Dunboyne Combined Residents Association 

Home - About DCRA - Contact DCRA -Archive - News- Politicians Directory - Planning - Environment - Links Page - Newsletters - DCRA Meetings - Soapbox - Waste & Recycling

 

Final DCRA Submission to MCC, Dec 2000

 

Submission to Meath County Council

on

The County Meath Draft Development Plan 2000

Dec 20, 2000

 

Table Of Contents:

Introduction

  1. Meath County Council Mission Statement: To promote and implement the sustainable development off our county in partnership with local communities so as to improve the quality of life and living environment of all our citizens.

    2. Meath County Draft Development Plan and amendments to same fail to promote sustainable development. The process of consultation with residents of Dunboyne has been deplorable. The Draft Plan and amendments will severely damage the quality of life and the living environment of the residents of Dunboyne.

  2. DCRA has made three previous submissions to Meath County Council in respect of the County Meath development Plan with specific reference to the Development of Dunboyne. They are

"Towards A Dunboyne Development Plan 2000" submitted in July '99

"The County Meath Development Plan 2000", submitted in June 2000

" Survey of Trees with Special Amenity Value", submitted February 2000

Apart from a cursory acknowledgement of receipt of these documents there is very little evidence that the wishes of our community expressed there-in have been included or have influenced your Draft County Plan or amendments to same. Regrettably, there has been an outright rejection of DCRA's two main proposals in respect of Dunboyne Castle Demesne and green belt lands east of the old railway line. It is a matter of record that these proposals were supported by the residents of Dunboyne by the submission to Meath County Council of approximately 1, 600 signed letters and by the vote of 700 people at a public meeting for the preservation of the green belt lands east of the railway line.
  1. It is a matter of record that in our discussions with County Councillors they were dismissive of the Strategic Planning Guidelines, published in March '99. Referring to the Strategic Planning Guidelines the County Draft Development Plan (2.6.2) says, "These guidelines have significant implications for the development of areas both urban and rural in Meath". This document has now received statutory recognition in the Planning and Development Act 2000. The Draft Development document continues, "The guidelines considered a number of "strategic options" in relation to the future of development of the greater Dublin area such as continuation of existing trends to further disperse growth on an unstructured basis in Meath and options such as significant growth of centres in South Meath and new towns. These were individually rejected for their failure to accord with the principles of sustainable development … It is intended therefore that this development plan should set itself the task of implementing the guidelines as they apply to County Meath. It is our understanding that the proposed rezonings and developments for Dunboyne contravene these guidelines.
  2. The proposed rezoning of the land east of the railway line and at Dunboyne Castle is conditioned by a number of assumptions. To rezone on such a basis of speculative assumptions could place Meath County Council in a legal position of liability and therefore it could be held to have acted irresponsibly and so be held to account for such. Our residents are taxpayers and so they would not wish that public resources be squandered in this way.
  3. Residents of Dunboyne have made their decisions publicly known to the County Council on both the Dunboyne Castle and the green belt. The County Councillors who promised our community prior to election to retain the present zoning on Dunboyne Castle and preserve the lands east of the railway line have reneged on their promises. Taking these two facts together, the response given to our community amounts to an abuse of the democratic process.

    4. The Councillors in question cannot be said to be acting as representatives of our community. The Dunboyne Combined Residents Association agrees with the South Meath Planning Alliance, of which the Dunboyne Combined Residents Association is a member, which recently called for the resignation of our six local County Councillors because of their failure to democratically represent local communities in South Meath, their rejection of the advice given by Meath County Council professional planners and their dismissal at several meetings of the Strategic Planning Guidelines

