“Submitted By Councillor(s): Cllr Joe Costello
Co-sponsors: Cllr Dermot Lacey, Cllr Declan Meenagh
Refers to: Chapter 3 - Climate Action
Motion 29
New Objective CA 20 (P.70) It is an objective of Dublin City Council that the area between the Canals be designated an Ultra-Low Emissions Zone (ULEZ) and that appropriate steps be taken to achieve and maintain that status.
Planning Reason
London City Centre has been so designated. Dublin City Council should develop similar strategies to reduce carbon emissions in the City Centre.
Chief Executive's Response
The London Ultra Low Emissions Zone (ULEZ) is an area of London where the most polluting vehicles must pay a levy in order to use the roads. The ULEZ charge system operates in conjunction with the city's overall congestion charging scheme which is enforced by a network of cameras situated at entry and exit points to the charging zone and at key locations within the zone itself.
Given the technical, operational, financial and legal issues associated with establishing such a charging system, it is not considered appropriate to address the development of such a system in the Draft Plan.However, it should be noted that Objective SMTO28 'Environmental and Road Safety Impacts of Traffic in the City' in Chapter 8 on page 226 commits to the monitoring and assessment of traffic related air quality in the city.
The issue of air quality is also specifically addressed in Section 9.5.7 'Air Quality' of Chapter 9 (on p.249) which describes how Dublin has signed up to the UN/WHO commitments on air quality, and finally, the issue of air pollution and schools is addressed by Objective QHSN14 on page 135.
It is considered that there is merit in the Climate Action, Environment and Energy SPC and the Traffic and Transportation SPC researching this issue to examine the concept for Dublin and possible future options.
Chief Executive Recommendation
It is the recommendation of the CE that the motion is not agreed.
The designation of ULEZ must be addressed through legislative change and at regional transport policy level.
Council Meeting Decision
The motion was WITHDRAWN. To be referred to Climate Action, Environment & Energy SPC and the Traffic & Transport SPC.
Submitted By Councillor(s): Green Party Comhaontas Glas
Refers to: Chapter 9 - Sustainable Environmental Infrastructure and Flood Risk
Motion 178
Chapter:9, Section:SIO19, Page:254 change from "To consider the feasibility" to: To investigate and pilot the use of community food waste composters.
Planning Reason
We need to actively start trialling these.
Chief Executive's Response
The sentiment is noted to support new sustainable proposals for waste management. However the Development Plan is a policy document, and it not the appropriate location to specify particular waste management actions. It is considered that the motion would be more appropriate if amended to refer to “promoting” community waste composters and the delivery of such as referred to the Climate Action, Environment and Energy SPC.
Chief Executive Recommendation
It is the recommendation of the CE to agree this motion with an amendment, amending Objective SIO19, section 9.5.5, page 248
From:
SIO19 Community Food Waste Composting
“To consider the feasibility of using community food waste composters as a tool for more sustainable and localised community approach to waste recovery and recycling.”
To:
SIO19 Community Food Waste Composting
“To promote the piloting of community food waste composters as a tool for more sustainable and localised community approach to waste recovery and recycling.”
Council Meeting Decision
The motion was AGREED as AMENDED. To be referred to the Climate Action, Environment and Energy SPC.
Submitted By Councillor(s): Cllr Cieran Perry
Refers to: Chapter 9 - Sustainable Environmental Infrastructure and Flood Risk
Motion 185
That the Development Plan commits to trial a public underground domestic waste storage system in a suitable location in the city.
Planning Reason
To provide a communal alternative to private waste collection and help tackle the environmentally damaging process of multiple waste collectors servicing the same areas.
Chief Executive's Response
This matter is addressed in the Draft Plan. In Chapter 9, objective SIO18 commits to trialling public underground waste storage solutions in line with the review of the Dublin City Council Litter Management Plan in order to determine the feasibility of deploying more innovative communal waste management solutions within the city.
Chief Executive Recommendation
It is the recommendation of the CE that the motion is not agreed as this matter is already addressed in the Draft Plan, in objective SIO18.
Council Meeting Decision
The motion was WITHDRAWN. To be referred to Climate Action, Environment and Energy SPC.
Submitted By Councillor(s): Cllr Nial Ring
Refers to: Chapter 9 - Sustainable Environmental Infrastructure and Flood Risk
Motion 187
That the Development Plan ensures that all flood protection proposals include, at first instance, communication and consultation with the local community directly affected.
Planning Reason
To ensure flood protection plans include local consultation.
Chief Executive's Response
The consultation arrangements around flood protection proposals are outside the scope of the Development Plan and would form part of the statutory process associated with such works. Draft Plan Policy SI19 (page 242) deals with Provision and Upgrading of Flood Alleviation Assets and lists proposed flood protection/ alleviation schemes which are intended to be progressed through the planning consent process during the lifetime of the 2022-2028 Dublin City Development Plan. The planning, design and delivery of these schemes is a matter for the Council’s Flood Management Division and all such schemes are subject to formal statutory public consultation as part of the consent process.
Chief Executive Recommendation
It is the recommendation of the CE that the motion is not agreed. This matter is outside the scope of the Development Plan.
Council Meeting Decision
The motion was WITHDRAWN. To be referred to Climate Action, Environment and Energy SPC.
Submitted By Councillor(s): Green Party Comhaontas Glas
Refers to: Chapter 9 - Sustainable Environmental Infrastructure and Flood Risk
Motion 192
Chapter:9, Section:SI4, Page:239 change from "new" to all private development sewers which are intended to connect to the public drainage system to comply with the requirements of the Greater Dublin Regional Code of Practice for Drainage Works and/ or Irish Water foul sewer specification (where applicable).
Planning Reason
Because if existing private developments want to join the public sewer system they need to follow the same requirements not just new ones.
Chief Executive's Response
Policy SI 4 refers to the requirement for new private development sewers, which are intended to connect to the public drainage system, to comply with the requirements of the Greater Dublin Regional Code of Practice for Drainage Works and/or Irish Water foul sewer specification (where applicable). The motion was referred to the Drainage Department who have confirmed that virtually all developments connect to the public sewer and those that are taken in charge are public. Those that are not taken in charge, are private but still connect to the public sewer.
The intent of this policy is to ensure that all new developments, are to be constructed in accordance with GDR CoP. This ensures better built quality, less risk of problems downstream in the network and that any private networks that are asked to take in charge in the future will have been built to the appropriate standards.
However, it is not considered appropriate to change the wording to apply to "all developments". It is considered that it would not be reasonable to ask private developments that are already connected to the public sewer system to retrospectively upgrade to be in accordance with the GDR CoP.
It should be noted that where DCC are asked to take in charge a private development, a request can be made for works to be undertaken at that stage if necessary, though this may not be practical if the developer is no longer involved. This is however, an operational matter, outside the scope of the Development Plan.
Chief Executive Recommendation
It is the recommendation of the CE that the motion is not agreed as it would introduce an element of confusion in the purpose of the motion, as the objective cannot be applied retrospectively.
The motion was WITHDRAWN. To be referred to Climate Action, Environment and Energy SPC.