Celbridge and the County Development Plan

Uimhir Thagarta Uathúil: 
KCC-C55-410
Stádas: 
Submitted
Údar: 
Celbridge Community Council
Líon na ndoiciméad faoi cheangal: 
1
Teorainneacha Gafa ar an léarscáil: 
Údar: 
Celbridge Community Council

Litir Chumhdaigh

Celbridge Community Council was established as a voluntary community group in 1975 and has for over forty years been actively involved in many aspects of community life in Celbridge. Our goal is to promote and improve community life and to influence in a positive way the physical development of the area for the benefit of all those who live and work there. As a voluntary group and representative voice for the community, Celbridge Community Council welcomes the opportunity to make a submission on the Draft Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029.

Observations

2.12 Preferred Development Strategy

2.12 The preferred development strategy 

The preferred development strategy includes the following:

  • Achieving the critical mass in the Metropolitan Area Strategic Plan (MASP) area (Maynooth, Leixlip, Celbridge & Kilcock) and in the Key Towns of Naas and Maynooth. 
  • Measured growth with emphasis on economic growth in the towns identified as Self-Sustaining Growth Towns and Self-Sustaining Towns as per Table 2.7. 

but the strategy is ambiguous in terms of how achieving critical mass will be balanced with measured growth in light of the fact that three of the four towns in the Dublin MASP are either a Self-Sustaining Growth Town (Leixlip) or a Self-Sustaining Town (Celbridge and Kilcock).

Table 2.8 - Settlement Hierarchy - Population and Housing Unit Targets Q1-2023 to Q2-2028 

  • Includes “(MASP)” in brackets after Maynooth.
    • It would be beneficial to do similar for Leixlip, Celbridge and Kilcock if, by virtue of their treatment in terms of housing targets differs from other towns on the same tiers in the Settlement Hierarchy due to their inclusion in the Dublin Metropolitan Area.
  • Sets out a 10% Housing & Population Target % for Celbridge despite classification as a Self-Sustaining Town. 
    • This only trails behind Leixlip’s target by 0.2% despite Celbridge being in a lower tier on the settlement hierarchy 
    • This is not matched by an emphasis on economic growth for Celbridge in the Draft County Development Plan
    • Due to inconsistency here, this needs to be revisited for Celbridge 

2.15 Naas to Newbridge Strategic Economic and Employment Zone [Should probably be “Focus for Growth”]

2.15 Naas to Newbridge Strategic Economic and Employment Zone [Should probably be "Focus for Growth"]

This section is called “2.15 Naas to Newbridge Strategic Economic and Employment Zone” but, given the sub-headings, this is not an appropriate heading as this section appears to be about the focus for growth. 

Section 2.15.2 Metropolitan Area Strategic Plan, is treated at the same level as 2.15.1 Key Towns, 2.15.3 Self-Sustaining Growth Towns and 2.15.4 Self-Sustaining Towns, 2.15.5 Towns but this conflates two separate themes. 

Since some towns under each Settlement Type classification are outside the Dublin MASP and some are within it, the definitions would benefit from sub-division depending on whether the towns are in the Dublin MASP or not. 

The Meath County Development Plan 2021-2027 separately addresses the Metropolitan and Core Areas of Co. Meath (2.10.1 Focus of Growth in the Metropolitan Area and 2.10.2 Focus of Growth in the Core Area). It is important to have clarity and direction for the medium and long-term growth of all Co. Kildare towns so, rather than the following headings:

  • 2.15.1 Key Towns
  • 2.15.2 Metropolitan Area Strategic Plan
  • 2.15.3 Self-Sustaining Growth Towns
  • 2.15.4 Self-Sustaining Towns
  • 2.15.5 Towns

One of the following approaches would allow for providing greater clarity on what is intended for each Settlement Type

2.15.1 Key Towns

2.15.1.1 Dublin Metropolitan Area - Maynooth

2.15.1.1 Core Area - Naas

2.15.2 Self-Sustaining Growth Towns

2.15.1.1 Dublin Metropolitan Area - Leixlip

2.15.1.1 Core Area - Newbridge, Kildare, Athy

2.15.3 Self-Sustaining Towns

2.15.1.1 Dublin Metropolitan Area - Celbridge, Kilcock

2.15.1.1 Core Area - Clane, Monasterevin

2.15.4 Towns

2.15.1 Dublin Metropolitan Area

2.15.1.1 Key Town - Maynooth

2.15.1.2 Self-Sustaining Growth Town - Leixlip

2.15.1.3 Self-Sustaining Towns - Celbridge, Kilcock

2.15.2 Core Area

2.15.2.1 Key Town - Naas

2.15.2.2 Self-Sustaining Growth Towns - Newbridge, Kildare, Athy

2.15.2.3 Self-Sustaining Towns - Clane, Monasterevin

2.15.2.4 Towns

Additionally, the definitions in the Draft Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 of what it means for a town to be classified as a certain settlement type lack clarity. The definitions are overly focused on economic growth when the Core Strategy should encompass both economic and population growth.

The text in the Meath County Development Plan 2021-2027 is much clearer than the proposed text in the Draft Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 regarding what it means for a town to be classified under a certain Settlement Type, for example: 

Meath County Development Plan 2021-2027 *

Active Voice

Draft Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029

Passive Voice

 

In the Self-Sustaining Growth Towns of Ashbourne, Kells, Trim, Dunboyne and Dunshaughlin there will be a focus on consolidation and the provision of employment opportunities in tandem with population growth in order to allow these centres to become more self-sufficient. The availability of infrastructural services and community infrastructure will also be an important factor in determining the quantum of new housing and population growth that these settlements could absorb.

2.15.3 Self-Sustaining Growth Towns 

The self-sustaining growth towns of Newbridge, Leixlip, Kildare Town and Athy will continue to attract a moderate level of jobs and services through a range of employment types including biotechnology, ICT, high-tech manufacturing and research, bloodstock, tourism and food and beverage products.

 

The focus of growth in the Self-Sustaining Towns of Laytown-Bettystown-Mornington-Donacarney, Ratoath, Enfield, Kilcock, Duleek and Stamullen will be on attracting employment and investment in services alongside a limited population growth and a more balanced delivery of housing. As a core economic policy response which will allow “economic catch-up” as envisaged in the RSES, strategic employment zones have been identified in a number of these towns.

2.15.4 Self-Sustaining Towns 

The self-sustaining towns of Celbridge, Kilcock, Monasterevin and Clane which have a high level of population growth and a weak employment base have the potential to improve their employment offering through biotechnology, knowledge based digital enterprises, logistics, tourism and food and beverage products in order to strengthen their overall economic offering.