  4. The reasoned and informed presentations we have made to Meath County Council together with this submission, we believe to be convincing. They are set out in compliance with the Strategic Planning Guidelines and environmental legislation and informed by good planning practice and principles. The proposals put forward for the rezoning of lands in Dunboyne are not supported by such.
  5. A planning decision that irretrievably destroys a village identity, that permanently damages its landscaped environment, that brings about a deterioration of the life-style of its people, that can lead to the destruction of its traditional community life, that inevitably increases traffic congestion and consequent pollution and that ignores the will of the majority of its residents is bad planning and bad decision making.
  1. The European Environmental Impact Assessment Directive 337/85/EEC, as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC, we understand is normally applied to individual developments. However, because of the major environmental impact for Dunboyne, due to the massive housing and other developments being proposed by Meath County Council, we are asking that a holistic Environmental Impact Assessment be undertaken for Dunboyne and surrounds. The Dunboyne Combined Residents Association reasonably demands that no rezoning of lands for development should be considered in or near Dunboyne village until after a full area hydro-geological and hydro-engineering survey is carried out. If the proposed development plan is ratified then it is very likely that project splitting will be used to avoid thresholds under the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive.
  2. Houses on lands already rezoned residential together with housing on lands at Dunboyne Castle and lands shown on Map DB16 brings the total number of units well beyond what is required to meet the needs of Dunboyne for the next six years. The County Secretary pointed this out to the Councillors at their full County Council meeting on the sixth of November '00 when he stated in reference to the lands east of the disused railway line: "It is clear that more than adequate provision has been made for expected residential growth in the Plan period without having to include this amendment."
  3. To zone beyond the requirements for the next five years is a clear breach of the Strategic Planning Guidelines and the Planning and Development Act 2000, in that lands should only be zoned if they are to be developed within the life of the development plan and that zoning should wither when the plan expires. With current services restrictions, these lands can not be developed during the next five years and should not be rezoned.

    4. The potential population, if all these proposed rezonings go through together with the lands already zoned from previous development plans, would increase the population from its present 5,500 to 14,000. The proposed rezonings and consequent developments proposed are intended to satisfy overspill and immigration resulting in urban sprawl and not, as required by the Strategic Planning Guidelines, to meet local needs.

    "Given the recommendations of the Strategic Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area it is envisaged that this should be directed at the consolidation of the town and addressing key housing needs local to the area rather than absorbing the town into the Metropolitan area of nearby Fingal area. To this end, this plan provides for the development of a number of key infill sites." (MCC Draft Dev. Plan:13.1.7) It is further stated: "The existing allocation of water services for Dunboyne is effectively fully committed" and "Any further rezoning for residential development would be dependent on the expansion of sewage capacity."(MCC Draft Dev. Plan: 13.1.7)

  4. Proposed rezoning of lands north of and within Millfarm Estate. Map Urban Detail 12, published by Meath County Council as an amendment, indicates lands for development that are an integral part of Millfarm Estate. The legal implications of this matter has been drawn to the attention of Meath County Council who have been asked to amend the map ensuring that this "Green No. 3" of 2.52 acres remains as at present and as approved by an Bord Pleanala.

Appraisal of Statistical Basis

A review of the reasons for the current development plan and its statistical foundations would be worthwhile at this time before the amended version is approved.

Following the introduction of the Strategic Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area, all the local authorities involved were instructed to bring their current plans into line with the guidelines as a matter of urgency. The preparation of the guidelines required a thorough analysis of current population trends in the Greater Dublin Area in order to provide a sound basis for future development. Clearly the current development plan for County Meath must also of necessity be based on the statistical forecasts of the Strategic Planning Guidelines.

Table 1 shows the Strategic Planning Guidelines forecasts for the Greater Dublin Area from 1996 to 2011. Column two gives the population forecast that would obtain in the absence of any migration, that is, based on organic growth alone. A separate analysis was done to determine the effects of migration on future population trends taking account of CSO labour predictions and similar factors. Three levels of migration were studied low, medium and high. For planning purposes the high levels were recommended despite some misgivings that the resulting forecast level for 2011 might not be reached until after 2011. The forecasts, subsequently amended upwards in 2000, are shown in column three. To summarize, assuming high levels of migration the population of the region could increase by some 25% by the year 2011. One cannot comment on the likelihood of this event, however, in view of the absence of any statistical information (standard errors, significance test results and confidence intervals) that usually accompanies forecasts of this nature.

Appendix 3 of the Strategic Planning Guidelines also provide the population forecasts for County Meath that would obtain in the absence of migration and these indicate that a population of some 119, 000 would be reached by 2011 representing an increase of 8.6%.

The Insert in the MCC Amendments to Section 2.2.3 of the Draft Development Plan states 'Assuming that the county plays its part of a regional population dynamic, the revised projections of the Strategic Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area indicate that a population of approximately a 130000 could be reached in 2011,161000 in 2006 and 180000 in 2011. In turn, of the order of 15000 extra households would need to be accommodated by 2006 and a further 18000 by 2011.'

