Liam Cosgrave Land Knocklyon

Marcusm

....... wrote: »

Then build it in places that are not already full and lacking in infrastructure.

This is simple stuff.

That area is not already full based on the availability of development land and is overrun with semi Ds when a mix of housing stock is required. Transport infrastructure is in the remit of NTA/TfI. Have you lobbied them? No point in blocking development which will allow people to be housed within M50 and reduce crazy commutes.

Qrt

BusConnects might improve the area...in the 2030s when they decide to buslane the orbital routes 😅

Marcusm

Marcusm wrote: »

That area is not already full based on the availability of development land and is overrun with semi Ds when a mix of housing stock is required. Transport infrastructure is in the remit of NTA/TfI. Have you lobbied them? No point in blocking development which will allow people to be housed within M50 and reduce crazy commutes.

This is the very last available private site of any substantial size within the Knocklyon/Templeogue/Rathfarnham area.

A 90 minute commute from the city centre doesn't require a mix of 'housing stock' and I'd challenge you to provide a single source that suggests otherwise.

The vast majority of the people commuting will do so via either the M50 or via public transport, both of which are already 'crazy commutes'. Indeed, I know of many middle aged professionals living in Knocklyon who won't consider a job in the city centre because the commute is too bad even compared to driving via the m50.

I don't really give a toss what goes up in the land, it's 25 years since I used to play in it trying to avoid the good-natured Gardai on protection duty. I do care that it's going to make an area that's already under-served on every type of infrastructure noticeably worse.

Councils absolutely should block planning until both local and national government put in place viable levels of infrastructure. Ardstone took a risk purchasing this land, they aren't guaranteed obscene levels of profit by God.

Atlantic Dawn

How did a person on a politicians salary acquire €70 million worth of land?

Atlantic Dawn

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

How did a person on a politicians salary acquire €70 million worth of land?

1) It sold for circa €32m

2) It had been in his family since 1919

K.Flyer

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

How did a person on a politicians salary acquire €70 million worth of land?

[Deleted User] wrote: »

1) It sold for circa €32m

2) It had been in his family since 1919

3) He didn't buy it, he inherited the property from his father, WT Cosgrave, the first leader of an independent Ireland, and refused all offers to sell it during the various building booms that occurred during his lifetime.

4) He had a very long political career, including the role of Taoiseach from 1973 - 1977 and retired with an annual pension of over 130k / year.

Yup, there had been many offers (including much higher than €32mil) to buy the land during the Celtic Tiger. All were rebuffed without a second thought.

Marcusm

Deleted User wrote: »

This is the very last available private site of any substantial size within the Knocklyon/Templeogue/Rathfarnham area.

A 90 minute commute from the city centre doesn't require a mix of 'housing stock' and I'd challenge you to provide a single source that suggests otherwise.

The vast majority of the people commuting will do so via either the M50 or via public transport, both of which are already 'crazy commutes'. Indeed, I know of many middle aged professionals living in Knocklyon who won't consider a job in the city centre because the commute is too bad even compared to driving via the m50.

I don't really give a toss what goes up in the land, it's 25 years since I used to play in it trying to avoid the good-natured Gardai on protection duty. I do care that it's going to make an area that's already under-served on every type of infrastructure noticeably worse.

Councils absolutely should block planning until both local and national government put in place viable levels of infrastructure. Ardstone took a risk purchasing this land, they aren't guaranteed obscene levels of profit by God.

A nice set of 6-8 storey apartment blocks with good landscaping would ideal for this site. Not everyone commutes to work, not every commuter heads to the city centre. Perhaps your neighbours adult children would like to fly the nest into an adjacent apartment which they could rent for a while. More housing stock is needed in south Dublin. Employment opportunities are being impeded by a lack of housing units, rents are increasing for similar reasons. Lobby for new schools, lobby for improved transport but why lobby against badly needed housing which might add only a small additional nuisance in terms of transport.

.......

I would like to see a multi use plan for the site. Housing and commercial opportunities.

Knocklyon has virtually nothing but housing. SuperValu, some small shops scattered about, a garage. If the council actually approved a mixed use such that local jobs might also be created it would be far far better than JUST more housing.

