TWILIGHT ZONEing

In 2017 executive planners in An Bord Pleanála, led by Paul Hyde, denied Skerries a hotel, pool, playing pitches and housing. It was a plan we had worked on since 2009. It had been voted in by the elected councillors in 2011. A full Masterplan was agreed by Fingal County Council in 2013 and full planning permission granted by the council in 2017. We had everything waiting to go, an eco bulder (Baufritz) for the housing, a Uk hotel operator interested and an agreement with Aura to operate the swimming pool.

As you know we were shocked to put it mildly. Although I knew what had happened, I  looked for clues in the Board under Freedom of Information, FOI.  I could see how the assistant Director of Planning, AnnMarie O’Connor, (now deputy planning regulator to Niall Cussen) was mentoring a young inspector who, before that in the Board, had worked on a house extension in Lusk. Holmpatrick Cove was quite the jump with its detailed Environmental Impact Assessment covering things such as archaeology, flora and fauna including bird surveys, visual impact, transportation and traffic, archaeological and cultural heritage, noise vibration, you name it. It was covered. All scientifically based studies that had been signed off by the various departments of Fingal Co Co.  Paul Hyde, Philip Jones and Terry Prendergast overturned a strong grant of planning permission from the council, in the Board. In fact, Paul Hyde added a few items for good measure before he presented it to the board.  And that was that. Holmpatrick Cove was no more.

Executive planners in Fingal took up the baton since then. When the local councillors asked for a variation, the answer was no. “We’ll look at it again in the context of the next development plan” …five bloody years later. In meeting after meeting trying to progress the planning, we were met by a brick wall no matter what way we tried to move on. We were stuck between two groups of planning executives. The Board who had thrown out what was in effect Fingal’s Masterplan and Fingal Co Co ececutive who were still saying it was in their development plan, whilst ignoring the role they had played in it all by removing the statutory objectives in 2017.

Here we are “five bloody years later” and executive planners are doing what they do. The land where the hotel was to be is being zoned High Amenity. They are ruling out hotels with that zoning. So we went for a guesthouse with glamping and who knows maybe long into the future, sense might prevail……But now they want to remove the glamping. (It was voted into the Draft Plan by the councillors in March of this year). To quote the executive report; “the permanent element of the facility would render it nugatory.” I had to look up the word nugatory. It means worthless, useless or futile. That’s the official line of the executive planners. It’s in AnnMarie Farrelly, the CEO’s recommendation. She should talk to her colleagues in the Economic Development department and Tourism branch. Only as recently as 2019 an application went into Fáilte Ireland by Fingal County Council. The glamping facility on our lands was front and centre to meet the criteria for the funding. Clearly the  Economic Development arm of the council doesn’t share the view that the glamping  is ‘nugatory’. And nor do we. A well run, sensitively designed glamping facility would go some way to fill a gaping hole, that is the lack of overnight accommodation in our town. They got the funding, by the way.

And that’s only the glamping part. Wait until you hear what they are saying about the housing. They are pretending that the land where the housing is was High Amenity land (HA). So everything they say is based on housing on HA lands, which doesn’t apply here. They are doing what they do best and talking about this and that objective as if the land was High Amenity. Fact is it was residential over three development plans since 2001. Before that, it was agricultural,  like most other houses built in Skerries over the last 50 years. So, when they say “it is not considered appropriate to zone HA zoned lands to RS/RA….and the RS zoned lands at Holmpatrick shall revert to HA zoned lands” they are misleading the councillors. In fact, using cockney rhyming slang, they are telling porky pies.

Maybe they’re going back as far as our archaeological reports that were submitted as part of the evidence based Environmental Impact Assesment. But actually, here’s an interesting fact; the archaeologist told me that our site was an industrial Bronze Age site! We have the remnants of a ‘Fulacht Fia’ (pit where water is heated for dyeing cloth and cooking)  where the glamping is planned. We are hoping to make the archaeological heritage very much an attraction of our glamping, by showcasing the archaeology.

