Category Archives: Meeting notes

Notes from a meeting of the Ballincollig/Carrigaline Municipal District, 15-05-2017

1. To consider the confirmation and signing of the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 18thApril 2017

‘Minutes 18.04.17 draft.pdf’

Proposed and seconded.

Matters arising:

Cllr Forde asks whether there was an update on her request that we would buy Barry’s Field in Douglas.

MDO was wondering what role we could have in it because there is an active planning file.

Cllr Forde says she understands that further information was requested.  Wants an inkling that they would be willing to examine the frame.

Cllr D’Alton asks about Marino Point.  She had sent a copy of the bond onto the MDO after the last meeting.  Wondered if the planning department had given an update.

The MDO said he had sent the bond on to them.  He doesn’t think they had any record of it.  He will talk to the Director of Planning but doesn’t think we will get very far.

Cllr D’Alton asks about Dock Terrace.  The MDO had agreed to contact the owner and to inspect them.

The MDO said he was in Passage West with Jim Molloy, the new SEO.  They are going to talk about Dock Terrace before they do anything more.

Cllr D’Alton confirms that grasscutting will be addressed later in the meeting.

Cllr McGrath had asked at the last meeting about the walkway between Lehenaghmore and Lenhenaghbeg.  He would also like an update on the junction between Barry’s and Driscoll’s pub.

AE:  Confirmed that the area in Lehenaghmore is belonging to Cork County Council.  Is hoping to look at it on the ground and see if the (much depleted) Gateway crew can do small works there.  Doesn’t know if it is within their capacity.

Barry’s junction – there are markings there already.  Not sure if there is much more that can be done.  It is a stop junction.  We will try to highlight this.

 

2.  Consideration of Reports and Recommendations

(i) Grange Road – Tramore Valley Park Pedestrian and CycleLink including bridge over the N40

‘Grange Road to TVP – Update re Part 8 to Ballincollig Carrigaline Municipal District Members.pdf’

‘Part 8 Planning Drawings Final.pdf’

Peter O’Donoghue:
We’re working on this for quite a while.  It will run down the valley, past Vernon Mount, cross the N40 and link into existing and future path to the city.  It will form part of the overall network of the city environs.  The Grange/Frankfield area has restricted access by car.  The two routes are very congested and the N40 adds a significant barrier which adds to the congestion.  This offers good opportunity to link the area to the city by walking/cycling.  The length is less than 1 km and another 1km brings you into the city.  We think that if this city were to proceed, it would be quite popular.  This is a transportation rather than recreational route.  Our primary interest is in transportation.

The Council bought the field at Grange known as the Donkey Field and that allows us to feed directly to the Grange Road.  Some of the gradients are steep by the Grange Road and we propose to provide cycle steps.  There are seven separate sets of cycle steps designed to deal with this.  We also propose a separate longer more meandering route that avoids the steps and will be useable by wheelchairs/buggies.

Public lighting will operate until 10pm and will come back on in the early morning.  This arrangement is the same as for Ballybrack and is good for wildlife.

Cllr Jeffers:  Very welcome overall.  Wanted for a long time.  Connectivity is the big issue.  Around the back of this would be used a lot for cycling.  Measures should be put in place to slow cyclists down because people will go fast on this.

Cllr Desmond wonders if it will ever be closed or is it just that the light will go off at nighttime?

Cllr McGrath:  Very positive.

Cllr D’Alton:  Despite previous request for a green bridge, the proposed bridge doesn’t look too bad.  Thanks Peter O’D for having answered successive emails on this in the past few months.  What do cycle steps look like?  The width of the main pathway with the steps is indicated as 4 metres but what is that of the meandering path?

Cllr Harris:  Will there be security cameras on the bridge?  Is it an enclosed structure?  For security reasons, thinks it should be.

Cllr Canty supports too.  There has always been talk about connectivity to this area from Grange.

Peter O’D:
Cyclists will have to get off to cycle through the steps.  So areas with the higher gradients can’t be sped on.  The rest is relatively flat.  There is no incentive for cyclists to go fast.  Cyclist behaviour is an issue all the time.  There are issues with pedestrians as well.  Imagines that if this were open it would be popular and heavily used.  This is the main reason people will slow down because they have to share.  There are no proposals to put in barriers to slow cyclists down.
The proposal is to pick up accesses that are existing and not to close them.  Will be open 24-7.  The Tramore Valley park will close at night time.  That is the exception.  Whatever regime is there, we will have to respect that.  Expects there will be a gate on the bridge.
Anti-social behaviour – we have built in ducting for security cameras.  We should be able to service them without having to lay further ducts.  We’ll have to wait and see how the anti-social thing goes.  High use is the greatest deterrent to anti-social behaviour.  The Passage West line is the best example of that.  We have other areas where there are more problems.  There were problems in Ballybrack initially although we feel we have resolved that largely.  Security cameras aren’t a high cost; the high cost is in the monitoring.
The path is 4 metres wide.  We intended that the meandering path would be less because it is not likely to be used very much.  Expects 90% of pedestrians/cyclists will use the direct route so this will be 3 metres..  Our approach to these things is to provide 4 m where possible.
Knows there is criticism that this isn’t a green bridge.  Normally a green bridge comes when you create severance.  In this case we’re providing connectivity rather than severing.  The need for us to provide compensating measures isn’t as high as it might be in other situations.  Accepts that the concept would be fabulous.  It would not be possible at the level of investment we’re able to tap into.
The answer to the security cameras question is something that will have to be dealt with in the longer run.
Cycle steps are just normal steps with a channel at one side.  Your wheels go in the channel and you dismount and push your bike.
There is nothing specific in this to stop skateboarders.  The issue here is the handrail and how available that might be.  This is a preliminary design; we’re going for Part 8.  Those kind of details can be addressed afterwards in detailed design.
Funding – this is a significant project.  We’re at the €3m level.  The bridge is relatively expensive because abutments have to be provided and we have to cross the city and harbour watermain.  We will be looking to national agencies to help fund this.  The arguments will be that severance has happened there by the provision of other infrastructure and this will provide connectivity.  National agencies have been spoken to.  They accept that there is a need.  There are few projects that give this amount of connectivity.
On enclosure – the intention is not to enclose it.  We gave a lot of time to the design of the bridge.  Part of the team involved using bridge architects.  We looked at a number of options and arrived at this one given the aesthetics and cost.  It has high-sided arching and supports so it does not lend itself to anti-social behaviour.  There are a number of bridges over the N40 and none of them is enclosed.  There is no protection at all on the Blackrock Greenway bridge.  To enclose it would make it unattractive to the normal user.  We have never done enclosed bridges, not even over railways.

Going forward for the Part 8 is proposed and seconded (Cllr Jeffers and Cllr D’Alton).

 

(ii) Report of the Economic Development, Enterprise & Community Directorate to Municipal District Committees – Quarterly Report to END of April 2017 

‘DRAFT Report to MD Committees May 2017.pdf’

Paul Sutton:
Construction has progressed on the development of the community enterprise centre in Dunmanway in conjunction with the local community, Enterprise Ireland, Cork County Council and Clann Credo. This will result in 3 units of enterprise space and office and hotdesking facilities on a site supplied by Cork County Council.

MDO:  These reports will be brought to us more often from now and will be tailored for our MD.

Cllr D’Alton asked whether for enterprise centres like this whether we generally own the land in advance or whether we purchase it.

PS: We generally own the land in advance.  Dunmanway is part funded by Cork County Council.  It was part of a national scheme brought out by Enterprise Ireland a few years ago.  Communities could apply for funding but there was a long lead in time.  This is probably the last one that will be developed under that scheme.  So it is part funded by Enterprise Ireland, part by Cork County Council and part by the local community enterprise group.  At the moment the building is largely finished.

Cllr Jeffers asked if we could get facts on employment creation, etc. on grants that are given out for start-up businesses such as these.  In particular whether the jobs involved are low-paid or whether they are attractive, fair jobs.

PS:  Yes.  In general the companies are start ups and employing less than 10 people.  He explains the process an entrepreneur will go through to get start up of a micro business.  Will ask the Local Enterprise Office the question about the quality of jobs.  Cautions that high wages would leave businesses in some sectors (such as restaurants) simply uncompetitive and so wages paid to employees are in part governed by this.

 

(iii) Section 85 Agreement 

‘Douglas FRS S85_Figure 2.pdf’
‘Douglas FRS S85_Figure 3.pdf’

Cork County Council, in collaboration with the Office of Public Works (the funding authority for the scheme), intends to undertake engineering works along the Ballybrack Stream, Grange Stream and Tramore River with the objective of minimising the risk of flooding in the areas of Douglas and Togher. The agreement of full Council is to be sought to the entering into a Section 85 agreement with Cork City Council for the purposes of Planning and Construction of Douglas Flood Relief Scheme.

(I left the room to talk to PS.)

 

 (iv) Control of Dogs (Parks and Greenways) Bye-Laws 2017 

‘Draft Control of Dog Parks Bye-Laws 2017.pdf’
‘Control of Dogs.pdf’

(Missed the beginning of this discussion.)

MDO:  Regional Park has over 3000 people/day.

Cllr Harris:  Douglas Community Park – lady walking with her children.  Dog comes up and scares her child.  She tells the man who owns the dog that he should keep his dog under control.  He tells her where to go.  That’s not right.

Cllr Jeffers:  We shouldn’t rush into this.  Thinks we have to take action.  People are coming to us.  Agree 100% that greenways should have bye-laws for dog control.  The parks would be good if we could have designated areas for dog exercise.  The long leads are a nightmare.  Doesn’t know if we can regulate them.  Greenways are built for pedestrians.

Cllr Murphy:  Have we the manpower if we introduce these?  In the MUGA, they’re still going in there and letting dogs off.

Cllr D’Alton:  Have made my opinion clear by email.  Think bye-laws are essential on greenways both for dogs on leads and extendable leads.  Doesn’t think they should be extended to parks.  We can’t implement the laws we’ve got.  Especially dog fouling.  Sees people going into Marmullane Park every morning with their dogs.  They go in when there is no one else around.  They keep the dog on a lead going in, let the dog off inside and exercise them off lead because they have no other place.  They can’t do it any more on the greenway.  They pick up the dog poo, put it into the bin (on which the lock is broken), put the dog back on the lead and go.  They are doing no harm to anyone, it is totally responsible but a bye-law would say they can’t do that any more.

MDO:  Dogs have to be kept under effective control under the Act.  The dog warden says that without bye laws it is very difficult for him to enforce that element of the Act.  Cllr D’Alton is misinterpreting what is actually there.  Dog warden says that if we want him to be able to go into parks on a regular basis, they have to have bye-laws to be able to deal with the situation.  It doesn’t have to be a blanket ban.  Suggests that we come up with proposals.

Cllr Canty says that he would be interested in bringing a bye-law in.  We brought in our own dog wardens into the Regional Park under cover.  They got abused by the dog owners when they remonstrated with them.  You have people in wheelchairs and pushing buggies and the dogs are loose.  We have to have the staff to implement them if we are going to pass bye-laws.  We have five different entrances coming into the regional park so you can’t control it.

MDO says he doesn’t want to put the proposal back to SPC.  We will be forever waiting for an answer.  Would like us to put it on the agenda for next month and get our feedback in the interim.  Maybe introduce time specific bye laws?

Cllr Murphy:  This started in Passage West park when I asked for the sign about dangerous dogs to be put up.  Maybe we should start there?

Cllr McGrath:  The case for the greenway seems clear cut.  Suggests that we do the bye laws for here only?  Disagrees about not sending the issue to SPC.