 * Emphasis added on points that should be clearly addressed in definitions

 

The County Development Plan needs to be explicit about what it means for each town to be self-sustaining in an individualised way per town. Generalised sentences are not useful for anyone. The approach taken in the Fingal Draft County Develpment Plan 2023-2029 (pages 80-84) is a great example whereby the vision for each Self-Sustaining Town is outlined and specific objectives are included which demonstrate insights into the unique character of each town.

 

 

Objective CSO 1.1 / New Objective CSO 1.x

Objective CSO 1.1 / New Objective CSO 1.x

Consider an adaptation of CSO 1.1 or a new objective similar to CS OBJ 1 contained in the Meath County Development Plan 2021-2027 to make development dependent on the provision of services and infrastructure.

Meath County Development Plan 2021-2027 objective CS OBJ 1  :: To secure the implementation of the Core Strategy and Settlement Strategy, in so far as practicable, by directing growth towards designated settlements, subject to the availability of infrastructure and services.

Objective CSO 1.5

Ábhair: 

Objective CSO 1.5

This objective relating to compact growth and the renewal of towns and villages appears to be loosely based on the Town Centre First policy but that policy sets out a framework to facilitate and resource each town to chart their own future through a tailored plan, developed by a collaborative Town Team, and supported by their Local Authority. Local communities and local businesses are supposed to be central to reimagining their own towns and planning their own future and the delivery of connected neighbourhoods and a 10-minute town concept within urban settlements requires far more than housing.

Objective CSO 1.5 would benefit from re-wording or, one or more other new objectives should be added specifically addressing the Town Centre First policy. Objectives should commit to the preservation of towns’ built and natural heritage through statements committing to 

  • Prevention of environmental destruction masked as Town Centre First development, 
    • Development on brownfield sites is preferred over infill, 
    • Where infill development occurs, it should not result in extensive felling of woodlands, loss of habitats or open space used for recreational amenity 
  • Prevention of development that would negatively impact on the historic setting of protected structures, the special character of Architectural Conservation Areas or Historic Landscape Areas
  • Enabling each town to chart its own future through a tailored Town Centre First plan, developed in line with the framework outlined in the Town Centre First policy

Objective CSO 1.7

Ábhair: 

Objective CSO 1.7

Update this objective to add the underlined text

Promote and facilitate the development of sustainable and socially integrated communities through land use planning that is informed by social infrastructure audits and environmental constraints, by providing for land uses capable of accommodating employment, community, leisure, recreational and cultural facilities having regard to the quality of the environment, landscape character and the archaeological and architectural heritage.

Objective CSO 1.9

Objective CSO 1.9

Should Clane be listed here as a town that requires a Local Area Plan?

Clane’s 2016 population exceeded the populations of Sallins, Kilcock and Monasterevin (all towns that are listed in this objective).

 

Objective CSO 1.11

Objective CSO 1.11

The acknowledgement of the need to help secure funding for town and village renewal particularly in more densely populated areas in the “north of the county and to endeavor to ensure key project plans are, where possible, prepared in advance of funding announcements” is welcomed but the “to endeavor to ensure key project plans are, where possible” wording needs to be replaced with something much stronger.

County Strategy Map / County Settlement Hierarchy Map

Ábhair: 

County Strategy Map / County Settlement Hierarchy Map

The icons used to represent the Settlement Types on the County Strategy and County Settlement Hierarchy maps misrepresent the large urban nature of Celbridge.  The extents of Celbridge town are outlined in red in this excerpt from the County Settlement Hierarchy Map but the size of the orange “splash” icon suggests a much smaller village. 

In a national context, Celbridge is the 16th most populous town in Ireland (outside of the cities). Celbridge is the 3rd most populous town in Co. Kildare after Newbridge and Naas yet Kildare County Council’s own maps downplay Celbridge’s significance by showing four smaller towns (Maynooth, Leixlip, Kildare, Athy) with larger “splashes”. 

Whilst acknowledging that 

  • the size of the icons represents the future growth strategy for the town and 
  • the “high level of population growth and a weak employment base” description for Self-Sustaining Towns is suited to Celbridge

the population growth targets in Table 2.8 - Settlement Hierarchy - Population and Housing Unit Targets Q1-2023 to Q2-2028 coupled with the lack of an ambitious strategy for enhancing the provision of employment opportunities in Celbridge amounts to a continuation of a high level of population growth with a weak employment base. Table 2.8 suggests that Celbridge will remain the 3rd largest town in Co. Kildare until long after 2028. 

The targets for 2028 do not reflect a more balanced delivery of housing in Celbridge relative to the towns that are higher on the settlement hierarchy. Celbridge is likely to continue to attract additional population and increased densities in the pursuit of critical mass in the Metropolitan Area Strategic Plan (MASP) area so misrepresentation of the size of Celbridge is risky as it is likely to result in a continuation of the established pattern of unsustainable development. 


Measures are needed throughout the Draft Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 with respect to the downplaying of Celbridge but, with respect to these maps, even if the icon used for each town is colour coded to match other towns of the same Settlement Type, the design of the icons should also reflect the relative size of each town.

4.4. Economic Development Hierarchy

4.4 Economic Development Hierarchy

The Sectoral Opportunities in Table 4.1 – Economic Development Hierarchy Table seems a bit arbitrary due to the grouping by level in the settlement hierarchy. 

Similar to our observation in relation to section 2.15 in Chapter 2 Core Strategy, sub-division depending on whether towns are in the Dublin MASP or not would provide clarity.

Though only listed for Self-Sustaining Growth Towns, there is no reason why ICT, professional services and logistics shouldn't also be sectoral opportunities for Celbridge and Kilcock in addition to those listed for Self-Sustaining Towns (biotechnology, knowledge based digital enterprise, tourism, food and beverage products).

