities on the Peninsula, with support from Fingal County Council.  There was good a good participation rate and the information gathered provide a good basis for developing a strategy.  At the moment, the Howth Sutton Community Council and Howth Community Centre Ltd. are finalising the report on the needs analysis and will be publishing it soon, with a public launch.

The next step is the development of a strategy to provide the
facilities to meet the needs identified.  This will involve the
cooperation of community organisations and the County Council in an
open transparent process.  I will put updates in relation to this
important process on this site as things happen.

A number of areas are designated in the Development Plan as Architectural Conservation Areas, including the historic core of Howth, Nashville Road and Terrace, St. Nessan’s and St Peter’s Terraces,  Howth Castle, two Terraces on Strand Road, Sutton and Baldoyle village.

The Council’s Conservation Officer has been carrying out detailed surveys of these areas. The next step is that the Statement of Characters and survey photos will go on public display.  There will be public consultation on the implications of the conservation area, looking for people’s feedback and input into how the ACA should be implemented.  This is expected to happen in March.  For more information, you can contact the Council’s Conservation Officer, Helena Bergin at 8906709.

Given the high level of development pressure especially in Howth, this work is badly needed and very welcome.

Both applications for development on the Grange Road just east of the railway line were withdrawn by the applicants on 6th February.

The traffic calming proposals for Sutton Park/Downs, Alden Road, Sarto Park, Verbena Avenue, Bayside Walk and Bayside Dart Station have been agreed with a number of changes.

I am not a great fan of ramps, as I think that other forms of traffic calming are safer and create a more pleasant environment.  An essential principle of creating a safe environment for pedestrians including children is taking away the impression that the road is for cars only.  One of the effects of ramps is to reinforce the primacy of cars on residential streets.  Changing the design and layout of streets will often create a better environment for all road users.  This would include widening footpaths, narrowing the carriageway, making the carriageway less straight, pinch points (designed to ensure safe passage for cyclists) etc.  Additionally, I am a strong supporter of the designation of and enforcement of 30 km/hr zones in residential areas.

The most important change I argued for in the proposals was the
inclusion of a raised junction platform at the junction of Bayside Park
and Bayside Walk just outside the Dart Station.  This means that the
carriageway surface will be raised to the level of the pavement, to
facilitate pedestrians crossing the road and emphasise their presence. 
A similar raised platform will be at the junction of Verbena Avenue and
Sarto Park outside Bayside National School.

The original
proposal had ramps on the "railway road" in Sutton Park.  It was
suggested to take these out and I agreed to this mostly because I had
noticed that almost all the cars parked along here are usually parked
on the footpaths.  Parking on the footpath not only diminishes the
space for pedestrians, and discourages them, it also widens the
available carriageway and thereby encourages greater speeds on the
road.  The first step for traffic calming on this road would be parking
on the carriageway not on the pavement.  I would be happy to come back
to traffic calming proposals once the cars are off the footpaths.

Most
of the ramps proposed have heen changed to "speed cushions" which are
easier for cyclists to negotiate, with the exception of a "pedestrian
friendly flat top ramp" just inside the Sutton Park access from Dublin
Road.  Most of the other changes made were in direct response to local
submissions.

Three of the submissions received in response
suggested preventing rat-running through the area by blocking motor
traffic at the western edge of Sutton Park (allowing pedestrians and
cyclists through).  I’m not sure how much support this would have in
the community, but I can see there are arguments for it.  Therefore I
proposed that a plan be drawn up to be put on public display for public
feedback.  This was agreed by the Area Committee.  However, Joan Maher
proposed that it be overturned at the monthly Council meeting. (which
you can see  at http://www.fingalcoco.public-i.tv/site/#pp3915).  The
result is that the proposal will not go to public consultation.

Nonetheless I am interested in any feedback in relation to traffic calming and management in the area.