But the real reason I bring up the archaeology is the fact that the executive’s recommendations act like they don’t remember all of the scientific based studies that have already been carried out on the land over the Masterplanning and planning applications that I already referred to above. These science-based studies showed how the development would not have any adverse ecological or environmental impact locally or on any Natura 200 sites. So , when the executive says things in their recommendations like “proximity to an international bird sanctuary”, ‘potential for environmental/archaeological assessment”, “highly sensitive landscape” “coastline vulnerable to coastal erosion”,  they should go talk to their own heritage officer who fully ratified all of these reports. They also are also pretending it’s “remote’ and not serviced; “absence of adequate services and infrastructure to serve the area”. They should talk to their roads and water/gas departments. It’s intentionally misleading. It’s propaganda but in fairness they did it before in 2010/11 and it gives the few objectors great ammunition.  

And speaking of the few objectors. What to say?! I won’t go there. The Coastal Way will come and open up that part of Skerries to everyone,  so there’s only so long they can enjoy our land for themselves. Personally, the Coastal walk can’t come soon enough. It has been an objective since the 1970s! We bought the missing link to connect  Holmpatrick Cove to the Council-owned Nun’s field. We lost that land and the house attached to it (our home) in the receivership. But that’s in my other blogs. I know from my conversations with the new owner, that he will not be standing in the way of the Coastal Way. It will be a great amenity for the area and ironically, for those living on the Rush Road.

I think it’s important to mention the fact that some objectors are putting local councillors under a lot of pressure and in one case I would say it is close to harassment at this point. I refer particularly to the two councillors who are proposing and seconding the motions on Holmpatrick , Cllr Karen Power and Cllr Seána O’Rodaigh. Their motions are in support of the glamping and against the council’s attempt to de-zone the residential zoning. They along with Cllr Tom O’Leary, Cllr Grainne Maguire and Cllr Tony Murphy (all our local councillors) will be fighting our corner tomorrow, as they have done before That’s Tuesday from 3pm. Our motions should be about an hour in. I think it’s around motion 410. I would encourage anyone to log onto the Fingal Co Co Website where you can watch the debate live. You can do this by looking up the Webcasts and clicking into the live meeting. This is the sixth time we have gone through this and it doesn’t get any easier. The executive seem to go to extreme lengths to stop us. We should have gone for a municipal dump. It might have been easier!

Last quote from the executive report regarding the glamping “one submission supports Map-based objective 6 (the glamping) as set out in the Draft Plan while the vast majority of submissions are opposed to its inclusion…”. They are referring to my submission and maybe six possibly seven who wrote into the Draft Plan opposing. If  you don’t think the glamping is “nugatory” and you haven’t signed the petition set up by Cllr Power, I woud be grateful if you would sign it and remind the executive what vast majority actually means. As I write this, we are 932 signatures. Thank you to everyone who has signed so far and for the comments on social media and in the Uplift petition. We are very grateful, as always, for your support.

Finally, I see in the news today that Paul Hyde (see above!) is now facing criminal charges under the Planning and Development Act. The OPR came out with the first part of two, in their Inquiry into the Board the other day. The Ditch and The Examiner have written extensively about the culture in the board and about serious questions to be asked of the Chairman, the Director of Planning and several board members. Yet the OPR was silent on this. There’s a lot to be said on this but Paul Hyde is being touted as the Ray Burke “line in the sand”. We all know how that worked out.

The Change.org petition in support of a glamping facility at Holmpatrick can be found on the link below.

https://chng.it/7DtfyBhwkB

It’s Democracy…..

Fingal County Council planners (the executive) don’t like democracy and I don’t say this lightly. I say it after 20 years of experience. Well, maybe to be more accurate in terms of the Fingal executive (as against the planning appeals Board), I should say 12 years, because it started back in 2010.

I won’t repeat that time again, because it’s well documented in my blogs; Power and Propaganda, which tell that part of our story. I’ll cut to after Christmas last year (2021) when two of our local councillors told us that they were shocked to see that the executive of Fingal County Council, (AnnMarie Farrelly and the Director of Planning, her chief advisor Matthew McAleese), had put down a recommendation to de-zone our land. (The bit we had left after the last fun and games at the Board with the Paul Hyde/Philip Jones/Terry Prendergast special- An Bord Pleanála are in another league when it comes to democracy and transparency). The councillors had kindly waited until after Christmas so as not to spoil it for us. We were baffled and angry, but not surprised.

