All posts by admin

Meeting notes, Minutes meetings, Motions 2016, News

Notes from a meeting of the full Council, 24th October 2016

1.  Confirmation of Minutes of Meeting of the Council held on 12th September, 2016.

Proposed and seconded.

 

2.  Votes of Sympathy (if any) to the relatives of:

  • members or employees of the Council,
  • dignitaries of Church or State, or
  • members of old I.R.A. and Cumann na mBan.
Votes of Sympathy (if any) to the relatives of:
  • members or employees of the Council,
  • dignitaries of Church or State, or
  • members of old I.R.A. and Cumann na mBan.


Cllr Hegarty (FG): Alf Smiddy’s father

Cllr Jeffers (SF): Donie Harris, Grange

 

3.  Disposal of Property

East Cork Municipal District, 5th September, 2016:
(a).       Disposal of land at Dungourney, Co. Cork.

Blarney/Macroom Municipal District, 30th September, 2016:
(b).       Disposal of Cloughphilip, Ballincollig, Co. Cork.

Both agreed

 

REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF COMMITTEES

Ballincollig-Carrigaline Municipal District

4.  LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT, 2001 (BYE-LAWS) REGULATIONS 2006
Making of Cork County Council’s Cemeteries Bye- Laws, 2016

‘Draft Cemetery Bye Laws Final June 16 (with amendments).pdf’

‘Bye Laws report to Council Oct 2016.pdf’

Mayor: This was discussed previously at full Council. Clarification was required. Now it has gone back to the Municipal Districts and has been agreed at Muncipal District level.

Cllr O’Flynn (FF) proposes. Says that regardless of the bye-laws, we should always be sensitive because families are burying their loved ones and we should be slow to change precedents. Know that some families like Celtic crosses. They are beautiful and part of our heritage. They should be considered. Also there is a restriction on the number of graves a family can buy when there is a bereavement. Thinks we should be flexible on this. Recently there was a funeral in Fermoy where a single family was looking for 6 graves – 4 members of the family had passed away within 5 months. Proposes adoption of the bye-laws but thinks we should always look on a case by case. This is a very sensitive issue in rural Ireland.

Cllr Carroll (FF): We discussed this in West Cork. We were told that with the consent of the local authority, the traditions of neighbours and family could be observed. The people of West Cork will need more clarification on this. Seconds the bye-laws.

 

5.  “That the Ballincollig – Carrigaline Municipal District would ask Full Council to support its request for a detailed status update on the taking in charge of Pembroke Wood, Passage West, identification of the procedural steps to be taken from this point forward to achieve the taking in charge and timelines for same.”

CE: Over the last few Council meetings there have been issued referred from Municipal District meetings which should be dealt with at Municipal District level. This issue should be dealt with at Municipal District level. Understand it was already brought up at the Municipal District and a report was issued. We will arrange for a more detailed report to be sent to the next Ballincollig-Carrigaline Municipal District meeting.

Cllr D’Alton (Ind): This is on the agenda because it was indeed brought up at the Municipal District meeting and the report that was issued in response was a one liner – “Pembroke Wood has not been taken in charge”. This estate received planning permission in 1997/98. The residents had been working with the developer until he went into receivership in 2011 or so. I understand there is an issue with the bond. The bondholder claims the bond has expired and the County Council is pursuing it through the legal department. It has been with the legal department since before Christmas.   There are 400 houses in it, the residents of which pay their Local Property Tax every year.

I as their representative need to be able to give them an update and I have been unable to get that update. Hence I asked for the support of the Municipal District to bring it to Full Council. If there is a difficulty, that is fine, but at least let us know.

CE: There is no request for the taking in charge in. If there is a suggestion that it is taking long because of our legal department, wants to clarify that this is not the case. Understood that a second more detailed report was given to the Municipal District. Will get a more detailed report issued.

The Mayor says he understands that this is frustrating for all including members of previous Town Council. Will wait for the more detailed report to issue to the Municipal District.

 

6.  Road and Transportation SPC
Road Drainage – draft policy approved by SPC on 12-09-16

‘Road Drainage – Draft Policy approved by SPC on 12 09 16 (3).pdf’

‘Appendix A – Roads Act 1993 Section 76 Drainage (3).pdf’

‘Appendix B – Guidance Notes Section 76 Roads Act 1993 (3).pdf’

‘Appendix C – Guide Landowners and Roads Act Section 76.pdf’

Cllr Hurley (Ind): If we support this, we will commence a public awareness campaign in relation to the importance of good road drainage, the dangers of water on roads with respect to aquaplaning, etc. Thanks to the SPC members for their input in bringing this policy to Council.

Cllr T Collins (Ind): Supports. There are many roads that we travel that are not drained at all. Suggests that more funding is made available to do drainage on roads.

Cllr K Murphy (FG): The volume of water from landholdings is making trash of our roads. We spend several million per year repairing roads damaged by water coming from landholdings. This policy will not address the warning of landowners that any water on public roads is not acceptable. We have to ensure that where drainage works take place the relevant landowners have to get their act in order. Enforcement is the main issue here. We have to prosecute if landowners let water onto the public road.

Cllr O’Flynn (FF): Prevention is better than cure. You raise the road over the land and if you don’t the water will never leave it. It would save us millions. Most important things in the draft policy are communications and the best practice guidance. In some cases the local landowners or householders go out and clear the local drain. Are they right to do it?

Cllr Carroll (FF): A mini0digger could do many miles of road in a short time where drains are no longer being freed. We still haven’t seen minidiggers used for this purpose. They would solve a lot of problems.

Cllr Hayes (SF): Supports the policy as a member of the SPC. In recent times, many of the local area engineers are putting more of an emphasis on drainage work in association with resurfacing. This makes sense. Might cost more at the start but it is worth it in the long run. The policy also highlights the responsibility of landowners to keep water off the public road. Welcomes that.

Cllr D Collins (Ind): Supports the report. What is happening here is that the Council workers are not being replaced. These are the people who know where the drains are and who used to keep them cleared. We need more Council workers on the road to keep the drains cleared.

Cllr K Murphy (FG) repeats the importance of enforcement. We have to make sure water doesn’t go onto public road.

CE: Welcomes the policy document. It reflects our own policy. There is an emphasis on road drainage and how we deal with that. How adjoining landowners are impacted is a particular issue.

Cllr Hayes proposed.

 

CORRESPONDENCE FROM GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS

7.  Department of Education and Skills
Letter dated 5th October, 2016, in response to Council’s motion of 27th June, 2016, in relation to ASD provision at secondary level in Cork

‘Correspondence from Minister for Education and Skills.pdf’

Cllr D’Alton (Ind): This was in response to a motion I raised and this is the second response from the Department. The two issues we asked the Department to address were to acknowledge the shortage of ASD special classes at secondary level and to outline proposals for removing the option for schools to pick and choose whether they want to set up a special ASD class or not in an area of identified need. The letter doesn’t deal with the first issue at all. It is repetitive in telling us about the additional ASD special classes provided this year. But there are still twice as many at primary level than at secondary level. It is coming a little closer to dealing with the second issue. It appears that the Education (Admissions to Schools) Bill will require admission policies drafted by Boards of Management to not discriminate on a whole range of issues. But if a school is oversubscribed and a school has to pick between two students, it is far too easy for the school to choose the student who requires fewer special resources. The Bill also says that if a child with special educational needs cannot find a school place, the NCSE will find that place. But that place would of course be within mainstream education, not in a special class. Think we are not going to get any further with the Department and it is a waste of time writing back. The Education (Admission to Schools) Bill has gone through the first stage. Asks for the support of the Members to send a letter to the Special Committee on Education and Skills, letting them know that if the NCSE identifies a need for a special ASD class in an area, it will no longer be optional for schools to pick and choose whether they want to set up that special ASD class or not.

Cllr Desmond: Agrees with everything Cllr D’Alton says. This is an area of huge need. The response from the Department is saying more of the same. We’re so far short of where we need to be. There are children and young adults with no places to go. They do not have access to education which is their right. Access to an SNA is an issue and not enough. It has shifted responsibility to a local principle which is totally unfair. They decide who gets access and what access. This is a huge issue and it is escalating.

We will forward a letter to the Committee on Education and Skills.

 

8.  Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Skills
Letter dated 7th October, 2016, in relation to Council’s motion of 12th September, 2016, in relation to potential business and employment opportunities for Cork following the United Kingdom’s vote to exit the European Union

As read.

 

Notices of Motion

9.  Cllr Des O’Grady
“To request a written report outlining the total cost paid by Cork County Council to external consultants for the year 2015. The figure should include all professional consultancy fees paid to non-Council employees, including amounts paid on projects funded by Government grants. The separate amount for each Council Directorate to be included.”

Separately, to outline the amounts spent on external legal services in 2015.

Response to Cllr O’Grady’s motion on consultants

Cllr O’Grady (SF): €4.6m was spent last year on outside consultants, including legal fees. This highlights the amount of public money which is being transferred into public hands. Over the last few years, €30m transferred from Cork County Council into private hands. It is clear what is happening here. Road services cost €2.1m in consultancy fees. €866,000 was spent on external legal services even though the Council has its own legal department. Thinks the growing dependence on outside consultants should be reversed.

Recent example – when Minister Coveney announced LIHAF, he stated local authorities would now prepare submissions to the Department. There was no mention of outside consultants in the Ministerial announcement. But we didn’t liaise with the bodies the Minister mentioned, rather employing outside consultants to carry out market research. Are any agency workers employed by Cork County Council? We should be depending more on our own in-house departments to carry out this work.

Cllr Mullane (SF): Seconds. Concurs with what Cllr O’Grady said. Would like a better breakdown on division of fees. Have we ever done a breakdown to see how cost-efficient it is to use external consultants? My own experience from my own employment is that those in-house have huge knowledge. This public money is spent ad-hoc. We don’t have a proposer or seconder on how we spend public money on consultancy fees.

Cllr Jeffers (SF): Supports. The amount spent on road services is a lot of money. We should be looking at expertise in-house. Fees to external agencies for public relations – are we employing them this year?

Cllr K Murphy (FG): The report shows in detail where the money is going openly and transparently. Thinks it is trash to draw up a report and criticise it immediately. Thinks it is money well spent to have proposals from consultants who are experts in the field and thinks our expecting to do that work in-house is futile. We are drained for staff. So welcomes the report and if we are waiting for internal staff to do this work, we would be several years behind. Glad to see we are spending prudently on consultants.

Cllr O’Flynn (FF): It is only 4.5% of the capital programme of €80m. €2.9m was recouped from grants. Shows that there is activity in the Council. If we weren’t doing anything, we wouldn’t need outside specialists. Get the people who have expertise in an area. Hopes there will be more consultants with more work carried out but wants them taken on only where necessary.

Cllr Harris (ind): This motion gives good service because it gives us an idea of what is going on. Hopes we are not using the same consultants all the time. Presumes most of the companies are based in Cork so we are helping local employment. This is a good motion and the most important thing is transparency and a lot of people are vying for the business and it is important to get value for money. Better to have in-house expertise but if it is not there at the moment, this is not money wasted.

Cllr K McCarthy (Ind): Thinks we have enough people in the building without venturing outside. Why does the Council spend taxpayers money on consultants and then hire people on JobBridge.

CE: We only recruit consultants where necessary. Cork County would grind to a standstill if we weren’t engaging consultants. If this figure were increasing year on year, it would reflect an increase in activity within the County. Would like to see that happen. We have an excellent in-house staff but there are situations that arise where we need different teams of consultants to work with that staff. Roads is 60% of the spend on consultants. But much of that is from NTA and TII for projects which we are progressing on their behalf. We couldn’t get an N28 or Dunkettle scheme ready to go without consultants. Legal spend is to bring in former Town Councils. This will reduce over time. But there is a significant cost associated with defending actions against this Council. On LIHAF, it is a competitive bid, a highly significant issue and I wanted to put our best foot forward in a short space of time. Wanted a highly professional proposal which built on the professional work we had done in-house here. Makes no apologies for that. The issue of cost efficiency has been referenced. All consultants go through a tendering system, some through EU tendering. Rarely do we use PR consultants for external advice. Our LEOs use them at times but a very small spend only. If €3.79m increases, it reflects increased investment.

Cllr O’Grady (SF): We are very much against the CE’s position. Is there a cap on the amount we can spend on external consultants in any area? Also are there funds due from the grants system from the Department? None of the money from government for housing (€972k) will be paid back to Council until work starts on site. Much of this money will go to outside consultants and the Council will have to pay up front. Won’t be recoupable for some time.

CE: The €972k is a cashflow issue. We are developing projects and we will recover our costs associated with housing capital projects once work commences on site. So this is just a cashflow issue. There is a certain percentage recoupable from the Department. On LAP €4.1m, there is no link between money spent on consultancy fees and the LAP income. There isn’t any cap on what we pay to consultants. We go to the market and a competitive tendering process. You pay for what you get.

