Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
LAST MONTH, AN Bord Pleanála refused planning permission for a large-scale housing project in Dublin due to concerns for the Light-Bellied Brent Goose.
The Light-bellied Brent Goose is a small dark goose that migrates from high-Arctic Canada to winter in Ireland.
The Irish population is seen as being internationally significant and the Brent Goose is amber-listed in Ireland since the majority of the birds winter at fewer than ten sites here.
Birds on the amber-list are deemed to have an “unfavourable conservation status in Europe”.
Plans had been drafted for 330 apartments, 60 assisted living units and retail units at the site of the former Cadbury’s pitch and putt course at Oscar Traynor Road, Coolock in Dublin 5.
However, An Bord Pleanála was not satisfied that the proposed development would not adversely affect the integrity of European conservation sites, namely the North Bull Island Special Protection Area (SPA), South Dublin Bay and River Tolka SPA and the Baldoyle Bay SPA.
It was stated that there is evidence that the appeal site is part of a network of amenity grasslands that are an ex-situ foraging habitat for the Light Bellied Brent Goose.
However, consultants for OTR Development Company, Tom Phillips+Associates, wholly rejected the Light Bellied Brent Goose reason for refusal.
The consultancy had stated that the homes “are desperately needed amidst the current housing crisis”.
A Director at Tom Phillips stated that a report lodged with the application concluded that the development of the site would not have a negative effect on the LBBG population for Dublin Bay.
It was further stated that four years of site specific survey data confirmed that the Cadbury site is no longer used by the LBBG and there is no evidence that the LBBG would have been adversely affected.
Gavin Lawlor is the president of the Irish Planning Institute, which represents around 1,000 planners in Ireland.
These members work across the private sector, within regional authorities and for semi-state bodies, such as the Land Development Agency.
“So it’s a very broad church of membership,” said Lawlor, “and therefore a very broad base in terms of view.”
“Everybody goes to the old argument of animals versus humans, the reverse of George Orwell’s 1984 stuff,” said Lawlor, “but it’s a little bit more fundamental and basic than that.”
He told The Journal that “we can all agree that we need a lot more houses and it’d be better to build them in areas that are already serviced, than trying to expand out into the countryside”.
In the case of the former Cadbury’s site, Lawlor noted that it’s a brownfield site, meaning it is land that was previously developed but has since been abandoned or underutilised.
“That’s what the national planning framework says, it wants us to favour brownfield development like this site in question over greenfield development.”
The National Planning Framework, published in 2018, aims to guide strategic planning and development for Ireland until 2040.
It includes a target for at least 40% of all new housing to be delivered within the existing built up areas on brownfield sites.
However, Lawlor noted that Ireland has been “very poor at dealing with biodiversity issues and environmental protection” and that this is partly a resourcing issue.
The National Parks & Wildlife Service is responsible for the designation of conservation sites in Ireland.
Lawlor told The Journal that “until very recently, it had no resources being invested in it”.
“They had a very small human resource team to deal with a very big problem in terms of designation and protection of species,” said Lawlor.
While Brent Geese were spotted on the former Cadbury’s site previously, the developers said this last happened around four years ago.
An Appropriate Assessment was carried out on the site in question on behalf of the developers.
This assessment looks at the potential adverse effects of a project on Special Areas of Conservation and Special Protection Areas.
It said that since the 2020/2021 winter season, there has only been one indication that Brent Geese have been using the habitats within the development and that the overgrown grasslands are “suboptimal for foraging Brent Geese”.
Meanwhile, Lawlor said the “frustration” in relation to this site is that “it ticks all the boxes from a planning perspective”.
“You couldn’t find a better one that would meet all of the current policy criteria.
“It has fantastic public transport, it’s serviced by water and it’s a brownfield redevelopment of a site, it’s a high-density scheme.
“And it’s refused on the basis of an issue that should have been dealt with at the development plan stage, before the planning application.”
However, Lawlor added that it would be “overly simplistic” to say too many developments are being refused because of such ecological concerns.
He also remarked that Ireland is grappling with three crises; in biodiversity, housing, and the climate crisis.
“All are interrelated, all are very pressing and they have to be managed in balance,” said Lawlor.
“When the priority is placed on any one of those over the other, the other fingers tend to react.
“It’s complex but in this instance, the frustration is that the issue of the Brent geese should have been considered when they were adopting the development plan.”
Meanwhile, environmental journalist John Gibbons took issue with the developers arguing that there is a “desperate need” for the apartments.
“The desperate need the developers specify is the desperate need of the developers to make money,” said Gibbons.
He added that we shouldn’t be “taking our cue on housing needs from developers as they have a strong vested financial interest”.
Gibbons told The Journal that the migratory path of the Brent Geese is one that “will have been travelled by these geese for hundreds, if not thousands of years”.