The Draft Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 fails to define much of a strategy beyond what the Regional Spatial & Economic Strategy says in relation to Key Towns and Strategic Development Areas in the MASP. The statement that "The focus is on achieving critical mass in the Metropolitan Area Strategic Plan (MASP) area (Maynooth, Leixlip, Celbridge and Kilcock)." in section 4.4.1 Strategic Development Areas in the MASP may relate mostly to the proposed new research & technology park adjoining Maynooth University, the Kildare Innovation Campus (former Hewlett Packard site between Celbridge and Leixlip) and the Intel/Collinstown site in Leixlip. Section 4.4.6 Self-Sustaining Towns states that Celbridge, Monasterevin, Clane and Kilcock "require contained growth, focusing on driving investment in services, employment growth and infrastructure while balancing housing delivery" and that "Growth shall be focused on consolidation and inclusion of policies in relation to improvements in services and employment provision." It is not enough to acknowledge the "high levels of population growth and a weak employment base", reliance on "other areas for employment and/or services" and the requirement for "targeted ‘catch-up’ investment" in order for Celbridge, Monasterevin, Clane and Kilcock to become more self-sustaining. The Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 needs concrete objectives that would have real impact for Self-Sustaining Towns. 

Objective RE O14

Objective RE O14

This aspiration expressed in this objective - i.e. to

Undertake, within the first 2 years from the adoption of the Plan, a Strategic Land Use, Employment and Transportation Study of north east Kildare including the Dublin Metropolitan area towns of Leixlip, (and Collinstown), Maynooth, Celbridge and Kilcock. The preparation of the study will have regard to existing and emerging local area plans. It is envisaged that the study will involve the participation of all strategic stakeholders, including the National Transportation Authority, adjoining local authorities (i.e. Meath, Fingal and South Dublin County Councils), the Regional Assembly, transportation providers, Waterways Ireland, Government Departments and Environmental Agencies.

is welcomed.

However, the manner in which the timeframe for delivery of this study is expressed ("within the first 2 years from the adoption of the Plan") is reminiscent of Objective MTO3.1 in the Celbridge Local Area Plan 2017-2023 "To seek to prepare, within 12 months of the date of the adoption of the Celbridge Local Area Plan, a Transport Management Plan and Public Transport Strategy for Celbridge to support the sustainable growth and development of the town and to identify strategic connections for pedestrian, cyclist, bus, vehicle movement and links to the railway stations in consultation with statutory agencies, key stakeholders and the local community. Upon completion, the recommendations of the TMP shall be integrated into the LAP by way of a statutory amendment, where appropriate."

The Transport Management Plan and Public Transport Strategy for Celbridge never happened in 2018.

The commitment to undertake this badly needed Strategic Land Use, Employment and Transportation Study of North East Kildare should be expressed as a pre-requisite for / input into the revised Local Area Plans for Maynooth, Kilcock, Celbridge and Leixlip as a holisitc approach is required for the North East Kildare part of the Dublin Metropolitan Area in order to guide the individual LAPs.

Objective RE O27

Objective RE O27

This objective to "Encourage job creation in the Self-Sustaining Towns of Celbridge, Monasterevin, Clane and Kilcock and with particular focus on the economic areas of biotechnology, digital enterprise, tourism, distilling and brewing industries and food and beverage products, in order for them to become more self-sustainable and balanced considering they have experienced rapid population growth with high levels of commuter focused residential expansion without equivalent increases in jobs and services. Also, encourage new businesses to develop and embrace the diversity of opportunities that exist in these locations." is too vague. 

Section 4.4.6 Self-Sustaining Towns needs to include specific objectives for each town that demonstrate an understanding of the opportunities for each town. Failure to confront the need for credible economic and job creation strategies for Celbridge, Monasterevin, Clane and Kilcock will prolong the established pattern of unsustainable development in these towns. The Kildare County development Plan 2023-2029 needs to demonstrate that there is a shared understanding regarding how these towns will develop and that Kildare County Council is prioritising the goal to make the towns "more self-sustainable". A generic objective covering all four towns fails to do this.

4.5 Economic Clusters, Objective RE O29, Action RE A3

4.5 Economic Clusters, Objective RE O29, Action RE A3

Mirroring the approach taken in the existing Kildare County Development Plan 2017-2023, the concept of Economic Clusters is poorly explained in the Draft Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029.

It is stated that "economic clusters are also promoted as part of the overall economic strategy. Naas is clustered with Newbridge and Kilcullen while Maynooth is clustered with Leixlip, Celbridge and Kilcock. Clusters are to develop in a mutually dependent way, so that the amenities and economies of the whole cluster are greater than the sum of the individual parts."

There is a single extremely vague objective (RE O29) to "Promote and facilitate an economy of smart specialisation around specific towns and regions within the county." and a single extremely vague action (RE A3) to "Develop a strategy for the lands between the settlements of Naas and Newbridge, to consolidate existing development whilst also preventing the coalescence of these settlements."

There should be more specific objectives and actions. While there is a high-level stratgy for the Dublin MASP in the Regional Spatial & Economic Strategy, Kildare County Council needs to layer its local knowledge and responsibility onto the MASP. It is a serious omission to include an action to develop a strategy for only one of the Economic Clusters (Naas is clustered with Newbridge) whilst failing to do the same for the other (Maynooth is clustered with Leixlip, Celbridge and Kilcock).

The County Development Plan needs to provide a robust framework for how Maynooth as a “Key Town” will influence, support and become the economic driver for north-east Kildare in a manner that is positive and sustainable for residents across all settlements. The interests of residents and employers in all of the settlements in North-East Kildare need to feed into decisions relating to Maynooth. A strategy for sharing or clustering of services/ facilities that relies on residents having to travel between neighbouring towns for things that should be available within a 10-minute walk or cycle is unlikely to be sustainable enough for a credible response to the climate emergency so this needs a rethink.

Policies, Objectives and Actions are required here to demystify what "Clusters are to develop in a mutually dependent way, so that the amenities and economies of the whole cluster are greater than the sum of the individual parts." actually means.

 

4.27 Heritage Tourism

4.27 Heritage Tourism

Given the richness of built and natural heritage in Celbridge and the fact that heritage and tourism are the only explicit economic opportunities called out in section 7.3 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT of the Celbridge LAP 2017-2023

  • Policy ED1 – Enterprise and Economic Development
    It is the policy of the Council to support sustainable economic development in Celbridge, optimising on the town’s location in the North Kildare Economic Cluster and the Metropolitan Area of Dublin and its potential as a heritage and tourism destination
  • Policy ED2 – Tourism
    It is a policy of the Council to promote the significant heritage and tourism potential of Celbridge and to support sustainable tourism development.

the Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 needs to include extremely strong protection and a strategy for all heritage assets of Celbridge whether they are currently used for tourism purposes or not. Much important built and natural heritage in Celbridge is either not easily accessed by the public or totally inaccessible to the public.  

Objective RE O142 would benefit from the underlined addition

Ensure heritage assets (built and natural) that are or have the potential to become the focus for tourism development, are appropriately managed and their special interest conserved from potential adverse effects from visitors or development in general and that best practice standards in relation to the environmental management of tourism enterprises are adhered to. 