 

10.  Mayor Seamus McGrath
“To seek a report outlining the Council’s previous involvement, in whatever form, in the provision of public garden allotments across the County. Also, to request that further consideration is given towards utilising Council owned land as garden allotments, perhaps on an interim basis and particularly in the vicinity of large population bases”.

Response to Cllr McGrath’s motion on allotments

Cllr McGrath (FF): Allotments have worked very well in the past in the county. They involve use of local produce, reducing transport costs, etc. They have many positives associated with them. Welcomes the report. Hopes the Municipal District would try to identify land that is available for garden allotments in association with local groups. Even in an interim or medium term this is something we should explore. Overall welcomes the report.

Cllr Canty (FG): Fully supports. We had to jump through a lot of hoops to get where we are in Ballincollig. At the time, the owner of the land objected to Cork County Council using it if he wasn’t allowed build on it. Ballincollig has 100 allotments. It is railed off, has toilets, etc. But that was the Regional Park land and it is working very well. There are people working on their allotments from 7am in the morning. There is a charge but it is minimal and it is encouraging people to get out. They have formed their own committee in relation to the running of it.

Cllr Barry (FG): Congratulates on bringing the motion …

 

I had to leave for a few minutes.

 

Cllr O’Flynn (FF) supports.

Cllr R McCarthy (SF): Commends allotments in town and villages where they are. Some provide employment through TUS schemes, etc. Some take groups and schools, some do courses. In Bandon, the land that they are on is Council land, some of which we would hope to develop for social housing. So the future of the allotments is a little uncertain. Hopes that the land would be allocated so as to give them greater security.

Cllr Dawson (FG): When Mitchelstown wanted an allotment, we found it very difficult until Cork County Council came on board.

Cllr Hurley (Ind): There is a community garden in Dunmanway getting great support from Cork County Council. It is a win-win situation for the Council and the community. It provides employment. It provides produce for the farmers market. Participated in the West Cork Food Festival. Community gardens are another focus for this motion.

CE: Welcomes the motion. The Director of Services is also keen to move this on. There have been some very successful allotments. It is important that communities who take the allotment project on have the capacity to do so. We don’t want land that is required for something else to displace allotment groups. Need reasonable permanency for them.

Cllr J Murphy (Ind): Thinks a great motion. In Mitchelstown, we could see some Council land being used as a car park down the line which is right next to an old folks home. They would love to see this land used as an allotment. If it comes to full Council for approval, hopes Members will remember what they said today and will not let it go ahead.

Cllr McGrath: Thanks Cllr O’Flynn for the point in relation to new developments. Thinks relevant. Could retrofit into existing estates where members are having difficulties in managing a particular area of ground. We will work through the Municipal Districts and come back to this issue.

 

11.  Cllr Noel Collins
“That this Council report on the need for public health warning signs to bathers and beachgoers to exercise caution on beaches, following the massive infestation of deadly jellyfish, which have reached our shores”.

Response to Cllr Collins’ motion on jellyfish

Cllr N Collins (Ind) outlines the dangers of the jellyfish.

Cllr Cullinane (InD): Onsite, it is vital that we bring awareness as to how dangerous this is.

Cllr A O’Sullivan (FF): Supports and commends Cork County Council staff for picking up hundreds of these jellyfish on Youghal beach. We are very happy in Youghal with the County Council response.

Cllr C O’Sullivan (FF): Thinks Cork County Council could not have predicted this influx of jellyfish and commends them for the speed with which they have responded. But beach users generally need to be aware.

CE: We have reacted swiftly to the issue of these jellyfish. Signage has been erected but welcomes any opportunity to increase awareness further. Hopefully the influx of jellyfish won’t last much longer.

Cllr N Collins (Ind): Thanks all for the support. Would appreciate if signs were to up on the 5 beaches in East Cork.

 

12.  Cllr Michael Murphy
“That this council writes to the minister to keep their promise as stated in programme for government document Page 48 – to protect and enhance the services available within our post office”.

Cllr Murphy (SF): A report commissioned by An Post in 2013 suggested that without government commitment to granting of services through the post office network, they wouldn’t stand a chance of survival. Some postmasters are maintaining services at below minimum wage income. Most can stay open for only a short while.

Cllr O’Shea (Ind): A number of reports have been commissioned by the government and An Post on how to improve the sustainability of the network going forward.   They have missed deadline after deadline in reporting back. Unless the services are used, 400 post offices are really going to be in serious trouble. We know post offices that have closed in recent years have had a devastating impact on their towns and villages. Suggests that we write to Ministers responsible for this. Minister Naughten has set up a committee in relation to rural post offices.   Thinks we should write to both Ministers responsible and ask for an update.

Cllr Jeffers (SF): Post offices are under pressure. Previous governments have let so many close. We have lost garda stations too. Everything must be urgently acted upon to save our post offices.

Cllr Coughlan (FF): Supports. Post office as an integral part of communities is to be strengthened. Current policy is non-existent. We are not seeing any policy. We need to send out a strong message that we want enhancement of the services post offices provide. It will be further centralization and movement towards banks if we don’t.

Cllr Doyle (FF): Supports. Through our Municipal Districts, we are always discussing and putting money back into rural Ireland and enhancing our towns and villages. We have a ready made business centre with our local post office. It behoves us all to help the services it offers.

Cllr Conway (Ind): Supports. Can’t highlight how important this really is. It was a big social aspect in rural areas. Wouldn’t blame government necessarily but the policy that is there doesn’t give confidence that the post offices would stay open. Non-viability was stated on the Week In Politics that this is what would close them. Supports suggestion that we would write to the Ministers.

Cllr D Collins (Ind): Post offices should be extending their services. Minister Ring said mobile post offices might be one way out of this. This is rural Ireland. A lot of towns have lost mobile banks. Social welfare was taken off post offices and put into the banks. We need to expand their services.

Cllr B Ryan (FF): Supports. Supports Cllr O’Shea’s suggestion. The government governs and we should insist that Ministers with the responsibility would come forward with a policy quickly. Would be terrible to leave communities without the services post office offer.

Cllr Cullinane (Ind): We have all been contacted about this issue. All our national services used to carry a sovereign seal.   This has disappeared from post offices. Nobody noticed, almost signalling what is coming down the line. They are a national service. We need those sovereign seals back.

Cllr Hayes (SF): Post offices are a vital part of the social fabric. In Clonakilty 15 years ago there was a threat of post office closure. We formed a committee and ensured its survival. You do have to use the facility if it is in your community. Nationally, services do need to be driven through the post office. Social welfare going through banks need to be knocked on the head. Welcomes the reopening of Leap post office last year.

Cllr J Murphy (Ind): Supports and concurs. Local postmistress felt that the public representatives in Dublin didn’t care. She couldn’t sleep worrying about what is going to happen. She has full time staff employed. The knock-on effect of what might happen is detrimental.

Cllr PG Murphy (FF): An old chestnut. We have to creative about how we look at increasing the services of the post office. A suggestion made is that they could become tourist information offices in small towns and villages. The way the government has undermined them with regard to social welfare payments is unacceptable.

Cllr R McCarthy (SF): Post offices are a way of life for people in rural Ireland. People in Dublin don’t understand this where you have wifi or banks on your doorstep. In rural Ireland, they don’t have those services. This is a matter of principle. If the government is serious about reviving rural Ireland, this motion should be taken seriously.

Cllr K Murphy (FG): We don’t use post offices properly. In some cases we have to be realistic as well. Modern technology must be installed in them. We have to prove conclusively if a post office is needed in an area and the we have to use it. Get as many ideas as we possibly can to make them viable. We have to use it or we will lose it.

Cllr O’Flynn (FF): They are talking about post offices one every 20 miles at the moment. They were saying that about local health centres at one stage. Use them or we’ll lose them. At the same time, they need to be reviewed with a heart that wants to keep them open. It behoves the Minister and his department to ensure that facilities that can be used in the local post offices will be put in place.

Cllr Harris (Ind): When you try to expand services in post offices, it is objected to by the banking sector. So it is a political decision. Thinks post offices would thrive were it not for the banking sector.

Cllr Murphy (SF): Thanks all for their support. Has no problem with what Cllr O’Shea proposed.

 

13.  Cllr Danielle Twomey
“That this council ask the Minister for health Simon Harris. To increase funding to the CUH in the new budget. In order to help alleviate the staffing shortage and to also give enough funding for the hospital to provide its own Mri equipment and facilities”. 

 Cllr Twomey (SF): Nurses and midwives are paying unfair taxes. We are losing our doctors and nurses to abroad. One nurse she spoke to was a single mother who is struggling to pay and says she may be forced to leave her country. Hard to visit this hospital and see the wonderful work it does but also to see the stress which they employees are under. The MRI at the CUH is owned by Alliance Medical and the hospital has an SLA in place. Constituent had seizures on a Friday, had to wait until the following Wednesday for an MRI. No staff available to conduct the scan. The CUH doesn’t take referrals for MRI scans unless private. Then you will be referred to a consultant. Young boy – bike accient – ER – needed MRI – nurses feared because out of hours – consultant answered phone by chance and agreed to carry out the scan – boy survived because he was treated adequately. A PR company gave her a copy of operating hours at MRI unit. CUH aims to provide high quality care, clinical excellence and safety. The hospital is totally relied on and more so with the closure of the Mercy ER department. The staff is amazing but is stretched to their limit. Staffing level needs to be addressed. Amends motion to increase pay and abolish crazy taxes.

Cllr Mullane (SF): A private company is running the MRI equipment in the CUH. The health service should never be down to the wealth that you have.

Cllr Twomey clarified her amendment to the motion: That the Minister would consider addressing the concerns that the staff have in relation to their pay conditions and their taxes.

The motion was passed.

 

CORRESPONDENCE FROM OTHER BODIES

14.  Davis College Mallow
Letter dated 10th October, 2016 in response to Council’s letter of 5th October in relation to the current progress on the construction at Davis College, Mallow.

‘Correspondence from Davis College Cork.pdf’

Cllr Mullane (SF): Was in discussions with the planning office here about Davis College. What is said here by the ETB is not correct. They don’t qualify at all. So can we confirm that ETB would be breaking planning conditions by going on site with prefabs?

CE: If the Cllr has a concern that the letter doesn’t represent the situation on the ground, there is process for anybody to issue their concern to our own planning department.

Cllr Mullane (SF): I have done that, I have been told that what the ETB is claiming is not ok and I have relayed that to Cork ETB.

Mayor: We will receive clarification.

 

15.  Port of Cork
Letter dated 11th October, 2016, in response to Council’s letter of 27th September, 2016, in relation to plans for the Marino Point site.

‘Port of Cork Correspondence.pdf’

Cllr Murphy (SF): The letter is brief. Who looks after the site at the moment? It is run down. Is it safe?

Cllr Cullinane (Ind): Met with the Port of Cork last week on this. They say several of the partners have to iron out some specific points but they do intend to move forward very shortly.

Mayor: This response doesn’t give us any new information! Will we revert to the Port and ask that they come back with new information when there is more to hand?

Cllr Murphy: Yes.

 

16.  VOTES OF CONGRATULATIONS

Cllr P O’Sullivan (FF): Munster Senior League Soccer Club.

Cllr D O’Brien (FF): Kildorrery karate club

Cllr Coughlan (FF)

Cllr D’Alton (Ind): Passage West karate club

Cllr D Collins (Ind): on Shamrocks match yesterday.

Cllr K Murphy (FG): Wants to be associated with that. Also own home team of Kinsale who won junior football champions.

Cllr PG Murphy (FF)

Lots more

 

17.  Any Other Business

Cllr Forde (FG): Could the CE help us out with N28? There was a recent accident on Carr’s Hill. A resident rang and said it caused a lot of hassle. We don’t have stats for accidents and around Bloomfield, Carr’s Hill, N28. We’re going to make a momentus decision in relation to the Port of Cork and these roads. Have looked for Demand Management Study to be published. Would also like to know the volume of traffic increase on the N40, N28 and at the Bloomfield. Can’t make an informed decision without this data. Will be asking the gardai if they can give us some stats. We never get stats for this. The Area Office wasn’t aware of that accident on that day. Asking the CE would he liaise with maybe the gardai or the agency and come up with those stats as soon as possible?

Cllr Couglan (FF): Bus Eireann is providing buses to transport people from the Cork Jazz festival to the Metropolitan area and to Midleton but not to Bandon. They have done this before. They provide a bus to Ballincollig, Blarney, Carrigaline, Midleton, etc. but not to Bandon. Asks that we write to Bus Eireann on this. Will be writing herself.

CE: Will convey members request to TII. We are agents on behalf of TII. Is sure that these matters have been raised through the public consultation process but will ask.

Cllr Forde (FG): Is asking for the Demand Management Study to be published for the last 18 months. Also asks that CE write to the Chief Garda Commissioner.