These projections represent a massive population growth of 64% by the year 2011, almost three times the maximum increase of 25% expected by the Strategic Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area as a whole and confirm the widespread opinion that MCC is pursuing a policy which is totally at variance with the principles of the Strategic Planning Guidelines.

Because all of County Meath is in the Hinterland Area where according to the guidelines, apart from Navan which is the specified growth centre, development is to be confined strictly to meeting local needs, it could be argued that for planning purposes the appropriate forecasts should be based solely on organic growth. This would imply a modest population increase of some 9% up to the year 2011. Even if consideration is given to the intended development of Navan as a growth centre it would be difficult at present to put forward valid reasons for a planned population increase approaching the 25% for the Greater Dublin Area as a whole. This is because the guidelines envisage that future development would be concentrated in the Metropolitan Area.

It is appropriate here to make the point that the common practice of forecasting on the basis of historical population trends is hardly relevant in the present context because the underlying process is basically deterministic rather than stochastic. The recent unprecedented population explosion is almost entirely due to immigration caused by a benevolent attitude towards urban sprawl, ribbon development and similar objectionable practices. Consequently recent population increases can readily be calculated from the number of new houses for which planning permission was given. Therefore, the usual forecasting techniques would only serve to permit further urban sprawl based on the amount of urban sprawl that has already been allowed to occur. This amounts to an unacceptable form of self-fulfilling prophesizing that can be perpetuated.

Irrespective of any broad statement of policy about planned population projections, the likely outcome in reality can be estimated from an analysis of the Settlement Structure corresponding to the respective proposed zonings shown on the various maps.

It will now be seen that a population increase of 110% would actually occur if the zonings presently proposed by the councillors are implemented. To put this in perspective, if the population growth rate forecast by the Strategic Planning Guidelines, based on the highest migration scenario, were to apply to County Meath indefinitely then the potential population resulting from the present proposed zoning would provide for future growth up to the year 2045 or for many years more at the estimated organic growth rate.

  • The population projections put forward in the Draft Development Plan for the County and Dunboyne are not in line with those put forward by the Strategic Planning Guidelines and the Update to same.
  • Secondly, it is not acceptable to take figures for population increase that apply to the metropolitan area and transfer them to Meath and finally to Dunboyne without correction.
  • Thirdly, it is a flawed exercise to transfer statistical data and the interpretation of them from a macro national and regional application to a specific and determined environment, namely in this instance, Dunboyne village.
  • Fourthly, it is regrettable that interested members of the public could have been misled, and consequently their submissions, particularly those involving objections to proposed zoning, would have been greatly impaired by believing that projections and plans were in line with the Strategic Planning Guidelines.

Flooding

The recent severe flooding in Dunboyne is cause for serious concern. The Castle River was the source of the flooding in Dunboyne village, Woodview Heights, Beechdale and Larchfield estates. Serious flooding occurred at Bennetstown where the Tolka overflowed. East of the railway line there was expansive and severe flooding. The damage to homes and to their value, and the trauma caused to families, has been immense. The flooding was aggravated by housing developments that have been undertaken in recent years. Additional development will increase the risk of future flooding.

Should Meath County Council decide to rezone and develop any lands in or adjacent to the village of Dunboyne they will be acting against the expressed wishes of residents and against the provisions of the Strategic Planning Guidelines for which both the Council and County Councillors will be held to account.

Dunboyne Castle

We propose that Dunboyne Castle and grounds be developed for tourism and amenity uses. The mature wooded grounds, sweeping lawns, secluded walks and central location which is easily accessible to all residents of Dunboyne, make it an ideal location for a town park. While most housing estates have a number of small open spaces there is no proper park in the area and this is the only suitable land left for this purpose.

We believe that the State should purchase this demesne as a regional tourism amenity with the castle developed along the lines of Malahide Castle, Ardgillan Castle and Newbridge House heritage craft centres. There are no such facilities in South Meath or indeed in the adjoining North/West Dublin area covering the Greater Blancharstown/Castleknock area which now has a population fast approaching 100,000.

