My Submission to An Bord Pleanala on the proposed Amusement Arcade in Finglas Village

The Secretary,

An Bord Pleanala,

64 Marlborough Street,

Dublin 1

                                                                                                                                  16^th November 2012

Dear Sir/Madam,

We wish to make an observation in relation to the An Bord Pleanala Case reference PL29N.24122 on the appeal against a decision by Dublin City Council to part refuse the planning application reference number 3032/12.

The basis of our objection is primarily to do with the inappropriateness of this use within Finglas Village and the concerns expressed to us by local residents about the proposal. We previously outlined these to Dublin City Council prior to their issuance of a split decision to refuse permission for the amusement arcade element of the proposal.

We wish to state that we support business development in Finglas Village and do not oppose the internet café element of the permission.

In relation to the appeal against the split decision of Dublin City Council we wish to make the following points;

   - The future development of Finglas Village should be based on making the village a vibrant and sustainable commercial centre. This involves the provision of a wide retail and service offering based on the needs of the local community and which promote Finglas village as a shopping destination.

     - The Dublin City Development Plan 2012 -2017 shares the above aim and it identifies Finglas Village as key district centre. While the stated internet café/amusement use is a permissible use under the Z4 zoning, we believe the proposed development is not conducive to the development of the village in line with the objectives of the district centre designation.

     - From our engagement with local residents on this issue, the belief in the area is that amusement arcades can give a negative perception to a main street.  Much work has been done in recent years by the Tolka Area Partnership, the City Council, local businesses and local interest groups, amongst others, to promote and develop Finglas Village. This work is based on a shared belief about how the village should develop based on a varied and complementary service offering. This valuable work is at an advanced stage and any proposal that has the possibility of detrimentally affecting this work by means of a negative perception of the main street should not be allowed.

     - Significantly, this potential for a negative perception is considered locally to possibly be a major impediment to the ability of Finglas Village to compete with the City Centre and Charlestown Shopping Centre as a retail destination.

     -  Finglas village already has six betting shops and we believe the amusement arcade aspect of the application is targeted at a market that is already very well provided for.

     - In the appeal documents submitted to An Bord Pleanala on the 24^th of October 2012 the applicant’s agent states that under the Z4 zoning, amusement arcades are ‘normally permitted’. Given that nature of this application, and the potential for a precedent to be established in the area, I think it is important to note that ‘permissible’ means that it is an allowed use but that does not equate to ‘normally permitted’ which we feel is an important distinction.

- We also note with concern two planning permissions for amusement arcades refused by Local Authorities then appealed to An Bord Pleanala (appeal references PL35 .240508 and PL06F.239466) resulting in recommendations issued by the An Bord Pleanala Inspectors reports for refusal for the amusement element of the applications, only to be granted on a temporary basis by the Board. In both instances, the planning policy in the locality was based on the principles of protecting and enhancing the amenities and character of the town/village centre. The same planning principles apply in Finglas Village and we respectfully request that the views expressed to us by local residents and interest groups be heard and permission, even on a temporary basis, not be allowed to proceed.

In summary, it is our belief that this proposal would not be complementary to the future development of Finglas Village and we therefore oppose the amusement arcade element of this planning application.

With best wishes,

John Lyons TD

Cllr John Redmond

Cllr Steve Wrenn

Cheque for €50 enclosed.                   

Response to the death of Savita Halappanavar

I have been contacted by a huge number of constituents in the last 24 hours as the details of the tragic death of Savita Halappanavar have emerged.

I share the serious concerns that so many people have expressed to me and I want to assure you that implementing the recommendations of the Expert Group report is a key issue for the Labour Party in Government.

As many people are aware, the Programme for Government negotiated by both Labour and Fine Gael on forming government contains the following commitment:

"We acknowledge the recent ruling of the European Court of Human Rights subsequent to the established ruling of the Irish Supreme Court on the X-case. We will establish an expert group to address this issue, drawing on appropriate medical and legal expertise with a view to making recommendations to Government on how this matter should be properly addressed."

I understand this report was presented to the Minister for Health on Tuesday and will be considered by the Cabinet shortly and I am assured the Government will act on foot of the report. I will work with my colleagues so that this is the case.

The shocking and tragic news of the death of Savita Halappanavar underlines the importance of acting on this matter. It also highlights the need to provide legal certainty and legal clarity, for situations like this, and I have no doubt that the Government will act on foot of the Group’s recommendations as a matter of urgency.

I am in agreement with Tanaiste Eamon Gilmore’s comments on this matter yesterday which stated:

"It's a heartbreaking case and I must say I was very upset reading it and hearing about it.  We need in this country to provide legal certainty, legal clarity, for a situation where a woman is requesting a termination of pregnancy in circumstances like this and that's why we decided to establish the Expert Group to look at the ABC case and to make recommendations to Government on what steps we can take to deal with that. That group has now completed its work, and has submitted its report to Minister for Health. We need to give our response to the Council of Europe by end of November, so I expect we will be considering the Expert Group report between now and end of  November and dealing with it then.  

"This issue has been with us now for 20 years and this is the first Government that has decided that were are going to deal with it.  We put place a process, an Expert Group chaired by Judge Ryan to address all of the issues, to make recommendations to us. That Expert  Group looked for an extension on the period of time they needed to consider the issues. It is a complex and sensitive area. They have now completed their work, submitted their report to Minister for Health and we will deal with it promptly.

"We need to provide legal clarity.....  Before this incredibly tragic and heartbreaking case we had already determined as a Government that we were going to deal with this by having the Expert Group and getting their recommendations."

I share the very strong feelings that have been expressed to me over the last 24 hours and I will be working with my party colleagues to act on the recommendations of the report as matter of priority.

Please feel free to call me on 618 3280 or john.lyons@oir.ie if you would like to discuss this matter further.