 

 This concluded the meeting.

 

 

 

 

Local area, Meeting notes, Minutes meetings, News

Notes from the October meeting of the Ballincollig-Carrigaline Municipal District

1.   Confirmation of Minutes
To consider the confirmation and signing of the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 19th September 2016.

Minutes 19.09.16 draft

Proposed and seconded.

To consider the confirmation and signing of the Minutes of the Special Meeting held on 19th September 2016.

Cllr McGrath wonders should we endorse these minutes at the next Special Meeting rather than today?

Municipal District Officer (MDO) says that what was given out at the last Special Meeting was a presentation and the next one will be a presentation on what is going out for public consultation in November.

General confusion amongst the Members who thought that they were going to be consulted at another meeting before the Draft Local Area Plan was produced for circulation.

Cllr Forde: Why have we had two meetings so the officials can tell us what they are going to do? In effect, the officials decide what is in the plan.

MDO: No. The decisions are made after the public consultation process. That’s when the decision-making starts for Members. This time, the Planning Policy Unit (PPU) did consultation with Members over and above what is required under the Act.

Cllr Collins: All the submissions that came in are they being weeded out before it goes for public consultation?

MDO not clear on this.

Cllr D’Alton checked up her notes from the Special Meeting and confirmed that although it wasn’t the impression given, the PPU had said that the next meeting would indeed be the presentation of the Draft Plan.

Confirmed that the next Special Meeting will be on 25th October at 10am – next special LAP meeting.

MDO: What will be presented at the next meeting is what is going to be published. If people want to put something in which wasn’t there at that stage, it is done under the public consultation process.

Cllrs Collins and Forde are worried that some submissions were late in, the PPU was under pressure to get the Plan out. They asked that these submissions would be left until after the public consultation has gone in and then they will be considered again.

Cllr McGrath: We are concerned that Members have no input into the Plan that is going out. I don’t feel like we have ownership of it.

All Members are in agreement.

Cllr Forde: I want to flag it that this matter of the late submissions will be cleared up on 25th. I had a private meeting with the PPU and they asked me to defer. They said to come back to them after the pubic consultation. Now this appears to be wrong?

Cllr McGrath: When the Draft Plan is published, you can make amendments only.

Cllr Collins: If there were late submissions that might top up the availability of land for housing requirements, they will be narrowing it done to one in the Draft Plan?

Cllr Canty: They showed us 3 late submissions the last day and they said that they’d go out as well. There are 800 houses planned for Ballincollig already. Spoke of Murnane O’Shea development. Details for the main new area for housebuilding planned for Ballincollig are already in.

Cllr McGrath: Please tell PPU that the Members want this next meeting to be a 2-way meeting, not a one way meeting.

MDO: OK but to be fair, PPU made it clear that they had time constraints, that they were working under significant pressure and that the next meeting would be a presentation.

 

2.  Consideration of Reports and Recommendations

National Roads – Proposed Speed Limit Changes
Works programmes updates: – Surface Dressing, Restoration Improvement, Drainage, Footpaths, Public Lighting

 Area Engineer (AE): For information purposes, the TII is doing a speed limit review for national roads. RPS has been appointed to put the proposals together. The proposals as recommended by RPS are what are in these drawings today.

  • The N40 to the Kinsale Road Roundabout.
  • The N27 to the airport from the Kinsale Road.
  • The N71 towards Ballinhassig.
  • The N28 from the Bloomfield Interchange.

RPS is proposing some changes to speed limits. They will go to public consultation next month. These proposals were shown to the area engineers and the Area Engineer has recommended some changes. Thinks we should look at the proposals and will email us with whom we should send our recommendations to.

Restoration improvement programme: We came before the Municipal District Committee with a 3 year programme and we have done the 2016 items listed on that. Alta Terrace is still to be done; hopes to have it done before the end of the month. We had some money left over from savings from a competitive tendering point of view. We extended the areas we were working in rather than transfer the money to 2017. It was primarily this that completed the section in Coach Hill. Yet more savings mean that we will do some roads from the 2017 programme. We don’t like doing road work of this type at this time of year but so far it has been relatively favourable from a temperature point of view.

After the bad storm weather in December last year, we got funding from the Department to cover the damage done to roads. Three other roads being done with this funding. Ballea Road: extra drainage and resurfacing. Ballinrea Road: drainage works done and surface will be redone from from north of Ashgrove roundabout to the urban area. Old Carrigaline Road is in very poor condition and it got a bad battering because it didn’t have an adequate storm network.

Surface dressing programme: All done.

Public lighting programme: Church Road and R610 done. We hoped to do a Ballincollig scheme but the public lighting allocation wasn’t sufficient at the start of the year. This was a big project. But other budgets were made available subsequently and we can put a new section of footpath in this area (to be started in next few weeks) and will include an underground network for public lighting.

Also a larger scheme included an additional light on Bracken Court. We have since decided to put in a new section of footpath where we removed the ditch at Scart Cross and we will put new additional lights on this rather than the single light planned beforehand. All the other individual lights are being done.

 Footpath programme: Has started. Focusing on Carrigaline at present but a second crew will come on line soon in Douglas and they will work in tandem.

Drainage programme: Mostly done. Apart from the drainage programme, we have a drainage company on site every day of the year who twice a week clean out drains.

Cllr Collins: There is a public light in the middle of the footpath of Highbury Drive. The location is dangerous and the light is faulty. Is delighted with the drainage at the Portgate Industrial Estate. Sightlines out of Carrigmore are dangerous; one cannot see traffic coming up from Ashgrove.

Cllr McGrath: Will there be any layout changes with the resurfacing of the Old Carrigaline Road? Will the footpath at Scart be done in the coming weeks? What about the €800k from the new school campus in relation to the drainage and resurfacing on the Ballinrea Road.

AE: On the Ballinrea Road, most of the perceived works will be beyond where we will be resurfacing. The €800k will be used for resurfacing, Ballinrea Cross and on the main Cork Road, etc.

Cllr Jeffers: When it is raining, because of the camber of the road, rainwater is flowing down into Grange Heights.

AE: Water should be cut off before it reaches Grange Heights. There will not be any new drains installed here – this road has a concrete base. But if we can improve the shape and stop water coming in off the Grange Road, we will do that.

Cllr Jeffers: When will the Donnybrook Hill lights be turned on?

AE: Footpath will be in and as part of that the ducting will be in as will the bases for the columns. Airtricity is swamped at the moment so thinks it will be December before those lights are connected. There is no timeline for by Douglas Hall. A week ago, they said they would be submitting a road opening licence.

Cllr Forde: Good news. If you get the detail of the footpath programme, you might let us have it. Years ago we would get a detail every month of what was being done in the Municipal District. Would that be too much trouble?

AE: I can try but at times it will not be possible. Or the programme may change before we get it. Will try though.

Cllr D’Alton: When the Rochestown to Passage West walkway was being done, there was a commitment to putting low wattage lights that wouldn’t throw lights too far. This was to protect the SPA in Lough Mahon. At the beginning, some of the lights were repeatedly broken. Some of the heads have been replaced with heads that throw a sharp white light, nothing like the soft light which had been committed to. Would there be funding remaining after this lighting programme to put replacement low wattage heads on these lights that are too bright?

AE: No. But will follow this up with Airtricity. Get details of the poles that have those new lights and will get the public lighting section to liaise with Airtricity too. They might replace them free of charge if the timeline isn’t too long.

Cllr D’Alton: Also on lighting, the lights on the quayside at Passage West haven’t been working since the works in Fr. O’Flynn Park.

AE: We are aware of this and we have identified what is wrong. We’re waiting for the contractor who did the work on the park to come back and fix it. He broke the cable. Not sure if the park will be closed off for fixing this but will give us warning if it is.

Cllr D’Alton: And the new lights in Tom Fahy Park and those installed in the Centre Block by the Town Council before its dissolution are also not working. The Centre Block ones may be troublesome because they are installed in the ground so drainage may be an issue.

Also on drainage, when some of the roads were being resurfaced, manholes were covered over. In the case of Chapel Hill, for example, the ones at the top were re-exposed but the ones at the bottom were not. Also tar was left in the drains running down the side of the hill so that the rainwater can’t reach the gully.

AE: Yes, we’re aware of that. Believes that drain is on the list to be cleared.

Cllr Murphy: Light beyond Eurospar where there are trees growing around it. Public lighting guy couldn’t find it on his map. Also please clean gullies in Ardmore Estate.

AE: We’re aware the trees are blocking the light.

 

3.  Disposal of Property

To consider the disposal of freehold interest in house and plot at No. 8 Dan Desmond Terrace, Carrigaline, Co. Cork to Jason Orchard and Deirdre O’Callaghan for the consideration of €350.00 inclusive of administration charges.

No objections

To consider the Grant of Wayleave and Right-of-Way at Castletreasure, Douglas, Co Cork to Mr. Maurice Walsh, Clonmoyle, Coachford, Co Cork for the consideration of €1.00.

No objections.

To consider the disposal of property at Castletreasure, Co. Cork to College Corinthians A.F.C. by way of lease for the term of 35 years for the consideration of €200.00 per annum.

Cllr Forde: Raised questions about this at a previous meeting and didn’t get a satisfactory answer. Said that she was unhappy with disposal of that land and access/egress. The main access outlined in the planning was subsequently built over and the council then decided that the access would go through an estate and the residents objected. We all supported the residents. There was a parcel of land which was given to College Corinthians prior to this – that’s great – and this next parcel is great news for them but queries why some of the land could not be designated for another sporting organisation. There are many sporting organisations in Douglas which need to be facilitated, including Douglas Rugby and gymnastics. Has never been told what the cost of the 25 acres was. Who paid for it – housing or recreation/amenity? How much is left? Will the topography mean that it cannot be used for anything? Doesn’t want to hold College Corinthians up but feels the whole way this land has been bought, used and dispersed is open to question. Still wants to see sight of the email Cllr D’Alton saw when the South Cork Manager was circulating a map at a previous meeting. Would like to see this and the date on it. Hopes the Local Area Plan will designate land for other sporting organisations.

Cllr McGrath: This isn’t suitable land for recreation. Thinks we saw a figure before on its purchase cost but doesn’t have it to hand. There is a question mark over the land and why it was purchased. Is happy to propose this for College Corinthians. They are the only club who can benefit from this parcel of land because of the access issues.

Cllr Forde: But you do accept that the access issues have stymied other organisations getting use from that land?

MDO: The original access would have gone through the estate anyway. The new access is 100-200 metres away from the original one. You are saying houses were built over the original access.

Cllr Forde: The access that was proposed originally was a main spine road into the estate. It was the subject of many meetings between the councillors and officials. The officials said then that access could be via a small green. But the residents’ kids used to play on that green. Hopes the LAP will come up trumps so that sporting organisations won’t be forced into other areas.

MDO: Cost of the site would be have been available at the time. You said you were “never able to find out” what the price of it was. But this was publicly available information.

Cllr Forde: That was well over 12 years ago and was in the context of the land being used for recreation and amenity.

Cllr Desmond: Seconds Seamus’s proposal to accept it for College Corinthians.

 

4.  General Municipal Allocation/Town Development Fund

GMA and TDF

MDO: We agreed to set aside €36k for the skate park in Carrigaline if there was a call from Sports Capital. We did it last year because we knew there was a call but it was not successful. We agreed to hold the application and funding but there was no call. So there is €36k in the GMA that hasn’t been spent. It has been agreed that this money would be used for the skatepark and I am waiting for the finance department to come back to report on a Special Planning Contribution in Carrigaline. These two together should be enough to build a skate park. The good news for 2017 will mean that we will have more money available in the kitty for 2017. There is €8,200 left in the GMA. The AE wants €3k to do works on an open area in Frankfield. It was an issue last year. That would leave €5,200 in the GMA.

On the TDF, we allocated money to various schemes. The Street Painting Scheme will use only €5k. About €10k of the signage will be used. So there is €50,500 remaining in the TDF. The AE has suggested that there is a badly needed footpath on the Rochestown Road heading from the hotel into Douglas. The rest could then be used for works in Passage West, Ballincollig, Douglas, etc.

Cllr O’Donnabhain: There is one remaining stretch of footpath in Ballincollig that needs to be addressed. On the way down to the Regional Park. People are stepping off the footpath because it is too narrow and the road is very busy. Urgent health and safety issue.

Cllr Desmond: Welcomes the report and thinks we will have to be tougher. Delighted for the footpaths to be done on the Rochestown Road. Asks for more detail on the Frankfield situation.

Cllr McGrath: Agrees with the skateboard funding proposal. The Minister did say there would be a Sports Capital Grant coming up next year. There is huge potential for the community park in Carrigaline. Was hoping for a running track. Thinks it would get fantastic use. It is off-road and the space is there.