Following the informal meeting on 23rd November (notes here), a special formal meeting of the Area Cttee has been called to be held at the Council offices in Swords on  Thursday  19th January.   The normal Area Cttee B meeting has been moved to the Wednesday 18th (in Baldoyle Library as always.)

We have been asked to list the issues to be addressed and I have tried to itemise them as follows.  I would welcome comments.
DRAFT:

Issues to be discussed as requested:

1.    New development at Stapolin

a.    roundabout on coast road and road to it from new Stapolin area
i.    what is the planning status of this, a report on the compliance submission, whether the compliance submission reflects what is built on the ground
ii.    why are there two lanes at all of the entrances to a single-lane roundabout and what are the safety implications of this?  What is the Transportation department’s view on the design?
iii.    What is the design purpose of the red footpaths as built?
iv.    What is/will be the arrangement for pedestrians to reach the footpath on the other side of the road?
v.    What are the plans for accessing the planned park from this road by each of the various modes which will be using the road?
vi.    What is the cross-section of the road as built and what is the Transportation Department’s view of it?

b.    Access from Grange Road
i.    What is the planning status of this constructed section of road?
ii.    What is the Transportation Department’s view on the segregated cycle facilities included in the design and apparently constructed?
iii.    What is the Transportation Department’s view on the design as constructed as it affects cyclists?
iv.    What is the Transportation Department’s view on the design as constructed as it affects pedestrians?
v.    What is the planned traffic lights set-up for this junction?

c.    Design of streets and roads in new Stapolin development
i.    Description of design of these streets and roads envisaged in Local Area Plan and Masterplan and applications already granted and applications made.
ii.    Do they meet the criteria for designation as 30km/hr zones?

d.    Pedestrian links through the area
i.    What are the planned pedestrian links in the area?
ii.    Are they designed so as to ensure a quality and safe environment?
iii.    How will the existing pedestrian link to Howth Junction railway station be taken advantage of improved and made more accessible?

e.    Parking in the vicinity of the new railway station
i.    What level of parking demand is envisaged at this location and will parking control be necessary/appropriate?

f.     3 ton limits
i.    Is a 3 ton limit envisaged on the distributor road through the Stapolin development?

2.    Road and path network throughout the area

a.    General road network
i.    What changes are under consideration?
ii.    What are the constraints on the design, whether biodiversity, financial, technical etc.?
iii.    What about providing a segregated cyclepath parallel to the Moyne Road?
iv.    What is intended/under consideration for the junction of Moyne Road and Hole in the Wall Road?
v.    What is intended/ under consideration for the junction of Moyne Road and Coast Road?
vi.    What is intended/ under consideration for Moyne Road?
vii.    What is intended/ under consideration for the Coast Road?
viii.    What is the general intention for the proposed Station Road Boulevard?  (i.e. what does boulevard mean here?)
ix.    What is intended/ under consideration for the railway bridge on Moyne Road?
x.    What is intended/ under consideration for the railway bridge on Station Road?

b.    Pedestrian and cyclist links through the park/green belt
i.    What are these and how do they integrate with the general road network?  If they are not proposed already what is the process by which they will be planned and designed?
ii.    Will the railway alignment be used to facilitate a direct cyclepath between north and south?

c.    Will the existing Baldoyle Area Plan, the draft Portmarnock Area Plan and the Park provide direct and convenient cycle routes including the following:
i.    Between the bus/bicycle/pedestrian bridge over the railway at the new Dart station and the Station Road area so as to facilitate cyclists coming from / going to the North Fringe area?
ii.    Accessing the playing fields on both sides of the Moyne Road from both Baldoyle/Donaghmede and from Portmarnock?
iii.    between Baldoyle and the Station Road area such as to enable secondary school students to access Pobalscoil Neasáin from the Station Road area without coming into conflict with motor traffic?

d.    Coastal walkway and cycle route
i.    What are the design options under consideration?
ii.    What are constraints on the design, whether biodiversity, financial etc.?
iii.    Will the route be on the coastal side for the entire distance from Baldoyle to Portmarnock?

e.    Bus routes
i.    What extra bus routes are under consideration in the area?
ii.    Assuming that bus lanes are not envisaged, what junction designs are envisaged to ensure that buses are not caught in the expected traffic congestion which will result from this development and the North Fringe development?
iii.    What is the interaction between bus routes and the proposals for the general road network?