Marcusm

Marcusm wrote: »

A nice set of 6-8 storey apartment blocks with good landscaping would ideal for this site.

Why exactly?

Not everyone commutes to work, not every commuter heads to the city centre.

Local roads and the M50 are already beyond capacity, as has been said. Repeatedly.

Perhaps your neighbours adult children would like to fly the nest into an adjacent apartment which they could rent for a while.

People prefer houses, large apartments developments aren't suitable for deeply suburban areas unless they have high speed public transport to employment hubs. Even high-rise cities elsewhere in Europe/USA follow this trend.

More housing stock is needed in south Dublin.

More housing stock is needed where local amenities, facilities and commutes are realistic and viable.

Employment opportunities are being impeded by a lack of housing units, rents are increasing for similar reasons.

More employment opportunities in Dublin aren't long-term viable, even if all the scraps of land within the M50 are filled with apartments.

Lobby for new schools, lobby for improved transport

Facilities and amenities need to be developed in tandem, not decades after the fact.

but why lobby against badly needed housing

Because it's not sustainable, not suitable for the area as it is right now, there are no plans to develop additional amenities or transport options and it's condemning another generation to living a quantifiably worse life than they otherwise would.

which might add only a small additional nuisance in terms of transport.

Knocklyon is only 10,000ish people including children and retirees. 5-600 apartment units is going to be increasing the numbers of people commuting by a ridiculous amount. What makes you think it will only be a small additional nuisance?

As an aside, where exactly do you propose SDCC develops amenities/facilities like schools and parks and play areas, given that knocklyon is effectively now completely developed after this site?

Your post is an example of the anti-intellectual myopia that permeates any discussion on the housing crisis in Dublin - build as much as possible at any cost and forget sustainable living or quality of life, all that matters is making everyone more miserable so we can continue an unsustainable bubble in Dublin.

seamus

Deleted User wrote: »

The vast majority of the people commuting will do so via either the M50 or via public transport, both of which are already 'crazy commutes'. Indeed, I know of many middle aged professionals living in Knocklyon who won't consider a job in the city centre because the commute is too bad even compared to driving via the m50.

To be fair, that harks back to a lack of facilities and lack of sustainable transport options.

Knocklyon is insanely close to the city centre in commuting terms, less than 10km. If you're so inclined, you can walk it in 90 minutes. Problem is that too many people want to drive and busses and bikes aren't given enough priority. If it was possible to actually get on a bus in the morning and it didn't get stuck for 20 minutes each in Templeogue and Terenure village, more people would use it. If segregated bike lanes were available all the way to Terenure, more people would cycle.

The Knocklyon road realignment would provide this space for part of the distance. This has been in planning since the late 70s and has been paused, "awaiting funding" since 2006.

Which is all part of the wider issue. Planners need to reject MUDs for the area until the infrastructure is upgraded to something which not only meets the needs of the area, but has some headroom for growth. Just call a complete stop to development.

Marcusm wrote: »

A nice set of 6-8 storey apartment blocks with good landscaping would ideal for this site.

If the infrastructure was in place. It's far too high density at the moment - as another poster points out, you're talking about increasing the population by 10% in an area that's already at least 10% over capacity.

AndrewJRenko

Deleted User wrote: »

Can you provide a source for that? It wouldn't be the SDCC briefing that compared pedestrian + bicycle traffic from 2014 with 2019 would it? Because comparing one day in November 2014 with a single day in Spring 2019 shows absolutely nothing, particularly given that St Colmcilles primary school hadn't even re-opened at that stage. It's just another example of how SDCC employs people who are clearly not the brightest.

A development of 500-600 units:

Bus services have been oversubscribed for several years and take ~75-90 minutes at peak time to reach anywhere even close to city centre if you can even get on one.

Roads are overcapacity (and shouldn't be developed any further)

No cycling facilities

No civic amenities

No local amenities beyond one small shopping centre

To put it into context, this development will result in more homes than Orlagh + Woodfield put together (great! knocklyon could do with growing after having become moribund in the last couple of decades) in an area that cannot manage existing traffic (whether vehicular, by bike or by public transport), doesn't even have a restaurant or pub (unless you count Delaney's), doesn't have a park(because SDCC won't get off their arses and do something with the Dodder), and an area in which every single school is massively oversubscribed. What's the point?