AE: The section of footpath is that opposite the hotel on the Rochestown Road. Not sure if the funding will stretch to the section that has no footpath. The existing footpath is level with the road and is flat and unsafe.

Cllr McGrath: That would be good. Has a motion today about two estates. Would appreciate if their footpath requirements could be considered.

MDO: The width of the road where Cllr O’Donnabhain is talking about is the issue. There isn’t much can be done there. But will look.

In Frankfield, there is a disputed area of green at the rear of Dunvale. There was an attempt to incorporate it into private gardens. It got contentious but has all been resolved. In our efforts to assist, we are proposing to cut the grass.

The running track will be looked at.

Cllr Collins: Twinning – will funding for this be out of the TDF? The County Manager is now saying twinning will be with Municipal Districts rather than with a town. How will this affect it? What about signage? Why is the spending less than allocated?

MDO: Doesn’t know about Municipal Districts and twinning. Carrigaline Community and Ballincollig are the only twinnings which have been funded this year. Is not yet aware of the CE’s proposals.

On signage, Douglas Tidy Towns were going to put up new signs on a lot of the streets. We said we would work with them but when they went to property owners, the proposal wasn’t as well received as was expected. We might have over-provided for signage.

 

5.  To consider the following Notices of Motion in the name of:

 Cllr. D Forde
1.  “That the Area Engineer and MD manager clarify if Monfield estate has been taken in charge and what progress is being made to address the infrastructural deficiencies.”

 Cllr Forde: This has been dealt with.

2.  “That a safe crossing be installed at or adjacent to St Lukes National School or a Traffic Warden be appointed to the school in the interests of the pupils’ safety.”

Cllr Forde: For many years the residents in the vicinity of Douglas Lawn and in the school have been asking for traffic calming. It is very narrow under the BowWow bridge and footpaths are very narrow. The principal of St. Luke’s School is asking for a pedestrian crossing between the school and the church. It is dangerous. Would like to incorporate one from the church to the other side of the road also. And to incorporate assistance for people trying to exit Douglas Lawn. That whole area needs some alternative way of crossing.

AE: There are no real speed or traffic volumes on Churchyard Lane. Is willing to speak to the principal to understand where she is coming from. Whereas there is much more traffic on Church Road, there isn’t a suitable location to serve the school with a pedestrian crossing. You have a tabletop ramp outside the church and you run out of footpath on the southern side of the road. A school warden is out of my control. It has come up many times but it is clear that we are not employing any more school wardens.

Cllr McGrath: Believes the decision on the LPT is facilitating a new school warden scheme. Thinks this will be brought forward as a proposal soon.

AE: Thinks there is no satisfactory answer for Church Road.

 

 Cllr. S McGrath
1.  “To seek a written report outlining who is responsible for the removal of abandoned vehicles in a public place.”

Response to McGrath’s motion on abandoned vehicles

Cllr McGrath: Thanks for the report. Clears the issue up in general. Abandoned vehicles are a huge problem. What about estates not taken in charge.

MDO: We will not clear from estates not taken in charge. The Road Traffic Act deals with abandoned vehicles on a public road or in a car park. But if someone abandons one in a field, etc. it is a waste management issue. It becomes litter. So perhaps take it up with the Environment Department.

Cllr McGrath: Gardai acknowledge a road in an estate not taken in charge to be a public place. You have to have insurance to drive on it. But taking away abandoned vehicles is a significant draw on Council resources. It isn’t ok that people can leave vehicles lying around.

Cllr D’Alton: Could you tell us what cost is involved in moving a vehicle? It might be illustrative for the public.

MDO/AE: The biggest cost is that it is a significant drain on time. An engineer has to go out to check the vehicle, come back and do paperwork, then go back out to check that it has been removed. Will find out the cost of getting the vehicle lifted.

Cllr O’Donnabhain: Designated spaces per house in a housing estate coupled with a transient population – this makes vehicle dumping a real problem. Echoes comments seeking stronger regulation. Every vehicle has a registration and the registered owner is liable for fines, etc. when other aspects of the Road Traffic Act is not complied with. There can be a health and safety issue too. Could perhaps be referred to the JPC? Gardai have a role here too. Local gardai in Ballincollig are helpful.

Cllr Canty: This has arisen many times over the years. We don’t seem to have a comprehensive attitude towards it at all. Selling cars on the side of the road is now happening again. Within estates too. You’ll still see signs on the side of the road. We have to enforce our rules and regulations. Recommends that perhaps we could refer it to the SPC.

 

2.  “To request that Mount Rivers & Newton Court be included in a future Footpath Work Programme.”

Cllr McGrath: Have already spoken about this. Mount Rivers is a 40 year old estate. Many of the residents are elderly. Some have taken tumbles. Cllr Jeffers supports the request for Newton Court. The volume of footfall through the estate increases year on years. The school is now Munster’s largest primary school.

AE: These will be looked at in 2017.

 

3.  “To seek a written update on the proposed road realignment at the front of the Maryborough Ridge development.”

MDO: We have no report on this. Will circulate the report and we will talk about it at the next meeting. 

 

Cllr. M D’Alton
1.  “That, cognisant of the damaging noise and air pollution associated with heavily trafficked motorways, the National Roads Design Office/Transport Infrastructure Ireland would consider an entirely alternative route for the new M28 which would avoid its being led through built up residential areas.”

Response to D’Alton’s motion on M28

Cllr D’Alton: We’re all aware that the new motorway to lead from Ringaskiddy is being designed and the EIS and planning application is in preparation. Cognisant that the Port of Cork predicts the volume of freight traffic on this road to increase by almost 3,500 vehicles per year. At present, the route that is being considered is down that of the existing N28. Residents along this route already have huge issues with noise. Even if the residents are to be provided with noise protection, there is only physically so much mitigation noise barriers can give. It is very difficult to engineer the noise issue out. It is virtually impossible to engineer out the issue with air pollution from what will be largely diesel engines. There is increasing awareness of health-related concerns associated with air pollution from busy roads such as this. For example one recent study in the Netherlands indicated that for every increase of 5 µg/m3 in annual exposure to PM2.5, the risk of death for men rises by 7%. And PM­2.5 is a relatively large particulate; there are others which are much smaller. Notes the report that has been issued by Bob O’Shea and thanks for it. We are all aware that the Ringaskiddy traffic must connect with the N40 but I disagree that the only way it can connect to the N40 is through residential areas.

Cllr Desmond: Is concerned in particular about the noise issue. The biggest concern is the standard which TII applies to this. The answer you always get is that the noise experienced is to an acceptable standard. The acceptable is at 60 dB for a greenfield site but all they have to do in relation to this development is not to exceed current exposure which is already far in excess of what anybody should have to endure in their homes.

Cllr Forde: We are all currently involved with residents who have a strong objection to the proposed route for the N28 Ringaskiddy Motorway scheme. These residents have mobilised significant public opinion. I live smack bang in the middle of this area. I can confirm that congestion of traffic has increased significantly in last few weeks. Cannot imagine what it will be like when the proposals are implemented. Also concerned that the long-promised Demand Management Study still hasn’t been given to us. The Douglas LUTS study confirms that noise is way beyond norms. When we raise this issue and ask for noise barriers, the officials tell us it is not the NRA’s problem. So noise and air pollution will cause this to run and run. The reply from Bob O’Shea doesn’t cut it.

Cllr McGrath: The reply doesn’t tell us anything new. Residents attended a meeting here with many of the councillors and at the time, it was confirmed that the EIS would look at alternatives. The response here doesn’t show that those alternatives are being considered. There are indeed existing pollution issues. Asks for some feedback arising from the August meeting.

Cllr D’Alton: I have significant concerns with regard to the EIS. Have been involved with the preparation and analysis of EIS’s long enough to know that it is far too easy to appear to address issues in EIS’s so that they look ok, but they are not really when the project gets implemented. At that meeting in County Hall with the Roads Design Office, I asked the engineers to be aware that there are noise and air pollution issues that are simply beyond their control. And the impacts of those cannot be engineered out. The reality is that if the noise levels experienced by some residents increase yet further, I think they would have a genuine case to bring to the European Courts.

MDO: I will revert to Bob O’Shea and ask for feedback on the August meeting, particularly in relation to noise and air pollution.

All agreed that this would be good.

 

2.  “That the road surface in Maryborough Court would be addressed as soon as possible.”

Cllr D’Alton: Residents contacted me about the road surface in Maryborough Court. Pleased to hear the AE talk about savings in the implementing of the resurfacing programme. Hopeful that perhaps some of those savings could be used to do this surface. The residents maintain the estate well but the roads are narrow, there is a lot of on-street parking and the surface is disintegrating extensively in places. Had hoped the annual programme of surface dressing could possibly be used but understand that this is now no longer permitted within estates. Perhaps the AE could expand on this?

Cllr McGrath: A number of us were contacted about this. Have been talking about this with the AE for some time. Knows she can’t commit at this stage to the resurfacing.

AE: Any savings we have made have been used. We will be lucky to get to the end of the year unscathed. Won’t be doing anything in Maryborough Court this year. It is true that other councillors have mentioned Maryborough Court to me. The roads that were on the programmes this year were in a worse condition than Maryborough Court. Have to prioritise based on the need. It is not suitable for surface dressing. We don’t use surface dressing as a finish in estates because it is loose. Up to this year just gone, a certain proportion of it could be used inside in housing estates. It would be a bitumen surface. But this year we were not allowed to do this any more. Will look to see if something can be done next year but will prioritise relative to other estates.

 

Cllr. E Jeffers

1.  “To implement road markings exiting Glenside into Grangevale in Pinecroft to stop traffic and give way to traffic in Glenside.”

AE: We are still doing road markings although the weather is trying to turn. Will link up with Cllr Jeffers and identify exact area.

 

2.  “To reduce the height of footpaths or allow a gully to access the culvert at Greenwood estate, Togher Road to help with flooding.”

AE: The footpath is right next to a pedestrian crossing. We did flooding protection works and put in a lot of extra gullies. So if the capacity is in the river, that problem is solved. What happened on 29th December is that the river at that point has a concrete beam over the top of it. The full bore was taken up, the volume of water was so great in the river. A resident of Greenwood told me this. A flash flood came down.   In most situations except the extreme, what is there will more than adequately cater for it. No properties were affected.

The residents got an awful battering in 2012, so understands why they are nervous but there is little more we can do. Will talk to the Flood Relief people and make sure there is nothing more can be done. Although we have spoken to them before.

 

2.  “To redevelop and improve the surrounding areas at the mass rock on the airport road to enhance its potential for tourism and theological purposes.”

Cllr Jeffers: The Council did work to this before. It is a gorgeous area off the airport road. People use it to pray. Mass Rocks are historic. This one is very hard to get into now. People did stop using it because there was trouble – horses, litter, etc. Would be something that could make it make it more accessible. There appears to have been some work done on it recently?

AE: The Mass Rock is on private property. We’re limited in what we can do.

Cllr Forde: Didn’t a committee come before us to ask us about this?

MDO: That was about 20 years ago. But there was only so much they could do themselves because it is on private land.

AE: We haven’t done anything on the rock in the last 5 years.

Cllr Jeffers: It is open to the public and it is used.

MDO: It isn’t ours, so it is not our responsibility either. Would be slow for us to take on something like this on private ground. It is very steep. Regulations for slopes, etc. – this wouldn’t do now.

 

6.  Votes of Congratulations

Cllr Desmond: Congratulations to Ballincollig on winning the County Final. They beat NEMO on the way!

 

7.  Any Other Business

Cllr Murphy: Dock Cottages, Passage West – the residents have their bins with Greenstar. But Greenstar won’t come up the road. That means the bins would be sitting on Church Hill. Greenstar says Wiser has narrower trucks than Greenstar does so this why Wiser can go up the road but Greenstar can’t.

AE: Bin collections are a private service between individuals.

Cllr Murphy: Mariners Quay, Passage West – can we write to the property owner?

Cllr D’Alton: There is no overall property owner in this instance. There are a whole lot of individual property owners, all of whom are supposed to pay into a management fee. The property is then managed by a property management company. I have spoken to them several times, most recently about two months ago. Many of the owners bought during the boom and have gone bust themselves since. So they are not paying their annual charge which funds the property management. As it stands, the fund is not adequate to clean the building. On a positive note, the property management company says that in these improving financial times, many of the properties are being moved on. So they hope that the current situation will change. Absolutely write to the property management company, but just be aware that they are as fully cognisant of the need to clean the building as we are.

Cllr Forde: Douglas traffic management alleviation works. Suggests relocating the bus stop outside St. Columba’s School back towards Shamrock Lawn. Has received an email from a resident to make a case for this. He suggests that the footpath would be cut into the tree border. It would enable buses to pull off the roadway and allow traffic freeflow down the hill. It makes sense.