MDO:  No.  If we do it for the greenway only, everyone will ask why we’re not including the parks.  It is from people with small children in park that my complaints are coming.

 

(v) Schedule of Municipal Works 2017 

‘Schedule of Municipal Works 2017.pdf’

‘Schedule of Municipal Works note.pdf’

MDO:  We should be reporting back at least on a quarterly basis to the MD to see how the budgets are going.  We haven’t done that to date.  Will do it from now on.

Cllr D’Alton:  Last year there was a H11 code which related specifically and only to the Passage West Greenway.  Where is that this year and will it mitigate against the walkway that it is not there?  Is worried about litter management (E05) and burial ground maintenance (E09) – litter management has nearly halved.  Burial ground maintenance down by €34k.  Good to see expenditure on regional roads and leisure facilities up.  Also wonders about G02 on piers and harbours (G02).  Had a motion in November asking that we would work out a schedule of slip maintenance.  This was based on Budget 2017 which allocated this MD an additional €50,000 for maintenance of piers and harbours.  Doesn’t see that additional money reflected here.

AE:  Is not sure if that additional money would show on this.  Thinks my request from November is being addressed.

MDO:  These are the figures that were adopted in the budget.  Will look into the litter and burial grounds.

 

(vi) Taxi Ranks Douglas

‘Taxi Ranks Douglas.pdf’

MDO:  After consulting on this, the response that we received was that the only mechanism we can use is by making bye laws under the 2013 Act.  So it is a matter for us to consider if we want to do this or not.  Thought we should talk about it before we draft them.  May make more problems than we can solve.

Cllr McGrath:  It would require bye law changes.  Is happy to proceed with this.  Wants us to consult the taxi people.  Asked that there would be adequate signage.  Makes sense that it would coincide with the pay parking hours.  There will be some taxi spaces still outside Ecos – should consider that we still need 4 spaces there.  This is a significant enough change there.  We will need to clarify that taxi parking will be after hours.

Cllr Jeffers: Sees the valid point of making more spaces available down towards Barrys.  Spoke to the taxi people and thinks it important that we consult with them.  Doesn’t think it feasible that it would revert at 6pm.  Would make policing difficult.  Thinks we should consult APCOA.  How do we make it visible?  Saturday would be an issue.  The numbers of taxis increase on a Saturday.

Cllr D’Alton:  There is a live planning application on Barry’s Field and if it is granted, the taxi rank will go.  Maybe rather than setting into the time and expense of making bye-laws, we should wait until the result of the planning application is clear?  It is at further information stage.

MDO:  If we’re even going to discuss them with people we’re talking signage, etc.  Wrt signage, it is much easier if there is the same rule every day.  Doesn’t see it would be possible to change the rule for Saturdays.  It makes the signage too complicated.  How many spaces do ye want?

Cllr Jeffers says that we should get a formal reply from the taxi people.  Have to remember that many of the taxi drivers are self employed and this is their patch.  This is the only taxi rank in Cork County and it was hard fought for.  We need to respect it.

Cllr Harris:  Thinks we should leave this well alone, especially with the planning application.

Cllr McGrath:  There are different views here.  There are 10 spaces there; parking is at a premium during the day but taxis don’t use it much during the day.  Have never seen more than one or two only during the day.  But it is not so straightforward to bring in the bye-law change.  The enforcement issue is a valid one.  APCOA continue until 6pm – who enforces afterwards?  Thinks the issue was worth considering.

Cllr Canty:  Wait until the development is finalised and a decision is taken.  We can revisit then.

 

3.  Correspondence

(i) Response from TII re Ringaskiddy Playground – N28

‘TII Correspondence Ringaskiddy Playground – N28.pdf’

Cllr D’Alton:  Can’t help noticing that this is the first time since I was elected that we have had a response from TII on TII headed paper.  Just thinks it is so sad that we’re reduced to this for a pedestrian crossing in the heart of a village in an industrial area beside a children’s playground.  Brought both this and the Castlewhite-N71 junction up at the Southern Committee meeting this morning.  The CRDO said that they would look at it in the next couple of weeks.

Cllr McGrath:  Concurs.  Ringaskiddy is in a unique situation.  The playground is on one side of the road, the village on the other.  Worries about the required studies TII outlines.  Fears Ringaskiddy may not qualify.

Cllr D’Alton asks the AE whether she is familiar with protocol for getting pedestrian crossings in other villages with national roads running through them.

AE:  Thinks that what the CRDO has already done is what they are asking for here.  Other villages with national roads would be Innishannon, Castlemartyr – these are similar but have higher through traffic.  Towns like these will be asking for pedestrians crossings also.  So competitively it may be difficult to make the case for Ringaskiddy.

Cllr McGrath:  Can we ask TII to give credence to some of the unique circumstances in Ringaskiddy?  Heavy industry, etc.

AE:  Expects that if the CRDO is to be asked to look at it, it is to them we should be writing.

Agreed we would do this.

 

(ii) Response from TII re N71 – Castlewhite Junction

‘TII Correspondence N71 – Castlewhite Junction.pdf’

 

4.  Disposal of Property

(i) Grant of Wayleave and Right-of-Way at Douglas, Co. Cork to CADO Pvt. Limited, Cinema World, Douglas, Co Cork (plus owners and occupiers of adjoining and adjacent premises) for the consideration of €5,000 plus Council’s costs.

 (ii) Grant of Wayleave and Right-of-Way at Douglas, Co. Cork to Douglas Central Properties Limited, 48 Upper Drumcondra Road, Dublin for the consideration of €5,000 plus Council’s costs.

‘Section 183 Notice.pdf’
‘Map.pdf’

MDO:  This was brought to last month’s meeting and we agreed to revisit it.  It has come back to this month’s meeting as two separate proposals.

AE:  The right of way is being sought because the owners will need to cross Council land.

Cllr Harris:  We should be asking a higher price for this.  It is prime land.

MDO: We’re giving a right of way, not selling the land.  The costs involved will be split between the two applicants.

Cllr D’Alton:  Will the right of way be developed so that it is an actual road?  Does this mean the tree line will go?  There is informal parking under the trees used by MacDonalds because often their car park is full.   Will this be gone too?  Also you say it is to facilitate the planning permission but there is no planning permission on this site.  The one in 2011 has expired and another has been lodged recently for an extension but wonders is there a precedent for considering an extension when the original permission has lapsed?  We shouldn’t be facilitating a development that doesn’t have planning permission.

AE:  Thought the planning permission hadn’t fully expired. Thought they had put in for an extension somewhere along the way.

Cllr McGrath agrees with Cllr Harris that this is a very low figure.  The site owners are looking for something significant from the Council in terms of access.

Cllr Jeffers agres with them.  Also agrees with Cllr D’Alton on tree line and parking.

AE:  The strip of ground in question isn’t the width of the table.  It is still providing access but is very small.  These are two properties – one derelict and one semiderelict.  Thinks it is in everybody’s interest to get these places developed.

MDO:  The area is 0.004 of a hectare.  You couldn’t get a shopping trolley through it!

Cllr McGrath suggests we send it back to the Property Section looking for an explanation as to how it was arrived at.  This was agreed.

 

 5.  GMA/TDF

Grasscutting in difficult estates:
AE got an estimate of €6,000 for all three estates, i.e. €1,800 + VAT per cut for three cuts.  Cautions that if we do this for these three estates, many more estates will be asking next year.

Cllr Jeffers:  Speaking of Pinecroft in particular, it is an area that is not owned by any particular part of the estate.  The residents will never cut it if we don’t.

MDO:  There are other estates throughout the MD that have other large green areas.  They can and will demand the same.  We are talking about consistency ourselves across the MD.  Most of the estates which have larger green areas are larger estates with aging populations.  If we do it this year we’ll have two or three times the number of requests next year.

Cllr O’Donnabhain asks what we’re doing with Muskerry Estate and Highfield in Ballincollig.  People are getting old in Muskerry and in Highfield, the residents on one side can afford to pay whilst those on the other can’t.

Cllr Canty: We always gave our own Council estates ride ons and amenity grants, but if this is happening, I’ll be the first to be asking for our estate to be cut next year.

Cllr Jeffers:  Thinks this is more highlighting a deficiency generally with regard to maintenance of estates.

Cllr Desmond:  Everyone wants their road done; everyone wants their footpath done.  We prioritise these every year.  Doesn’t think the 3 cuts would satisfy residents in other areas.  Parkgate, for example, is meticulous and they have a huge green area.  But they don’t want the Pinecroft arrangement.   These 3 estates that were mentioned the last day keeping being renamed as the ones that are problematic.

Cllr Harris:  These residents cut their grass; ownership of the large green areas is the issue.

Cllr McGrath:  The way we’ve approached this in the last few years has been a fudge.  We have operated by the squeaky wheel approach.  Wants a transparent system put in place now.  These are not traditional greens.

Cllr Jeffers:  Agreed.  People are saying they are paying their property tax and that they get nothing for it.

Cllr Desmond:  Have been approached by other wanting their grass cut and have told them it won’t be done.  Give us some credit!

MDO:  This will have to come out of GMA.  The Area Office doesn’t have the budget.

Agreed that it would be done.

 

6.  Notices of Motion

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

Cllr. D Forde

  1. “That the Engineer examines if Cork County Council can assist in minimising anti social behaviour adjacent to Mount Oval.”
  2. “That the Municipal District Manager gives a report on what, if any restrictions, are placed on the erection of satellite dishes on residential properties.”
  3. “That the Engineer considers more safety measures on the zebra crossing at the Fingerpost Roundabout. In particular, motorists coming from the Rochestown Road on to the main Carrigaline Road. More prominent signage is needed and flashing lights on existing poles half way down poles. CCTV cameras to monitor offending motorists would be a big help.”

Cllr Forde wasn’t present.

 

Cllr. M R Desmond

  1. “To ask the Engineer for an update in relation to the pedestrian crossing near Foxwood School in Rochestown.”

AE:  The school has to carry out road 3 safety audit as part of planning permission.  Understands the safety issue arises when leaving the school.  Our last approach has been to try to get the school to carry out that stage 3 audit.  We can then see what would be the best location for this crossing.

 

  1. “To ask the Engineer to reinstate existing yellow lines at the front of Parkgate Estate, Grange.”

AE:  This is no problem.

 

Cllr. S McGrath

  1. “To seek an explanation as to why grass was not cut in many areas until the first week of May.”

Cllr McGrath:  This issue has come to me as a public rep.  It isn’t a surprise that we need to cut the grass until March.  Presume there is an explanation as to why it wasn’t cut until May and would like to hear it.

AE:  The grasscutting contract didn’t go out until later this year.  There were several reasons for that.  A lot of areas formerly done by the Gateway staff have to come back into the contract.  Crosshaven had to be included.  We were also busy and the weather was so favourable the growing season came on us earlier.  There were many areas around Carrigaline that were done as an extension of our last contract.  This year’s contract itself started in mid April.  The full area wasn’t completed until early May but there were plenty of areas done well before that.  The first cut takes the longest.  Hopes that there will be a noticeable improvement and will make it easier going forward.

 

  1. “To request a report outlining the proposed infrastructural improvements to be carried from the special planning contributions associated with the Education Campus site at Ballinrea, Carrigaline.”

‘Cllr McGrath NOM 2.pdf’

AE confirms that there is an uncontrolled crossing at Ashgrove roundabout at present and this is to upgraded in association with the campus.  Ballinrea Cross equally so.

 

  1. “To have a discussion about possible preventative measures against anti-social behaviour (outside normal hours of use) at the Carrigaline playground.”