3.    Draft Portmarnock Local Area Plan

a.    Distributor Road
i.    Is the distributor road through this area intended to be a bus route and if so should the road not be as direct as possible?
ii.    What is the reason for the proposed design?  (It was described as indicative when the draft plan was last on display.)

b.    Roundabouts
i.    Are what appear as roundabouts on the draft plan intended to be roundabouts?  
ii.    If not, can they be marked differently?  (When the draft plan was last on display it was stated that they were not intended to be read as roundabouts.)
iii.    If they are roundabouts, what is the design rationale here and how will pedestrians be facilitated?

Could I also ask that colour versions of the Baldoyle Area Plan map and the Masterplan be made available to cllrs and all departments at the meeting.  At our last Area Cttee meeting Parks were relying on a photocopy which was illegible to me.

I have made a written observation on the proposed development in the corner formed by the railway line and Grange Road where the road rises to cross the railway.
                                   
                                    54, Evora Park,
                                    Howth,
                                    Co. Dublin
                                    01 8324087
                                    verdire@eircom.net
                                    14th January 2006

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

Re: Reg. Ref. 05A/1731, Grange Road Baldoyle

A chairde,

I would like to make the following observations in relation to this proposal

1.    The application fails to deal adequately with the design challenge of proximity with Grange Road where it rises to bridge the railway.  The proposal that the bottom floor of the apartment block should be made up of garages and doorways, facing the retaining wall of the road would create an unpleasant and insecure environment.  

One possible improvement in the western part of the site could be  for this area between the building and the retaining wall of the road to be covered over to provide carparking underneath and a 1st floor access to the houses.  The extra carparking gained could remove the need for the ground floor north side of the development to be made up of garages.

2.    The application has been made jointly with Reg. Ref 05A/1799.  The height in that application is clearly excessive, something visible from the photomontages supplied.  It is much harder to guage the visual impact of this proposal but it needs to be considered on its own and not in the context of the unacceptable 1799.

3.    Pedestrian access from the development to Grange Road and bridge over railway.

The application fails to give good pedestrian access to the Grange Road especially for pedestrians travelling west.

4.    Pedestrian and cyclist access from Grange Road to new railway station.  

In addition to the existing station at Howth Junction, a new station is proposed which according to the application is 500m north of the Grange Road.  This site lies along the closest direct line between the Grange Road and the new station.   Therefore provision needs to be made in this application for a pedestrian and cyclists access to the new Station, presumably by a short dedicated link across this application site between Grange Road and the new residential road parallel to the railway line.

5.    Pedestrian and cyclist access to Howth Junction train station.

Although the application makes much of the proximity of Howth Junction Station, it does not refer to the quality of the access to the station.  The developer should be required to contribute to the cost of taking this right of way in charge and bringing it up to a high standard.

6.    Link under Grange Road along railway line.  

Simply improving the existing right of way to Howth Junction will not solve all the problems at this location.  Access to the right of way to Howth Junction from the Grange Road will always be difficult due to the difference in level.  Currently access is by a flight of stairs down from the Grange Road.  If practical, there could be an access at the railway level under the road beside the railway.  If this is possible, the developer should be required to contriute to the cost of this work which will facilitate the development.

7.    Environmental Impact Assessment

The development might need EIA in its own right.  If not, then taken in conjunction with its partner application (shown on the same plans) F05A/1799 and with the adjoining developments to the North within the same Action Area Plan area, it definitely needs EIA.

Finally, I would just note that contrary to what is stated in the application, train services from Howth Junction do not run every 5-10 minutes, (although they will of course remain significantly more frequent than those from the new station when it is built).

