Special Amenity Areas

Gabhaim míle buíochas leis an Aire Stáit, an Teachta O’Donnell, as a bheith anseo anocht in áit an Aire atá freagrach as seo. I thank the Minister of State. It is now past midnight but I felt compelled to put this item down for discussion, even at this late stage, because it is topical. We have just had a major vote in respect of the lands at St. Edmundsbury as part of a Government-initiated development plan review process, which ended in my area this week. There is now an opportunity to move forward. In this context, I am submitting a formal request to the Minister of State to instruct South Dublin County Council to extend the special amenity area order, SAAO, on the existing lands at St. Edmundsbury, Woodville, bringing them all the way up to the Lucan Road. To put it in context, we have faced multiple attempts to rezone these lands. In 1998, there was a close vote, 14 to 12. It was only 2,000 people coming out in a referendum that stopped the lands being rezoned for housing back then. Years later, a delegation from South Dublin County Council came to the then Minister for the environment, John Gormley, seeking so-called affordable housing on the land. I was with the Minister at the time. The representatives of the council were suggesting this would be a great place to put housing. It was not quite affordable. They were well over the market rates. We have seen continuous efforts since then. We had the 2016 development plan process and the 2022 development plan process. Now, under the current Government's requests to rezone additional lands throughout south Dublin, St. Edmundsbury is under threat once again. The area in Lucan, which the Minister of State might not know, is unique and irreplaceable. It possesses immense biodiversity and outstanding natural beauty. It serves as a natural entrance to the already protected valley below. It is of such exceptional amenity and recreational value that it has to continue to be zoned as an amenity, but given the continuous threats it has faced, this land will always be at risk until it is a regional or national park or unless the SAAO is extended. In the current proposals, a unanimous number of councillors twice said "No" to rezoning, pleading for these lands to be kept for amenity. Almost 2,000 members of the public did likewise. Unfortunately, South Dublin County Council and Fingal County Council have not used their mandates to work together constructively towards a Liffey Valley park, as originally suggested in the 2006 programme, along with Kildare, Dublin city and the OPW. Fingal County Council and South Dublin County Council have rarely met over the past 20 years. It has met an average of approximately 1.5 times per council term. The most recent occasion on which the Liffey Valley special amenity area order monitoring committee met was in January 2025. Our shared long-term vision is to see a comprehensive Liffey Valley regional or national park, as I said, stretching from Islandbridge, through Palmerstown, Chapelizod, Lucan and Leixlip and on to Celbridge. In the short term, our immediate priority has to be to protect St. Edmundsbury and Woodville lands by ensuring they can never again come under this type of threat. The only way to achieve this is by extending the special area designation. This power rests in ministerial hands under the Planning Act to instruct South Dublin County Council to initiate or expand the SAAO. Section 202(2) of the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended, allows the Minister to make a direction to a planning authority based on natural beauty or recreational value, etc. Under other legislation, such as section 266(2) of the of the Planning and Development Act 2024, the Minister can direct a council to draft an SAAO. It is in the Government's hands and I am urging action to be taken in this regard.

I thank the Deputy for raising this important matter and providing me with an opportunity to update the House. I am taking this Topical Issue on behalf of the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage, Deputy James Browne. The making, amendment, review or revocation of a special amenity area order is a matter governed by sections 202 and 203 of the Planning and Development Act 2000. Prior to the enactment of the Act of 2000, the relevant provisions in relation to areas of special amenity were contained in sections 42 and 43 of the Local Government (Planning and Development) Act 1963. The provisions referenced, which are contained in the Planning and Development Act 2024, are yet to be commenced. The Dublin County Council Lucan Bridge to Palmerstown special amenity area order was confirmed with a minor modification by the Minister for the environment in March 1990, further to section 43 of the Act of 1963. It is to that matter that SI 59 of 1990 refers. Section 203 of the Act of 2000 states "Any reference in ... [any enactment] to a special amenity area order shall be construed as a reference to an order confirmed under this section" of the Act of 2000. Accordingly, the provisions of the Act of 2000 apply to existing areas. An order may state the objective of the planning authority in respect of the preservation or enhancement of the character or special features of the area, including objectives for the prevention or limitation of development in the area. On 19 October, yesterday - or the day before yesterday, to be more precise - the elected members of South Dublin County Council made variation No. 2 to the south Dublin county development plan for 2022 to 2028 under section 58 of the Planning and Development Act 2024. The making of a variation to a development plan is a reserved function of the elected members. Like all variations to local authority development plans, variation No. 2 will now be assessed by the Office of the Planning Regulator under section 63 of the Act to evaluate whether it is materially consistent with national and regional planning policy requirements. The Office of the Planning Regulator, OPR, is statutorily independent of the Minister in the performance of its plan evaluation and assessment function in accordance with section 538 of the Act. Cognisant of this fact, and in light of this ongoing statutory plan assessment process, it would not be appropriate for me to comment on specific lands which formed part of the variation.

I thank the Minister of State. I am setting the ball rolling because if the planning regulator makes a recommendation that the lands should still be rezoned, the Minister reserves the absolute right to agree or disagree with that decision. Whether a decision is made in that regard or the lands are designated to stay as is, the Minister of State and his colleagues in Government - including Deputy Currie, who has raised it multiple times - will be totally aware of the long-standing desire for a Liffey Valley regional or national park and for those lands to be protected. When the appropriate time comes to make a decision on that, as it will in the next number of weeks, I want the Minister of State, the Minister and the other line Ministers to be absolutely aware of the groundswell of feeling on this issue. To have a Liffey Valley regional or national park as part of a strategy, you have to sustain the integrity of the entrance to the existing protected area. In that context, the only way that is going to happens is if the special amenity area order is extended to the roadway. I am putting it out there so that when the appropriate time comes, which will be in a matter of weeks, the Minister will be fully aware of all the facts. We know the elected members have, on two occasions in this iteration, unanimously recommended that the lands stay zoned as amenity. We know there is a huge groundswell out there to keep it this way with regard to public participation. It was one of the biggest submissions made in any of these consultation processes and we also know this has been going on since 2006, when we had the original discussions. It is not something that has just come up but it is something that is going to come up again and again until the message finally gets to those in Government, and possibly the landowners as well, that these are particularly special lands. They supersede any other housing requirements as part of a wider context. I hope that measure will be shared loud and clear.

I again thank Deputy Gogarty for raising this important issue in the House, which I am taking behalf of the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage, Deputy James Browne. In conclusion, sections 202 and 203 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 set out a statutory process for the making, amendment, review or revocation of a special amenity area order. The provisions referenced, which are contained in the Planning and Development Act 2024, are due to be commenced later this year. In the interim, the provisions of the 2000 Act continue to apply. Variation No. 2 to the south Dublin county development plan is currently being assessed by the Office of the Planning Regulator, as already referenced, under section 63 of the Act to evaluate whether it is materially consistent with national and regional planning policy requirements. In light of the ongoing statutory plan assessment process and the independence of the OPR, it would not, as I stated earlier, be appropriate for me to comment at this time on specific lands that form part of the variation in question.