“We have to just be more respectful of nature, we can’t just say, ‘we need that space now, and that’s too bad’.”
He said that any development which interferes with areas of conservation, like migratory paths for migratory species, would “doom those species to either extinction or to huge loss in habitats, which is the precursor for extinction”.
“This is often framed as a loss for us, and we never look at it from the point of view of whose rights are greater, who got there first?
“I think the idea that a developer can come along and say, ‘I want this area, and anyway, we’re meeting a need and we can just obliterate habitats and migratory pathways that have existed for hundreds and thousands of years’, it’s a dreadful mindset.”
He added that it’s not as simple as the birds going elsewhere.
“It’s basically in their DNA, these pathways, they fly thousands of kilometres to arrive at very specific locations, and they depend on those locations being available.
“If those locations have been disturbed or destroyed, basically those birds will arrive exhausted and hungry and they’ll die.
“Of course we need housing, but we also need wildlife and we need to be far more respectful of the creatures that we share this earth with.”
The developers said there has only been one indication of Brent Geese having used the former Cadbury’s site in the past four years, but Gibbons said if there is any doubt, “we have to err on the side of caution”.
“They may be right, but what if they’re wrong,” said Gibbons.
“That’s the problem, because then they’ve doomed the species.
“They have a strong vested financial interest in one outcome and that doesn’t mean they’re wrong, but it means that strong interest that should be recognised.
“We have to be listening to the experts, and if they haven’t satisfied An Bord Pleanála and the concerns of environmentalists and ecologists around this, then they really have no business,” said Gibbons.
“What if we get this wrong,” added Gibbons.
“Then you’re destroying migratory pathways that are literally ingrained into these birds, and they don’t have the ability to quickly change, and anyway, where would they go?
“On the other hand, developers can go elsewhere, there’s always another site.
“If we have to choose between the profits of developers and the protection of wildlife, I know where I stand.”
-With additional reporting from Gordon Deegan
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
And who decides who gets a key? I’ve an invisible disability and you get some looks from people whose disability is visible sometimes.
@Alan OConnor: my understanding of these toilets is that they’re designed for people with a physical disability, who use a wheelchair. That’s why wider doorway and more space to move around.
@NoelDublin: kind of what I’m getting at. Sometimes you can have a disability that needs privacy. Something many people don’t take into consideration sometimes.
@Alan OConnor: many of these toilets also double up as child changing facilities so the question of who gets the key is quite valid. A permanent attendant would work but no where is going to employ a person just for this. Just waiting for the wrc to issue a fine
@Alan OConnor: It’s a ridiculous idea. I have often used disabled persons toilets and never once was another person waiting to use it It’s not the same as taking a disabled parking space. There is absolutely no need for this bureaucracy.
@Alan OConnor: you probably get issues with a code the same way you get a car park tag
they are designed for anyone with a disability not every disability is visible, and people that don’t require a disabled bathroom shouldn’t use them.
@Alan OConnor: I think word here is organised use and just like coin toilet no key no use, set up purchasing of key with disability site with broad application if you want key you apply and PURCHASE if your borderline. you won’t spend the money,and yes Alan I’m user in the hidden disability section,
I don’t see any reason why the toilets shouldn’t be used by anyone in a queue? If someone with a disability comes in they can be prioritised but why leave them empty?
@Patricia Dunne: because they are meant for a person with a disability not someone just because they are standing in a queue. How would you feel if you have blocked the toiled and someone with a disability needs the used of the bathroom designed for them urgently and cannot use another one, some disability bathrooms have changing areas for disabled people that cannot use a toilet, don’t use a disabled bathroom just because it’s unoccupied
@silvery moon: what do you call a disability, someone with an enlarged prostate and has to pee frequently imo is just as entitled to use these toilets as someone with a mental or physical disability.
@Patricia Dunne: That’s like saying you can use a disabled parking space because it’s empty. Accessible Disabled toilets are for those who truly need them.
@Reply Address Removed: that is absolutely not the same
@silvery moon: who are you the toilet police. You know there could be an opening soon for some one like you.
Every one gets caught short and if it’s empty use it . Not moving in and squaring in it just spending a penny.
@silvery moon: that’s ridiculous!I already said you could prioritise a person with a disability. Anyone can be caught short, disability or not. They are designed so that a person with a disability can use them. No reason why they should be exclusively used by them
@Reply Address Removed: not the same at all. If you take a parking space, you deprive the person with a disability of it. . You’re not depriving anyone by having a quick p**
@silvery moon: Your point is valid, but so is the OP. There are many people with incontinence issues and whilst this is not a disability, it is not reasonable to expect someone to suffer serious discomfort whilst an disabled toilet sits vacant. Absolutely, a person with a physical disability should have first refusal, but if there is nobody with a disability in the vicinity, what harm is it doing?