‘Cllr McGrath NOM 3.pdf’

Cllr McGrath:  Something unsavoury was left in the playground recently.  The idea of locking it has come up.  Is this something we can consider?  Do the reports to your office merit it?  The gardai get called there on occasion and sometimes lock the playground themselves.

In Douglas they pay someone to do it.

AE:  We are aware there is a problem.  A member of staff does it in the Regional Park.  It is done voluntarily in Douglas through the community association.  The issue of locking it is down to financial resources.

MDO:  Even if you lock the playground, they’ll still have access to the park.

Cllr Murphy:  Same in Passage.  There’s bigger young fellas there late at night.  Maybe the gardai should be more active.

Cllr D’Alton:  Similar issue in Monkstown playground recently.  A swing has been detached and the surface of the playground damaged.  In Passage they hang out after hours but they’re just sitting; there is no damage.  Monkstown has a park situation similar to Carrigaline.  Have always been conscious when this issue came up before wrt Passage that Pat O’Sullivan used to say when the playground in Carrigaline was installed first it was locked.  There was more damage then than when it was subsequently left open.  Opening it removed the challenge.

Cllr Harris:  Suggests we look at lighting there.  Thinks lighting is poor in the park.

MDO:  Tidy Towns people would then complain that we were disturbing the birds and bats.

Cllr McGrath:  Doesn’t agree that there more issues when the park was locked.  There are more issues there now.  Some are of an unsavoury nature.  Gardai who were there when the park was locked say that there were fewer incidents when the park was locked.  Thinks that if this get worse, we will have to be prepared to act on it.

 

Cllr. D Canty

  1. “That the Members of Ballincollig/Carrigaline Municipal District be updated on the proposed horse grazing project at the Lee Road.”

Residents are very upset.  This is coming in under the radar.

  1. “That an update be given in relation to line painting in the Ballincollig area.”
  2. “That the Engineer gives a report on the remedial works on the bad areas of footpaths in the Ballincollig area.”

‘Cllr Canty NOM 1.pdf’

‘Cllr Canty NOM 2.pdf’

‘Cllr Canty NOM 3.pdf’

Cllr Canty thanks the engineer for the responses.

 

Cllr. E Jeffers

  1. “That Grange Heights be given consideration for future footpath works programs.”

Cllr Jeffers:  Last works done here was 10 years ago.  To the RHS of entrance the path is away from the wall.  Is hazardous.

 

  1. “That there would be a development along the boundary ditches of Grange Heights running along the Grange Road for a specific area for flowers or other items as to give this area a significant visual benefit.”

Cllr Jeffers:  There used to be a nice patch here where the residents planted flowers.  Nice features and the Grange Road lacks features.  Would there be scope there that the residents could develop a small little area.  They want a clean patch, perhaps could be done in relation with Douglas Tidy Towns.

AE:  There is a very active residents group in Grange Heights.  They have approached us before in relation to tidy up that area at the entrance to the estate.   Many are now moving on a bit.  We would be willing to help them out.  Needs to be teased out a bit more.  Not sure if we could do much but it would be would be willing to assist if plans were scaled back over a small area.

We’re well aware about the footpaths.  We will address next year and if there is an isolated hazard, let us know.

 

  1. “To seek a written report on the possibility of implementing a pedestrian crossing within the vicinity of the entrance to Herons Wood and the bus stop on the road heading out of Carrigaline. The report should include the cost and any plans old or new to implement a pedestrian crossing in this area.”

Cllr Jeffers:  Glad to see there have been contribution levies put in place for this.

 

Cllr. D O’Donnabhain

  1. “That this Municipal District requires the employment of a full time park warden for the Ballincollig Regional Park.”

Cllr O’Donnabhain:  Asking for someone for Friday, Saturday, Sunday and bank holidays to be employed.  There have been some unsavoury incidents recently.  Gives some examples of when rules weren’t obeyed.  Describes an issue which led to the late opening of the park.  Attempt by person to bring a sulky into the park.  People not enforcing the dangerous dogs act.  We need a full time warden.  So much money has been spent in this park that it warrants it.

MDO:  There is a financial implication with this proposal.  We have to have at least 2 people.  Can’t do with one.  Staffing is something for the CE and we can refer this to him.

 

  1. “That this Municipal District would call on Cork County Council to introduce bye-laws preventing the placement of election posters in public areas.”

‘Cllr O Donnabhain NOM 2.pdf’

Cllr O’Donnabhain:  This is an issue that was brought up at a recent meeting.  Thinks it would be great if it came as a proposal from this MD.

Cllr D’Alton:  It was brought up as part of the signage policy development at the Environment SPC.  Was proposed but didn’t gain any traction.  The disbenefits of election posters outweigh the benefits.  Think it would be excellent if this MD could propose.

Cllr McGrath:  We had this decision taken at full Council in the past.  It wasn’t approached nationally.  The idea of designated areas for postering is the way to go.  To me, health and safety is the biggest issue.  The posters can fall or blow off on top of a car.

The MDO explained that this is a decision that can be taken only nationally.  We can’t introduce bye-laws ourselves to cover this.  We can make an alternative proposal to contact the Department about it.  Cllr O’Donnabhain would need to accept this alternative proposal as an amendment to his motion

Cllr D’Alton suggests wording.  Cllr O’Donnabhain accepts.  It was agreed that the MD writes to the Department to ask them to pass bye-laws to prohibit the hanging of election posters in public places.

 

  1. “This Municipal District requests double yellow lines to be painted on the approach road to the Ballincollig Regional park, in particular from the bend in the road for 200m, and also in the region of the entrance to Westcourt/Westcourt Heights.”

‘Cllr O’Donnabhain NOM 3.pdf’

Cllr O’Donnabhain:  Describes dreadful parking in this area.  Can be packed with cars leading to hazard, in particular with cars parking on the bend.  Gardai didn’t respond when called about it.  If the fire brigade had been called to the park, they couldn’t access it.  So asking for double yellow lines to be painted.

 

7.  Votes of Congratulations

Cllr Desmond for Peter O’Keeffe of Frankfield.
Cllr Murphy for Cody Barrett – won gold medal in karate nationals
Cllr Harris for Peter O’Flynn – Mr. Cork body building championship
Cllr Jeffers for Everton Football Club – senior team for promotion

 

8.  Any Other Business

Cllr Jeffers:  Land beside Douglas GAA Club is for sale.  Asks that the Council would make a serious community investment in buying this patch of land.  It is a place of anti-social behaviour, so has a dual benefit.

Cllr D’Alton and Cllr Harris support.  Cllr D’Alton says there is an acknowledged shortage of recreational space in Douglas.

Cllr McGrath says he has already spoken to the CE about this but no harm that it is brought up at MD level too.

MDO asks whether Douglas GAA has not bought additional land recently.

Cllr Jeffers says the land is unlikely to be suitable for anything other than recreation.

Cllr D’Alton describes latest damage in the Monkstown playground.  AE says she got a phone call to the office about it also and they will look at it.

Cllr McGrath says there are bollards on the R610 between Raffeen Tce and N28 that are unsightly. Asks that they would be looked at.  Also there is a manhole by the entrance to Robert’s Bridge car park.  The surface of the road around it has broken away.

Notes from a meeting of full Council on the Cross River Ferry – Raffeen Bridge Greenway, 08-05-2017

 

MANAGER’S REPORT UNDER SECTION 179, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ACT, 2000:  Proposed Development of Pedestrian and Cycle Greenway and Ancillary Works from Glenbrook to Raffeen Bridge

Cllr Canty (FG):  As Chair of the Municipal District, is pleased to propose this project.  It would be a great asset to the Monkstown – Raffeen area.

Cllr Desmond (FF):  Is against the proposal as it stands.  Acknowledges the work that has been done in-house but there are concerns with this particular route.  Takes in an existing and established walkway.  Is predominantly used by elderly people.  The shared use is what is causing the issue.  The primary users of this pathway would be like skittles.  There is a strong tradition of fishing off the quay wall.  That’s posing a problem too.  Very disappointed that the concerns that have been raised by Members and the public haven’t been able to be addressed.

Cllr Collins (FG):  Supports Cllr Canty in proposing this.  Thinks it a pity that a section of a 25km walk from Páirc Uí Chaoimh to Crosshaven would be discontinued for this section.  It’s not for the people of Monkstown, Glenbrook and Raffeen; it’s for everyone.  We’re trying to encourage everyone to get out and be active.  Very disappointing that there isn’t support for it.  There are safety issues but the greenway from Carrigaline to Crosshaven is a shared space as is the rest of the line and there have yet to be accidents.

Cllr D’Alton (Ind):  Thanks the team working in-house on this, especially Clare Cronin, for a very long time.  Think the concept was first introduced to us in 2012.  Am generally very much in favour of development of greenways all around Cork Harbour.  Many years ago a railway line ran between Blackrock and Crosshaven.  A greenway has been developed along the route between Blackrock and Passage West and between Carrigaline and Crosshaven.  It is off road nearly all the way.  This proposal is for part of the section that would connect the two.  In one section it isn’t for off-road but on an existing footpath.  Many of the older and more vulnerable users who couldn’t deal with the bicycles on the Passage West to Hop Island section moved to this footpath for walking.  It is wide and flat and known as the Cardiac Mile.  It is their only physical and social outlet.  They will not be able to share this surface with bikes and so they will have nowhere to go.  The path runs alongside a busy, fast moving regional road.  There is real risk to cyclists of falling off the path onto the road.  They are totally unprotected.  But there a second stretch of this proposed route where the road is winding and dangerous and here we can provide off-road greenway.  Would be real benefits from developing this section.  If this part of the proposal could be separated out, would support.  But it is being presented as one proposal and so very sadly cannot support it.

Cllr Jeffers (SF):  Sinn Féin won’t be supporting this proposal.  Elderly people use this walkway because it is not congested with traffic.  We are in favour of cycle lanes.  In Passage, people are not using the route because of the business.  This is too close to a busy road.  Has been speaking to a few anglers on the walkway.  They have been there for years.  There has been accommodation further down but they won’t use that point because the fishing isn’t good for them there.  They say they won’t move from the place they fish in.

Cllr Forde (FG):  Very seldom that I disagree with you, Mayor, but have to say that we don’t live in an ideal world.   Not all projects are ideal.  It’s not long ago that people in Rochestown didn’t even have footpath.  They had to walk against a wall and you know what the population of Rochestown is like. Hop Island to Passage West is a wonderful amenity.  The Blackrock Greenway is a wonderful amenity.  It is not ideal – dogs running loose, cyclists.  I travel extensively and when I go abroad I see that shared surfaces are normal.  You get used to the bicycle bells.  We will lose the money if we don’t pass this proposal.  Thinks we should pass and adapt as time goes on, improving on the bits that aren’t entirely satisfactory.  Supports.

Cllr Harris (Ind):  On balance, thinks we should support it.  It has been around a long time.  These issues that have been raised can be dealt with in the fullness of time.  On the balance of evidence, supports.

Cllr Murphy (SF):  I cycle a lot around that area.  Is worried because the one from Rochestown isn’t working if you listen to the people around the area.

Cllr McGrath (FF):  From the outset has raised serious concerns about the shared use of the footpath.  Had hoped that the issues would be addressed through the process but they haven’t.  Appreciates that there are physical restrictions.  Compliments Clare Cronin on the work she has done.  My position has been consistent on shared use.  Thinks it should have a 4 metre width similar to the Douglas Amenity Park.  We have two existing greenways.  Sees issues with them very regularly.  People don’t know what side of the path they should be at.  There’s no proper Code of Conduct in place.  Gets complaints from users.  Thinks there is a particular safety issue with the path beside the busy regional road.  Especially with families on bicycles which is the type of user we’re promoting.  Put forward a number of suggestions that didn’t happen. Isn’t prepared to support it.  It is now proposed to suspend the greenway through Monkstown; thinks it should be extended further to accommodate existing walkers.  The harbour has to be for all users.

