COMHAIRLE CONTAE ÁTHA CLIATH THEAS
SOUTH DUBLIN COUNTY COUNCIL

South Dublin County Council Crest

MEETING OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN MEETING

Thursday, June 18, 2015

MOTION NO. 279

MOTION: Councillor E. Higgins

That Maps No. 4/8 be amended such that lands at Moneenalion Commons at Baldonnell, currently zoned 'EP2' (enterprise) and proposed to be rezoned to 'RJ' (rural/agricultural) should instead retain an 'EE' (enterprise) zoning; and that a Specific Local Objective should further be applied to these lands as follows: "To require preparation of a site specific Flood Risk Assessment and  Mitigation Strategy, prepared by a qualified person(s), to be submitted with any proposal for development on these lands.

Co Sponsor: Cllr. Kenneth Egan

 

REPORT:

At the outset it is important to highlight that concern about enterprise zoning at this location is not in relation to the Baldonnell security zone and is wholly in relation to Flood Risk.

As part of the County Development Plan and SEA process 2016-2022, a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) was carried out for the County, with a further detailed Flood Risk Assessment also carried out subsequently due to the lands located at Moneenalion Commons being identified in the County study as having a potential risk.  This resulted in evidence based data being reported on flood risk. This study identifies a significant portion of the site in question as being in flood risk zone A, with ‘a high probability of flooding’.

Guidelines for Planning Authorities on Flood Risk Management were published by the OPW and DECLG in 2009.  The Flood Risk Management Guidelines advise in relation to Flood Zone A that ‘most types of development would be considered inappropriate in this zone’ and that ‘development in this zone should be avoided and/or considered only in exceptional circumstances’.

These 'exceptional circumstances' require all parts of a Development Plan justification test to be met ‘on a solid evidence basis’. It is considered that on the basis of the information currently available to the Planning Authority, this cannot be met in respect of the subject lands i.e. this is because the Planning Authority is not satisfied that ‘it can be demonstrated on a solid evidence base that the zoning or designation for development will satisfy the justification test.’

The DECLG Planning Policy Statement 2015, reiterates the Key Principles that should be used as a strategic guide to implementing proper planning and sustainable development of urban and rural areas and state that planning must be plan-led and evidence based. This follows on from the 2010 Planning Act, which requires an evidence based ‘core strategy’ as the basis for all County Development Plans.

This zoning recommendation in respect of the lands at Baldonnell has been made based on evidence and information detailed in specifically comissioned reports prepared by independent consultants for the County Development Plan, as stated above. These reports are based on the Eastern Catchment Flood Risk Assessment and Management Plan, that was published by the OPW in early 2015 and is therefore information that has been available to the public, including the subject site landowner, since at least March 2015.  In addition, as part of the Eastern CFRAM study, a detailed Camac Options report was published by the OPW in early 2014.  This detailed study highlights the extent of flood risk in the Camac catchment and possible related measures to be taken.

Section 4 of the Flood Risk Guidelines relates specifically to  to "existing, undeveloped, zoned areas at risk of flooding" and Sections 4.26 & 4.27 state that “future flood risk assessments required to support the development plan process may highlight existing, undeveloped areas which, on their own merits, were zoned for development in previous development plans but which new information indicates may now, or in the future, be at risk of flooding”. The Flood Risk Guidelines advise that “planning authorities should reconsider the zoning objective” and following this reconsideration, “may decide to:

Given the extent and location of flood risk zone A on the lands in question, it is considered that removal of the existing zoning where the lands remain undeveloped is the most appropriate course of action, in line with the 'precautionary approach', which requires planning authorities to consider possible future changes in flood risk including the effects of climate change, "so that future occupants are not subject to unacceptable risks". In effect this means not giving the benefit of the doubt where risk has been identified. It also means that a site-specific solution does not appear to be an option when the risk relates to the catchment as a whole.

It is of concern that the proposed SLO, which is based on a presumption in favour of development with a Flood Risk Mitigation Strategy to be carried out by an applicant as part of any development proposals on the site, may not allow for the cumulative impact of development on the flood zone to be assessed and addressed and may result in works being required that are outside of an applicant’s control.  In effect, this would be likely to shift the burden of responsibility and associated cost onto the local authority.

If the zoning is removed for public display of the Draft Plan, it should then be a matter for the landowner to demonstrate on a solid evidence base that the zoning or designation for development can satisfy the 'justification test'. The Council may then reconsider the zoning of the lands. If the Council decides to retain the zoning in the face of evidence of flood risk, it will be necessary to reflect this in Environmental Report of the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the Plan.

Recommendation

It is recommended that the motion is not agreed