I enclose a cheque for €20.

Is mise, le meas,

Cllr. David Healy

In Autumn 2005, Fingal County Council sought comments in relation to traffic management and parking in Howth.  A public meeting was organised by the Community Council which I attended.  There was a general opposition to car parking control/charges at that meeting.  I undertook at that meeting not to support such charging while there was general opposition in the community.

There were good reasons for charging discussed at the meeting.  Additionally, the Transportation Department of the Council is enthusiastic about experience in Malahide, as indeed are a number of the Malahide councillors and I understand community organisations.  I also have become aware of good reasons for such charging; see
http://www.planning.org/bookservice/highcost.htm

Fingal County Council Transport Department believes it will convince Howth residents about the parking scheme.  Information on the scheme in Malahide is here.

I would welcome any feedback.

I attach the submission made to the County Council by the Howth Sutton Community Council.
HOWTH TRAFFIC AND PARKING MANAGEMENT SCHEME

SUBMISSION FROM HOWTH SUTTON COMMUNITY COUNCIL

INTRODUCTION

Howth Sutton Community Council ( HSCC ) is the umbrella group for every significant organisation operating in the Howth Sutton peninsula and there are currently forty member organisations involved.
                                
In addition to the usual residents associations, the Community Council incorporates the Chamber of Commerce, Howth Comhair Iascaire Teo, the main churches, Drug Awareness Group, GAA, Howth Celtic, Howth Golf Club, Howth Yacht Club, Heritage Society, Tidy Towns and Credit Union.  Also represented are the Garda Siochana and Fingal Co Council.   From this it will be seen that proposals emerging from the HSCC are representative and reflective of those of the key business, religious, public and sporting organisations in the area.

HSCC is supportive of the introduction of a Parking and Traffic Plan for the area and wishes to be involved with Fingal Co Council in the development of such a plan. However, it is anxious that any such plan will not be a revenue raising effort but one which is sympathetic to the cultural, historic and touristic environment of the area.  It is also concerned that the plan will take into account the requirements of people who live and work in the area.

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

In preparing this submission, the HSCC held a public meeting in the Baily Court Hotel in Howth to discuss the subject.  This meeting was representative of all sections of the community and was well attended.  In addition, two local Fingal councillors attended and addressed the meeting – Joan Maher and David Healy.

The meeting emphasised the importance of local consultation – which did not properly take place in the past – and welcomed the commitment of Fingal officials to ensure that proper consultation would be a feature of any future plan.

The meeting also agreed that any plan should be an integrated one incorporating parking, traffic flow and traffic calming, speed limits, bus and taxi stops, loading bays, handicapped and disability requirements, traffic lights, pedestrian crossings, footpath and safety.

DEPARTMENT OF THE MARINE

The Department of the Marine is responsible for and controls the Harbour area and, therefore, has a substantial role in public amenities, parking, green areas, footpaths, etc in Howth.  It is essential that any plan for Howth should be formulated jointly and agreed with the Department of the Marine.

We are, therefore, requesting that the formulation and agreement of the plan should be a tripartite one –Fingal Co Council, Department of the Marine and the Howth Community.

BACKGROUND

To quote from the introduction to the Fingal County Councils excellent SSAO booklet

“Dublin has one of the most spectacular settings of any Europenan capital and Howth is arguably the brightest jewel in that setting.  The peninsula and nearby Ireland’s Eye contain scenery and habitats as fine as any in the country”.

“The Howth Special Amenity Area Order is a recognition of the quality of the area. To receive this designation an area must be of either outstanding natural beauty or it must have special recreational value or it must be an area where there is a need for nature conservation.”

The main touristic attractions in Howth are the harbour area for its nautical amenities, the village for its traditional appearance, the Summit area for its unspoilt, wild natural beauty and views and the Balscadden and East Mountain areas for its cliff walks and marvellous scenery.