Jesus Christ a key with everything going on fg love the distraction politics
@Darragh Mcnamara: They are digital. Imagine something like a small wheelchair parking card with a chip. You ‘tap’ to unlock the door.
I have a hidden disability and often use disability toilets, how do I explain to someone in a public place that I need the key??
@Clare Power: you would have bought the key beforehand. No explaining to do
@Clare Power: if you read the full article you’ll see that you won’t need to
@Ian McDonald: You’re right, I glanced though…silly me.
Why is this needed?
@Keyser Söze: Exactly. When the toilet is not in use by a disabled person then why should it not being used by a able person. Otherwise it could be not used for days.
@hans vos: because they are meant for a person with a disability not someone just because they are standing in a queue. How would you feel if you have blocked the toiled and someone with a disability needs the used of the bathroom designed for them urgently and cannot use another one, some disability bathrooms have changing areas for disabled people that cannot use a toilet, don’t use a disabled bathroom just because it’s unoccupied
@Keyser Söze: It will also cause more problems than it will solve. Whether it is a physical key, an app or a code, the key can be shared with able bodied friends of those with a disability. Also, what if you forget you key or lose it? Have a think about the number of times you have had to wait to use a disabled toilet or the number of times you have seen someone waiting? For me the answer is never (but I do not have a disability). The efforts of government would be better served upgrading and enforcing DAC regulations and making more facilities available.
I think she means that every person who needs one will get one of these universal keys – a bit like a blue badge….however, these toilets should be available to everyone, not just those who need them for a specific reason, that’s discrimination
@Ben dover: They’re toilets specifically for disabled people.. why should they be available for everyone? I think, speaking as a disabled person, she’s trying to highlight this exact attitude..and the abuse of these toilets by people like yourself it would seem. If you genuinely think the provision of specialist facilities for people with disabilities in society in our public infrastructure is discrimination(parking spaces, toilets, spaces on buses etc..) then you’ve got a serious problem.
@Brian: Say you have 500 people in a pub and 3 cubicles in each of the men’s and women’s and 1 disabled toilet is it an issue. There are two people in the pub with physical disabilities who can only use the disabled toilet. Does it make sense to make everyone else queue I’d there is a perfectly good toilet not in use. Can the person in the wheelchair not join a queue if necessary?
@Brian: equality. Simple concept really… because someones a wheelchair user doesn’t render their bladder control redundant.
@Brian: a toilet is for pissing and shitting in. How is using it for it’s designed function abuse?
@Ben dover: fk me.. what a prck.
@Brian: Why shouldn’t they be available if noone is using them. Disabled people can wait a few minutes if they are occupied Their bodily functions are similar to a key bodies people. They don’t wet or soil themselves at the drop if a hat or no more so than an able bodied person.
@helen mary fitzsimons: Stay classy Helen..
@Brian: jesus, what a thread
@Brian: anyone can sit in a seat assigned for the disabled on a bus as long as they vacate it if a disabled person needs it. The same goes for disabled toilets, as far as I am concerned. Why should it be exclusively for the disabled?
@Ben dover: Disabled people are a cohort that are discriminated against so I would have issues with your point of view.
@silvery moon: thats ok pet, everyone has a point of view and we can’t all be right
@SYaxJ2Ts: incredible!!!
Wow! What a contribution, right up there with another senator’s insistence on swing doors to alcohol display areas.
What do you need to be a senator, an IQ of 50+?
@Padraig O’Brien: 50+? That’s aiming very high.
Probably spend an hour looking for who has the key, and where is it kept..
Vrry bizarre issue to drag up
My understanding is that these are toilets for everyone, including those who are disabled.
Invisible disabilities are real disabilities. Autistic adults. People with EDS. Hip replacements colostomy bags etc
Minority rules.
I’d agree with the poster who said of the disabled toilet is not in use then why should it not be used by an able bodied person. Slightly discriminatory if they forbid able bodied people from access to disabled toilets when not in use. Might have to reconsider my health and safety cert which says in the event of a fire I am to help a disabled person. Basically, I will consider my safety first.
Bad idea
On a related topic; last week I was sitting in my car in Tesco Galway’s carpark listening to the radio for 20 mins. During that time a total of 4 cars used the disabled driver spots. All drivers (only 1 person in each car) appeared healthy as they walked in & out in a smart enough fashion. When they were leaving I could see their windscreens and none had the blue badge. Spoke with security man who said they don’t “really” use the large white stickers, with heavy red print, in such cases but they do use them for cars on yellow boxes. I left it at that.
@Patrice Ahern: People who do that have no brains & no respect for others especially the disabled driver.