Section 4.27 must include an additional objective that expands on the  concern regarding "potential adverse effects from ... development" expressed in Objective RE O142 to explicitly address how the need for heritage conservation will be balanced with the Town Centre First policy / need for towns to develop as 10-minute towns. Protections are needed in the Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 to ensure that negative impacts on the fabric or setting of Kildare’s built and natural heritage assets cannot be masked as adherence to the Town Centre First policy. Pending the development of a detailed and credible tourism strategy that addresses how all built and natural heritage assets within each heritage town (regardless of current public ownership) will contribute to a tourism economy for the town and the preparation of guidelines for balancing development at sensitive heritage locations with the Town Centre First policy, it would be judicious to prevent development at sites

  • Containing Protected Structures (including the entire curtilage)
  • Within Architectural Conservation Areas (ACAs)
  • Within Landscape Character Areas with sensitivity classified as High Sensitivity (3), Special (4) or Unique (5) 
  • Adjacent to protected structures, ACAs and Landscape Character Areas with sensitivity class 3, 4 or 5      

Objective RE O145 should be expanded to include Celbridge Abbey, Oakley Park and the Liffey Valley. It should also address how Celbridge can be promoted as a gateway to Castletown House given the location of car parking off the M4. Celbridge loses significant tourism revenue by virtue of the fact that visitors to Castletown House from outside Celbridge tend not to visit Celbridge town.

Objective RE O100 to "Direct the provision of tourist related facilities such as information offices and cultural centres, into town and village locations to support and strengthen the existing economic infrastructure of such centres." might be expanded to suggest that such information offices may be co-located with other public information offices/ centres such as Citizen's Information, Libraries, etc. to make the provision of such facilities more feasible.

The protections afforded to Castletown House by Objective RE O144 are welcomed but the objective should explicitly name the historic demesnes of Donaghcumper and St. Wolstan’s as the designed landscapes of all three demesnes collectively form the landscape setting of Castletown House and its grounds. 

Objective RE O146 is welcome but would benefit from calling out the integrations that would be most strategic for Heritage Tourism such as connecting the Grand Canal and Royal Canal with the Liffey in Celbridge and with Castletown House.  

In addition to Action RE A7 "To prepare an integrated public amenity park and tourism destination at The Wonderful Barn and associated lands, to be informed by a detailed conservation and management plan.", there should be actions relating to other priority projects identified through the Town Renewal Plan processes that have potential to positively contribute to heritage tourism in Kildare towns. For example, Project 3 in the outcomes from the Celbridge Town Renewal Plan consultation proposes the creation of a green route along the LIffey, through the grounds of Celbridge Abbey and the Mill, to Donaghumper and on to Castletown House.

Chapter 5 - People & Place Visualisation (page 1) + Figures & Tables exclude Celbridge (the 3rd largest town in Co. Kildare)

People & Place Visualisation (page 1) + Figures and Tables Exclude the 3rd Largest Town in Co. Kildare

As stated in our observation regarding the County Strategy Map and County Settlement Hierarchy Map in Chapter 2, Celbridge is the 16th most populous town in Ireland (outside of the cities). Celbridge is also the 3rd most populous town in Co. Kildare after Newbridge and Naas.

Where the County Strategy and County Settlement Hierarchy Maps in Chapter 2 downplay Celbridge’s significance, the People & Place map on the first page and all of the figures and tables (Figure 5.5 - Kildare County Commuter Flow Patterns to work, Figure 5.6 - Town level commuter flow to work, Figure 5.7 - Car-based travel to work per settlement, Table 5.3 - Satisfaction levels with commute to work) in Chapter 5 omit Celbridge completely.

Whilst acknowledging that 

  • The intent was probably to only include the Key Towns and Self-Sustaining Growth Towns to which commuters are increasingly expected to travel due to strategies that would lead to these towns attracting greater inflows of commuters, and
  • Celbridge has "a weak employment base

omission of Celbridge like this disregards the large number who commute from Celbridge and fails to represent the destinations to which they travel.

The use of unsustainable modes of transport is disproportionately high amongst residents of Celbridge when compared with transport mode shares in other parts of the Dublin Metropolitan Area. Due to flows to and from other towns, it is not appropriate for this challenge to be addressed only in the Celbridge Local Area Plan.

If population and housing targets are to remain as outlined in Table 2.8 - Settlement Hierarchy - Population and Housing Unit Targets Q1-2023 to Q2-2028, then commuter flows from Celbridge will become increasingly important with Celbridge remaining the 3rd largest town in Co. Kildare until long after 2028 and continuing to take additional population disproportionately to its designation as a mere Self-Sustaining Town.

As a point of reference, this map of Ireland from the Town Centre First: A Policy Approach for Irish Towns document, shows Celbridge in the top 19 towns in Ireland (outside of the cities) with populations over 20,000.

When the Kildare County Development Plan fails to acknowledge the significance of Celbridge, how might decision makers and bodies with a national remit that rely on County Development Plans for insight be informed of the needs of Celbridge with respect to transport?

To avoid continuation of the established commuting patterns from Celbridge, Chapter 5 needs to include Celbridge in maps, figures and tables relating to Sustainable Mobility and Transport in Co. Kildare

5.3 Overarching Goals, Policies and Objectives

Objective TM O7 to "Introduce measures to reduce traffic congestion in town centres such as pedestrianisation, pedestrian priority and/or improved pedestrian facilities, in particular increasing the number of safe crossings." should also include the implementation of one-way roads and the removal of parking spaces as these methods will be required in some town centres to win back space for the provision of improved pedestrian facilities.

5.4 Sustainable Movement

Section 5.4, in particular sub-section 5.4.1 Walking and Cycling, contains a number of objectives and actions relating to the development of cycling and pedestrian infrastructure. They include Draft Greater Dublin Area Cycle Network Plan routes, greenways, blueways, other cycleways and paths between and within a number of towns. 

Due to some objectives/ actions being subject to collaboration and/ or funding from other organisations and bodies including the NTA and Waterways Ireland, this section of the document would benefit from a table that lists proposed route sections.