The grounds could be used for much needed football playing pitches for the GAA and soccer clubs and other such field sports. Alternative suitable uses for the demesne would suggest a hotel/leisure complex including golf. There are very few remaining country estates with such character and potential so close to the City and we feel it should be zoned as a community and regional amenity and leisure facility.

Dunboyne Castle and lands are not only important tourist attractions but also are part of our local and national heritage which must be protected and preserved.

Should additional land be needed for development there is land available in Dunboyne. But there is only one Castle and demesne and it's present zoning for agriculture should remain.

Reasons put forward by the Councillors for rezoning the Castle lands.

Reasons put forward by the proposer, Mary Bergin and by the seconder, Brian Fitzgerald:-

  1. Subject to development taking place on a phased basis

    2. DCRA'S Reply

    This does not refer to the question of rezoning and cannot be used as an argument in support of rezoning.

    The term "phased basis" development is not enforced by Meath County Council as has been the experience in the development of Millfarm. MCC failed to enforce the phased development of Millfarm on the developer John Connaughton despite strong representation from the Millfarm Residents Association. The proof of this is that Open Space No. 3, which should have been landscaped on completion of phase 3, was not landscaped, while the developer was allowed by MCC to develop phase four and move off site. Meath County Council it seems are either unwilling or unable to enforce phased development. Despite Meath County Council having a Bond to protect residents in such instances there were no moves to ensure the developer complied with the phased development of Millfarm.

  2. Subject to services being available.

    3. DCRA Reply

    MCC Senior Planner in response said there are serious constraints in terms of waste water capacity at present. "The existing allocation of water services for Dunboyne is effectively fully committed" and "Any further rezoning for residential development would be dependent on the expansion of sewage capacity."(MCC Draft Dev. Plan: 13.1.7). It is our reliable information that Fingal County Council has barely enough capacity to service the lands already zoned for development in their area of authority and are not likely to increase, in the foreseeable future, the capacity (for a population of 5,000) allowed for Dunboyne. In fact services are not currently available to meet the developments proposed. For Meath County Council to rezone for massive developments given this situation would seem to be highly irresponsible.

    The primary outcome of this rezoning will be to increase the value of the lands proposed for development.

  3. Subject to the Area Action Plan and same to incorporate the playing pitches on the Rooske Road.

    4. DCRA Reply

    An Area Action Plan requirement is connected to planning not to rezoning and therefore does not apply here. An Area Action Plan is usually funded by the developer and drawn up by his planning consultant with little community input.

  4. Subject to the development of a primary distributor road between the Maynooth Road and the Rooske Road and connecting to the Dunboyne By-Pass.

DCRA Reply

At a large public meeting in Dunboyne in 1996 to discuss the 1997 Draft Development Plan for Dunboyne the proposal to include a distributor road was unanimously rejected by the meeting and in fact that proposal was removed from that plan a few weeks later. Councillors Conor Tormey and Mary Wallace (Fianna Fail Newsletter '96): "That the By-Pass road section from the Maynooth Road to the Rooske Road was dropped by agreement by our local five Councillors". The development of this distributor road is being introduced to facilitate a housing development that is not necessary to meet local needs and is contrary to the expressed wishes of residents.

The Residents of Rooske Road and the estates off it are strongly opposed to the development of this distributor road as it would be used as a "rat run" especially for heavy traffic. In planning terms the proposal is ill conceived.

Other Points Raised by Members in support of the rezoning of the Castle lands

  1. A significant planning gain for the community with up to 20 acres of land being dedicated for community facilities.

    2. DCRA Reply

    The price of destroying a unique community heritage to gain lands for community facilities which Meath County Council should provide for a town of Dunboyne's size is dearly bought. These are the only lands left in Dunboyne with such rich landscape and trees and, most importantly, these lands enjoy a central location to provide a much needed community facility and public park for the people of Dunboyne and a regional tourism amenity for the surrounding area including Dublin 15.