Some of the attendees at meeting 1st November, 2017

After An Bord Pleanála (appeals board) overturned our grant of planning in 2017, all the local councillors and TDs met. The outcome of the meeting was to ask the executive in Fingal to support a variation. (We even took a photo on the day!). The councillors had voted on the zoning you see. It is their role in the planning system; local democracy at work. We elect them and therefore they (unlike others) are accountable. They were shocked when the planning appeals Board made their strange decision and overturned the grant of permission from Fingal County Council, for Holmpatrick Cove.

To put things in context, at this stage, local councillors had already voted on the zoning of our land FOUR times- 2001, 2010, 2011 and 2016 – These had been lengthy, detailed debates. There was an awful lot of misinformation pedalled about. But the local councillors knew their town and their area. They backed our plans for our land. They didn’t buy the propaganda coming from some executive planners.

In a meeting that followed with me and Michael, AnnMarie Farrelly, (as sympathetic as she appeared to be), said she couldn’t do the variation for technical reasons. She said she could only “look at it in the context of the next development plan process”. We respectfully told her (and planner Peter Byrne) we wouldn’t be around in five years. Well, as it turned out, we weren’t quite right. We were ravaged. But we were still standing. It was a tough five years to put it mildly.

Fast forward five years and back to the “context of the next development plan”. We were sold a bit of a pup by the executive in 2017. The executive ignored the councillors support for developing that land and decided instead to de-zone it. So now we were faced with yet another vote with many new councillors who wouldn’t be familiar with what had gone before. This vote would be number FIVE. It wasn’t easy. There was the same propaganda coming from the executive – Let me give you an example – those of us living in Skerries don’t see the Rush Road as rural Fingal. It’s residential and attached to the town. I should know. I grew up on the Rush Road. It’s also much closer to the centre of town than many of the developments to the north of Skerries, (Barnageera Cove, Hamilton Hill). But you see AnnMarie and Matthew say it’s remote and that the road is inadequate. (They’re talking about the Regional road with the Dublin bus route by the way). They say the land isn’t serviced. (That means paths, transport, mains water, electricity and gas to you and I – which it has). They say it is coastal. Yes, it’s coastal but can I tell you the housing is as far away from the coast as Supervalue is in Church Street (if not further). And they have started to bring back the birds on the islands. Honestly most of the town of Skerries is closer to Shenick island than that land. It’s not as if we haven’t provided them with evidence based studies over the years. But why spoil a good conspiracy. Especially when you are in control of the information.

That last vote was a pain. That of course is an understatement. We’d been through it too many times before. History repeating itself again. Same forces at play. I have a theory, gained from my years at the frontline, that the executive are defending the indefensible; the planning history and especially that Board decision. The decision (and not only that one) that should be bang smack in the middle of all three of the Inquiries going on (well maybe not the third one, the planning regulator OPR, because of the conflict; his parents live across the road from the entrance). The executive has obviously decided that to not defend that Board decision would “open up an appalling vista”.

We won that vote, the FIFTH one. It was close. It was thanks to our local councillors who fought hard……..again. Over the years I can only thank them all (and I’m talking the retired and new local councillors) for their support for us. They have had to work against a system that is doing the same thing over and over again, in the hope that eventually they will get a different result. (what is that a definition of?). Or maybe they are just hard losers. They lost the vote in March. The FIFTH time the councillors voted. But wait for it. They are back again. Take SIX. They want another vote in September. To be sure, to be sure, to be sure, to be sure, to be sure, to be (effing) sure. AnnMarie and Matthew now recommend that the glamping and the housing is de-zoned again. I read the report. It’s very compelling. Except it’s not. It is the same propaganda. Same as last March. Same as the 2010/2011 meeting when senior planner, Rachael Kenny, (Director of Planning in An Bord Pleanála since 2015) led the charge. Political gaslighting, to use the modern term.

