A new amendment to the Dublin City Development Plan which would reopen the possibility of high-rise apartment buildings in Ballsbridge is to be debated by the city council early next month.
Council management is proposing a key change to the development plan to facilitate the introduction of a "flexible approach" to building heights. However, former lord mayor and councillor Dermot Lacey said last night he did not think the proposal would be adopted by council members.
Management wants to amend the existing city development plan as part of what it describes as an "overarching policy" on the creation of large apartment and mixed-use developments.
The change would open the way for developers - including Seán Dunne of Mountbrook Homes who proposes a record height, mixed-use scheme of 18- and 37-storey structures in Ballsbridge - to argue that such schemes are permissible under the city development plan.
Last October, the city council's southeast area committee refused to back Mr Dunne's proposals. The same day, councillors asked the planners to draw up a new Ballsbridge local area plan. Mr Dunne's plans are nevertheless still under active consideration by council planners.
According to the proposed variation, entitled Achieving Livable Sustainable New Apartment Homes, the city development plan should have regard to a range of priorities including the need for good quality design and "good parks and play areas, good shopping and commercial facilities, good schools, a public library, leisure facilities, safe streets and clean streets and efficient public transport".
Crucially, the policy also states that "in assessing building heights, the planning authority shall take a flexible approach and shall have regard to performance criteria . . ." Performance criteria are defined as quality housing, together with commercial, educational, leisure and transport facilities.
In promoting his Ballsbridge development, Mr Dunne has drawn attention to the availability of all or most of these facilities in the immediate Ballsbridge area.
Mr Lacey, a southeast area councillor, said the proposed local area plan could be made irrelevant if "flexibility" and "overarching policy" considerations were adopted by council.
Many councillors had believed the draft amendment to the city development plan pertained only to the need for sustainable apartments suitable for families as well as individuals and the mobility-impaired, while creating socially mixed communities, he said.
Mr Lacey said he "would not be prepared to put words like flexibility" into a development plan. He instanced an "open space" zoning for "Scully's field" in Miltown in which some flexibility had been accepted by councillors who thought it implied a park- keeper's house or suchlike. In the event the council planners had approved a scheme of more then 100 apartments.
He added that an "overarching policy objective" was also an unspecific term which could result in an overriding policy.
The council is scheduled to debate the variation on Monday, December 3rd.