    If this amenity was located in any other town in such close proximity to Dublin it would be purchased by the State and developed for amenity and tourism uses like others of its kind including the Lucan Demesne, recently acquired by the State, in adjoining Fingal. The only reason this is not happening is because our politicians don't have the political foresight or will to see the treasure we are losing here. What good will 20 acres of community grounds do for our community when we increase our population by another 2000 as a pay off? The answer is that when these new residents move in we will have an even greater shortage of community land. Of course this will give the Councillors more reason to rezone additional lands once again with a community planning gain. This is highly questionable planning. DCRA condemns the practice of the incentivisation of selected organisations, to the exclusion of the majority of residents in our community, to achieve rezoning objectives.

    The seconder of this motion, Brian Fitzgerald said at a pre-election meeting called by DCRA in May 1999 said that the Dunboyne Castle lands "… must stay in their present zoning". In his pre-election manifesto he promised to ensure that Dunboyne Castle and its lands would remain zoned as at present and not be changed to residential.

    The primary beneficiaries of the rezoning of these lands and the destruction of this amenity forever is certainly not the residents of Dunboyne. If kept in its present zoning it could be purchased back by the state allowing a generous profit to the owners to which they would be entitled. This rezoning is premature, unnecessary and very bad planning.

  2. That the proposed rezoning would facilitate the appropriate redevelopment of the Castle as a hotel.

    3. DCRA Reply

    The development of a hotel is a commercial enterprise and should be viable and justified as such. It is a flawed planning principle that a developer needs be gifted with the rezoning of 50 acres of land for housing so that a hotel can be developed. Meath County Council has no such obligation. The development of 50 acres of housing is not required to meet local needs. How can building houses on 50 acres of Castle grounds facilitate the development of a hotel? It certainly will not improve the ambiance of the Castle and will if anything be a disincentive to the environmental and holistic development of the demesne. If the present owners had wished to develop a hotel prior to this rezoning they made no such moves that we are aware of.

  3. That the area around the Castle will be protected from development with mature trees being maintained.

    4. DCRA Reply

    Dunboyne Castle Demesne should be maintained and protected as one unit.

  4. That the proposal will provide for playing pitches/community facilities running parallel to the trees and next to the Council owned land.

    5. DCRA Reply

    Reply as in No.1 above.

  5. That no lands have been zoned since 1997 and that having regard to the long term interests of the community the present opportunities may not arise for up to ten years.

    6. DCRA Reply

    A decision was made by the Meath County Council at its meeting on 29th April '96 that there would be no more rezoning of land in the Dunboyne area for five years. It is not surprising that no lands have been rezoned since 1997. The population of Dunboyne has more than doubled in the past five years and the 1997 Development Plan zoned sufficient lands for Dunboyne's needs for the five years up to 2002 which is not technically due for review until then.

  6. That while 250 acres of land are being rezoned for industry at Portan, Clonee, we must facilitate people in terms of housing, schools, churches etc.

DCRA Reply

The development of an industrial estate at Portan, Clonee, is against the Strategic Planning Guidelines. The Councillors now use this development to justify a need for additional housing. In other words they admit there isn't a local need for all these residential rezonings, so they create a need. This claim cannot be substantiated since the number of parameters required to reach such a conclusion are multiple; some are unpredictable and, in respect of others, critical information is not available at this point. This assertion cannot be validated statistically. In a recent study carried out in Leixlip only approximately 11% of workers in Intel lived locally.