And I’m sorry if you think my tone is disrespectful. It’s way past the time to be respectful. We’ve tried that. It doesn’t work. Michael and I jokingly say, we have been long cured from our Stockholm Syndrome. This is people’s lives and livelihoods these public servants are dealing with. Oddly I wouldn’t even wish the consequences on them or their families.

If you notice I don’t include the 2016 vote. Paul Reid was CEO at that time and he stopped the attempted propaganda at that meeting. You see, he didn’t come from the system. He actually took the time to visit the site with us and discuss our plans. I remember in that council meeting he said “to de-zone that land would be a retrograde step”. Not long after that I met him at an event to celebrate Skerries winning the Tidy Town’s. He shook my hand told me to “keep up the good work”.

So finally, my question is, WHO are these planning executives serving? Why will they not accept the democratic vote? There was a lovely comment made the other day that resonated with me. (one of the numerous positive comments in reaction to the article about our proposal in the Sunday Independent); “The planners are servants of democracy. Not its masters”. Can somebody please send that memo to Fingal Co Co executive? (Oh and An Bord Pleanála while you are at it).

I hoped I would never have to write about planning again. I am so sick of it all, but as somebody said we are fighting for our lives. So, this time I am asking anyone, especially anyone from Skerries and the surrounding area, if you support what we are trying to do and don’t agree with the actions of the executive, could you send them a message? Could you please mail AnnMarie and Matthew in Fingal Executive.  I will include their contact details below.

I will also include Fingal councillors’ emails. If you are of a mind in the next short while and if you have a spare moment, if you could let them know that you support our proposals we would appreciate it. (The councillors outside of Skerries rely on the executive to inform them and they have the same vote as the local councillors).   

I won’t include our local councillors’ emails (as they know the full story) I would especially like to mention Karen Power and  Seána O’Rodaigh, who Michael and I are so grateful to for their kindness and support and for proposing and seconding our motion last March. Nor will I include Tom O’Leary, Tony Murphy and Grainne Maguire, who have always supported us, both outside and in the chamber of Fingal Co Co. Michael and I really appreciate this too.

Fingal Executive

CEO AnnMarie Farrelly  annmarie.farrelly@fingal.ie

Matthew MacAleese.  matthew.mcaleese@fingal.ie

Fingal Councillors (excluding local -Skerries/Balbriggan)

Howard.mahony@cllrs.fingal.ie cathal.boland@cllrs.fingal.ie

Daniel.whooley@cllrs.fingal.ie pamela.conroy@cllrs.fingal.ie

Ted.leddy@cllrs.fingal.ie                                            Siobhan.shovlin@cllrs.fingal.ie

Natalie.treacy@cllrs.fingal.ie                                     john.walsh@cllrs.fingal.ie

Jimmy.guerin@cllrs.fingal.ie                                      David.healy@cllrs.fingal.ie

Joan.hopkins@cllrs.fingal.ie                                       Anthony.lavin@cllrs.fingal.ie

Brian.mcdonagh@cllrs.fingal.ie                                 Eoghan.obrien@cllrs.fingal.ie

Aoibhinn.tormey@cllrs.fingal.ie joe.newman@cllrs.fingal.ie

Tom.kitt@cllrs.fingal.ie tania.doyle@cllrs.fingal.ie

John.burthaell@cllrs.fingal.ie breda.hanaphy@cllrs.fingal.ie

Mary.mccamley@cllrs.fingal.ie                                  jk.onwumereh@cllrs.fingal.ie

Punam.rane@cllrs.fingal.ie Darragh.butler@cllrs.fingal.ie

Ian.carey@cllrs.fingal.ie                                             ann.graves@cllrs.fingal.ie

James.humphreys@cllrs.fingal.ie                               brigid.manton@cllrs.fingal.ie

Dean.mulligan@cllrs.fingal.ie                                     Kieran.dennison@cllrs.fingal.ie

Angela.donnelly@cllrs.fingal.ie                                  brian.dennehy@cllrs.fingal.ie

Adrian.henchy@cllrs.fingal.ie                                    paul.mulville@cllrs.fingal.ie

Robert.odonoghue@cllrs.fingal.ie

Propaganda

Every five years the local council votes on a new plan for their area. It is called the County Development Plan.  There is approximately a two year lead up to this process which is known as the Draft Development Plan. At the end of the two year period the local councillors get to vote in the plan that will shape their area over the next 5 years. The public participate in this process by making proposals to their local council and commenting on submissions made by third parties. The executive planners in the council are the administrators of this democratic process.