It is within these settings that a parking and traffic plan must fit.

With regard to the Harbour and Village areas, any plan should take the following into consideration.

a.    Howth has an old village traditional ambience and any traffic plan should be sympathetic to this
b.    Howth is an important touristic and visitor centre
c.    Howth is more residential that commercial.  There is no necessity to introduce an element in plan to prohibit access to traffic or cars as, say, in city areas.
d.    Howth is a destination and is not on a main thoroughfare to any other destination
e.    Howth differs substantially from the larger towns in Fingal, such as Swords, Malahide, Balbriggan, Skerries and plans introduced there are not necessarily transferable to Howth.

PARKING

The following elements should be taken into account in any parking review for Howth
i.    Staff parking
ii.    Visitor parking
iii.    Local shopping needs – very short stay
iv.    Local delivery to shops
v.    Church parking
vi.    Park and ride
vii.    Disabled parking
viii.    Harbour commercial requirements
ix.    Boat and yachting parking requirements

CURRENT PARKING SITUATION
The following figures are estimates rather than based on an exact scientific count

i.    There are approximately 320 parking spaces between Teelings Garage and the top of the Upper Main Street (excluding the Harbour but including Harbour Rd car park)
ii.    Approximately 264 of these are from Teelings Garage to the East Pier
iii.    There are only 90 spaces approx between Harbour Rd and the top of Uper Main Street (incl Church Street)
iv.    Apart from Harbour shop and factory staff and customer parking, the Harbour car park is used mainly by DART users and visitors to Yacht Club

PARKING PLAN AND REQUIREMENTS
i.    Essential that Department of Marine is involved in parking plan and that any plan agreed is an integrated one
ii.    There is a necessity to provide an area for staff car parking to free scarce spaces in the Lower and Upper Main Street areas
iii.    Special parking to be allowed around the Catholic Church and St Mary’s at specified times i.e. Mass/Service times, Funerals and Weddings
iv.    Local Delivery;  there are too few spaces available in the village centre for general use to allocate all day loading bays. Loading bays should be confined to commercial vehicles for a limited period e.g 7am – 10.00 am.
v.    Local Shopping:  consideration must be given to facilitate the quick “shop visit” whether this be to newsagent, chemist or shop
vi.    Harbour Parking
a.    Howth is an important sailing venue – boaters need all day parking for cars and trailers
b.    Howth is a commercial harbour – no blockage of fish unloadings or businesses on piers
c.    Harbour is a big day-trip destination, especially on weekends
d.    Park and ride; residents of Sutton, Bayside, Raheny, Portmarnock, Baldoyle and Malahide would not use Howth Harbour for all-day parking if sufficient facilities were provided at their own nearest stations.

PROPOSALS ON PARKING

a.    Residents and business in Howth do not want introduction of Pay and Display
b.    Council should explore with Dept of Marine possibility of extending Harbour Rd Car park
c.    There is a necessity for a major new space – Council should explore Edros site and Council site near Techrete currently owned by Dublin City Council
d.    Strict parking restrictions at churches should be frozen for special occasions – masses/services, funerals and weddings
e.    Parking spaces should be provided on both sides of St Mary’s Place now that bus stop is no longer in use
f.    Lr Thormanby Road parking (at Catholic Church) should be transferred from residential side to Church side of street

DISABLED PARKING

There is a need to revisit the reserved disabled parking spaces around Howth to ensure they are suitable in terms of
a.    proximity to shops
b.    proximity to churches
c.    on flat areas to facilitate exit or entry to/from cars
d.    facilitated by ramp or flat access to footpaths etc, particularly at crossing points

TRAFFIC CALMING

OBJECTIVE ; to slow traffic on Harbour Road, through Howth village centre and on Thormanby Road.

Speeding is not a major issue on Harbour Road, mainly because with parking on both sides, the roadway is extremely narrow – to such an extent that two busses or heavy vehicles cannot easily pass each other.  This attempt at traffic calming creates its own safety issues and should be addressed.

