Residents' groups oppose height plans

SOME 48 residents’ groups representing tens of thousands of Dubliners have said the new Dublin City Development Plan will dramatically raise building heights in the low-rise areas of the city.

Residents said they have been let down by their elected representatives, whose decisions on permissible heights would have “enormous repercussions” for the city.

Councillors last week agreed a development plan which for the first time sets maximum heights for buildings in different parts of the city. Previously decisions on whether the height of a building was appropriate for an area were the preserve of the city planners.

The new Dublin City Development Plan 2011-2017 sets low-rise heights for three different areas.

In the inner city apartments can be up to six storeys or 19m and offices up to seven storeys/28m.

At rail hubs apartments can be six storeys/19m and offices six storeys/24m.

In the outer city, apartments can be four storeys/13m and offices can be four storeys/16m.

Applications for taller buildings will only be considered where a separate local area plan, detailing specific permissible heights, is agreed.

The 48 residents’ associations had lobbied councillors to amend the development plan so that it stated “low-rise is defined by the prevailing local height” of buildings. However, the amendment was rejected by most of the council.

Pirooz Daneshmandi, chairman of the Grangegorman Residents’ Alliance, said councillors had ignored the wishes of their constituents and had sided with the city manager in promoting the construction of tall buildings in the city. “Councillors have taken the side of the city manager against their constituents, who had overwhelmingly asked them to consider the city and the communities living in it.”

Allowing buildings of up to 28m in the city centre would “dramatically raise” building heights in the city, which would have enormous repercussions not just for communities but for the tourism industry, Mr Daneshmandi said. It was incredible that councillors were not seeking to scale back development at a time when there was such an excess of office, retail and residential property.

Pat Allison, of the Navan Road Community Council, said the fact so many residents groups had banded together should not be ignored by the council. She said it would have made more sense if the council had waited until the next development plan to consider changing the definition of heights.