Skerries Harbour

In 2010 we made our submission to the Draft Development Plan process for Holmpatrick Cove. In truth we had made a submission in 2009 but it was returned because it was sent in at the wrong stage of the Development Plan process. (It was site-specific and at that stage they were dealing with strategic plans). The 2009 initial proposal was ambitious. A bit too ambitious as we were talking about Heritage Centres and Bird-Watching platforms and I think even an Aquarium!).  We had been to Lahinch, you see, earlier that year. That’s where the idea for Holmpatrick Cove evolved. They had it all there: hotel, swimming pool, aquarium, Heritage Centre down the road. So, we thought well, why not use our site in Skerries? We knew we had a great site. Strange decisions had been made in the Planning Board around our entrance. We knew they were based on vexatious claims so we could deal with that in the future.

The council had supported our plans for Holmpatrick Cove. By this I mean the executive planners who we went to in the first instance. They were going to propose it themselves in their January 2010 Manager’s Report. But that never happened; there was the famous unexplained U-turn. The local councillors did support our plans so, encouraged by them, we put our submission into the Draft Development Plan in May, 2010. At this point the plan was for a hotel, swimming pool, 24 contemporary houses on the residential lands, a park, training spaces and a coastal walkway- Holmpatrick Cove.

The first commentary on our proposal (Manager’s Report) that came out of the council was in September 2010. Another “Screening Report” followed which went on public display.  The executive had changed their tune, to put it mildly.  Holmpatrick Cove was now “highly undesirable” It was rural, distant, it had no public transport, highly sensitive, highly visible, it would damage the birds on island, it would damage air quality and climate. The report implied that the developers couldn’t be trusted, the entrance was sub-standard, there were plenty of hotels in the area, there was already public paths on the land. If what was said was true, Holmpatrick Cove would have been scandalous. But it wasn’t true. Our proposal was unrecognizable. Only possibly a municipal dump could have elicited such strong objection from the executive planners. The report was aimed at the 24 councillors who were to vote on the proposal in March 2011.

In January of 2011 we had our opportunity to respond to these reports. It was a stage in the Draft Plan that also allowed the public to make their views known. We made our submission dealing with the ‘mis-information’ in the Manager’s and Screening Reports. We included our Court Judgment and Order regarding the entrance and past refusals.  All of the submissions made during that stage were accessible on the Council’s public web-site. Except ours. Our submission was redacted/obliterated. They mustn’t have liked it.

The council executives got to reply to the January submissions in their February Manager’s Report.  “There were a large number of submissions received both in support and opposing Amendments 5.11 and 5.12 (collectively addressed as Holmpatrick).” That’s what they said, the Executive in Fingal Co Co. They were referring to Holmpatrick Cove. The truth is there were 19 against Holmpatrick Cove (including a round robin) and 125 in support (including all of the main sports clubs and societies in the town). The bias shown in the opening statement continued throughout the report.  Previous errors we had drawn their attention to were repeated. Holmpatrick Cove was stilll “highly undesirable” for the same five reasons. (they mustn’t have read the Court Judgment because they still mentioned the substandard access and previous refusals). They must have hidden our reply very well because it was completely ignored. It was now February 2011 and a month before the elected councillors would get to vote on the new County Development Plan

The final Development Plan meeting took place on March 23rd 2011. The councillors came armed with the February 2011 Manager’s Report (they were saving on printing). All 24 councillors were at the meeting and twenty of them spoke. Many of the councillors had bought into it the Manager’s Reports. Why wouldn’t they? There was a motion to take Holmpatrick Cove out of the County Development Plan. The councillor remarked at the meeting in March that she “was struck by the Manager’s lengthy and detailed reply. I haven’t seen such an emphatic reply to an objective”. So, she urged her fellow councillors to support her motion to remove Holmpatrick Cove from the Development Plan.