Inclusion of information such as the following would aid with understanding the overall pipeline:

  • Source & destination of route (e.g. Celbridge-Maynooth)
  • Whether the route section is part of a wider programme (e.g. GDA Cycle Network Plan, Barrow Blueway, Grand Canal Greenway, Royal Canal Greenway, etc.) 
  • How the route section will be planned and delivered (e.g.Kildare County Council only, Kildare County Council + NTA, NTA only, Kildare County Council + Waterways Ireland, Waterways Ireland only, etc.)  
  • Source from which funding needs to be obtained (e.g. NTA, Municipal District Budget, etc.)
  • Readiness to seek funding and/ or progress with a Part 8 development / whether a feasibility assessment is considered necessary before a route could be progressed 
  • etc.

Objective TM O11 to "Investigate the feasibility of developing high-quality, suitable, safe and sustainable cycling pathways..." lists distinct routes between a small number of destinations:

  • Maynooth/Leixlip and Dublin
  • Naas and Dublin
  • Naas and Newbridge
  • Newbridge to Kildare and on towards Portlaoise
  • Kildare to Monasterevin

Unless the feasibility of these routes has already been established, this objective should be updated to also include 

  • Celbridge and Maynooth
  • Celbridge and Leixlip
  • Celbridge to Lucan

It is unclear why Objective TM O11 is listed in the table before the 5.4.1 Walking and Cycling sub-section when all other cycle objectives are in sub-section 5.4.1 Walking and Cycling.

  • Does this relate to the proposed National Cycle Network?
  • Is it that a different quality is anticipated - should all cycleways not be "high-quality, suitable, safe and sustainable cycling pathways"?

Objective TM O12 to "Promote and facilitate the implementation of public transport projects (bus and rail) and encourage transport providers and other agencies (e.g. NTA, developers etc.) to improve public transport (bus and rail) and to have regard to and support recently implemented and/or planned routes under NTA’s Bus Connects and proposed / planned routes under NTA’s Connecting Ireland Rural Mobility Plan.." lists distinct routes between

  • Kilcock/Maynooth/Leixlip and Dublin
  • Celbridge and Dublin
  • Maynooth and Naas
  • Celbridge and Naas
  • Naas and Carragh

This objective should be updated to also list

  • Maynooth to Tallaght (BusConnects route)
  • Celbridge to Newbridge (extension of route between Celbridge and Naas onto Newbridge or increased service on GoAhead 120B)
  • Routes proposed as a result of the Strategic Land Use, Employment and Transportation Study of North East Kildare (Objective RE O14) and Area Based Transport Assessments carried out during the preparation of Local Area Plans (Action TM A2) - these may include
    • Enhanced connection between Celbridge and Maynooth to include a link between West Celbridge, Maynooth Business Campus and West Maynooth (University / new Research & Technology Park)
    • Celbridge to North-West Dublin (Blanchardstown and Dublin Airport)

5.4.1 Walking and Cycling

5.4.1 Walking and Cycling

Action TM A6 to "Develop a new pedestrian and cycle link from Celbridge to Leixlip, via Castletown House, through the former Hewlett Packard site, across the M4 to the Wonderful Barn and onto Leixlip Town Centre and Leixlip Louisa Station. " is welcomed.

  • Insert the word Bridge into the name of Leixlip Louisa Bridge Station.
  • The words "former Hewlett Packard site" might be rephrased to the "Kildare Innovation Campus".

 

Action TM A7 to

       "Investigate the feasibility of providing a footpath connection from Maynooth to Celbridge."

should be changed to

       "Develop a new pedestrian and cycle link from Maynooth to Celbridge"

 

Actions TM A11 and TM A12 regarding permeability connections should include a commitment to ensure that permeability connections are implemented. Permeability connections are key to promoting walking and cycling as they can have a dramatic reduction on walking and cycling distances and time.

 

Action TM A13 to "Prepare a Cycle Network Study for each of the key towns in County Kildare consisting of the primary links identified in the NTA’s Draft Greater Dublin Area Cycle Network Plan (2021), connections between the major towns and surrounding settlements, key strategic cycle routes, greenways and local links, all in accordance with the National Cycle Manual. The study will include draft widths, level of services and identify local targets." should be expanded to at least include all towns in the Dublin Metropolitan Area and Newbridge, that is, the key towns and all towns clustered with them. Ideally something of the caliber of South Dublin Co Co's CySd Cycle South Dublin Programme of Work should be prepared with all schemes gruoped into NOW, SOON or LATER. 

 

This section should include new objectives/ actions to progress needs identified during the Celbridge Town Renewal Plan consultation and defined in the FINAL Proposed Projects Document:

Project 3 - Enhance & Develop Green Infrastructure

The public consultation feedback clearly highlights the value the local community sees in green infrastructure. Comments focused on existing green spaces that are not open to the public, such as Donaghcumper House and St.John of Gods, as well as potential green connections for cyclists and pedestrians.

Project 3 proposes the creation of a green route along the LIffey, through the grounds of Celbridge Abbey and the Mill, to Donaghumper and on to Castletown House.

Project 4 - Upgrade Cycle Infrastructure

The majority of town centre streets do not have dedicated cycle lanes. Project 4 focuses on the upgrade of existing cycle infrastructure and the inclusion of new infrastructure. While we recognise the existing fabric of the town does not permit the inclusion of cycle tracks in some areas, they would be of great benefit wherever they can be included.

  • In areas where this is not possible,other interventions could be considered, such as:
  • Priority lights for cyclists;
  • Shared pedestrian / cycle paths;
  • Creating cycle routes through quieter, residential streets, reinforced by closing one end of the street to vehicular traffic.

Project 4 can also work alongside and interface with Project 1 Main Street Interventions and Project 3 Enhance and Develop Green Infrastructure.

5.4.2 Public Transport

5.4.2 Public Transport

Objective TM O35 to

"Seek to address urban congestion with particular emphasis on facilitating the development of town bus services for the Key Towns within the County ensuring connectivity to and from residential areas, key employers, and public transport hubs such as train stations, along with retail and amenity sites"

should be changed to 

"Seek to address urban congestion with particular emphasis on facilitating the development of local bus services for the Key Towns within the County ensuring connectivity to and from residential areas, key employers, and public transport hubs such as train stations, along with retail and amenity sites. Local bus services should serve both the Key Town and other towns that are clustered with it."

 

Objective TM O43 mentions "the extension of the LUAS network". Is this relevant to Co. Kildare?

5.5 Road and Street Network

5.5 Road and Street Network

Objective TM O58 should not limit provision of "enhanced public transport, cycling and pedestrian facilities in the relevant centre" to only when the road project is an orbital road but make such provision for any significant new road infrastructure to be provided in a town.