CE:  Continous development of the Cork Harbour Greenway is a prioritised project within the Council.  There is significant demand from other regions for in-house resources to develop other greenways.  There are certain constraints in the area as there would be in developing any other greenway.  We’re not talking about a shared footpath; we’re talking about a shared greenway.  Can assure members that this particular greenway is designed within the guidelines that are there to provide for safe greenways and situations that are not dangerous to users.  Provides for a variety of widths.  Is reduced to 3 metres in the section that is causing the challenge.  Is still within the guidelines.  Members might recall that the Waterford greenway is 3 metres wide, albeit in a different scenario.  It is neither lined nor segregated.  It is natural that there would be a level of uncertainty among certain users.  Went there myself.  Spent time, walked it.  Saw leisure cyclists using the existing footpath as a shared space on the footpath that is causing the problem.  So we are increasing safety for the people currently using it.  Members need to consider this.  There will be no other proposal coming before Council on this particular section of greenway.

Cllr Linehan Foley (Ind) speaks of how wonderful the Waterford Greenway is and what an asset it is to the region.

Cllr D’Alton (Ind) says the Waterford Greenway is a totally different scenario.  There is a far lower level of use there.  This proposal is for a commuter route in a suburban area.  Many Members voiced their disagreement with this.

Cllr Canty (FG) repeats the proposal.  Cllr Forde (FG) says we’ll lose €3.5m of funding.

The proposal is put to a vote.  22 in favour, 20 against, 3 abstain.  The proposal is carried.

 

Notes from a meeting of full Council, 24th April 2017

Tenders are being opened in the Chamber.  They relate to the fitting out of the motor tax office.

Mayor proposes a suspension of standing orders at 1pm for discussion of issues in the Local Area Plan.

 

1.  Confirmation of Minutes

‘Minapr1.17.pdf’
‘APPENDIX 1.pdf’
‘APPENDIX 2 LAP amendments.pdf’

Will be done at 1pm.

 

2.  Votes of Sympathy

Cllr Frank O’Flynn had a vote of sympathy.

 

Statutory Business

3.  Disposal of Property

Bandon – Kinsale  Municipal District Meeting, 27th January, 2017:(a)  Disposal of property at Camden Fort Meagher, Crosshaven.

Passed.

 

4.  Section 19 of the Local reenwayovernment Act, 2001:
Filling of Vacancies on Housing SPC, Arts Culture & Languages SPC and LCDC West Committees

Cllr K Murphy proposes Cllr John O’Sullivan.  Seconded by Cllr M Hegarty.  For all three committees.

 

Financial Business

Capital Programme

‘FINAL Council Report Capital Programme 2017 – 2019.pdf’
‘Final Council Table.pdf’

Head of Finance:

  • The budget is divided into two: contractual and non-contractual.
  • The ongoing programme of works is contractual. These include housing, roads, water, recreation, municipal districts.  There is a further €129m which is based on business need.  These are schemes we want to progress but we have to go through statutory processes.  We have to make sure that funding is in place before we can progress at all.
  • This programme doesn’t require Council approval.
  • We’ll get as much grant funding as we can.
  • ICR = internal capital receipts. Comes from tenant purchase of houses.  We reinvest this.
  • Social housing is the biggest area of proposed investment. Ties in with commitments under Rebuilding Ireland.  Includes €131m contractually committed.  Part V is included in this, turnkey developments, energy efficiency, social housing construction (Clonakilty, Fermoy, Ballincollig, Bantry, Kanturk).  €29m not contractually committed is for single house and land acquisition.
  • The schemes we hope to bring forward are contained in here.
  • Footpaths – looking at over €1m per year.
  • National roads is the biggest area of expenditure – includes provision for Ringskiddy, Macroom, Dunkettle. Most will be dealt with by TII but the initial elements are included in our programme.  Also includes some other projects like the pavement at Lissarda.
  • “Other” is things like the Science Park, Carrigaline.
  • “Regional and local roads” is improvement works across the County.
  • LIHAF – a lot of the works required for this will be roads based. Ballincollig, Glanmire, Midleton, Carrigaline.
  • Burial grounds – we have an ambitious programme to extend and develop. At the moment we have funding of only €0.5m.  We have intentions to develop this further.
  • Non-contractual programme in “environment” includes for capping of landfills. Air monitoring included there also (?).
  • Provision in “fire” for three fire stations.
  • We will need to source funding for the libraries.
  • Public realm is something we discussed as part of the revenue budget. We want to try and improve the public realm in our towns.  We are committed to this and to sourcing funding for it.
  • Tourism includes Camden. We have applied for the Fáilte Ireland grant for Dursey.
  • If we need to buy land for housing, we will be borrowing.

CE:  We are required to bring a capital report showing proposed expenditure.  It isn’t setting out a whole range of projects.  We all know there are lots of things we’d like to progress.  This simply captures the entirety of what we’d like to do if we had funding.

Cllr O’Shea (Ind):  Lots to be welcomed in this.  Particularly recreation and amenity.  Discuss playground improvement programme please.  Worthwhile seeing that reinstated.  Hopes we might get a briefing at Municipal District level about how this will be implemented.  Also welcomes footpaths; thinks the commitment to footpaths should be more.  It works out at only about €120k per Municipal District per year.  Kanturk Mallow is subventing footpaths at Municipal District level.  Thinks we need to look at this again at budget time.

Cllr G Murphy (FG):  Welcomes.  €2.6bn extra was mentioned from the Southern Assembly between 2018 – 2021.  Cooperation between 3 cities in the southern region, which is critical.  In the report, they mentioned that some of the €2.6bn should be spent at the discretion of local authorities.  Asks that the priority would be put on rural towns and rural villages.  Have we made that application in conjunction with the Southern Assembly?  Have we backed up the Southern Assembly’s primary objective about the M20?

Cllr Hegarty (FG):  Thanks Lorraine.  Very encouraging.  Thought we were now renting/leasing our fleet.  So what is fleet investment about?  The €4.2m on the 2nd slide. What is that about?

Cllr O’Grady (SF):  Huge increase on previous programme.  Rolling programme is to be welcomed.  Overall figure transferred from the revenue budget to the capital budget?  Any money to be transferred from the capital budget to revenue?  Housing – in the last 3 year programme there was €15.1m put into affordable housing.  Has that come to an end?  Also the DPG grants, there was €700k committed before.  Doesn’t see it committed now?  Housing programme – in 2015 we were given figures of 469 units provided in the county.  168 were under social leasing.  But the national oversight and audit committee report says it is 52 short of the figure we were given last year.  Why?  98 local authority builds and acquisitions – we were told this last year.  But more recent report said 90.  Voids numbers are different too giving a shortage of 29 houses.  Can these be explained.  Delivery of 429 units is to be very much welcomed.  LIHAF – €27.3 is contractually committed but we’ve received funding for €15m and we have to come up with €5m.  That’s €20m.  So where is the €27.3 coming from?

Cllr D’Alton (Ind):  Thanks Lorraine.  Footpaths and roads are both included under the “roads” category.  Cyclepaths and facilities for bikes are always included in “recreation and amenity” or in something else.  Could they please be included under roads also because unless we start the mindset of planning for them from the outset, they will never be a real alternative to the car.  Also we are very anxious to improve the appearance of our town centres.  Many are blighted by dereliction which we can put right using compulsory purchase.  It would be good to see provision for CPO in the capital budget.  Last year’s capital budget was for a spend of €165k, with €50k of required funding to be found through grants and other means.  Would like to know how much of that €50k we succeeded in getting.

Cllr O’Flynn (FF):  Welcomes long term planning for quality of life.  Voids are taking too long to turn around.  CBL is working very well.  There is nothing worse than a Council house lying idle.  Parking in estates, especially older estates, is a big issue.  People have to have cars; there are no buses and no trains.  When I ask, the answer is “no funding”.  Regional and local roads – I understand our funding is back 10%.  We have to look after these.  Playground programme is very welcome.  There was serious damage done again to the playground in Fermoy recently.  A disgrace.  Perhaps there should be CCTV put in.  On Mallow Relief Road and M20 – thanks Michael Lynch who did a lot of work on this.  Asks the Mayor is there any update on when we can meet the Minister.  Now there is rumour about a new line for the road going through Cahir and Mitchelstown.  This is crazy; it must go through Mallow.

Cllr Carroll (FF):  Thanks all.  Very encouraging budget.  Makes a strong case for the state of the roads.  They are away behind the standards that you find around the rest of the county.  The southern region and the €2.6bn is not to be sneezed at.  Hopes the Council has a submission made for a slice of that money.  There are a lot of villages and towns losing out because of the lack of LEADER money.  This is a golden opportunity to replace that and bring life back into those villages and towns again.  Hopes the Council has made a submission.

Cllr O’Cadhla (Ind):  Thanks for report.  Asks that we clarify the housing element.  You said we would look at borrowing for land purchase.  Is it built in that the Council would borrow for construction of houses also?  There are good sources of borrowed funds available now.  Welcomes the number of projected housing completions but think it is completely inadequate in terms of the need.  It is one of the biggest crises in our society.  If it means borrowing money to deliver houses, thinks we should.

Cllr Doyle (FF):  welcomes the MD funding in particular.  Especially public realm, footpath, parks and playgrounds improvements.  Mid term review of the roads programme is up during the summer.  Highlights the need for the M20 and the route of the M20.  Maybe some of the €2.6bn could be used in the short term to provide relief roads to the likes of Charleville and Mallow?

Cllr K Murphy (FG):  Ambitious programme and welcome.  Maintenance and upgrade of national secondary routes is never mentioned.  €680k for the county is invested in this as a whole.  A disgrace: they are the forgotten routes.  Thinks this should increase to several million.  Wonders if we can look for an opening to fund these.

Cllr T Collins (Ind):  Importance of the M20.  It should not go through Mitchelstown.  Huge bad bends there where people have been killed before.  If the M20 is put in place, this would solve the problem there.  Should go from Cork to Mallow to Limerick.  Would improve Buttevant and Charleville.  The Mallow Relief Road cannot be forgotten.

Cllr S McCarthy (FG):  Thanks Lorraine.  National roads budget is €86m.  Regional and local roads is €9m.  Understands TII is the national roads authority but wonders why while there is huge investment needed in national roads, the smaller roads are suffering drastically.  Is this allocation to national roads because it is locked in money from TII?  Maybe it is more a national issue that we need to look at this breakdown and disparity?

Head of Finance:

  • Fleet investment – we are progressing to leasing smaller vehicles but not the bigger ones like velocity patchers and bigger trucks. We have to maintain the fleet.  A lot of it is over 10 years old.
  • Capital transferred from revenue account – we transferred about €13.6m from revenue to capital over the 2014 – 2017 period. That goes across areas from coastal protection, tourism, housing, etc.  Our capacity to be able to do that is based on what we provide in the budget, the variation in LPT, etc.  If money isn’t spent in the capital account, we post it back through the revenue account but this rarely happens.
  • We have a provision in capital programme for DPGs of about €4m.
  • Figures as regards housing will have to be clarified with housing. Will revert.
  • Cycleways – will be included under greenways and NTA schemes. Traffic and transport sits within roads directorate so it is more nomenclature really.
  • Dereliction and funding was part of the revenue budget.
  • Borrowings – any we take on has to get Council approval and then departmental approval. Perhaps some of the LIHAF will come from borrowing.
  • Non-national roads grant allocation would be included in the revenue budget. So the imbalance is perceived but it is actually included in the revenue budget.
  • €517m is the intent from taking on board what the directorates have said and taking on board what came through the MDs. We may not reach the €517m over 3 years
  • We still have €50m unfunded. It just moves on and on and on.  There are €50m for identified projects unfunded this year too.
  • We haven’t made a submission to the €2.6bn. Will follow this up.