And are they going to employ people to be in charge of these keys and be in the area at all times policing it or will it be a trek for the disabled person to try and find a needle in the haystack every time. Ireland must be a truely shocking country to live in with a severe disability.The amount of times you read a business paying out to them in the courts for having their rights discriminated against is nothing short of disgraceful. Between people refusing to give up public transport seats for them or security refusing their guide dogs entry to stores.
@Dan The Man: Disabled people will fill out a form with their local council and those who meet the criteria will be provided with their own key. Thats how it works in the UK. There’s no wandering about looking for people with a key..
It is astounding that somebody suggests that when a disabled toilet is not in use by a disabled person it should be used by anybody. Do they apply the same logic to disabled parking spots too?
The nonsense people spout in their incessant need to be outraged at the Government.
@Sun Rise: So, a small caffe, business premises, petrol station, clubhouse, etc, may have a single toilet for customers. It was initially overlooked to make it suitable for disabled people, but the management has now renovated it and made it suitable for disabled people. By your batty logic, it can not now be used by any able bodied people.
@Sun Rise: difference there love sitting on a loo for a few mins to do business if it’s empty & Using a parking space in carpark to do shopping is no comparison.
I think the key issue should relate specifically to changing places disability toilets which might be what is being referred to in the article. I think any of these toilets should be key only. These toilets are equipped with ceiling hoists and changing beds for adults. Some also have showers. These particular toilets should be radar key only for a number of reasons including to protect the equipment. I think the bog standard (excuse the pun) disabled toilets are absolutely useless for a large portion of the disabled community. I need a changing bed for my daughter. She is way too heavy for baby changing unit and I’m often stuck when our for somewhere to change her.
So the premise of this special access keys is, we need to stop discrimination against people with disabilities by discriminating against everyone else?
Disabled toilets are designed to make them accessible for people with disabilities, not to make them inaccessible to people without disabilities.
I’ve never seen a person with a disability needing the disabled toilet when I am using one. Mind you, I could never see through the locked door, so I am making a complete assumption, which is informing my opinion.
There is already a scheme where you have to buy the key in the Greater Dublin area in order to use public disabled toilets unfortunately there is a cost to the user of 35 euro this is discrimination against disabled people as normal body people are not required to pay to 35 euro in order to use a public toilet.
As someone with that’s needs a shit and our government wants Notting to do with us ,it’s lies more lies and more lies ,ffg wants to sell us all for their benefits if you want something built it
Reading all of the ‘but sure it’s empty, and I’ll only be a minute’ comments on here, it’s obvious why Senator Bradley is pushing for a key system. Some people need to try looking at things from others’ point of view more often.
Please include people without disabilities parking in disability parking spots.
Going by some of the Comments, you can tell who has a Disabled Relative, or Friend, and those that don’t.
And those that are trying to separate the Issue of the Toilets, and the Parking Spaces either don’t see, or want to see the connection.
My Ex is in a Wheelchair, and yes; we’ve had to wait, for the ones, in the Train Stations; “Heuston”, and “Connolly”, or the Shopping Centers; “Jervis”, “The Ilac, “The Fairgreen” or the Pubs, Restaurants, or had to deal, with the tiny space that was available; “”Heuston”, AGAIN, and Pubs, Restaurants. Add to that the fact that there is a difference, between the number Cubicles, or Urinals that Toilets, that those of us without Disabilities have, as opposed to the one Cubicle, for those with Disabilities.
Why should those of us, that don’t have Disabilities be allowed to use the Toilets, but not the Parking Spaces, when a Disabled Person doesn’t need the Toilet?
No surprise that Thomas Sheridan jumps in to whinge and moan. No mattercehat the topic is he must be anti-government. Thomas, you are just another one of life’s failures. Your situation is all of your own making. Own it rather than blaming governments that the vast majority have prospered under. You are the failure.
@Sun Rise: your comment highlights the dangers of late night consumption of mind altering substances.
If you see a flaw in the logic of my argument, then please point it out, but making personal attacks is uncalled for and only demeans yourself.
The whole article highlights how řidiĉùlous politics has become if the first priority of a newly appointed and highly paid politician is who can take a pișș where. It says even more about for attacking me over a very logical comment that I made.
On your other point, certainly plenty of Layabouts have prospered under recent goverments. Less so for a whole generation of workers that are have become rent slaves and tax slaves to the present policies.
Now, try getting to sleep earlier and getting a proper job.
It sounds like a good idea, but there’s practical elements that would need to be looked at. I was in a museum last week on the continent, and the disabled toilet was within the gents rather than being a separate loo. (I’m presuming the ladies had a similar layout) Where that’s the case, it can’t be exclusive.
If thats the case then they should also allow pensioners to have access keys. Quite a lot of that age group go out practically dehydrated for fear they have to use the toilets.The disabled parking and parent parking situation is a complete joke in Kerry. Most of the spots all over the place are parked in by people with no blue stickers and no children.
have your say