Lands East of the Railway Line - Green Belt: Reasons for Retention

  1. The Strategic Planning Guidelines (SPG) say that development in the Hinterland Area is to be concentrated into designated "Development Centres". Elsewhere development is to be strictly limited to local needs as opposed to regional needs.
  2. To develop on the lands east of the old railway line between Dunboyne and Clonee is contrary to the SP Guidelines because the location selected was designated as the Green Belt in the County Development Plan '94. This should now be regarded as 'Strategic Green Belt' in order to prevent precisely the sort of development that is proposed.
  3. The proposed development of the lands east of the old railway line is contrary to the logical development of the village. The clearly defined features that should form the 'stop lines' for development are the old Dublin-Navan Railway to the east and the proposed Clonee By-Pass Extension and R.157 Relief/ Ring Road to the west. Once the boundary of the old railway line is breached the pressures to extend development further with each subsequent development proposal, would result in the total abolition of the Green Belt. This would result in Dunboyne becoming absorbed into the metropolitan area of the nearby Fingal Area contrary to 13.1.7 of the Draft Development Plan. As a consequence the planning principle of providing a division between settlements would be abandoned as per the Strategic Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area.
  4. The proposed development of the lands east of the old railway line is contrary to the policy statements in the speech made by the Minister for the Environment and Local Government when introducing the guidelines "---- The local Authorities will need to put mechanisms in place to ensure that there is a clear distinction between urban and rural areas so that these Green Belts will be respected. This means resisting dormitory settlements along transportation routes." The Draft Development Plan for Dunboyne (13.1.3) acknowledges that Dunboyne is tending to develop as a dormitory town. This should now stop.
  5. The proposed development of a number of infill sites in the village, together with the suggested rezoning of 25 acres at Courthill, plus other lands already rezoned from the 1997 Dunboyne Development Plan, gives the potential to increase the present population from 5,000 to 7,000 - an increase of 40%. This is sufficient to cater for local needs for at least ten to fifteen years. Any additional rezoning beyond that for local needs would be contrary to the SP Guidelines.
  6. It should be noted that the recent Government audit has said that enough zoned and serviced sites are available to satisfy housing requirements. This is an added reason why County Meath should not rezone land to satisfy overspill from the Dublin Metropolitan Area.
  7. The need for housing for people living in the rural areas surrounding Dunboyne is catered for with the proposal to provide graigs/crossroads type clusters. To combine this excellent new initiative with the housing co-operative concept as mentioned in 3.3.5 of MCC Draft Plan would meet the needs of first time buyers who are unable to afford to purchase most of the houses recently built in the area. It would also make it unnecessary to rezone huge tracts of land just to satisfy the open housing market.
  8. To rezone the Dunboyne Green Belt for building is contrary to the Strategic Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area - Review and Update 2000 - which says: "In overall terms the approach should be to accommodate population, household and employment growth in line with the Strategic Planning Guidelines, that is, within the Metropolitan Area and the designated Development centres."
  9. The Strategic Planning Guidelines recognise that large parts of Greater Dublin Area will need to be protected from development other than development necessary to meet local needs. This need for protection will be greatest close to the Metropolitan Area and between that area and the principle 'development centres' of the Hinterland Area. Therefore, the Strategic Planning Guidelines call for the establishment of 'Strategic Green Belt' areas in Development Plans aimed at restricting land use within these areas and securing a clear distinction between urban and rural areas.
  10. The boundary of the Metropolitan Area is clearly shown on the map on page 116 of Strategic Planning Guidelines and Dunboyne can be seen to be situated just within the Hinterland Area and in a location which the Strategic Planning Guidelines specifically identify as requiring special protection to prevent overspill from the neighbouring Metropolitan Area.
  11. We would draw attention to the fact that in Section 3.1.1 of Meath County Development Plan 1994 entitled 'Pressure Areas' it is stated that 'it is intended that the area adjacent to the Dublin County boundary and indicated on Fig 4, will retain existing uses and will not be absorbed into the land use structure of the Greater Dublin Area'. The area shown on Figure 4 extends west from Clonee as far as the disused railway line at Dunboyne. We would therefore expect that this area would receive the special protection demanded by the Strategic Planning Guidelines and be clearly defined on future MCC Development Plans as 'Strategic Green Belt'.
  12. The rezoning of the Green Belt is contrary to the principles of Sustained Development because it clearly represents urban sprawl and ribbon development. We refer again to the statement by the Minister regarding resisting the creation of dormitory settlements along transportation routes. The proposed development would create an increase in the demand for transportation that would inevitably be provided largely by private cars. This would add substantially to local commuter traffic and add significantly to existing congestion. We have calculated that some thirty square miles of coniferous forests would be required to remove the carbon-dioxide generated by the commuter traffic concerned.

  13. The reason put forward for the rezoning of the Dunboyne Green Belt is "future development" (DB16). This is a meaningless planning criterion. This is development for the sake of development.