AE: This is an issue for Bus Eireann. But Eireann is very much against bus stops off line because it takes so long for the bus to get back on line. Maybe they would be willing to move the bus stop back without creating the layby.

MDO asks that Cllr Forde would forward the email to him.

Cllr Jeffers: Palmbury, Togher – the residents say the green is going to be taken away to accommodate parking. Is this the case?

AE: Cllr O’Laoghaire asked about this. County Hall hasn’t committed to it. Grangeway residents also requested. Some of this is planning related because it is taking away from green space. There are a lot of steps involved and there are financial steps as well.

MDO: Nicola Radley was to send us 2016 projects that didn’t get funded. We are now wondering whether there would be a call from the GMA for 2017 to fund these projects. There is one for our area – Carrigaline Tidy Towns for the Dermot Lynch Memorial Plaque. They want to put a plaque on the bridge to commemorate him. They were looking for €2k.

Cllr Desmond: Concerned because doesn’t think that the 1916 committee has finished its discussion on where these additional projects might be funded from. Believes they had not yet concluded that they should go back out to Municipal Districts to be funded from the GMA. Believes we should hold off until this is confirmed.

Cllr D’Alton: Very much in support of Carrigaline Tidy Towns. The work they do is excellent. But concerned because they got significant funding from the GMA to do the 1916 garden already. There is a big draw on our GMA and just wants its distribution to be equitable.

MDO: Much of the funding for the garden was from a separate source, not from the GMA. So it shouldn’t affect the equitable distribution issue.

Agreed we will put it on the agenda for next month.

Cllr Jeffers: Believe Carrigaline Tidy Towns opened a Garden of Remembrance. Just wondering why only some councillors got invitations to it?

MDO: The invitations were not issued by Cork County Council.

 

News

My submission to the proposal to extract soil from the Martello Tower peninsula to use on the East Tip of Haulbowline Island

A planning application (16/6219) has been lodged with Cork County Council in the name of the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Forestry to remove 134,000 cubic metres of topsoil and subsoil from 9.3 hectares of ground within an overall site area of 12.1 hectares and to include onsite screening and crushing of some excavated material, transport of approximately 114,000 cubic metres of material off-site to East Tip, Haulbowline Island, remediation and reprofiling and landscaping of site with retained material post extraction.

My submission to the planning application is here:
Submission to CCC, 04-10-2016

Local area, News

Port of Cork Material Alteration to PA0035, Redevelopment at Ringaskiddy

The Port of Cork is requesting permission from An Bord Pleanála for alterations to the development proposed under PA0035 for which planning permission was granted in May 2015.

PA0035 was a planning application made under the Strategic Infrastructure Act for a redevelopment of the Port of Cork’s facility in Ringaskiddy.  This redevelopment comprised works at Ringaskiddy East, Ringaskiddy West and Paddy’s Point.

The components of the Ringaskiddy East development for which permission was granted are:

  • Berth 1, a new 314m Container / Multipurpose Berth to the north of the existing ferry berth, to accommodate vessels carrying different cargoes.
  • Berth 2, a new 200m Container Berth to the north of berth 1.
  • Reclamation of approx. 2.4ha to facilitate the new berths.
  • Installation of a new link-span comprising a floating pontoon and access bridge at Berth 1 to facilitate ro-ro operations.
  • Surfacing of existing port lands to provide an operational area for container and cargo storage.
  • Dredging of the seabed to a level of -13.0m Chart Datum (CD).
  • Removal of an existing link-span, to the south of the ferry terminal.
  • Installation of container handling cranes and terminal transport equipment.
  • Maintenance building, administrative buildings and entrance kiosks.

The grant of permission was for a period of 10 years and was subject to 18 conditions.

The alterations now being requested by the Port of Cork are for:

  • A change in the landside handling system from Rubber Tyre Gantry Cranes to a Straddle Carrier system with ultimate installation of 2 Rail Mounted Gantry Cranes to work with the Straddle Carriers. This would result in containers being stacked 3 high as opposed to 5 high, a 7% larger footprint for container storage, altered noise barriers and altered lighting columns.
  • To omit the linkspan from Berth 1 and to use it for containers only.  The linkspan makes Roll On-Roll Off trade possible.  Because Ro-Ro activity cannot be commenced until the upgrading of the N28 is complete, omitting the linkspan would increase the berth length for containers from 514 metres to 560 metres (an increase of 9%).  Additional dredging (18% additional over that already permitted in Ringaskiddy East) would also be required.
  • The replacement of two mooring bollards and landside storm bollard with three new mooring bollards, each requiring 8 piles. This would allow the ferry terminal and container terminal operations to be separated.
  • Relocation and realignment of entrance and exit area. This would not impact on approved plans for vehicular access to and from site.
  • New maintenance, office and customs buildings with dedicated compound to the south of the existing Ferry Terminal access road by the eastern entrance to the Port of Cork lands.  The new maintenance building would be 22.5 metres high and capable of accommodating 3 Straddle Carriers simultaneously.  The maintenance building would also be built outside of the footprint to which PA0035 related.

If you wish to express your views in relation to this material alteration, you can make a submission to be received by An Bord Pleanála at 64, Marlborough Street, Dublin 1 by close of business on Friday, 7th October.  Include:

  • the reference PA0035 Material Alteration – Port of Cork, Ringaskiddy
  • your name and address
  • a fee of €50, although there is no charge if you made a submission to last year’s planning application.

Documentation (reports and drawings) submitted by the Port of Cork in respect of this material alteration can be viewed at the public planning desk of Cork County Council, County Hall.  I have scanned the reports (I cannot scan the drawings) and they are available here.  If you would like any clarification on these, please contact me.  Just be aware that any annotations or highlighting are from my own work on the documents.

Covering notes
PoC introductory letter
Alterations Report
Screening for AA, Chapters 1-4
Screening for AA, Chapters 4-5
Environmental Report, Chapters 1-6
Environmental Report, Chapters 7-10
Environmental Report, Chapters 11-13
Environmental Report, Chapters 14-16

Meeting notes, Motions 2016, News

My motion to full Council, 26th September 2016

“That in building new playgrounds or regenerating existing playgrounds, Cork County Council would introduce a policy of application of the Principles of Universal Design by installing a range of equipment which can be used by both able and less able bodied children alike.  In addition, that towards achieving universal design, Cork County Council would begin a programme of retrofitting all existing playgrounds in its jurisdictional area with at least one item of play equipment specifically designed for inclusivity of all.”

Not much is written about the benefits of playgrounds, but the fact is that in a world where play patterns are changing, where there is a decrease in free play and outdoor play and where concerns over children’s safety leads to increasing adult supervision, playgrounds are more important than ever before. Playgrounds help children to develop physical awareness and abilities, social skills, language interaction, motor skills, spatial awareness, balance, co-ordination, fitness and emotional wellbeing.

There are lots of playgrounds in County Cork. They are bright colourful places, a focus in the community, well used and well maintained. But very few of our playgrounds are universally designed. This often means that when a family with two children take an afternoon out in the local playground, the able-bodied child can play freely whilst her wheelchair-bound sibling can do little other than look on.

13% of people living in County Cork have a disability. Of those, over 6,000 are children under the age of 14. The National Intellectual Disability Register tells us that 98.7% of those under 18 with a disability are living at home. So for these children and their parents, the playground as a destination is critically important. Much of the equipment installed in playgrounds is labelled in the catalogues as being universally accessible. But the reality is quite different.

In preparing for this motion, I had the pleasure of visiting St. Paul’s Special Needs School which caters for pupils aged 4 – 18 years with moderate, severe or profound general learning disabilities.   According to the National Intellectual Disability Register, almost half of children registered as disabled fall into this category. I spoke to the principal and to many of the teachers so that I might benefit from their direct experience as to the value of County Cork’s playgrounds for their students.

The immediate reaction from all to whom I spoke was that there are nowhere near enough facilities which their students can use. The new swings in the Ballincollig Regional Park with the back and harness were singled out as being great for many. Basket swings everywhere were spoken of positively. But swings like these can be used by a wheelchair-bound child only if he/she is small enough to be lifted in. There is a wheelchair accessible roundabout in Lisgoold. There is a simple wheelchair swing in Fermoy and a top of the range wheelchair swing in Whitegate. The latter was provided by the Whitegate community, assisted by SECAD. That’s it.

Universal design does not require every piece of equipment to be accessible to every child, nor does it mean providing stand-alone features designed for the exclusive use of children with disabilities. It means choosing a variety of features and products that are usable by children of all abilities. Installing a spring system on gates to reduce the risk of a child bolting. Providing a sufficient range of equipment to cater for gross motor skills without undue physical effort on the part of the carer. Catering for finer motor skills with activity panels at ground level. Allowing access onto equipment via a transfer platform or ramp. If for example, more than one spring rocker is provided, install one with a back rest and sides.

Because children with disabilities can often be marginalised when it comes to play opportunities, the National Play Policy, “Ready, Steady, Play” (2004) recommended that all new and revamped local authority playgrounds would be universally designed.  But Cork County Council’s recreational policy drafted in 2006, doesn’t mention universal design at all.

So I ask that we amend this policy to reflect our collective aim of making playgrounds equally usable by all children.

Retrofitting just one item of universally accessible equipment into existing playgrounds is a small ask. Simple rainbow chimes provide sensory benefits, take very little space and cost in the region of €1,100. A chalkboard that allows children who cannot verbalise to express themselves is €700. A small spinning, swinging bowl for one costs €1,400. The same for two or three children is about €5,300. A gentle rocker with a back to seat several children costs about €4,200. A roundabout accessible to both wheelchairs and able-bodied children can be purchased for about €6,300 and needs a 17cm dig to make it level with the ground. These are just examples to illustrate how retrofitting just one item of universally accessible equipment is financially achieveable, does not need specialist installation but would extend the multi-faceted benefits of our playgrounds to all children, all over the county.

Meeting notes, Minutes meetings, News

Notes from a full meeting of Cork County Council, 26th September 2016

Notes from a meeting of the full Council, 26th September 2016

Confirmation of Minutes of Meeting of the Council held on 12th September, 2016.

‘Minsept1.16.pdf’-2

Proposed and seconded.

 

  1. Votes of Sympathy (if any) to the relatives of:
  • members or employees of the Council,
  • dignitaries of Church or State, or
  • members of old I.R.A. and Cumann na mBan.
Votes of Sympathy (if any) to the relatives of:
  • members or employees of the Council,
  • dignitaries of Church or State, or
  • members of old I.R.A. and Cumann na mBan.


 

Bandon Kinsale Municipal District Meeting March, 2016

  • Disposal of Ballinacubby, Kinsale, Co. Cork

Kanturk Mallow Municipal District  Meeting, 2nd September, 2016:

  • Disposal of 6 Edel Grove, Castlemagner, Co. Cork.

West Cork Municipal District Meeting, 5th September,  2016:

  • Disposal of 34, Riverdale Estate, Skibbereen, Co. Cork.
  • Disposal grant of wayleave through Car Park at Mardyke Street, Skibbereen, Co. Cork.
  • Disposal of land at Western Road, Clonakilty, Co. Cork.

 

  1. Filling of vacancy on the AILG.

Cllr K Murphy (FG) proposes Cllr Sheppard (FG). Seconded and agreed.

 

 

  1. Filling of vacancy for Cork County Council representative to the Governing Authority of University College Cork

Cllr B Moynihan (FF) was proposed by Cllr O’Flynn (FF). Seconded and agreed.

 

  1. Nomination to the Board of Directors for Mitchelstown Community Forum

Cllr D O’Brien (FF) was proposed by Cllr O’Flynn (FF). Seconded and agreed.

 

  1. Local Property Tax: Consideration of report on the financial impact of the LPT variation under section 20 of the Finance ( Local Property Tax) Act 2012, as amended by Section 5 of the Finance (Local Property Tax) Act 2013

LPT Variation Report 2017

Lorraine Dempsey (Head of Finance):

  • A report was circulated last week detailing the items that had to be considered by the Members in taking the decision whether or not to vary the LPT.
  • Members have to consider income and expenditure, the financial position of the local authority (and two other things).
  • The rate variation applies for the year only.
  • Last year the decision was taken to reduce by 5%.
  • The government has indicated that the same funding model will continue for 2017.
  • A variation by 5% will impact discretionary income by €2m.
  • We are depending on the national budget for grants and subsidies, any changes in funding or requirements that we have to meet.
  • We want to reduce reliance on using reserves but we have to balance that against delivery of services.
  • Cork County Council didn’t receive any submissions on the variation in the rate of LPT consultation.