Also, lack of houses isn't a national crisis. Lack of sustainable, government led development is. There's still no mention of the knocklyon road re-alignment, which would at least be a beginning on creating a public transport+bicycle corridor into the city centre for commuters.

Yes indeed, that's the SDCC traffic count I'm referring to, comparing November to February (both generally fairly similar for weather conditions).


You really seem to be making a mountain out of a molehill. Knocklyon is not exactly starved of green space.


Yes, traffic can be fairly crap at peak times, given the large numbers of people who insist on bringing an empty armchair and empty couch with them on every journey, though it's far from the worst in the city. And yeah, more community facilities would be great, just like in the rest of the city.



But residents can't get to block every possible housing development by setting mythical bars way too high to ever be practically achieved.

L1011

Deleted User wrote: »

This is the very last available private site of any substantial size within the Knocklyon/Templeogue/Rathfarnham area.

A 90 minute commute from the city centre doesn't require a mix of 'housing stock' and I'd challenge you to provide a single source that suggests otherwise.

The vast majority of the people commuting will do so via either the M50 or via public transport, both of which are already 'crazy commutes'. Indeed, I know of many middle aged professionals living in Knocklyon who won't consider a job in the city centre because the commute is too bad even compared to driving via the m50.

I don't really give a toss what goes up in the land, it's 25 years since I used to play in it trying to avoid the good-natured Gardai on protection duty. I do care that it's going to make an area that's already under-served on every type of infrastructure noticeably worse.

Councils absolutely should block planning until both local and national government put in place viable levels of infrastructure. Ardstone took a risk purchasing this land, they aren't guaranteed obscene levels of profit by God.

Anything over 100 units is out of a councils hands and cannot be blocked by them as the application doesn't even go to them

Qrt

L1011 wrote: »

Anything over 100 units is out of a councils hands and cannot be blocked by them as the application doesn't even go to them

Is that mandatory?

AndrewJRenko

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Yes indeed, that's the SDCC traffic count I'm referring to, comparing November to February (both generally fairly similar for weather conditions).

You mean comparing November 2014 to February 2019?

Are you still arguing with a straight face that having a traffic count 4.5 years later somehow proves anything when it comes to a new roundabout design finished a couple of months back?

And no, two individual days aren't 'generally fairly similar for weather conditions'.



To re-iterate, in November 2014 St Colmcilles Primary School was still located in it's temporary facilities in Ballyroan. School-aged pedestrians and cyclists are obviously going to be less when a primary school with ~1200 students is closed.

You claimed that "I've seen the fuss and drama kicked up by some residents around the Scholarstown roundabout, despite the improvement seen within weeks in numbers of cyclists and pedestrians using it. "

You really seem to be making a mountain out of a molehill. Knocklyon is not exactly starved of green space.

It's starved of available land for development. I see your comprehension skills are consistently terrible.

Yes, traffic can be fairly crap at peak times, given the large numbers of people who insist on bringing an empty armchair and empty couch with them on every journey, though it's far from the worst in the city.

Can you tell me where else in the city has the same levels of congestion as the Scholarstown Road? Saturday at 5pm: Stuck for 8 minutes travelling 400m from Scholarstown to Orlagh. Sunday at 3pm: Stuck for 12 minutes from southbound M50 slip road to Orlagh Roundabout.

Can you tell me where specifically is as consistently bad in a suburban area?

And yeah, more community facilities would be great, just like in the rest of the city

Can you tell me specifically which areas you think have less facilities and amenities compared to the wider Knocklyon area?

But residents can't get to block every possible housing development by setting mythical bars way too high to ever be practically achieved.

Can you tell me specifically what mythical bars are being set?

I italicised the word specifically because you refuse to actually be nailed down on anything you say.