Objective TM O67 to "Require a Glint and Glare Assessment as part of all solar energy development proposals where there is a likelihood of impact on the national road network." should be rephrased to apply only require this for significant / non-domestic solar energy development due to the upcoming changes whereby domestic solar energy development will be exempted from planning.

Item No. 6 on Table 5.4 - Priority Road and Bridge Projects simply states "Upgrade existing bridge in Celbridge". This should be more specific in terms of the details of the upgrade, for example, "Provide a shared pedestrian and cycle bridge directly adjacent to the existing road bridge in Celbridge"

  • The proposed development comprises of a shared pedestrian and cycle bridge from the footpath adjacent to the former Bank of Ireland car park in Celbridge to the footpath outside the Abbey Lodge public house. The bridge will span over the River Liffey for approximately 50m. It will be constructed directly adjacent to the existing road bridge.)

It is not clear why there is a specific Objective TM O61 to "Support and promote the delivery of a second bridge crossing in Newbridge as a priority of this development plan." in addition to Objective TM O58 which references "other transport infrastructure improvement identified within this Plan", including Table 5.4 - Priority Road and Bridge Projects on which item 11 is a "Second bridge crossing in Newbridge."

  • Is it that the projects are at different stages? If so, an additional column in Table 5.4 would aid with the legibility of the data

5.6 Motorways

5.6 Motorways

Objective TM O73 to "Examine the feasibility of delivering an overpass of the M4 to link the Wonderful Barn at Leixlip to the former HP site and Castletown Demesne in Celbridge in consultation with Transport Infrastructure Ireland, while being sensitive to the heritage sensitivities of both sites." needs to be specific as to the nature of the overpass (pedestrian and cycle bridge overpass) to align with Action TM A6 to "Develop a new pedestrian and cycle link from Celbridge to Leixlip, via Castletown House, through the former Hewlett Packard site, across the M4 to the Wonderful Barn and onto Leixlip Town Centre and Leixlip Louisa Station."

Additionally, the words "former HP site" might be rephrased to the "Kildare Innovation Campus".

5.12 Car Parking

5.12 Car Parking

Objective TM O109 to "To facilitate, along with the NTA and TII, the conversion of the private car fleet to electric..." should include that charging infrastructure is

  • accessible to all and
  • provided in a safe location

Objective TM O115 to "Support car sharing initiatives as part of new housing developments and workplaces." should include for the provision of car sharing initiatives in existing developments and existing workplaces. Alternatively, this should be contained in a new objective.

6.8.1 Waste Management

Objective IN O49 to "Examine the possibility of providing a recycling facility in each Municipal District within the County and seek new markets for recycling in existing centres, including North Kildare." is admirable objective. However, there has already been a Part 8 consultation in relation to Objective INFO4. 2 in the Celbridge Local Area Plan 2017-2023 "To provide a civic amenity site (recycling centre) in Celbridge on lands located south of the M4 Motorway and north of the R449 Regional Route to the west of Exit 6."

Given lack of recycling centres in North Kildare, this project which has progressed to planning should be prioritised through the inclusion of an action to progress this.

8.7.2.1 Celbridge

8.7.2.1 Celbridge

Celbridge, like many settlements in Co. Kildare, has extended outwards from an old village centre so achieving a 10-minute neighbourhood is a particular challenge, especially in light of the need to provide recreational space and to preserve heritage.

10-minute neighbourhoods/ villages only require a level of retail that caters for the actual needs of the neighbourhood. Achieving sustainability must be the guiding principle rather than promoting consumerism. For example, families with children should be able to buy footwear and clothing for their children locally rather than being dependent on large shopping centres in West Dublin or on internet shopping which increasingly involves significant delays and can involve costly returns when items prove unsuitable.

Regarding Objective RET O33 to "Encourage and facilitate the re-use and regeneration of vacant or underused sites for appropriate town centre uses and encourage the full use of buildings and in particular, upper floors and back lands." and Objective RET O34 to "Support KDA 1 in the Celbridge Local Area Plan which requires a masterplan for a mixed-use scheme with a retail element at St. Raphael’s (Oakley Park)."

  • Preference should be for re-use and regeneration of vacant or underused sites
  • Caution must be exercised in terms of how retail development might adversely impact the natural and built heritage of Celbridge
    • "back lands" on one side of the Main St in Celbridge are actually back gardens sloping down to the River Liffey and any attempts to develop on these would negatively impact on both the natural and built heritage of Celbridge (Architectural Conservation Area, protected structures and Class 4 Special landscape sensitivity)
    • Oakley Park is a peaceful demesne with protected structure within and adjacent to it

Objectives RET O33 should be qualified to exclude back lands between the Main St and the River Liffey.

Objective RET O34 should be qualified by a clause stating that any development at KDA1 will not negatively impact the setting of Oakley Park 

10.6 Community Services and Facilities + 10.12 Educational Facilities

10.6 Community Services and Facilities + 10/12 Educational Facilities

Objective SC O13 to "Progress plans for the provision of a regional swimming pool in North Kildare in conjunction with other relevant bodies." should be qualified to state acknowledge that there is a strong case for more than one pool in North Kildare and that the pool needs to be at a location that is easily accessed by public transport from all towns that are intended to be served by the swimming pool. For example

  • "Assess the level of demand for swimming pools in North Kildare and progress plans for the provision of one or more regional swimming pools in North Kildare in conjunction with other relevant bodies. Each swimming pool(s) should be easily accessible by public transport from all towns to be served by it."

Related to Objectives SC O6, SC O10, SC O16, SC O68, SC O70 and SC O71, an objective should be added, either in Chapter 10 or Chapter 5, to prioritise permeability initiatives to clustered community facilities / multi-purpose hubs and locations where community and sporting facilities are co-located or adjacent to schools. Prioritisation of permeability initiatives should be based on a social infrastructure audit completed during preparation of each town's LAP and should focus on maximising the number of

  • primary school children who can walk to existing schools and sporting activities in 10-minutes (most younger children are unable to cycle) and
  • young people walking or cycling to school and sporting activities in 10-minutes via segregated cycleways.

10.8.1 Children and Young People

10.8.1 Children and Young People

Objective SC O26 to "Support the provision of multi-purpose sports (to include minority sports, and arts / drama activities) halls, outdoor playing pitches, all-weather playing pitches, swimming pools, and associated facilities in appropriate locations and to particularly encourage flexibility in the design of sports facilities in order to accommodate a range of sporting activities." should be more explicit regarding what is meant by "appropriate locations" and what support might be expected for the provision of swimming pools in North Kildare in light of the separate Objective SC O13 to "Progress plans for the provision of a regional swimming pool in North Kildare in conjunction with other relevant bodies.