 

Deputy CE:

  • We’re not determining the budget today; it is still work in progress. The decision the Members make today will impact on this in due course.
  • An adjustment to the LPT amounting to €2m might not be significant. But the real comparison should be made against the discretionary spend once all the commitments we have are taken into account.
  • We have experienced years of budgetary restrictions. As recently as 2011, our budget was €350m. This has reduced significantly. These restrictions have brought efficiencies which are welcome but service levels have been impacted and the Council has been forced to adopt a budget deficit. It is possible to ride these storms on a temporary basis but not permanently. Compares it to road resurfacing.
  • The LPT variation is applied on the gross amount. So it is a very significant reduction.
  • The report issued shows that the impact on householders individually is very small.
  • A 5% reduction reduces the annual household bill by €16 for a house of the value of that of 79% of all houses in the county.
  • The benefits of reducing LPT by only 5% last year have been very positive.
  • We ask the Members not to make any change in the LPT rate. Even if a zero change is made, we are still likely to be presenting a deficit budget in a few weeks time.

Cllr K Murphy (FG): Thanks for the reports. FG intends to vote for a zero variation – stick with the base rate. Thinks it’s a no-brainer. The savings from any kind of a LPT reduction to the householder are minimal. Everything that comes into the Council comes back into planned maintenance. The deficit budget we have been experiencing over the past few years will impact on services. We are also being impacted by the global revaluations. We were compensated for these last year but are bearing the full brunt of the €1.3m loss this year. Those who have high valuations on their properties will benefit more from LPT reduction than those who have lower value properties and can less afford it. Thinks we should give back better insulation, etc. to all those houses. Thinks we need to return core services to the people. If we don’t pass back the maximum amount to the Council, we’re doing our constituents a disservice.

Cllr O’Flynn (FF): Thanks Lorraine and Declan for support. With an equalisation fund of 20%, we in Cork County are losing out. There is €8.12m taken off what is gathered in the county through LPT. There is a big drop this year from €2.9 to €8.4 going towards the pension fund. We as councillors are elected to provide services for the people we represent. We can only do this if we have the finances. It is the government responsibility to provide this funding. This government has cut budgets to local authorities over the past number of years. The only sources of income we have are LPT, commercial rates, rents, etc. Recognises the benefits of the decision taken last year. Will ask for a 5% reduction again this year. There are hard-pressed householders who shouldn’t see any increase in their property tax bills.

Cllr Hurley (Ind): We have debated and discussed this over the weekend and have reached a conclusion but we will wait until the debate takes place to state our position.

Cllr O’Grady (SF): We’re calling for a 15% reduction in LPT for 2017. The so-called LPT is an unjust and regressive tax which takes no account of income, is not local because its collected by the revenue commissioners and put into central government funds to keep councils barely afloat. If it were a local tax it would be collected locally so that funds could be used to service the local community. SF’s position on this has remained consistent since its introduction. We would abolish it for a tax on high earners. This position is consistent and follows through on a commitment to our constituents that we will continue to reduce LPT by 15% until it is abolished. Families expected an increase in services from the LPT. They were sold a pup. The truth is that people are not getting extra services from paying this tax. They are struggling to pay and not seeing any real benefit. The fund was taken to pay Irish Water for the first year. We are putting €6m back into the local economy, not taking €6m from the LA budget.

Cllr Rasmussen (Lab): This is a difficult time of year because we’re under a certain amount of pressure from both sides. We spend a great deal of time complaining that we don’t have services. The stark reality is that while it is important to give back something to the people, €16 per year is very small. You can argue that when coupled with other income tax breaks it might be €40-50. We are trying to find a balance between services and household budgets. Will wait and see what other Members are doing but would like to see a cut of some small percentage.

Cllr K McCarthy (Ind): Is independent but does not vote with the independent grouping. Agrees with the SF position. Would go further if possible.

The Mayor asks whether we will go to a vote. Many members say yes; SF disagrees. They want to debate. The Mayor puts it to a vote on whether to proceed to a vote on the variations in LPT rate proposed.

Result: 42 in favour, 8 against

Members proceed to a vote on the LPT rate of variation without a debate.

Vote on 5% proposed by Cllr O’Flynn (FF): 16 in favour, 36 against

Vote on 15% proposed by Cllr O’Grady (SF): 7 in favour, 43 against

Vote on 0% proposed by Cllr Murphy (FG): 40 in favour, 10 against

The decision is that the LPT will be at the base rate.

 

 

REPORTS & RECOMMENDATIONS OF COMMITTEES

  1. Cobh Municipal District

REPORT UNDER SECTION 179 OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ACT 2000.

(a)   R639 Sallybrook Pedestrian Crossing Glanmire.
(b)  L3004 Glounthaune Traffic Calming Scheme

‘R639S Sallybrook Part 8 managers Report..pdf’
‘L3004 Glounthane Traffic Calming Part 8 Managers Report – Septmeber 2016.pdf’

Proposed and seconded.

 

  1. European and International Affairs Committee

Report on visit to Ajara, Georgia

‘Report on Ajara Visit 2016.pdf’

No comments from Members.

 

REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF OFFICERS

  1. Quarterly Report of the Chief Executive on Economic Development

‘Economic Development Report.pdf’-2

Cllr D’Alton (Ind) asks for the Deputy CE to explain why there is such an apparent difference in LEO grants approved in South Cork and in North/West Cork. The amount approved in South Cork is much higher than that in North/West Cork but the amount actually paid out is much higher in North/West Cork than in South Cork. There also seems to be much higher activity in North/West Cork with regard to TOV and MFI than in South Cork.

The Deputy CE will get clarification and revert, although he says the South Cork LEO has been so successful that it has had a second tranche of money allocated to it.

 

 

NOTICES OF MOTION 

  1. Councillor Marcia D’Alton

“That in building new playgrounds or regenerating existing playgrounds, Cork County Council would introduce a policy of application of the Principles of Universal Design by installing a range of equipment which can be used by both able and less able bodied children alike.  In addition, that towards achieving universal design, Cork County Council would begin a programme of retrofitting all existing playgrounds in its jurisdictional area with at least one item of play equipment specifically designed for inclusivity of all.”

Text of introduction to the motion is under separate cover.

 

  1. Councillor Eoghan Jeffers

“That this council would adopt a policy of providing facilities for disabled children in all local authority playgrounds and exercise facilities for disabled peoples on all greenways and parks where exercise machines already exist and where there are plans to install more.”

Cllr Jeffers (SF): Welcomes Cllr D’Alton’s motion. Wonders how he can follow it. Feels this proposal would be a massive step forward in quality of life. Public open spaces in which children play are one of the most fundamental building blocks in their lives. Believes the local authority should provide facilities for all children. Cllr D’Alton covered a lot of the issues – commends – hopes Members support.

Both motions are taken together.

Cllr J Murphy (Ind): These are timely motions. Has a similar motion in own Municipal District tomorrow. How can you follow this? Everything that needed to be brought up has been said. Suppose that Cork County Council has a design team, access to universities to get their expertise in designing parks that are useful to people coming from all different backgrounds and challenges. In my Municipal District, we have a lot of people who attend St Joseph’s in Charleville. We have many people who have to travel to Fermoy to use a playground that is suitable for them. So supports both motions.

Cllr Forde (FG): Supports both motions. We can’t argue with the sentiment. The same parent wrote to all of us. He would love if one of his children could have the same pleasure when he goes to the park as do his siblings. We have moved along in the way we cater for those with different abilities, particularly children. The planning process has made a huge difference in this regard but must take account of young people with disabilities. Speaks of autistic child negatively affected by an adjacent planning decision. Thinks we need to take planning into account too when considering the disabled. But good to start small, so supports the motion.

Cllr Cullinane (Ind): Supports both motions. Timely with what is going on in Cobh, where we are increasing the playgrounds for both local community and tourism. Our amenity grants are so tight that it hasn’t always been possible to fund playgrounds appropriately. This morning, with the vote on the LPT, we will have the funding and the discretion to say where the money goes.

Cllr Coughlan (FF): If communities are to receive the benefit of a piece of equipment that is disability friendly, asks that local consultation would take place with local groups of parents who are supporting children with disabilities and with the children themselves. We as councillors too should be consulted with regard to retrofitting. Also important that we look at new playgrounds in places like Innishannon where provision of playground services have not kept up with burgeoning population.

Cllr O’Flynn (FF): Supports both motions. Timely. Thanks Cork County Council that there is scarcely a village in North Cork that doesn’t have a playground. The LEADER board has provided quite a lot of funding. Playgrounds are one of the best facilities in any rural area. Thinks we should do an audit of playgrounds throughout the county. Some may have facilities for those with disabilities. Thinks the motion should go to SPC for this audit and a costing.

Cllr G Moynihan (FF): Commends both motions. Thinks they are very good. Thinks people with disabilities are the forgotten people. We should help them in any way we can.

Cllr K Murphy (FG): Supports both motions. Timely and surprised the issue hasn’t been here before now. People with disabilities so often fight their own corner. Fully supports.

Cllr Murphy (SF): Supports both motions. Both well done.

Mayor: Supports. Also received the email.

Deputy CE: There may be low cost measures we can introduce.  We have a disability access policy in the Council. We commit to access to wide range of services, buildings and outdoor spaces. The history over the years is that playgrounds have been provided and communities have fundraised and the County Council has contributed. When playgrounds were put in place they were mindful of the standards of the time. These standards were made in 2007. We have around 140 playgrounds. They are inspected every two weeks. Those inspections often identify equipment which needs to be retired. When replacements are being made, we will favour disability friendly equipment. The figures Cllr D’Alton has for disability friendly equipment are different from that which was quoted to me – up to €20,000. Also have been told that the surfacing might be affected. If we are to carry out a full retrospective inspection itwould be very costly. There will be more ability at local level what is appropriate for replacement or retrofitting. The constraints are financial only but can commit to favouring disability friendly equipment in replacing worn out equipment.

Cllr D’Alton (Ind): Thanks all the Members for their support. Thanks the Deputy CE also for his support. Great to know that universally designed equipment will be favoured when equipment is being replaced. Comments in particular on Cllr Forde’s mention of the importance of the planning process in designing for disabilities. Couldn’t agree more. Recalls the particular case she mentions and actually proposed a motion to the Chamber in relation to that case. It went to the Department for approval but, as usual, they made no change. Costs quoted are real and directly from equipment providers. Would be pleased to share the details with the Deputy CE.

Cllr Jeffers (SF): Thanks Members for the support. Would also like to remind of disability friendly greenways also.

 

  1. Councillor Melissa Mullane

“That this council provides a written report on what building/planning supports it provides to post primary education across the county. The report should also include in particular Davis College, Mallow.”

‘Response to Motion from Cllr Melissa Mullane.pdf’

Cllr Mullane (SF): September tsunami in Davis College. Application was submitted by the CETB. There was to be a stand alone extension to the rear of the building to cater for 625 students. The Davis college development was granted subject to 31 conditions. There are huge issues currently because of this application. The students are cramped, have inadequate classrooms, lunch facilities are being divided into 4, students are working on their laps and it is a game of chance to get a classroom. This is hugely detrimental to education. Presently the school has >800 students. They have taken >100 European students additionally. There are 6 prefabs erected but as late as last week they are still dividing classrooms. Cork ETC proposes to erect a further 3 prefabs for which they say they do not need planning. Is this correct? There have always been objections to prefabs. They are likely to go up on the site where the extension is to happen. Have contacted the CETB, but information is extremely vague and no proper account is taken of the welfare of the school, residents and staff. Cork ETB seem to have very little concern for the chaos they have caused students and residents. Asks Cork County Council to write to the college asking them to review their parking.   The school has no adequate measures for parking. Asks that Cork County Council would contact the CETB to ask them what their intentions are with regard to the extension.

Cllr O’Shea (Ind): Has no issue with the CETB. They have always provided a detailed response wrt the extension of Davis College. There were objections to the proposed extension during the planning application and it went to the Board. This is causing delay. The rear entrance to the school is to be developed in consultation with the residents. That has come to a fruitful conclusion. Understands where Cllr Mullane is coming from because some children are being taught in difficult circumstances. But the management of the College is doing what they can for the students and particularly for exam students. Hopes new facility will be in place by 2017. But would welcome an official update from the ETB. There are issues in reltion to parking. Parents park on cycle lane on main road. A man living locally with a wheelchair has to use the public road because he cannot access the footpath. So the parking issues are real.

Cllr Hegarty (FG): Thinks the CETB should be allowed an opportunity to refute or respond to the allegations made here this morning. If they are true and factual, the CETB will likely deal with the situation. Cllr O’Grady is a member of the CETB and should be able to get answers for Cllr Mullane.

Cllr O’Grady (SF): Was told that they were awaiting fire certs before the 3 prefabs could be put in. They have planning for 5 but are putting in only 3. Was told there are problems on the site.

Cllr B Moynihan (FF): Agrees with the motion. We were at the opening of a school in Buttevant last week. The CETB has a record of delivering for communities on the ground. Ted Owens and his staff do great work around the county. The issues with regard to parking, etc. need to be looked at but is slow to criticise Ted Owens and his staff.