Speeding down Thormanby Road and through the Howth village centre are seen as being issues which need remedy.  

We propose the following initiatives:

a.    Speed limit of 30 km per hour to operate from DART station along Harbour Road, Church Street, Abbey St and Main Street to Church
b.    New low-profile traffic roundabouts to be installed on Thormanby Road at Nashville Road and Asgard Park.  These would both slow traffic down and facilitate exit from these two roads
c.    The slowing of traffic through Howth village centre is treated separately below

TRAFFIC CONTROL – HOWTH VILLAGE CENTRE

The PROBLEM;  
a.    Traffic travelling too quickly on stretch from Church to Health Centre
b.    Problem of safely accessing Upper Main St from Lr Main St
c.    Safety issues involved with cars from Upper Main St merging with cars from Thormanby Road direction at McDermotts Chemist shop

PROPOSAL

We propose the replacement of the current rectangular island in front of Church with a circular floral island which would serve as a traffic island. This would have the following benefits

a.    Slow traffic from all directions
b.    Provide safe traffic access to Upper Main Street
c.    Provide safe traffic from Upper Main St to Lr Main Street.

IMPROVING TRAFFIC FLOW

There are currently some bottlenecks in Howth which should be improved.  We propose the examination of the following;

a.    Introduce one-way traffic only on St Laurences Road (at Spar shop) – traffic flow to be from Lr Main Street to Harbour View
b.    Tucketts Lane – currently unofficially one way during school times by agreement with parents and locals – to be made official
c.    Harbour Road should be widened.  This can be achieved by moving the footpath to behind small concrete railings/wall.  This would also improve pedestrian safety
d.    Explore possibility of widening road at Balscadden to facilitate return to two-way traffic.

IMPROVING SAFETY

a.    Chicanes / Build-outs.  These are currently causing accidents and a danger to safety on both Harbour Road, Main Street and Lr Thormanby Road.  They are difficult to see in dark and wet conditions and create dangerous situations rather than helping safety.  They also make parking difficult if not impossible at times. We propose consideration of the following;
b.    Remove the build-out at the harbour exit to Harbour Road
c.    Remove build-out outside Findlaters opposite exit from harbour
d.    Remove build-out at Library bus stop
e.    Remove build-outs from Library to Asgard Road
f.    Adjust buildout at junction of Church St / Harbour Rd

RIGHT OF WAY AT EAST PIER EXIT

Currently the right of way at the junction of Abbey Street/Harbour Road goes to traffic emerging from the direction of the East Pier.  In essence this gives right of way totraffic emerging from a car park over the main traffic flow.  It is potentially a dangerous situation and we recommend that the right of way revert to traffic from Abbey Street.

RAMPS

We contend that ramps are unsightly and damaging to both car and passenger. They also create problems for cyclists.  We believe these would be out of context within the Howth traditional environment and unnecessary if other measure proposed were introduced.

PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS

Howth is adequately serviced at present and no changes are recommended

TRAFFIC LIGHTS

Howth is adequately serviced at present time and no changes recommended

DISABLED

We request that any survey carried out incorporate a review of the road and footpath infrastructure to facilitate the disabled, handicapped and elderly.

FOOTPATHS

Footpaths should be resurfaced where damaged

TOUR BUSES

There is a necessity to introduce bye-laws limiting areas where these may be parked

BUS DEPOT

Currently Dublin Bus has moved its Howth depot from St Mary’s Place to the Summit.  This is satisfactory within the context of the current schedules.

However, the HSCC is in discussion with Dublin Bus about the possibility of running every second bus clockwise and anti-clockwise aroung the peninsula. This could only be achieved if a suitable village bus depot was provided.

We suggest that the area in front of the DART station would be the most suitable for this. However, this would require that it be a no-parking zone for other vehicles.  We recommend that this form part of the overall study.

                                        END