The executive (Gilbert Power and Rachael Kenny) did their best to defend their reports. Some points were obviously troublesome so there was a bit of clarification done only after the councillors’ debate had concluded. Apparently there were some facts in the Manager’s Reports that they couldn’t defend any more…there is a 33 bus that runs past the site….we haven’t I think anywhere in the report indicated numbers of submissions for or against….In relation to the access onto the road …there were a number of Board Pleanala refusals….we gave the factual panning history…the proposer has won a high court case…and that’s quite correct…and it should be said on the record. There seems to be a suggestion that the proposer has reneged on these lands, in ceding these lands….we were just simply answering the obvious question -were the lands in our control? No.…..In relation to hotels …there is a permission for a hotel at Milverton……you have existing hotels in the area, the Bracken Court Hotel…there are hotels in the area. We did make mention that there were local paths across the site….our information is probably incorrect….In relation to the reduction of Open Space lands where we did say 50%……that was a rough estimation on our part…….You can’t say that it’s visible from all areas of Skerries but it is visible. The senior planners tried their best to undermine Holmpatrick Cove- even at one stage Rachael Kenny displaying an incorrect site plan, the one that had been returned in 2009 with the Heritage Centre and Bird Watching building. This was done to illustrate to the councillors how much land would be taken up by the development. It was misleading to say the least. Perhaps an innocent mistake?

But local democracy won on that occasion. The local councillors defended the proposal and managed to persuade enough councillors to trust that they had their community’s best interest at heart.  The vote went in favour of Holmpatrick Cove. Holmpatrick Cove was on a Statutory footing in the 2011-17 Development Plan.

If anyone was to search the public record to read the official minutes of that meeting they would think the councillors who voted for Holmpatrick Cove must have been on some pretty strong substances to have voted the way they did. The public record consists of a Manager’s Report and a record of the way the vote went. But here’s the shocking bit.  When the minutes were published a month later the heading on the minutes said “The following report by the Manager, which had been considered, was CONSIDERED” (to you and I that means that the following report is the one that was debated).  But it wasn’t the report that had been ‘considered’. The report that was debated was substituted by a new, altered even more negative report. For example there were now 11 numbered reasons why Holmpatrick Cove was “highly undesirable.”  The public record is false.   

At the time we asked them why they altered the minutes and got a non-response. Earlier this year we contacted the council again. We provided detail and wanted the public record amended. The official response was “ The Planning History is on the Public Record”. No it’s not.

It is now 2020 and we are mid-way through the 2017-23 Development Plan. Holmpatrick Cove fell between two Development Plans. The council did grant planning permission for Holmpatrick Cove but it was refused by the planning board in 2017. That decision is a re-play of 2010/11.(For example they ignored the Court Judgment and preferred to mention the past refusals due to the substandard entrance etc. etc.). Also, the Statutory Objectives were taken away and exchanged by a ‘Non-Statutory’ Masterplan by the Fingal executive just before the refusal. Oh dear! That didn’t help. But fear not they did leave in one of the three Statutory Objectives- the one about ceding lands to Fingal. Anyway that’s another story and I’m sure there were at least 19 happy people (including the round robin!). Well maybe at least 21. (Must not forget those in the long grass).

The truth is the 2010/11 reports were biased, there were false and exaggerated statements made to further an agenda.  One-sided information was disseminated in a deliberate manner to influence public opinion.  Facts were manipulated and half-truths were presented as fact. The flow of information was controlled and information was withheld from the public. Loaded language was used to produce an emotional rather than a rational response. This is what the senior executives in the council presided over in 2011. Oh! and by the way, I have just outlined the definition of Propaganda.

Two nights ago we went to the Lighthouse Cinema to see The Sound of Music. Our eldest son had bought us all tickets. (He studies film and this was special because it was a 4k restoration of the original film). What a movie! Our youngest had never seen it before which I found hard to believe. Our eldest joked afterwards about the parallels in the end scene when the Von Trapp family are walking over the mountains into Switzerland, leaving everything behind them. They all agreed that they were looking forward to the day that we do the same with the field!


Credit: The Sound of Music- Von Trapp family flee to Switzerland