Deputy CE: There is a written response provided from the executive. Much of what has been raised is not Council business but lies rather with the management of the school and the ETB. Unless there is a particular issue in relation to planning, it doesn’t really relate to the Council.

Mayor: We can obviously contact the ETB.

Cllr Mullane: Just looking for clarity. Is it correct to say no approval is required for 3 prefabs?

Deputy CE: Not in a position to give a definitive view but in general, if you are putting in prefabs, you need planning. But if there is a planning permission for 5, it is ok to put in 3.

Cllr Mullane: Thinks the 5 that have been given permission are already on site.

 

  1. Councillor Noel Collins

“That this Council request the appropriate Minister to make an order redrawing the county boundaries to include the waters of the harbours in which development of either commercial or high profile nature has taken place in order to give the Council authority to develop and control such developments.”

‘Response to Motion from Cllr Noel Collins.pdf’

Cllr Collins (Ind): Since I was first elected in 1967, Cork County Council has been robbed of a range of public services. Harbours could be next for the dead list. Don’t let it happen. Rivers, harbours, lakes have been exploited. Are we doing enough by way of legislation to protect our rights? When the present boundaries were drawn, the only use made of the marine environment was to sail ships over it. Nowadays far more use is made of it. The harbours that are mostly affected are Youghal, Ballycotton, Cork, Kinsale and Castletownbere. Bantry Bay has already had its boundary adjusted. The users should make payments similar to rates, in turn spent on harbour towns which are badly in need of improvements.

Cllr Linehan-Foley (Ind): Seconds the motion. Local knowledge in these cases is paramount. Sometimes those making decisions on our harbours are taking those decisions from offices far removed from the harbour.

Cllr Cullinane (Ind): As far as Cork Harbour is concerned, we are well advanced towards getting a democratic voice around the harbour. 4 Municipal Districts around the harbour have voted for that democratic process and one universal voice.

Cllr McCarthy (FG): Local knowledge is the issue here. We are relying on the OPW. We should have more say in our own waters and harbours within Cork County Council.

Deputy CE: We do have control of harbours under the Planning & Development Act. We recognise the importance of harbours and the coastal zone. Our recently published tourism strategy recognizes Cork as a maritime paradise. Kinsale and Baltimore have transferred to Council/Municipal District control. Municipal Districts have control in relation to harbour policies and these should be exercised locally.

Cllr N Collins (Ind): Welcomes support. Can we pursue this at Municipal District level?

Deputy CE agreed that this was the best course of action but that if Cllr Collins hit a stumbling block, to revert to him.

 

  1. Councillor Des O’Grady

“That this Council calls on the Minister for Finance to fully finance the Local Government Equalisation Fund from general taxation and permit Local Authorities to retain 100% of the Local Property Tax collected in their areas.”

Cllr O’Grady (SF): Supports the equalization fund. LPT was >€100m in 2015. But there was an injustice in that 20% was removed. That is deeply hurting Cork County Council. Asks the Council to support that we call on the Minister to fund the equalization fund from general taxation. All local authorities should retain their entire LPT into the future. Thinks democracy was done a disservice in the Chamber this morning. Silencing was never imposed on people before. Is deeply saddened by this.

Cllr Mullane (SF): Supports. Concurs with Cllr O’Grady that we weren’t allowed to speak this morning.

Mayor: Stick to the motion please.

Cllr Mullane: Not against equalization but doesn’t want what is meant to be a LPT to be propping up what the government should be paying for. If we were to take the NPPR in, it would be another €1.2 out of the fund. €1.9 would be lost by rates reduction to multinationals in this county. €2.1 m collected through the motor tax office in Cork is lost. While elected, I will do everything in my power to oppose the property tax.

Cllr Murphy (FG): The motion and its content speak for themselves. The full LPT collected should be retained within the county in which it is collected.

Cllr O’Flynn (FF): €8.1m collected in the county should be going to services for people in the county.

Cllr Cullinane (Ind): In support. In 2014, a similar motion came before the floor and on that occasion it was SF who went against us writing to the Minister for the €8m. Thinks we should demand the €8.1m back. If we got it back, where would it go?

Cllr Jeffers (SF): Welcomes the motion. Wouldn’t like to begrudge the smaller counties but they should be funded nationally. This is not a LPT but just plugs a gap in national finances caused by reckless governance. We weren’t allowed to debate the need for local services today. €15,750 would be collected in my own estate in LPT alone but we struggle to get trees cut. This is disgraceful.

Cllr Hegarty (FG): Supports sentiments and content of motion. When LPT was introduced, we were told it would be collected locally and retained locally. It would result in a lot of badly needed improvements in our municipal areas. This has not been the case

Cllr Murphy (SF): Supports.

The motion is agreed and correspondence will be forwarded to the Minister. Cllr O’Grady asks that the FG councillors who supported the motion would contact their party heads directly.

Mayor: Democracy was supported today. All proposals that came from the floor were voted on. Everything that was done this morning was done in accordance with a vote.

 

  1. Councillor Michael Murphy

“That this council writes to Port of Cork to ask what  plans they have for Marino Point.”

Cllr Murphy (SF): Is just looking for transparency. When we were on the Town Council in Passage West, the Port of Cork had no interest in Marino Point. First I heard that they were interested was when it came up in the Evening Echo. It is in a desperate state so who is responsible?

Cllr McCarthy (Ind): Anyone who passes Marino Point and looks over the wall, it looks like Hiroshima. When the planning permission was granted to NET, one of the conditions was that when fertiliser production ceased, it would revert back to a greenfield site except in the event of port-related activities. We would like to know what is this port related activity and does it include removal of these eyesores.

Cllr D’Alton (Ind): Support the motion. Marino Point is less than 5 km from Passage West as the crow flies and a very important site to Cobh and the Great Island. Redevelopment of Marino Point is likely to impact significantly on Passage West. Those of us involved for many years with the Port’s redevelopment of Ringaskiddy will know that the Port has always expressed an interest in Marino Point. Planning permission was granted in Ringaskiddy on the basis of the Port’s proposed development of Marino Point, including reopening a rail link to support the TEN-T requirement for multi-modal transport. Bulks were mentioned at the time as being the likely use. Other uses have been mentioned since. Recent newspaper report saying that the Port had purchased Marino Point is not true. It has not yet been purchased. However, it is fair that the Port would indicate what its intentions are now with Marino Point, when we might expect those intentions to be acted on and what they will involve.

Cllr Cullinane (Ind): If you look a the County Development Plan, we have supported the Port of Cork to hold all of the eggs in their basket. But the Port has been very slow to communicate. We the people have been held back by this lack of communication. They haven’t even yet purchased the site. So we need clarity. We are waiting 10 months for clarity on slipways and piers so can’t imagine how long we will be waiting for an answer to this.

 

  1. VOTES OF CONGRATULATIONS

Cllr O’Flynn (FF): Congratulates Cork Ladies Football team on their weekend win and Cork County Council on the opening of Spike Island. Thanks Declan Daly, David Keane and Michael Ryan in particular for their involvement in the development of Spike Island.

Cllr Cullinane: Cobh won gold medal in the Tidy Towns awards this morning.

Cllr Hayes: Clonakilty got gold in the county awards also.

 

  1. Any Other Business

Cllr Murphy (FG): Rural water monitoring – much funding has gone to group schemes. Several have been propped up by grant aid. But no money has gone to group sewage schemes. Very serious problem in one group scheme near own home town that needs grant aid immediately. Substantial number of residents involved. We have no response back. Asking for immediate contact with the Department.

The Deputy CE will investigate and revert back.

Cllr D’Alton (Ind): What is the protocol for notification of water outages? Water outage in own area over the weekend was notified by Cork County Council on Twitter. Other recent outage was not notified. Yet another was notified by Irish Water. So who notifies, through what medium and is a notice put on the affected road? Obviously a breakage cannot be notified.

Mayor: Agrees that it is time a protocol with regard to notification of water outages is established.

The Deputy CE will check and revert. The new text alert might be useful, although it is still in development.

Cllr Forde (FG): Minutepad is slow to access. Perhaps IT could bear this in mind.

 

 

This concluded the meeting.

News

Introduction to my motion to Full Council on Vernon Mount, 12th July 2016

“That Cork County Council would identify 

  • the details of notices served under Section 59 of the Planning & Development Act 2000 on the owners of Vernon Mount since 1997, 
  • the dates on which such notices were served, 
  • any works undertaken by the owners in response to those notices

and that Cork County Council would pursue the owners of Vernon Mount (No. 00480 in the Record of Protected Structures) for prosecution under Section 58 of the Local Government (Planning & Development) Act 2000.”

 

There are so many aspects of the sad story of Vernon Mount which are wrong. By proposing this motion, I am asking for support in righting just one of those wrongs. But this wrong is fundamental to the future of every protected structure in the country. We have legislation drafted under Section 58 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 which imposes an obligation on the owners and occupiers of protected structures. Specifically, it states that:

“Each owner and occupier of a “protected structure” or proposed “protected structure” shall ensure that the structure, or any element of it that contributes to its special architectural, historical, archaeological, artistic, cultural, scientific, social or technical interest, is not endangered. “Endangered” means exposed to harm, decay or damage, whether immediately or over a period of time, through neglect or through direct or indirect means.”

If a protected structure is endangered, Section 59 of the Act allows the planning authority to serve a notice on the owner or occupier, requiring them to carry out any work that it considers necessary to protect the structure. During the eight weeks that follow the issuing of the notice, the owner or occupier can meet for discussions with the planning authority and the agreed work must be done within a further 8 weeks.

If a notice to prevent a structure from becoming endangered has been ignored, the planning authority can take enforcement action.

An Taisce has listed some 100 protected structures on its Buildings at Risk Register. Nine of these are in the Cork County Council jurisdictional area. One was Vernon Mount. The serious fire damage to Vernon Mount, Cork highlights the continuing failure of Irish planning legislation to enforce the maintenance of legally protected historic buildings.

I commend Cork County Council’s actions in repairing the roof of Vernon Mount on two separate occasions. That is not the point of this motion. The point is that the condition of Vernon Mount had been significantly deteriorating not just since 1997 when it was purchased by its current owners but since the 1960s and 70s. But the County Council has at no point enforced the legislation designed for its protection. Buildings such as Vernon Mount on the RPS are rich heritage assets. Consequently, any owner or occupier of those buildings has a societal responsibility. The citizens of this county place their trust in Cork County Council as the planning authority to ensure such owners or occupiers observe that responsibility. By not enforcing their powers under Section 59 of the Act, the reality is that Cork County Council is reneging on that trust.

Following through on Section 59 of the Act is not going to bring Vernon Mount back. It won’t right any of the succession of wrongs that this protected structure endured. But what it would do is to demonstrate Cork County Council’s commitment to and appreciation of the county’s protected structures and, in doing so, convey to owners and occupiers of all other protected structures the need to uphold their societal responsibility.

Local area, Meeting notes, Minutes meetings

Notes from the March meeting of the Ballincollig-Carrigaline Municipal District (21-03-2016)

Notes from the BCMD meeting, 21st March, 2016

1.  Confirmation of Minutes
To consider the confirmation and signing of the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 15th February 2016.

Matters Arising:

Cllr D’Alton (Ind): The MDO said that he would seek further information on the taking in charge of Pembroke Wood. Wondering has that been done?
Is there any update on the sale of the convent in Passage West?
We spoke about the grasscutting in Pinecroft two meetings ago. Wondering when this will be done?
At the last meeting, the Area Office committed to sign cleaning. When will this be starting?
The one way system proposed for Fairy Hill/Chapel Hill in Monkstown – when will this be advertised and could we be notified when it is please?
Cllr Forde proposed in a motion that TII would come before our Municipal; District as they did before the City Councillors to give an update on the Demand Management Study for the N40. We agreed to write and request this update. Any response?
Finally, when will the public consultation on the casual trading bye-laws begin and could we please be notified of same?

Area Engineer: Is looking at the rotas for grasscutting now. Hopes to start it within the next month.
The sign cleaning has begun. It started with Carrigaline and is continuing on to Douglas this week. So it is underway. We are prioritising urban centres and will then catch up on the areas in between.
The recommendation for the advertising/public consultation on the proposed one-way system in Monkstown is currently being done.

South Cork Manager: The causal trading bye-laws have not been advertised yet but he will confirm when they are.

MDO: No response from the solicitors on the taking in charge of Pembroke Wood.
There have been preplanning discussions in relation to the content of a planning application for the convent but no planning application has been submitted yet.
We wrote to TII but got no response.

Chair: Suggests we write to TII again asking them to attend.

Cllr McGrath (FF) reminds that we want a report on the dog fouling bins. We need consistency on this. There should at least be consistency on dedicated walkways.

 

2.  Consideration of Reports and Recommendations

Municipal District Programme of Works 2016

Speed Limit Review
Programme of works report will be discussed at the April meeting.