  1. When the Ring Road is constructed there will obviously be pressure for development along its route.

  2. On best advice from a Transport Planning Consultant, should a rail line be approved, it would reasonably take 10-15 years to implement. In any event it will not be implemented in the life of this plan. It would be premature to rezone before the railway line is provided. To do so would mean that people would have developed travel patterns mainly by car and eventually the rail line would not have the desired effect of reducing road traffic. The possibility of a rail line must not be used as a reason for rezoning lands in the Green Belt.
  3. Lands, which may be required if ever the rail line is re-opened, will have to be acquired by compulsory purchase order if they are already zoned for development rather than for agriculture. This would add significantly to development costs of rail station and car-park facilities.
  4. The additional population arising from the proposed development of the Dunboyne Green Belt would put intolerable pressure on the village's community facilities, especially on school accommodation, that would be detrimental to the education of the children of Dunboyne.
  5. The recently published Bacon Report, which has been accepted by the Government, also suggested the creation of Special Development Zones which would deliver housing needs for the Greater Dublin Area which proposal obviously does not include Dunboyne.
  6. DCRA fully supports The Board of Management of Gael Scoil in their objection to having their school located east of the old railway line.
  7. It is the view of DCRA that the Draft Development Plan for Dunboyne is contrary to the Strategic Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area and could leave it open to legal challenge.
  8. The development of the Green Belt is contrary to the wishes of all the sixteen Dunboyne Residents Associations

Lands East of the Railway Line - Green Belt

Issues raised by Councillors in support of the proposed rezoning

  1. That the Area Action Plan which would be prepared for the area would help deliver the railway line and that this plan would also determine when development would start.

    2. DCRA Reply

    The route of the railway line has not been decided and even if it had been there is no way it is going to happen during the lifetime of this plan. Surely the main reason for the re-opening of the railway line to Navan is to facilitate the development of Navan as a major development centre. At the launch of the Strategic Planning Guidelines, the Minister for the Environment stated, "The local Authorities will need to put mechanisms in place to ensure that there is a clear distinction between urban and rural areas so that these Green Belts will be respected. This means resisting dormitory settlements along transportation routes." The Draft Development Plan for Dunboyne (13.1.3) acknowledges that Dunboyne is tending to develop as a dormitory town. This type of planning for dormitory development should now stop.

    Mary Wallace TD told DCRA Representatives (Meeting: 08.11.00) that even if there was a railway line already in place, all the money needed and rolling stock available, there still would not be a railway because of technical difficulties at Connolly station.

    John Bruton TD has stated that there should be no development until the railway through Dunboyne is operational.

  2. That any proposal for the area should be subject to agreement with Fingal Co. Council in respect of services.

    DCRA Reply

    There are serious constraints in respect of waste capacity at present. To our knowledge no agreement is in place to increase sewage capacity to the level required to satisfy the need resulting from the increased domestic and industrial development proposed. The Senior Planner, Meath County Council, advised that to rezone lands in the hope and expectation that the necessary services will be available would be inadvisable and irresponsible as compensation claims could subsequently be laid on the Council by developers.

  3. Development in this area should be on a phased basis.

    4. DCRA Reply

    Please refer to the reply given to the same suggestion of phased development of Castle lands above. John Connaughton, the major beneficiary of this rezoning, was the developer of Millfarm where, as already stated, the phased development was not implemented and not enforced. John Connaughton is also the developer of Beechdale Estate which development began approximately twenty years ago and has not yet been taken over by Meath County Council.

  4. That the development of the area could proceed independently and in advance of the provision of the railway line.

    5. DCRA Reply

    Dunboyne today suffers from major traffic constrictions and delays. Current road infrastructures are inadequate. The inadquacy of transport structures in such a situation is not addressed. Indeed it could be said that this reasoning, that development should precede the provision of a railway, indicates a lack of confidence in the railway going ahead. This suggestion proposes that Dunboyne with or without a railway will become a dormitory town which would contravene the Strategic Planning Guidelines.

  5. That a minimum 5 acre site for a primary school should be identified within the lands in question.

    6. DCRA Reply

    The identification of a site for a primary school is a long way from actually building a new school. We only have to look a mile down the road to Little Pace at Clonee where, despite an Area Action Plan, over four years after that development commenced, and with thousands of new houses occupied, there is still no primary school built in the area and children have to be transported to schools all around the city.

    This suggestion is put as an incentive to achieve consent to rezone but is not directly applicable to formulating a decision to do so.

    DCRA fully supports the provision of a location for a Gael Scoil but on an appropriate site taking into account safe access and proximity to other centrally located facilities.