Cllr O’Grady (SF):  Wants year on year figures for transfer from revenue to capital over 3 years.  Asks more about LIHAF.

Lorraine:  Has them and will send out.  3 housing schemes which haven’t progressed would be in Kanturk, Cobh and Mogeely.  There are not included in 2017.  But there are others coming in under social leasing.

CE:  We have to fund 25% of the €20m – LIHAF.  The LIHAF doesn’t fund land purchase around spine roads so we will have to do that.

Cllr G Murphy (FG):  On the Southern Assembly.  We have a problem with LEADER funding.  Is a particular problem in Cork.

Cllr O’Cadhla (Ind):  Are our hands tied that the Council can’t put together a programme for investment in housing to respond to the housing crisis?

CE:  What we do on housing is governed by 6 year housing strategy.  Covers a whole range of housing options.  Our funding comes directly from the department and we try to achieve the targets set by that 6 year programme.  That’s the way it works.

Cllr O’Cadhla (Ind):  Knows this.  But Council has its own revenue.  Is it ok for us to put together a far more ambitious programme?

CE: I would have to bring that programme to Council for approval.  When there is a funded government strategy in place, I can’t bring another proposal to Council for borrowing.  Government has account of our need and requirement and will fund that through the various forms of social housing support.

Cllr O’Cadhla (Ind):  Can we as a Council bring forward a proposal?

CE:  To bring a proposal for borrowing, I have to be satisfied that we can secure it for a particular purpose to respond to Council’s investment programmes.  I am told by government that they will deliver on what we need so I see no need to outside of that.

Cllr Doyle (FF):  LIHAF – this is for infrastructure.  In a town like Charleville which is zoned for 800 houses or so, we will never have the infrastructure.  Is it possible to get some of that funding towards infrastructure of this nature.

CE:  We will have to come back to the Council for support to borrow for this.  We got good funding from LIHAF in the context of allocations nationally.  Borrowing to pay for the infrastructural deficits in towns like Charleville, etc. would be based on our capacity to borrow.  I would borrow if I were sure that number of houses were going to be delivered by a developer to support the borrowing so I could get it paid back.  At the moment, I don’t see that happening.

Cllr G Murphy (FG):  There is a separate capital fund in the housing department to build roads to facilitate development.   If there are 750 plannings in Charleville, there should be funding from the housing department because there is general acceptance that those 750 houses cannot be built until the traffic problem in Charleville is solved.

CE:  The funding was the LIHAF funds.  We weren’t successful that the level of investment there would not deliver that number of houses.  If there is another round of LIHAF, we will go back in and look for more for Charleville and other towns like it.

Mayor:  This year’s capital budget represents a good sum of money and a nice increase in last year. We have a provisional date with Minister Ross towards the end of June.  Request was in since last October.  We have asked that it would be brought forward.  Confirmed that it would be cross party.

 

Reports and Recommendations

6.  Ballincollig-Carrigaline Municipal District
MANAGER’S REPORT UNDER SECTION 179, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ACT, 2000:  Proposed Development of Pedestrian and Cycle Greenway and Ancillary Works from Glenbrook to Raffeen Bridge.

‘Part 8 Manager’s Report 15 March 2017.pdf’

To be deferred.  It will be on the next full Council meeting.

 

7.  Bandon-Kinsale Municipal District
MANAGER’S REPORT UNDER SECTION 179, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ACT, 2000:  L6506 Ferney Road Improvement Scheme, Carrigaline, Co. Cork

‘Ferney Road Part 8 Managers Report (8).pdf’

Approved.

 

8.  Reports from the International and EU Affairs Committee
(a) Report on proposed Sister Agreement with Miami Dade County.

Cllr Coleman (Ind):  It is 20 years since we last signed a sister agreement.  That was with Cook County and it has been very successful.  The most critical thing Miami Dade brings is the cruise industry.  It is the heart of the cruise industry and we will see 7 cruises coming to Cork this year.  That is as a result of the hard work of the County Council.  Food ingredients is a big area too as is agriculture.  Hopes this Council will endorse the signing of a sister agreement and hopes if it progresses well, it will move forward to a formal twinning.

Cllr M Hegarty (FG):  If it was only a quarter as successful as what we have with Cook County, it will be phenomenal.  We have many similarities and will give us lots of opportunities to grow our links.  Formally seconds.

Cllr Mary Hegarty (FG):  Welcomes and speaks on the importance of these visits.  From West Cork’s point of view, we welcome the 7 cruise liner visits.  The work of the Council often goes unrecognised in these areas.  Would like to see more relationships with Port of Cork developed too.

The sister agreement was approved.

 

(b) Tourism and Trade Mission to the U.S.

Mayor:  This is on the agenda for information.

 

Correspondence from Government Departments

9.  Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine
Letter dated 16th March, 2017, in response to Council’s motion of 27th February, 2017, regarding bird flu virus.

Response to Cllr Collins’ motion: ‘Bird Flu Virus.pdf’

Cllr N Collins (Ind):  Pleased to note requirement to keep birds confined.  Thanks the Department and Michael Creed, TD.

 

10.  Department of Justice and Equality
Letter dated 16th March, 2017, in response to Council’s motion of 13th February, 2017, regarding amendment of the Valuation Act 2001

Response to Cllr D’Alton’s motion: ‘Correspondence from Dept of Justice & Equality.pdf’

Cllr D’Alton (Ind):  Extraordinary irony that the issue the Oireachtas is concerned with is ensuring there is no discrimination between Members of the Oireachtas.  They are utterly forgetting about the discrimination between Members of the Oireachtas and the public.  If they want parity and not to support discrimination, rates should be payable on all constituency offices whether within the Oireachtas or not.

Cllr O’Grady (SF):  We received a letter from Minister Coveney saying he would be bringing forward legislation on rates.  Has the Council made a submission on this.  May give us an opportunity to work something?

Cllr O’Shea (Ind):  Cllrs have to pay rates if they have constituency offices.  That was brought up when the motion was discussed.  That is discriminating to us too.  Suggests that if we are writing back we would ask that this is noted.

Cllr O’Flynn:  Thinks we should treat all public representatives the same.

CE:  The proposed legislation from Minister Coveney is being drafted to strengthen local authorities’ powers in relation to rates.  Hasn’t seen the draft legislation.  Once it is legislation, is sure it will become part of our discussions.

We agreed that we would write back.

Cllr D’Alton (Ind):  Ask that the legislation would be relooked at so that it doesn’t support discrimination between Members of the Oireachtas and the public.  In other words, rates should be imposed on all constituency offices regardless of where they are located, whether in the Dáil or otherwise.  But if they are adamant they won’t relook at the legislation then the least they can do is to produce legislation which is equally supportive of all public reps.

 

11.  Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment:
Letter dated 24th March, 2017, in response to Council’s motion of 20th February, 2017, regarding a moratorium on solar energy power plants in County Cork

Response to Cllr Murphy’s motion: ‘Correspondence from Dept of Communications

Cllr K Murphy (FG):  Is disgusted with the response.  Doesn’t agree that planning code is sufficiently robust.  Have spoken to Minister Coveney.  He said he would look at guidelines going forward.  They should be included in the framework.  Otherwise there will always be a question.  They should be in place early on.

Cllr R McCarthy (SF):  The Minister says his function is to encourage renewable energy.  We’re not discouraging this; we just want to control development within the sector.  Guidelines would provide greater clarity.  The court case imminent on wind farms shows what happens when there are no guidelines in place.  In Cork, there appears to be a high concentration of solar planning applications within the county.  Thinks we should write back to the Minister.  Wonders should the Environment SPC look at this?  Up to last October there were 22 planning applications lodged for solar farms.

Cllr Doyle (FF):  Agrees with Cllr Murphy.  Solar farms are new to our planning department.  They are various sizes, scale and we have no understanding of the effect they may have on our rural areas, runoff, visual impact, construction, etc.  It is an unacceptable response.  We have seen what has happened to wind farms and the distance between wind farms and houses Europe-wide has now changed.

Cllr Coleman (Ind):  Cork County Council was the first to come up with pilot guidelines on windfarms.  Thinks the PPU could do pilot guidelines on solar farming too.

Agreed that we would write back.  Cllr O’Grady supports that the PPU would help us develop our own.

CE:  Assures the members that these applications are always assessed against the various policies.  Any level of development that is approved will be appropriate.  Doesn’t see that this organisation should develop guidelines when there are no national guidelines.

 

12.  Department of Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government:
Letter dated 29th March, 2017, in response to Council’s motion of 27th February, 2017, regarding designation of the southern side of Carrigaline as a Rent Pressure Zone.

Response to Cllr Jeffers’ motion: ‘DOE Rent Pressure Zone.pdf’

Cllr Jeffers (SF):  Thanks the department for writing back.  Is not happy.  The response doesn’t support the people on the south side of Carrigaline.  Can’t understand how the Minister could let this happen within his own town.  SF does not agree with the mechanism of rent pressure zones.  We want to link them to the CPI.  But we have to work with what we have and on the southern side of Carrigaline, a 4 bed is priced on Daft at €1500.month.  On the northern side of Carrigaline, it is at €900.month.  Is it down to this?  Home ownership is at its lowest since 1971.  The Housing Agency may, in conjunction with a local authority, make a proposal to the Minister for an area to be a rent pressure zone.  Asks that we as a local authority would make that submission to the Minister.  Asks that we would write to the Minister and ask that the criteria for rent pressure zones would be changed so that other areas in County Cork could be included.

Cllr R McCarthy (SF):  Supports and seconds.

Cllr Lombard (FG):  Thinks the price disparity is caused more because we have an electoral area dividing the town.  The market will correct a lot of this; you can’t just compare prices on one side of a boundary with the other like that.

Mayor:  Supports calls to raise this issue further.  It does stem back to the town being divided but no town should have an area left out.  We should write to the Housing Agency asking that we would together jointly make the request.

Cllr Jeffers:  Agrees.  Thinks it would have to come from the Chamber that we request the Housing Agency to follow up on this issue and include the southern side of Carrigaline.

Cllr K Murphy (FG):  Suggests that we start the letter by supporting the scheme in general.

Cllr Jeffers (SF):  My own political views would be not be supportive of the scheme.

 

13.  Department of Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government:
Letter dated 29th March, 2017, in response to Council’s motion of 27th February, 2017, regarding a resolution of the Council in relation to Affordable Housing Purchase schemes

Response to Cllr Coleman’s motion: ‘DOE Affordable Housing.pdf’

Cllr Coleman (Ind):  Very disappointing response that we will have no affordable housing scheme.  We were told at SPC that an affordable housing scheme would be imminent.

Cllr Hayes (SF):  Thinks the Minister has missed the point.  There was a good scheme run up until 2011.  People are in a gap at the moment; they can’t afford to buy privately and don’t fit the criteria for a Council house.  There is confusion as to the message we’re getting; thinks we should write back.

Cllr Mary Hegarty (FG):  We discussed this at Western Division.  It is important to have a scheme for couples who are falling through the hoops.  Thinks we should seek more clarity.  Is disappointed with the response.

Cllr Barry (FG):  Support previous speakers.  Is a huge supporter of the affordable scheme.  It maybe had too many hoops to jump through but definitely filled a gap in the market.  We have to look at how we house people.  The gap between social housing and people drawing mortgages from financial institutions is huge.  We have to see if there is a way people on the minimum wage can purchase their own homes.