Speed limit review: The report circulated is primarily for information purposes. If there are any other areas for inclusion, submit them as quickly as possible. The process is that the gardaí have to be consulted, then it will go to public consultation and then it reverts to the Council.

Everything that is passed forms part of the Road Traffic Bye Laws.

Cllr D’Alton (Ind): The speed limit request for the R610 approaching Harbour Heights – could that be incorporated into traffic calming around the entrance to Roberts Bridge as I had requested some months ago?

AE: Yes, that would be the intention.

 

3.  General Municipal Allocation/Town Development Fund

2016 Allocations – Circulated.  (Published below on this website.)

 

4.  Chun na Ruin so leanas ón gComhairleoir a mheas:

To consider the following Notice of Motion in the name of:

 Cllr. D Forde:
1.  “Residents in West Avenue Parkgate request the engineer to reinstate the surface of the road and footpaths in the estate where there are large potholes. It is requested works carried out by a utility company where it is claimed reinstatements are very poor. Parking for wheelchair users was not reinstated also.”

 AE: West Avenue is on the roads programme. Most of the areas that are very badly damaged with potholes will be dealt with. The ESB were in there last year. Most of the works were on the green. They wouldn’t have been able to do full reinstatement because of the weather. We will be ensuring that they do it now. Wasn’t aware of the wheelchair place issue.

 

 Cllr. D O’Donnabhain:
1.  “That this Municipal District would carry out a review of parking arrangements at the western car park of the Regional Park. Such a review should examine the adequacy of parking for wheelchair accessible and those with disabled parking permits and also the adequacy of signage indicating additional parking at the Allotments car park.”

Chair (Cllr O’Donnabhain (FF)): Cars were parking in the disabled spaces or in such a way that easy access to them was prohibited. The car park in the allotments would be no more than one third fall but the other one is bursting at the seams.

MDO: The Regional Park is suffering from its own success. It is very difficult. People don’t listen to the staff there. There’s a central area that’s lined off and they can try to do more lining but people tend to park nilly willy.

Cllr Canty (FG): Understands this frustration. We relined the car park and did everything possible but it is still very difficult.

Cllr Forde (FG): Can cars not abiding by the parking rules not be ticketed?

MDO: Thinks staff might have done this on some cars but that is not easy either. We are staff restricted. It is mostly gardening staff there. It’s just a pity people can’t behave decently. The car park is too small. People prefer to use this one and even though it was expanded by 30 – 40 places last year, it still cannot cope. Maybe when the toilets go into the Inishmore car park, it will become more popular.

Cllr O’Donnabhain (FF): The western car park is at its physical limits. You could only expand it further by spending lots of money and that would not be in its interest. Its overflowing is now causing problems on the public road. If we could use signage to encourage people to use the Inishmore car park, it might help.

Cllr Canty (FG): We have 3 car parks serving the Regional Park, not two. We just need to educate people. We’re tarmacking one strip of path through the woods.

 

2.  “That this Municipal District welcomes the announcement of a public toilet for the Regional Park at the Allotments car park. In welcoming the decision this Municipal District calls for during the months of May to September for the provision of temporary ‘portaloo’s’ at a secure location at or near the Western car park.”

MDO: Costs of doing this are outlined in the response to the motion. We just don’t have this sort of money.

 

Cllr. S McGrath:
1.  “To ask the Engineer to investigate possible measures to slow traffic in the vicinity of the Educate Together Primary Schools Carrigaline.”

 Cllr McGrath (FF): Put this motion on the agenda after receiving contact from the school. The school regularly gets complaints from parents. Knows there are roadworks around in the vicinity but also cars go very quickly there. Looking for some form of traffic calming – strips, signage, etc.

AE: We haven’t received a single complaint to the Area Office. We have in relation to the Ferney Road but not in relation to the Relief Road. There are footpaths on the Relief Road and there is a controlled crossing. It is not suitable for anything other than extra signs. There are signs indicating that there is a school there. What we can do is limited. Is genuinely surprised that we haven’t got any complaints.

Cllr McGrath (FF): Will ask the principal to send an email with more details directly to yourself.

 

2.  “To ask the Engineer to consider a yellow junction box at the entrance to Clifton, Grange.”

 AE: We will be looking at road markings in the vicinity of the Clifton junction. Every estate wants the yellow box at their junction. We all have this problem and it is not the overall solution. Grange Road is an extremely busy road. Understood the complaint was that the speed on the road was making it difficult to get out. A yellow box will do nothing for that. We want to see if we can assist from a visibility point of view.

 

3.  “To ask the Engineer to examine the problem of subsidence on the roads in Dunvale Estate, specifically Dunvale Lawn.”

Cllr McGrath (FF): The road is collapsing in places.

(I lost the thread of the conversation here!)

 

Cllr. M D’Alton:
1.  “That the Ballincollig-Carrigaline Municipal District deeply regrets the sale of the Royal Victoria Dockyard, Passage West by NAMA for a dock-related purpose. Equally, that the members of the Ballincollig-Carrigaline Municipal District deeply regret that Cork County Council did not pursue purchase of the Dockyard with a view to returning it to public use.”

Cllr D’Alton (Ind): I brought this motion to the Chamber to do just what it says. To try to express how devastated I am and the Passage West community is that the Passage West dockyard has been sold for what we believe is continued dock use. When it was put up for sale, I asked could I put a motion on the full Council agenda, requesting that Cork County Council would purchase it. I was advised not to, because if word got out that the Council was interested in purchasing something, the price would go up. That made sense, so I withdrew the motion. But I gave a presentation to the CE, a presentation of photographs showing what the dockyard was, what it is now and what it could become. It is an amazing site on the foreshore and it offers wonderful opportunities, for heritage, for recreation. As it stands currently, its impact on the town is devastating. It is makes the town centre dark, narrow, it completely cuts it off from the sea and the activities carried on there are noisy and dusty.   I even contacted the European Commission to see whether funding would be available for its rehabilitation and redevelopment. The CE was gracious but having had discussions with management, decided that the price was too high. They felt that development on the site could be controlled by conditions attached to a planning permission. I continued to make contact with the receiver, trying to ascertain whether interest in the sale was for development or for dock-related purposes. But I could never get a straight answer. Now I am told by the auctioneer that the site is sale agreed. The receiver will not even return my phone calls. We wrote to NAMA, didn’t we? We told them how important this dockyard is to the town of Passage West. And I just want to put on public record how absolutely and utterly devastated I am that this once in a lifetime opportunity for a sale of this dockyard from one public body to another public body – an opportunity that will never come again in my time or yours – has been completely and utterly missed. It is just devastating for the town of Passage West. I cannot adequately express how devastating it is.

Cllr Murphy (SF): Supports what Cllr D’Alton has said. Thinks anything is good enough for Passage. No-one consults the residents.

Cllr McGrath (FF): Supports Cllr D’Alton’s sentiments in relation to the site. Very regrettable that the site was on the market and the opportunity is lost. The sale is not quite confirmed but almost. There was an opportunity there. Also raised the issue with the CE. The view was that the cost was prohibitive. But an opportunity like this doesn’t come along too often. There were various options in terms of the cultural history of Passage West, etc. It appears now that the opportunity is lost.

Cllr Harris (Ind): It is outrageous that NAMA and Cork County Council could not negotiate on the transfer of this asset. In reality, the state is going to lose a lot of money over it. There still might be time if it is not closed. With all the reps we have here, parties with Ministers in government, it is appalling that this could happen. Why couldn’t they have put pressure on NAMA?

Manager: The site was on the market. It was for sale by NAMA. The CE felt the sale was prohibitive and that would not have been the end of the expense. The zoning sets out what the Members of the previous Council felt would have been appropriate use for the site.

Cllr D’Alton (Ind): Thanks everyone for the support and particularly thanks Cllr Harris for what he has said. The site was sold to Howard Holdings for €25 million ten years ago. Now the asking price is €2.75 million. Relatively, it was not expensive. That’s a massive loss that the taxpayer is now carrying.

Cllr Harris (Ind): NAMA has a special responsibility. They have sold land to the GAA because it was viewed as longer-term value to the State that way. This is being penny wise and pound foolish. We lose a prime asset; the purchaser might sell it on in 5 years time for €20 million. This has been a disaster from a financial point of view.

Manager: The Council’s position is as set out. The views of the Members will be communicated to the CE.

Cllr McGrath (FF): NAMA would have to shift its value for the site for the CE to become interested. NAMA’s community benefit aspects have not been really tested. Suggests we get in contact with NAMA.

Manager: Members can make any decision they wish. The CE considered this and it is not going to change.

Cllr Harris (Ind): NAMA has been remiss in not selling to Cork County Council. You could pay €2.5 m over 20 years if the will is there to do it. They just don’t give a damn – get it off the books. This is for the next 50/100 years. The return to the exchequer has been totally mishandled. We should contact NAMA and the Minister and see could we exert political pressure. We talk about strategic plans for the harbour, etc. There we have it staring us in the face. The most strategic property available.

Cllr D’Alton (Ind): Cllr Harris is absolutely correct. Can we contact NAMA and ask that they do not sell this dockyard now? We would do better to have it in NAMA ownership so that it could at least be sold for development when the market lifts. It would give a better return to the exchequer too.

Manager: We don’t have a role in this. We would like to have a role but we don’t.

Cllr Harris (Ind): Can we take an injunction?

Manager: That isn’t open as an option. Acquisition of property is an executive function, not a reserved function. It supports strategic plans that the Members make.

Cllr McGrath (FF): Agrees with Cllr D’Alton wrt contacting NAMA. We can pass a resolution as a Municipal District. We also need to send our request to the Minister for Finance. Our only hope there is that it might make it accessible to the Council.

Cllr Murphy (SF): Thought we were writing to NAMA before about this site?

Manager: The County Council cannot write to NAMA interfering with a property sale in this way. It is totally outside our remit.

Cllr D’Alton (Ind): I understand that the CE and executive took a decision not to buy. I understand that NAMA has no remit to me, a public representative. But I as a public representative have a remit to my electorate. That is my job. And they are the people in Passage West who will have to live with this sale and have to pay for the cost being carried by the taxpayer.

Manager: If Members want to contact NAMA they will have to set out the wording carefully and be clear it does not reflect the opinion of the CE or the executive.

Agreed that Cllr D’Alton would word a letter to go to NAMA and circulate it to the other Members and to the executive for agreement.

Manager: Nothing will go without its being seen by the CE.

 

5.  Votes of Congratulations

 

6.  Any Other Business

 Cllr D’Alton (Ind): Car parking spaces in front of electric car charging points. Are these marked out by the County Council or by the ESB? There is need for one in front of the electric charging point in the Owenabue car park.
Also many of the locks on the litterbins in Passage West/Monkstown are broken so that the doors of the bins are swinging open onto the footpath. They have been broken for a long time and I have brought this up several times with the Area Office. I understand a simple replacement of the locks will not suffice; the bin itself must be replaced. Bringing it up here because there is no move on it.
When will we have the derelict sites report we were told in December would come to the MD meetings?
Where did the Litter Management Plan go? We were presented with a draft plan for this Municipal District in January 2015 but it still hasn’t gone to public consultation.
The old town signs at the entrance to Passage West, Rochestown and Raffeen have been stolen. It is very sad. The Passage West one was beautifully painted and we were very proud of it.

Manager: Hopes to have a derelict sites report at the April meeting.
The Litter Management Plan was to have been adopted at Municipal District level but it became clear that there was a need for a county-wide litter management plan with specific objectives at MD level. We’re going to look at it again. It will come to members at full Council level.

AE: Believes the marking of car parking spaces in front of the electric charging points is the responsibility of the ESB. Will speak to the ESB about the Owenabue car park.
Was not aware of the litterbins issue and will follow it up.
Is aware of the loss of the old town signs and the Area Office plans to replace them.

Cllr Desmond (FF): Would like an update please on public lighting in Lehenaghbeg?

AE: This is in the hands of the ESB. Spoke to them last week. They say they are still under pressure after the storms around Christmas time.

Cllr Harris (Ind): Bins in Douglas, especially outside Centra. Can we have more put in?

Cllr McGrath (FF): The N40 screening that was proposed was never done. Can we agree to write to the TII and enquire about it?
Work was recently completed at Cogan’s Corner. The drains in the vicinity haven’t been cleaned. If you could follow up? This work was done to a high standard and traffic management was quite good.
The community park was in a dreadful state on Saturday. Knows it isn’t easy but there is virtually no enforcement of the litter laws. If we don’t have boots on the ground we are going nowhere.
Footpath in part of Ringaskiddy. Priest’s Avenue – Ferryview side – there is no footpath on that side of the road. There is a pole standing there with no sign. Looks a little neglected. Has had a request for a footpath. Asks that AE the would look at it.

 

It was agreed that we would hold a special meeting on the last Friday in April (29th April) to talk about the Local Area Plan.