  6. That the zoning of lands would lead to the provision of much needed housing for local people.

    7. DCRA Reply

    Local housing needs are well catered for in currently zoned lands. The County Secretary advised: "It is clear that more than adequate provision has been made for the expected residential growth in the Plan period without having to include the amendment referred to above." There is no local need to develop lands east of the railway line. The houses provided will, in the vast majority of cases, be occupied by people from outside the county and in particular from the Dublin Metropolitan Area. Even at present this is the situation, there being far more houses for sale than what is required to satisfy local needs.

    Under the heading "Sustainable Urban Development Principles" the Meath County Council Draft Development plan asserts as a overall principle: "To provide for the supply of zoned serviced land in line with actual needs and the provisions of regional planning guidelines to avoid excessive over zoning and consequent difficulties in co-ordinating development."

  7. That the question of phasing and the availability of services would be a matter for developers as part of the development control process.

    8. DCRA Reply

    This can not be a serious statement. Should services not be available to develop zoned lands the County Council will be held to account.

  8. That the proposed zoning would help to drive the development of the railway line project.

    9. DCRA Reply

    Until such time as the decision to route the railway through Dunboyne has been taken and the physical work has commenced no development should take place east of the railway line. No further consideration should be given to development east of the railway line until work on the railway has begun.

    DCRA are opposed to all development on the green belt east of the railway line. The issue of development consequent to the railway line coming through Dunboyne is a consideration for the future.

  9. That the proposal for the lands in question is entirely due to the proposed delivery of the railway line and that the railway line project would form part of the Area Action Plan.

    10. DCRA Reply

    Repeated reference is made appealing to Area Action Plans as a protection in respect of future developments. The question here is about rezoning of lands which precedes Action Plans. The suggestion that there will be an Action Plan can not be put as an argument for rezoning lands.

  10. That a clearly defined Strategic Green Belt area should be shown on the map and that the extent of the Green Belt area should not form part of any discussion in respect of the Action Plan.

    11. DCRA Reply

    While we welcome the fact that a Strategic Green Belt in now shown on the map, it is totally inadequate as it only extends half way from the proposed development boundary to Clonee as far as Loughsallagh. The obvious boundary for such a Green Belt should be from the railway line east of Dunboyne to the Fingal and Kildare County boundaries. These are the lands that have been protected by Meath County Council since the 1994 County Plan as a "de facto" green belt.

  11. That while a Green Belt area would not be zoned provision could be made to accommodate community facilities therein.

DCRA Reply

Community facilities provision should be confined to the "Cowpark".

Clonee Development Plan

  1. Because the proposed industrial development of the 250 acres north of Clonee and the further housing development of 20 acres south of Clonee village lie within the Dunboyne Green Belt many of the above points given under the heading "Reasons why the Dunboyne Green Belt Must be Retained" apply and therefore we object to both developments.
  2. We note under Clonee Development Plan 7.3.0, Specific Development Objectives CE 8 that an additional 50 acres are designated for development. This is a further infringement into the Green Belt and contrary to the Strategic Planning Guidelines.
  3. Clonee is neither a Primary nor a Secondary Centre for development as per the Strategic Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area. The boundary of the Metropolitan Area is clearly shown on the map on page 116 of the Strategic Planning Guidelines and can be seen to be situated just within the Hinterland Area and in a location which the SPG specifically identify as requiring special protection to prevent overspill from the neighbouring Metropolitan Area.
  4. In the light of the above it is quite impossible to reconcile the SPG requirement for a strongly directed development centre at Navan, providing high level employment activities, with Meath County Council's proposal for a major industrial development at Clonee.
  5. The selected location for this proposed industrial development is clearly within the defined 'Strategic Green Belt' area for the region as indicated on page 91 of the Strategic Planning Guidelines.
  6. It is surprising that no information is given under Objectives for the County at large in Section 3.2.3 Industry and Employment in MCC's Development Plan that would serve as an explanation for the proposed development or for the particular choice of location.

 

Contact:

Jim McGrath, Chairman, Dunboyne Combined Residents Association, 9 Elton Drive, Millfarm, Dunboyne, Co. Meath Tel: 01.8252189.

Email: mcgrathjim@esatclear.ie

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Send mail to DCRAMail@netscape.net with questions or comments about this web site.