The attached document illustrates the level of access to swimming pools for residents of the 100 largest towns in Ireland with Co. Kildare standing out as four of it's larger towns - Newbridge (no. 15), Celbridge (no. 21), Leixlip (no. 29) and Maynooth (no. 31) - all feature in the top 31 largest settlements without a public swimming pool. Of these four, only residents of Newbridge and Maynooth have leisure club pools for use by members. The only other town without a public swimming pool above Maynooth is Balbriggan at no. 17. The closure of the pool on the St John of God campus in Celbridge in March 2020 has been a major blow to families in Celbridge. Though dilapidated and limited in the services offered, many children used it for swimming lessons and have been unable to book into alternative classes anywhere else.

The demand for a swimming pool in Celbridge is significant and, if Kildare County Council is not going to be the one to provie this, then it has got to be made an attractive proposition for another organisation.

Lack of Family Resource Centre / Youth Services in Celbridge

A 2019 KWETB review of needs assessment and area profile in relation to youth services only reviewed towns that already had youth services. There needs to be a strategy for provision of youth services in large towns that lack them. The following table shows the 17 Kildare and Wicklow towns, 10 of which were included in the youth services needs assessment. Celbridge and Maynooth with the 21st largest and 31st largest populations in Ireland were ignored for this assessment.

Additionally, there is no Family Resource Centre in Celbridge or Maynooth. Objectives should be included to support redress of these deficits.

10.10 Arts and Culture in the Community

10.10 Arts and Culture in the Community

Action SC A11 to "Examine the feasibility of identifying a location for a performing arts space/theatre in North East Kildare taking account of the needs of existing groups operating in these areas." should be phrased more directly, for example "Identify a location and examine the feasibility of providing a performing arts space/theatre in North East Kildare taking account of the needs of existing groups operating in these areas."

Action SC A17 "To investigate the feasibility of providing a museum attraction in North Kildare." is vague and would benefit from more context.

11.15 Protected Structures + Views to be Preserved @ Castletown - Donaghcumper (Map 11.14)

11.15 Protected Structures + Views to be Preserved @ Castletown-Donaghcumper (Map 11.14)

The last bullet point in Objective AH O23 to "Maintain the views from Castletown House to the River Liffey and to protect the integrity of the designed landscape at Castletown Demesne, including the pathways, avenues, and the following views: 

  • Axial views between the Castletown House and Conolly’s Folly 
  • Views between Castletown House and the Wonderful Barn 
  • Views from the House to the river and across the back parterre 
  • Views across the river and to the linked demesnes of Donaghcumper and St. Wolstans. 
  • Views from the main avenue to the river towards Castletown, and up and down the river to Celbridge and New Bridges."

is not reflected with Views to be Preserved arrows on the Protected Area Castletown - Donaghcumper Map (11.14)

13.6 Recreation and Amenities

13.6 Recreation and Amenities

Objectives LR O55, LR O56 and LR O57 relating to support for a Liffey Valley Linear Park are welcomed. 

Objective LR O57 to "Investigate the feasibility of (i)... (ii) The possible expansion of recreational open space at other locations along the River Liffey, all subject to environmental considerationsshould be expanded to state the nature of the recreational open space (e.g. create a riverside park with walking and cycling trails) and to list the locations along the River Liffey that might be considered for recreational open space. For example

  • Along the one or both banks of the Liffey between the location of the emerging preferred route for the Celbridge-Hazelhatch Link Road / second bridge in Celbridge to the existing bridge in Celbridge
  • Along the bank of the Liffey in the grounds of Donaghcumper from the existing bridge in Celbridge to the Salmon Leap Bridge
  • etc. 

13.7 Urban Recreation and Amenity

13.7 Urban Recreation and Amenity

Add a new objective to progress opportunities to create circular/looped walks and enhanced access between the Royal and Grand Canals and the Liffey Valley in a number of locations to  enhance access between the principal water corridors of the Dublin and Mid East Region [reference action 5.10 in Towards a Liffey Valley Park Strategy’ (2006)]. 

Action LR A18 in Chapter 13 is a duplicate of SC O13 in Chapter 10. See observations in Chapter 10 for suggestions regarding text of this Action.

14.4 The Role of Settlements in Kildare

14.4 The Role of Settlements in Kildare

Regarding the point made in 14.4.3 Town Centres: Challenges and Opportunities that several towns "struggle with the consequences of out-of-town retail developments or retail leakage to other towns, while all continue to be affected by the fallout from the relentless rise of online shopping and e-commerce, and the resulting changes in retail needs and shopping habits.", it should not be assumed that online shopping will continue to rise or even remain at pandemic levels. Brexit and the COVID pandemic have imapcted the availability of goods both online and in physical shops. The concept of sustainability and 10-minute towns is to enable citizens to meet their needs locally. An analysis of what people travel out of town for is needed and initiatives should be taken based on any identified gaps to promote provision of these goods and services. For example, given the number of children in Celbridge, it is unbelievable that there are no shops selling clothing or shoes for children other than Tesco and a sports shop.

Objective UD O3 to "Support and promote the '10-minute settlement' concept across all towns and villages in the county and require that all Local Area Plans incorporate policies and objectives that will assist in its implementation" should reference the Town Centre First Policy.

Perhaps it could be reworded to 

"Support and promote the '10-minute settlement' concept across all towns and villages in the county through implementation of the specific actions for local authorities outlined in the Town Centre First Policy and through requiring that all Local Area Plans incorporate policies and objectives that will assist in its implementation"

 

14.5 Policy Responses

14.5.6 A Town Centre First Approach 

This section states that "This Plan commits to supporting the rollout and implementation of the Town Centre First Policy (February 2022) to towns and settlements across County Kildare and to ensuring that the provisions and actions contained in the policy document are fully integrated into the established regeneration activities and work programme of the County Council." but the Draft Kildare County Development Plan lacks explicit actions that address how Kildare Co Co will support the rollout and implementation of Town Centre First Policy establish Town Teams for each town.