Anything over 100 units is out of a councils hands and cannot be blocked by them as the application doesn't even go to them

The council's submissions to ABP can easily sway them one way or another, particularly if it's an in-depth one(HAH - not likely with SDCC) pointing out that a) the roads do not have the capacity for added vehicles b) public transport does not have the capacity for added commuters c) none of the schools in the area have the capacity for more students & d) none of these issues have a foreseeable way of being fixed, whether in the short, medium or long-term. In short, it's not a sustainable development in a community that's already unsustainable - and a community that has been routinely ignored by both local and national politicians for as long as I've been alive.

L1011

Qrt wrote: »

Is that mandatory?

No, but you'd be bloody insane to apply to a council when you can bypass them.

Iceman29

Are these houses social welfare houses? i've been looking to buy in the area and have noticed that Knocklyon doesnt seem to have any Council Estates... I would imagine this area will be getting a big one on this land maybe? I might hold off to see whats going in there

Synode

Iceman29 wrote: »

Are these houses social welfare houses? i've been looking to buy in the area and have noticed that Knocklyon doesnt seem to have any Council Estates... I would imagine this area will be getting a big one on this land maybe? I might hold off to see whats going in there

It's privately owned land so unlikely.

.......

Iceman29 wrote: »

Are these houses social welfare houses? i've been looking to buy in the area and have noticed that Knocklyon doesnt seem to have any Council Estates... I would imagine this area will be getting a big one on this land maybe? I might hold off to see whats going in there

Synode wrote: »

It's privately owned land so unlikely.

The councils have completely stopped building large council estates for decades now - this is one of the reasons we have such a housing problem in Ireland today.

For a long time now the policy has been that privately built estates have to have a percentage of new builds as social housing. The idea is that rather than build large council estates that cause anti social problems etc that social welfare tenants will be integrated in small groups in privately owned estates.

The planning application will detail what percentage is to be social housing, how many units etc.

I think that developers *may* be able to pay the council a fee to bypass allocating the social housing units - no entirely sure on that one.....

L1011

Developers can't buy themselves out but can provide units elsewhere. it's 10% that has to be offered - councils can decline to buy them too

Qrt

L1011 wrote: »

Developers can't buy themselves out but can provide units elsewhere. it's 10% that has to be offered - councils can decline to buy them too

The council bought units on a new development nearby do I highly doubt they’d decline or get units elsewhere.

.......

Qrt wrote: »

The council bought units on a new development nearby do I highly doubt they’d decline or get units elsewhere.

Which development?

Qrt

....... wrote: »

Which development?

White Pines.

I’m too lazy to find the exact post, but someone above referred to social housing as “social welfare houses” which is just...wrong.

.......

Qrt wrote: »

White Pines.

I’m too lazy to find the exact post, but someone above referred to social housing as “social welfare houses” which is just...wrong.

Did the council buy units there or was it just the builder had to allocate a percentage as they do these days?

I know the council actually bought a huge number of properties in Dalriada but thats years ago now.

Im not sure White Pines are under the same council (SDCC) as Knocklyon.

Isnt Rathfarnham (or bits of it) Dun Laoghaire Rathdown?

Qrt

....... wrote: »

Did the council buy units there or was it just the builder had to allocate a percentage as they do these days?

I know the council actually bought a huge number of properties in Dalriada but thats years ago now.

Im not sure White Pines are under the same council (SDCC) as Knocklyon.

Isnt Rathfarnham (or bits of it) Dun Laoghaire Rathdown?

I don't know the specifics, but I do know that not everyone in the general Rathfarnham area is well-to-do (very few people are these days property wise) and the council bought some. Some might be owned by AHBs either.

Rathfarnham doesn't hit DLR until past the Eden, I'm fairly sure most of Rathfarnham is SDCC because it has its own dedicated LEA within SDCC.

ted1

....... wrote: »

Did the council buy units there or was it just the builder had to allocate a percentage as they do these days?

I know the council actually bought a huge number of properties in Dalriada but thats years ago now.

Im not sure White Pines are under the same council (SDCC) as Knocklyon.

Isnt Rathfarnham (or bits of it) Dun Laoghaire Rathdown?

Marley grange is DLRCOCO and hermitage is SDCC.