Cllr G Murphy (FG):  The Minster has to either make affordable housing available or raise the threshold for social housing.  There are people caught in the middle.

Cllr K Murphy (FG):  We should seek for this to be clarified.  Affordable housing and affordable sites – neither was really addressed.  There is a welcome for an affordable scheme for people who are caught in the middle.

Cllr R McCarthy (SF):  Is disappointed.  In my own estate, the affordable houses didn’t sell but it was the wrong time at that point.  There is now much need for an affordable housing scheme.  My motion looks for an increase in the threshold for social tenants.  It will have to be one or the other.

Mayor supports too.  Has long been an advocate for this.  Has raised this issue when the Minister was with us last year.  We have agreement that we will write back and ask for him to examine this issue.

Cllr McCarthy (SF):  The response to my motion (yet to be heard) asks that we would write to seek an increase in threshold for social housing.  Should we not tie the two together?  We shouldn’t really be asking for both.

Mayor thinks that because we haven’t time to hear the motion now, we’ll have to go ahead and write separately on both issues.

 

14.  Department of Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government
Letter dated 29th March, 2017, in response to Council’s motion of 9th January, 2017, regarding the plight of older separated men and women with marital and relationship problems in their quest for social housing.

Response to Cllr Collins’ motion: ‘DOE Social Housing Leasing.pdf’

Cllr N Collins (Ind):  Asks Council to consider relaxing the housing letting regulations.  They are crazy.

 

15.  Department of Health
Letter dated 11th April, 2017, in response to Council’s motion of 13th February, 2017, regarding an opt-out system of consent for organ donation

Response to Cllr Sheppard’s motion: ‘Correspondence from Dept of Health.pdf’

Cllr Sheppard was not present so the response was noted.

 

Suspension of Standing Orders

Mayor proposes a 5 minute recess to meet with party leaders with the CE, the Senior Planner and the Director of Services, Planning.  Asks the proposers of the two amendments relating to Little Island and Passage West to be present also.

The meeting reconvened.

Senior Planner:  The two proposed amendments under discussion are those for Little Island and Passage West.  In the case of both these proposed amendments, the planning authority determined (S20.3(f)) pursuant to environmental reporting that an Appropriate Assessment (AA) was required for both of these amendments. The legislation says that where AA is required that the amendments don’t pass screening and would therefore fall to go forward for full AA.  The Act provides that the Manager will specify what period is necessary for the passage of the resolution.  We’re saying that should take between 12 and 18 months.  The AA relates to the Cork Harbour SPA.  We will probably need to procure specialist services.  We can confirm that the amendments could not be published without AA and therefore we would not be in a position to publish those amendments in May or adopt the two relevant Local Area Plans until the AA was finished.  The planning authority is required to publish a proposed material alteration, publish a determination and say that it will take that long.  So the amendments will be published but will not be brought forward for adoption until the AA is completed and this will not be completed for 12 – 18 months.

CE:  Where an amendment proposed is deemed to require Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), I must publish the amendments as proposed but I must also publish the date by which the AA will be undertaken.  So when we publish the draft Local Area Plans next week, I will be specifying that SEA will be required for both of these amendments and that the period to undertake these wil be 12 – 18 months.  So the full LAP for the Cobh Municipal District and the Ballincollig-Carrigaline Municipal District will not be coming back for adoption until the AAs are complete.

Mayor:  I proposed one of these amendments.  Is there an option to revoke?  How does it happen?

Meetings administrator:  A special meeting would have to be held.  Notification would have to issue today.  Intention to amend the resolution of Council would have to be given.  One third of Members would have to sign this.  Two thirds of the Members present at the Friday meeting would have to vote in favour of carrying the revocation.

Cllr P O’Sullivan (FF):  I proposed the other amendment.   Am willing to withdraw it.

Cllr Forde (FG) spoke.  Think she asked about the cost of doing the AA for both amendments.

Cllr D’Alton (Ind):  Don’t understand how when the site in question in the Little Island amendment is 450 metres from the SPA and the development that is proposed is 10 serviced sites that AA is being required, yet in other areas of Little Island and in Ringaskiddy in particular, we have a list of sites zoned for industrial development right down to the water’s edge, noted in the Local Area Plan as interacting with the SPA but they do not need AA.

ML:  These are existing zoned land – the reports relating to those are publicly available.  They would have been screened at draft stage and those reports are available.

Cllr D’Alton (Ind):  Will the provisional screenings of the amendments also be made available?

ML confirmed that we can also see the screening reports on the two proposed amendments.

ML:  We don’t have a cost for doing the AAs for the amendments.

CE:  We may have to go to tender.  There are two AA’s which would have to be undertaken.  So we don’t know how much that will cost.

ML:  These are existing zoned land – the reports relating to those are publicly available.  They would have been screened at draft stage and those reports are available.  We can also see the screening reports on the two proposed amendments.

Cllr G Murphy (FG) asked for clarity.

Cllr Canty (FG) also asked for clarity.

Cllr D’Alton (Ind):  In two of the sites in Ringaskiddy listed as being industrially zoned, the draft Local Area Plan clearly states “this area may be used as a feeding ground by bird species for which Cork Harbour SPA is designated” and in another it says “this zone is adjacent to the Cork Harbour Special Protection Area”.  Why is it not possible to include the two amendments in the same way, noting that there may be impacts on the SPA and assess those impacts subsequently through, as you would suggest yourself, development control?

ML:  The amendments failed the screening.  That’s what our ecologist says.  That’s it.

 

31.  Votes of Congratulations

 Cllr O’Grady (SF) wished Cllr Danielle Twomey congratulations on the birth of her little girl.

(Think there was another vote of congratulations also.)

 

The rest of the meeting was adjourned.

Notes from the March meeting of the Ballincollig-Carrigaline Municipal District, 20-03-2017

1.  Confirmation of Minutes

(a) To consider the confirmation and signing of the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 20th February 2017.

Minutes of the previous meeting: ‘Minutes 20.02.17 draft.pdf’

Confirmed and seconded.

 

Matters arising:

MDO said he has had no update from the Planning Department on Continue reading Notes from the March meeting of the Ballincollig-Carrigaline Municipal District, 20-03-2017

Notes from the February 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 16th January 2017.

‘Minutes 16.01.17 draft.pdf’

Cllr D’Alton (Ind): Correction – The Island as referred to in the minutes is in Ringaskiddy. So the casual trading areas to be included are Roberts Bridge, Passage West and the Island, Ringaskiddy.

The MDO also had a correction on Cllr Harris’s motion which will be incorporated. Continue reading Notes from the February meeting of the Ballincollig-Carrigaline Municipal District

Notes from the Municipal District meeting, 16-01-2017

First part of the meeting with Martin Walsh, Area Manager Bus Eireann:

MW comments on questions sent in advance by the Members:

  • Bus shelter at bridge in Carrigaline – would love to see it and has been requested. Structure of bridge won’t allow it to be put in place. There are concerns that it might undermine structure of the bridge because a base has to be put in. There appears to be no other suitable area in Carrigaline Main Street. A new company has the contract for looking after bus shelters: JC Deceaux. We will mention it to them and see have they any suggestions.

Continue reading Notes from the Municipal District meeting, 16-01-2017

Notes from the December 2016 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 21st November 2016.

‘BallincolligCarrigaline MD Minutes 21.11.16.pdf’

Cllr D’Alton: Motion 3 from last meeting – meant that a programme for slip cleaning would be drawn up in our Municipal District. The background to this is that the €50,000 allocated to our Municipal District in Budget 2017 for coastal works was clarified as also including for slip cleaning.

Also in AOB – my comments on the table tennis nets are correctly noted. But I also commented that the promised reinforcing under the table tennis nets has still not been put in place.

Minutes were proposed and seconded.

 

Matters arising:

Cllr D’Alton: We spoke about the Town and Village Renewal Fund at the last meeting. Is concerned because the funding was to have been spent and the project completed by year end. But we have had no update on the funding at all.

Anne: In an ideal world they wanted the money spent by December. But the closing date for applications was September and the projects weren’t confirmed until well into October. So the Department has said that the year-end deadline was insofar as possible. We have flexibility.

Cllr D’Alton: Will it be necessary to draw down the funding at least before year end, even if the projects aren’t complete.

Anne: We have the money!

Cllr D’Alton: We spoke of the consultation on the Casual trading bye-laws at the last meeting. The revised maps for our Municipal District have not been issued and legal advice was to have been sought on how to deal with the new maps in the consultation. Have we an update on this?

MDO: No. This is being run from West Cork. Will seek an update.

Cllr D’Alton: Concerned that the consultation will close on 31st December and we won’t have another Municipal Dsitrict meeting until after that. This is especially relevant to us because it is our maps that have been omitted. Asks that the update would be circulated to all Members as soon as possible.

Cllr McGrath: Update on Maryborough Ridge? The Area Engineer was to have got in touch with the NNRDO?

MDO: She did and believes a reply was issued but not circulated. Will circulate.

 

2.  Consideration of Reports and Recommendations
(a) Part VIII Planning report N27 Airport Roundabout & N28 Shanbally Roundabout.

‘Part 8 Planning Report N27 Airport Roundabout & N28 Shanbally Roundabout.pdf’-2

A presentation on these proposals was given previously.

Proposed and seconded. They will now go to full Council for approval.

 

(b) Report on the proposal to Take In Charge roads and services in (i) Daneswood, Douglas and (ii) The Orchard, Monkstown

‘TIC Layout – Daneswood.pdf’

‘TIC LayoutThe Orchard.pdf’

MDO: Planning has been in touch to say that an issue has arisen in The Orchards. They ask that the taking in charge of The Orchards would not be dealt with at this meeting. So only Daneswood is being considered at this meeting.

The taking in charge of Daneswood is proposed and seconded.

 

(c) Proposed Part VIII for upgrade works to Shannonpark Roundabout.

POD on proposal:

  • There are existing congestion problems at the Shannonpark roundabout. Various proposals have come to us in the past and have not been accepted. Arups was asked to consider all possible options for its upgrade. They have given us 8 options. They have also given us recommendations. The original proposal was for signalisation and it is seen still as the best technical solution.
  • The option that is being put forward now is Option 3A in the report. It comprises a three-lane approach from Ringaskiddy plus a north – east sliproad on the north east side. This arrangement gives additional capacity to the roundabout and should improve the queuing and pm delay in particular. Council intends to commence the Part 8 process for this upgrade with our agreement.
  • This is a national route so the Part 8 work would be done by the Cork Roads Design Office.

Cllr McGrath: Welcomes this. Never thought traffic lights would work but this is a welcome proposal.

Cllr D’Alton: Also welcomes it. Concerned that the third lane on the Ringaskiddy arm of the roundabout doesn’t start back far enough. Current queues stretch back to east of the Fernhill junction during the pm peak.

POD: The results of the simulation are showing that queuing will be significantly reduced. We have a constraint in that there is an entrance into a private property. The main reason for the long queues is that there is no opportunity to get out. The matter will be kept under review when the work is done. If we need to make further improvements afterwards, the various options can be examined.

Cllr D’Alton: Is this upgrade sufficiently adequate to allow the Shannonpark housing development to proceed?

POD: This improvement allows for the second phase of development of Shannonpark. The final phase requires some major alteration which is likely to be the motorway. Coming out on the Rock Road is going to need more than is there at present. But it will take us from Phase 1 to Phase 2.

 

(d) Lands at Castletreasure.

Lands at Castletreasure

MDO: Since the leasing of land at Castletreasure to the Corinthians, the Douglas Rugby Club has asked for access. The club is in discussion with the residents. They have been in contact with the planning department to make sure there is no hitch with respect to developing two full size pitches, car parking, etc. If things progress successfully, it will be brought back to the Municipal District again. This update is for information purposes.

Cllr Forde (FG): We will monitor this and will see how it goes. It is great that some sporting organisations get land. Notes though that others are left without it.

Cllr McGrath (FF): This land is sitting there and it would be great if it could be used. Welcomes engagement with the residents; it will be dependent on them.

Cllr Jeffers (SF): Understands this is the last of the lands available here? Would this stop other clubs wanting to join with Douglas Rugby Club?

MDO: It would be leased in entirety to Douglas Rugby Club. There would be no additional lands left – they will use it all. If any other club were to use it there would be an issue with the residents. A single club solution is the best solution from the residents’ perspective.

Cllr Forde: Some lands are zoned for recreation and amenity in the Local Area Plan that will never come on stream. We need to be careful of this.

Cllr Harris: Is there any land zoned for housing there?

MDO: No. It is adjacent to Green Valley. Some building is still going on there. (To Cllr Jeffers) If we lease the land for the sole use of Douglas Rugby Club, no other club could use it. In developing the pitches, they will have to cut and fill the land. By the time it is done, there will not be room for anything else.

 

3.  Correspondence
Correspondence re Extension of Public Consultation Period in relation to the 8 Municipal District Draft Local Area Plans.

 MDO: The Planning Policy Unit asked that we would bring this to the attention of all members.

‘Correspondence re Extension of Public Consultation Period in relation to the 8 Municipal District Draft Local Area Plans.pdf’ 

 

4.  To consider the following Notices of Motion:

Responses to all motions detailed in a single report here:
Response to all motions, 19-12-2016
Response to O’Donnabhain’s motions, 19-12-2016

 Cllr D O’Donnabhain
1.  “That this Municipal District be furnished with a Report on the Council’s policy of issuing litter fines to businesses, the number of such fines to businesses issued since June 2014, and the geographic areas where the fines arose from.”

Cllr O’Donnabhain: This came up in respect of a specific situation with one of the businesses on one of the main streets in Ballincollig. There was false information put out there that the business had been notified not to erect signage. It was not true that the business had been thus notified. In Mallow, Clonakilty and Bandon, there are similar signs on the run into towns and nobody is taken to task about these. The ones in question in Ballincollig were small and were just for a promotional weekend. Circus signs are given a by by the local office because they are not subject to any fines. The business on the main street pays its rates, donates to Tidy Towns and is part of the business association. But it is being fined while the other crowd coming in gets away scot free. Much larger and more offensive signs in other places are not pulled up.

MDO: Knows the signs being referred to. The property owner was advised not to erect signage like this again. The Environment Department (George Salter) said he had been advised not to do it on a previous occasion and had told him that if he did, he would be fined. But he did it again. We can’t comment in relation to other municipal districts. We have tried to chase after circuses. We have isseud fines to them. Some can be difficult. They change their name on a regular basis. We did pin down one on one occasion. So we don’t give them a by.

Cllr Canty: Don will tell sporting organisations where to put the signs. Not by a roundabout, etc. There used to be signs being put out by the businesses but the blind association and Enable Ireland, etc. asked that they be removed in case they fell down on people. Then the supermarkets started putting down little signs themselves. Don got sick of them and asked a litter warden to go to every business on the main street and say no more signs on the footpath. It got out of hand. But yes, circuses are a problem.

Cllr O’Donnabhain: Why are the circus signs not taken down immediately? The signs erected by the business were taken down imediately. In other towns, businesses are given a by. There are much larger signs going into Carrigaline put out by businesses that are being ignored.

MDO: It is factually incorrect to say that one business was being singled out. Another was the business with the barber sign. Ballincollig is different in that we have our own traffic/litter warden. There is none in Carrigaline and you are dependent on the resources of the Environment Department. They have engaged a couple of litter wardens recently so they will be looking at this issue. They are trying to develop a policy in relation to signage. Doesn’t think people have an issue with signage for events. Major bugbear is that those signs are not removed after the event has taken place. The Environment Department is developing a countywide policy in relation to signage. Will ask the Environment Department for a report for the next meeting.

Cllr O’Donnabhain: Would like that. If these circuses are so hard to come by, why would their posters not be taken down immediately?

MDO: Some are glued on. Also if the area office spends time on taking down circus posters, other work won’t be done.

Cllr Forde: This is a huge issue. It is taking money out of the area office to do real work. A planning was given for a shopping centre in Douglas. If you pass it, every space that was meant to be a window is now an advertising hoarding. So Planning needs to be brought into this. It is too ad hoc and is going to have to be fair to everyone. We want to encourage businesses, but otherwise the environment of our centres is going to get out of hand.

Cllr Harris: Agrees. Notices a couple of neon signs appearing outside shops. This is a worry.

Cllr Canty: We had the auctioneers associaiton at an area roads meeting years ago.

Cllr Forde: If planning gives permission which is meant to be aesthetically pleasing, it shouldn’t be used as an advertising hoarding.

MDO: But is putting advertising signage in a window a breach of planning?

Cllr Forde: That’s what I mean. We need planning not be woolly.

 

2.  “That this Municipal District seeks the painting of a disabled parking space outside the post office in Ballincollig.” 

Cllr O’Donnabhain: The post office is the only safe facility in the town where people can collect their social welfare.   There is a parking bay close to the post office. Would like one space within that bay as a disabled space.

This will be looked at.

 

 

Cllr M D’Alton
1.  “That mindful of the proximity of the former IFI plant at Marino Point to Passage West, the eyesore that currently is the derelict former IFI plant from the town of Passage West and the conditions attached to the grant of planning for the fertiliser factory in 1974 that Cork County Council would outline:

  • whether the former IFI factory is on the derelict sites list and if not, why not
  • whether the bond agreed between NET and Cork County Council in February 1976 will be used to remove all redundant or obsolete structures and infrastructure on the former IFI site and, if not
  • whether Cork County Council will require the liquidator responsible for the site to remove all redundant or obsolete structures and infrastructure on the former IFI site and, if not
  • whether Cork County Council would require any future purchaser of the former IFI site to remove all redundant or obsolete structures and infrastructure on the site before any future development takes place.”

Response to D’Alton’s motions, 19-12-2016

Cllr D’Alton: Marino Point is 500 metres from Passage West at its closest point. To put it in perspective, it is 5.8 km from Cobh. Before the fertiliser factory was developed, the area was evaluated as being of high amenity value. It was compared to parkland, with Marino House and grounds in an idyllic setting in what was compared to a parkland of mature beech, oak, horse chestnut and sycamore trees. When the planning application came before Cork County Council, the recommendation from the senior planner at the time was that because of this amenity value, permission should not be granted for the fertiliser factory. But it was indeed granted by the Minister in 1975.

Condition 34 clarified that the developer and owner of the site should furnish a bond or other security measures before the development commenced. This referred to the taking down and removal of the plant, equipment and installation if the plant ceased to function. The site would have to be reinstated to agricultural, rural or other uses agreed with planning authority.

 

On February 13 1976, N.E.T. entered into a Bond with Cork County Council with some £500,000 being put aside for the Council to take down and remove all plant equipment and installations connected or formed part of the plant in the event that the ammonia and urea complex ceased to function in the opinion of the council.

But it is still there and the factory has long since ceased to operate. The environmental liability on the site has been discharged and the EPA is happy. But as part of that discharge of environmental liabilities, the cladding from the buildings was removed. It contained asbestos. So now the facility looks more derelict than ever before. And the people of Passage West are looking at it. Wants the Council to confirm that these structures will be removed. That they will commit to their commitment of many years ago.

Cllr McGrath: Supports the spirit the motion. Very stark closeness to Passage West. Supports the points made in terms of the condition of the site. If a sale is agreed, this is something we need to monitor closely. Should also monitor closely if the Port of Cork development goes ahead. We need to be mindful of this.

 

Cllr Murphy (SF): Supports. Had a motion to full Council about this. The state of the place is the thing. When enquired from the environment whether the jetty was safe, was told everything was in order.

Cllr Canty: This issue has come through the Council in the last 10-12 years.

MDO: We can refer this again to the Cobh Municipal District and ask the Planning about the bond. In Cobh, they are conscious that the site is for sale and the best way to have it cleaned up is that it is sold. They are slow to do something that would impede a potential sale.

Cllr D’Alton: Understands the Cobh Municipal District’s approach. But we don’t know how long a sale may take. The reality is that the Council was given a bond to clean up the site and the site has not been cleaned up.   So wants to see a commitment of some form or other.

MDO: We need to be careful of our wording. The motion is essentially asking for preconditions of planning and we can’t do this.

Cllr D’Alton: Fair enough, but somehow wants to see commitment to the Council’s commitment. Asks that we keep in touch with the Cobh Municipal District about this.

MDO will contact the Director of Services, Planning again. Will state the concern of the Municipal District.

Cllr Forde: Would like to support the principle of the motion. There are proposals and solutions for dealing with what needs to be disposed of there and very creative solutions. There are big plans down the line. We can’t just ignore things because they went wrong 40 years ago. Has an issue with conditions that haven’t been met in planning. Is currently assessing the number of planning conditions that haven’t been met. These are very costly to Cork County Council. Knows 2 big planning permissions that haven’t fulfilled all of their conditions.

Ann: Will report back to a future Municipal District. Will say to the Planning Director of Services that these points have been agreed by the Members. Will make it clear that these are our concerns and this is what we’re looking for.

 

2.  “That Cork County Council would investigate the feasibility of making a continuous footpath on Church Hill connecting the existing footpath beyond Bloomingdale to the footpath at the bottom of Avondale.  This would allow children living west of the Maulbaun junction to walk to school in safety.”

Cllr D’Alton: Is happy with the report and would be pleased with an investigation into the feasibility of a footpath here. Asks the support of the Members for same.

Cllr McGrath: Supports.   This has been brought up as an issue before.

 

3.  “ Haulbowline Island has had a long and intimate relationship with Ringaskiddy.  It is accessible by land only from the Ballincollig-Carrigaline Municipal District.  The former primary school on Haulbowline Island amalgamated with the primary school in Ringaskiddy to form the Ringaskiddy Lower Harbour National School.  The navy based on Haulbowline Island has an intimate relationship with the National Maritime College at Ringaskiddy.  The proposed new amenity area to replace previous public access to port lands at Ringaskiddy is at Paddy’s Point, merely 200 metres from Rocky Island.  In the light of this historical and current relationship, that the Planning Policy Unit of Cork County Council would explain why Haulbowline and Rocky Islands are considered to be part of the Cobh Municipal District rather than part of the Ballincollig-Carrigaline Municipal District.”

Cllr D’Alton: Notes the report provided and thanks for it. Had believed until only recently that Rocky and Haulbowline Islands were part of the Ballincollig-Carrigaline Municipal District. Seems crazy that they are not. Acknowledges that the Planning Policy Unit commits to mentioning the special relationship between Ringaskiddy and Haulbowline Island in the Ballincollig-Carrigaline Local Area Plan. Would prefer if the islands were part of our Municipal District and that the special relationship between Cobh and Haulbowline Island were mentioned in the Cobh Local Area Plan.

MDO: The delineation was made by the Boundary Commission. We cannot change that. If we could, there would be other delineations we would change too.

Cllr D’Alton: Noted. But when the Boundary Commission makes new recommendations, as it surely will, believes that we should seek to have Haulbowline and Rocky Islands designated to the Ballincollig-Carrigaline Municipal District.

 

 

Cllr E Jeffers

  1. “That Hollyville, Grange would be included for footpath repairs in the next program.”
  2. “That the engineer would consult with the residents of Palmbury Orchard, Togher to provide extra residential parking within the estate.”
  3. “That the engineer would look at the possibility of improving visibility at the junction of Cooney’s Lane and Elm Hill.”

Cllr Jeffers is happy with the written responses to all of his motions.

 

Cllr MR Desmond

1.  “That this Municipal District would request that as part of the agreed works with the developer prior to taking in charge or out of the bond received by council that at least one if not two pedestrian crossings would be provided in Mount Ovel village to allow safe access to the square in Mount Oval. And that the Municipal District receive an update on the current status with taking in charge of this estate.”

Cllr Desmond: Has been working on this for nearly 12 months. Put it down as a motion because progress is so slow that people didn’t believe she was working on it. Stood with an elderly gentleman in Mount Oval while he was trying to cross the road. It took 15 minutes before he could safely get across. There is a difference of opinion between the developer and the Council. There are 800 houses in Mount Oval. There is a huge issue for children trying to access the shop area. Accepts there is no planning for a crossing but what are we going to do for the residents? They really need two crossings but even if we had one … A child will be killed there. An older person can evaluate the risk but a child cannot.

Cllr McGrath (FF): This issue has been raised with many of us over the years. Serious issue. Very busy road. Glad to see it in black and white about the position with the taking in charge of the road. Understands the developer is engaging with the Council.

Cllr D’Alton: Has had this issue raised also. Supports.

Cllr Forde (FG): Would like to see a report on where this taking in charge is at.

MDO: Will ask the Planning Department for a report on the taking in charge and an estimated time frame.

Cllr Desmond: We can’t leave this on the never never. Doesn’t want a one-line report back like this that has been given. The developer believes the road has been taken in charge and the Council says it is not. Nobody can find the paperwork to prove that it has been.

 

2.  “That children at play and reduce speed signs be placed in Kiltegan Park.”

Cllr Desmond is happy with the written response.

 

3.  “That this Municipal District write to Minister Simon Covney requesting assurance that the resources and funding required by the Cork Lower Harbour Main Drainage project team to allow for them proceed with the alternative site for the ESB substation as part of the project in Monkstown.” 

Cllr Desmond: Is not happy with this response. Is just asking that the Municipal District will support the premis of the move and is asking that the Minister would have that support across his desk.

Cllr D’Alton: Irish Water proposed to put a substation for the proposed pumping station in the Bosun car park. The location was chosen without consultation and blocks the view of the sea both from the village and the greenway. The residents have requested that it would be moved to a site in the Cut n Cover. Irish Water has done a feasibility study on it, it is technically possible. All that remains now is the funding for the move. This is what the residents want and it is aesthetically best for Monkstown. Supports the motion.

Cllr McGrath: This will ultimately be a cost issue. Supports writing to the Minister. There are no technical issues that will cause a difficulty.

 

Cllr S McGrath

1.  “That this Committee would contact Bus Eireann requesting that a bus service to Carrigaline from Passage West, Monkstown, Shanbally & Ringaskiddy be considered as a matter of priority.”

Cllr McGrath (FF): This issue has been raised before. There should be a bus link to Carrigaline from Passage West. The social welfare office amongst other services is in Carrigaline. There is a good bus service between Passage West – Monkstown – Ringaksiddy – Shanbally but it doesn’t get to Carrigaline.

MDO: We had Martin Walsh here before but it was some time ago.

Cllr McGrath proposes we write and invite him. Wants this issue to be included for discussion.

Cllr Murphy (SF): Supports the motion. Had a motion in at the full Council about coming back to us with a monthly report. He should be coming into us to liaise with us.

Cllr D’Alton: Had submitted this same request for Martin Walsh at his first meeting with us. His response was that the demand is not there. How do we overcome a repeat of the same response?

Cllr Forde says there is a review of the buses going on. Might be good to meet with him before the review is finalised.

Martin Walsh will be asked to attend the January meeting. Members are to submit questions for Martin Walsh to the MDO by the end of the week.

 

2.  “To seek a report from the Engineer in relation to the proposed plan for salting / treating roads over the Christmas period.”

Cllr McGrath: Where do we go with calls in adverse weather conditions over the holidays? Texted the area engineer over a weekend but did not receive any response. Not happy with the answer that has been given. There will be areas stranded if there is cold weather. Church Hill in Passage West is one, Church Hill in Carrigaline is another.

AC, Area Office: We have come up with a contingency plan in the area office should weather conditions deteriorate over the Christmas. We will engage our local crew and will have them briefed on salting well-used routes, not just priority 1 and 2 routes. Use the existing emergency line and we’ll have someone lined up to do salting insofar as possible.

Cllr Canty: We have 3 salt areas – in North Cork, in B’collig and West Cork. So there is never one too far away. Will get us circulated with the call centre number.

Cllr McGrath: This system hasn’t worked in the past. We need feedback. People ask us when the salt is going to be put down.

AC will take this concern back to the area office.

 

3.  “That the footpath from Coolmore Gardens & Coolmore Close in Shanbally to the Village be upgraded as soon as possible. “  

Cllr McGrath: This footpath is badly needed. Understands what the report says.

AC: There is no point in doing it yet before the Irish Water work is done.

 

5.  Votes of Congratulations

 

6.  Any Other Business

Pay parking dividend

MDO: Instead of spending the parking dividend piecemeal, suggests that we save it up to create a fund so that we can pay for removal of the overhead services along Douglas West. This is a really good proposal. Funding it will always be an issue. With this proposal we can overcome that.

Anne: €250k are the estimated costs at this stage.

Cllr Forde appreciates this innovative discussion.

Cllr Forde: Speed ramps in Avondale in Passage West. Who paid for these? They are needed in Avondale as well as Avondale Mews.

AC: The local residents came up with 25% of the funding. If the Avondale residents come to the Area Office requesting the same, we will talk to them.

 

Cllr Desmond: Asks for all responses to be paperless.

MDO: Hopes to go this way.

 

Cllr D’Alton: At the end of last year, we were promised quarterly derelict sites reports. But we have had only one this year – around April.

Anne: We’re only at the beginning stages of figuring out how we can deliver the services best. We want each Municipal District to develop expertise in certain areas. One will have expertise in derelict sites. Another will, for example, have expertise in parking fines. We haven’t the resources to develop this expertise in each Municipal District so we will have to optimise insofar as we can.

Cllr D’Alton thinks this is a very good idea but wonders how it will affect our requests for a site to be regarded as derelict. Anne clarifies that it won’t.

Cllr D’Alton: Have asked in every way possible about locks being replaced on bins. There is one in particular that is a concern between Glenbrook and Monkstown. It is swinging onto the path.

AC: Will put in the lock.

 

Cllr Harris: Re Avondale, the speed ramps were put into one part of the estate which left the other part of the estate with nothing and traffic speeds up when it comes to the other part of the estate. So the more affluent part of the estate gets speed ramps and the other part doesn’t get anything.

Cllr D’Alton: There is no more affluent part of the estate. One part of the estate is older than the other and there are two residents associations. One residents association in the newer part of the estate where a crèche is situated wanted ramps to slow down cars collecting from the crèche. They part paid for them themselves. The same will be offered to the other part of the estate. Have already advised them of this. That one part of the estate got ramps has nothing to do with affluence, merely to do with the fact that one part is newer than the other and so there are two residents associations.

 

Cllr Forde: Douglas GAA had done Trojan work in developing a training ground. The Council had given them an amenity grant. They were short €350. Can we find them the extra €350?

MDO: The GAA Club said the work was done. They said this in a letter when they were returning the invoices in August.   We paid out. We can only pay 50% in accordance with the scheme. Then the Club came in December and said something quite different. They were granted another grant in 2016. We can’t give them the extra €350.

 

Cllr McGrath: The lights in Church Road haven’t been turned on. We’re waiting on the ESB. They have been paid. This is the 2016 public lighting programme and the lights still haven’t been switched on. It takes so long to work through the scheme. We tell the public that we’re going to get public lighting and we’re half way through the winter and there are still no lights. We are the paying customer and should be following up with the ESB why they are not doing their part of the job.

AC: It is the ESB that is the problem. We will reinforce your concerns to them.

 

Cllr Harris: On Shamrock Road it is very dark. Was a bad accident there a few weeks ago. A car overturned.

AC: Will talk to the public lighting engineer.

 

Cllr Canty: Happy Christmas and a prosperous New Year to everyone.

_______________________________________

 

 

 

MY MOTION TO FULL COUNCIL REDUCING LOCAL PROPERTY TAX IN PRIVATE ESTATES NOT TAKEN IN CHARGE, 12/12/2016

“That the Local Property Tax charge on residences in private estates or estates not taken in charge by a local authority would be reduced by 35%.  This is to reflect the lower level of local authority service delivered to estates not taken in charge and the commensurate investment in road, drainage and other maintenance borne directly by residents of such estates.

(Note that in this instance, “estates not taken in charge” do not include unfinished estates as defined in S.I. 91 of 2013.)”

 

 

On of the logics behind the introduction of LPT in 2o13 was that people would appreciate paying directly for services they would receive directly.  Even today, the website of the Department of the Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government explains LPT as funding vital public services.  It is of course a tax on one’s residential property, gauged on the market value of that property.

 

Everyone appreciates that local authorities no longer have the financial wherewithal to maintain green areas in residential estates.  But one can expect the local authority to assist with maintenance of the roads when the condition of their surface deteriorates.  They will help to fix or replace the footpaths.  They clear drains.  Should a tree be in a dangerous condition, they will either make it safe or remove it.  Should an additional light be required for public safety, they will try to provide it.  If a car is abandoned in an estate, they will initiate the statutory process for it to be cleared. 

 

But the local authority has responsibility for none of these vital public services in an estate that is not taken in charge.  In this regard, I am not speaking of unfinished estates coll0quially referred to as ghost estates and listed in SI 91 of 2013, the legislation which sets out what residential areas are liable for property tax.  I am speaking of

  • estates which may have been designed from the outset as private estates,
  • estates which are to all intents and purposes complete but for which, perhaps arising from hassle with a bond or the folding of a builder, the taking in charge process is delayed
  • estates within which building is incomplete and where although the unfinished part of that estate may be exempted from LPT, houses which are standing and lived in are and
  • estates with temporary wastewater treatment plants which Irish Water cannot decide how to assume responsibility for.

 

Residents in estates such as these which are not taken in charge have to put aside funds to carry out the essential public services that local authorities would normally undertake in residential estates.  So whilst they pay their LPT for these services to be delivered, they then have to pay a contractor directly to actually carry them out.

 

A double unfairness is that the market value of an estate property can often be affected by a delay in the taking in charge process.  In the last few months alone, I have been asked to write, in one case on behalf of a potential purchaser of a property in my estate and in the other case on behalf of a resident moving out from my estate, to indicate that the taking in charge process in my estate is indeed underway.  Without this reassurance, the banks were not confident to lend.  But my estate has the appearance of being both complete and relatively mature.  Residents attempting to buy into or sell out of houses which are part of an unfinished estate do not have even the consolation of an appearance of completion.  In many of these estates, road surfaces are not even at their final level.  Often residents in these estates, having been exempted from 2012’s household charge, did not realise they were liable for LPT.  They are obliged to pay it, knowing they are paying for services that cannot be delivered to them and at a rate calculated on a market value their home cannot realise.

 

And so I ask for your support that an attempt at greater equity for households across the state would be reflected by a reduction in the rate of LPT charged on residents in private estates or estates not taken in charge.