The Kildare County Development Plan must include actions that address

  • The appointment of Town Regeneration Officers and the establishment of Town Teams for all towns but particularly those with higher population targets (Naas, Maynooth, Newbridge, Leixlip and Celbridge), 
  • Liaison with the National Town Centre First Office for advice on best practice,
  • Sequencing for the preparation of Town Centre Health Checks (Action UD A4), Town Renewal Plans (Action UD A3), Masterplans / Urban Design Frameworks (Action UD A2) and Local Area Plans 

Since Town Centre First Plans are non-statutory and expected to be produced by local Town Teams, there is a risk that they will not happen in a timely manner. The Kildare County Development Plan must include objectives to ensure that a Town Centre First Plan is prepared as a matter of urgency and prevent compact town centre development happening in Kildare towns until there is a shared understanding defined in a plan.

 

14 - Urban Design, Placemaking & Regeneration

Masterplans / Urban Design Frameworks

Action UD A2 to "Prepare a series of Masterplans / Urban Design Frameworks over the lifetime of the Plan, in co-operation with relevant stakeholders" and lists a number of areas including

  • Lands at St. Raphael’s / Oakley Park, Celbridge

Consideration should be given to extending the area for this Masterplan to also include The Mill in line with Priority Project 2 - The Mill & Surrounds proposed in the outcomes from the recent Celbridge Town Renewal Plan public consultation. Any developments impacting English Row, Tea Lane and the Clane Road in this area of town should be considered together in a coherent manner.

14 - Urban Design, Placemaking & Regeneration

Building Heights

Table 14.4 - Application of the Guidelines on Urban Development and Building Heights to a County Kildare Context suggests that building heights of 6+ storeys may be appropriate in Celbridge town centre.

14.8.3 Integrating Taller Buildings into the Urban Environment acknowledges that "...due regard must be had to the existing characteristics of the receiving environment. In particular, care must be taken when making such interventions within town centres, many of which are Architectural Conservation Areas (ACAs) and have an established building height of two to four storeys. It is therefore recognised that developments of greater than 6 storeys, as envisaged in the guidelines, would not generally be appropriate given the existing streetscape, the sensitive historic environment and may also not be viable. As provided for in the Guidelines (p.13), each proposal will be required to ‘…successfully integrate into/enhance the character and public realm of the area, having regard to topography, its cultural context, setting of key landmarks, protection of key views’."

It is hard to imagine how even a 4-6 story building would not have undue impact on Celbridge town center.

The phrase "subject to the avoidance of undue impacts on the existing residential or visual amenities" in Objective UD O12 to "Comply with the provisions of the Guidelines for Planning Authorities on Urban Development and Building Heights (2018)..." should be further qualified to reflect the above acknowledgement that tall buildings would not generally be appropriate given the existing streetscape.

15 - Development Management Standards

15.7.2 Cycle Parking

The Cycle Parking Standards in Table 0.5* should

  • Be noted as a minimum requirement to ensure the appropriate provision of cycling parking for new developments.
  • Include provision of resident and visitor cycle parking for houses (and not just for apartments) to promote cycling to new residential developments. 

Table 0.5 should probably be re-labelled as Table 15.5 (similar applies to other tables in this chapter)

15 - Development Management Standards

15.7.8 Car Parking

Regarding "Other than ‘Residential’, parking standards are maximum standards, having regard to the need to balance demand for parking against the need to promote more sustainable forms of transport, to limit traffic congestion and to protect the quality of the public realm from the physical impact of parking.", Car Parking Standards for Residential should also be a maximum standard to promote more sustainable forms of transport. This would be in line with other development plans throughout Ireland and in accordance with the Design Standards for New Apartments document.

In relation to apartment developments, the document should reference the Sustainable Urban Housing: Design Standards for New Apartments (2020) or any subsequent guidelines and the Urban Development and Building Height Guidelines (2018) for guidance regarding the appropriate provision of car parking for apartments.

16 - Monitoring & Implementation

16.3 Plan Implementation

Regarding "many areas of the county have witnessed rapid and prolonged periods of growth without the delivery of adequate, supporting social and community infrastructure. The Regional Spatial and Economic Strategy 2019-2031 (RSES) recognises this issue and states that measures should be taken to ensure ‘catch-up’ investment to promote consolidation and improvement in the sustainability of those areas."

  • How is adequate defined?
  • How will Kildare County Council measure the delivery of adequate infrastructure?
  • What measures does Kildare County Council propose to take to ensure ‘catch-up’ investment as stated in the RSES?

16.3.1 Implementing the Hierarchy of Plans

Regarding "the Council has developed an evidence-based methodology for preparing LAPs which focuses delivering compact growth, economic development, regeneration, climate action and community inclusion in the 12 settlements subject to a LAP in County Kildare."

  • What is the evidence-based methodology and will it be shared with the public?

Regarding "all LAPs will be accompanied by Local Transport Plans to ensure that Development Plan targets on sustainable mobility are applied to these settlements.", an Area Based Transport Assessment (ABTA) for a wider area (that includes neighbouring towns, expecially when clustered closely together) will be as important as a LTP which will be focused on the town for which the LAP is being prepared. No town can be looked at in isolation when movement happens between towns.

16.3.2 Securing Funding

Regarding "Where a key objective of the County Development Plan (or Local Area Plan) is not identified on the three-year capital programme, then the presumption will be that the project will be delayed and/or could be advanced as a ‘developer-led’ investment", there should not be any “presumption” or objectives are likely to fall through the cracks. Instead, each objective should be listed with a status update provided (and made public) on a quarterly basis.

 

7 - Energy & Communications

Ábhair: 

7.6 Solar Energy

Objective EC 018 to "Encourage and support the use of appropriately scaled solar energy in residential, commercial and industrial developments. The incorporation of solar technologies into the built fabric of existing buildings will also be encouraged where it does not materially affect the character of the structure or adjoining structures." should be reworded to require that all new houses, apartment blocks, commercial and industrial developments are future-proofed through the inclusion of solar panels.

7 - Energy & Communications

Ábhair: 

7.12.5 Electric Vehicles

Objective EC 045 to "Promote the delivery of EV charging facilities across the County where demand is proven, both on sites owned and occupied by Kildare County Council and private sites and ensure that EV charging points are installed in such a way that they do not cause significant obstruction to footpaths, cycle lanes, access to Train stations, or bus lanes/stops." should be reworded to remove "where demand is proven" on the basis that demand is inevitable and to require that all new houses are future-proofed through the inclusion of EV charging points and that there is adequate provision of EV charging points in apartment complexes to allow all car owners to charge their vehicles overnight.

Suímh a bhaineann leis an submission seo agus le observations

Faisnéis

Uimhir Thagarta Uathúil: 
KCC-C55-410
Stádas: 
Submitted
Líon na ndoiciméad faoi cheangal: 
1
Teorainneacha Gafa ar an léarscáil: