After small top-up of community space, councillors agree plan for housing on "spine site" in Darndale

Local residents had voiced the same broad questions during all the in-person consultations around plans to develop the "Spine Site" in Darndale, said independent Councillor John Lyons on at Monday night's monthly meeting of Dublin City Council.

Why aren't the guards and council dealing with the open drug dealing and intimidation and grooming by drug gangs in the area? Why are they not dealing with maintenance issues at existing council housing in the area?

"So what came from all of that, chair, was that there needs to be a bit more community buy-in or something for the community other than, more and more housing, chair," he said, to Lord Mayor Daryl Barron, who was chairing the meeting at City Hall.

On the agenda at the November meeting of the council was the planning proposal for 84 social homes on the site, with an 86sqm community hub at the bottom of one of the buildings.

The project is being spearheaded by the council and the housing charity Respond, and Monday night's vote was the last stage in what is known as the Part 8 planning process by which councillors approve – or, rarely, reject – council projects.

At the meeting, Lyons said he wanted to tweak the plans slightly, before councillors voted them through. To add some extra community space and facilities as a response to local input and to support community cohesion, he said.

As councillors chimed in, most spoke in favour of that – until the question arose as to whether such a change was big enough to send it back to a much earlier stage in design and planning, creating delays.

It was a bit unclear from the wording of the amendment, said Mick Mulhern, the council's housing manager.

Maybe Lyons could step outside the room and sidebar for a bit with council managers and refine his amendment to wording that would work without reopening the whole project, said Fine Gael Councillor Ray McAdam, in an attempt to break the gridlock.

Barron, chairing the meeting, agreed. "We're going to defer this until we get a bit of white smoke on it," said the Fianna Fáil councillor.

When they returned to the question later in the meeting, a compromise had been struck with a couple fewer homes, and a bit more community space.

Negotiation, always

The Spine Site is made up of long grassy patches of land, criss-crossed by paths. It sits amid two-story homes, near Darndale Junior School.

The Part 8 proposal that went before councillors for 84 homes, included 50 for senior citizens, and 34 for general-needs social homes, said Mulhern, the council's housing manager.

Among the apartments, there would be 45 one-beds and 5 two-beds, while for the houses, there would be 14 two-beds, 19 three-beds, and 1 four-bed home, planning documents show.

All would have private open space, and be "dual aspect" so get plenty of natural light – and residents would benefit from roughly 337sqm of communal amenity open space, a landscaped courtyard area within the proposed apartment block

The buildings would be two and three storeys.

At the bottom of one of the apartment blocks, there would be a community facility of 86sqm, says the planning document.

"This space would include a separate kitchen area, a workspace, toilet and multipurpose room. The scheme when constructed would be owned and operated by the City Council in partnership with Respond Housing Association," it says.

"The area is described as a community hub which will allow for use of a range of activities and to be booked for use by local clubs and societies for classes, information events and demos as well as use by the residents of the proposed residential development," it says.

Council officials had first been asked to look at developing the site because of concerns about anti-social behaviour in the space, said Mulhern, a council manager for housing, at the meeting.

"This isn't opinion," said Mulhern. "This is views that have come out from the chamber asking the executive to progress a housing scheme for that site."

They've worked and consulted on it for three years, he said, changing the look of it as they go – scaling back the homes, lowering the heights, and adding more amenity.

A bit of changes here and there

Lyons, at the meeting, pointed to the significant number of submissions to the formal public consultation for the proposal.

There had been 44 of them, he said. "I think that must have been one of the largest partakes we've had in recent times."

Councillors needed to respond to that, said Lyons – hence his amendment to slightly reduce the number of homes, and grow the amount of community space. "They raised their concerns and we are not listening to them."

Councillors generally spoke in favour of both the social housing on the site given the desperate need, and also in favour of Lyons' amendment.

Social Democrats Councillor Jesslyn Henry said that she welcomed the housing. "However, we must be clear that building housing is not enough on that site. We must be serious about improving the quality of life of the residents there."

Community space is vital, she said, given the anti-social behaviour and the crumbling of the Bell Building, a community building, from pyrite with so many services being pulled back.

Yep, the housing is welcome, said Micheál MacDonncha, a Sinn Féin councillor. But an overall approach towards the well-being of the community is essential, as is better estate management, he said.

Racheal Bourke, of Fianna Fáil, said she too agreed that it should be developed but also that the community facilities are built and maintained.

But can the amendment be taken without a delay? asked Green Party Councillor Donna Cooney.

Mulhern said councillors could make an amendment, sure, but the wording of the amendment was vague and lacking detail, asking them to increase the size of community facilities. "It's unclear what we're being asked to do."

Lyons said he had kept it general on purpose, because he wasn't sure of the best way to go about it.

Independent Mannix Flynn asked if they could write the amendment in a way that it would definitely be non-material – a small one.

Said McAdam, the Fine Gael councillor: "There does need to be more prescription in the amendment." But could managers, and Lyons, agree a wording that councillors could agree without any delays, he said.

When they came back, there were two amendments.

One motion in the name of Fianna Fáil Councillor Aoibheann Mahon, with cross-party backing, was to change the use of two ground-floor residential units to community use – so there would be 82 homes – and to carry out engagement with the community on detailed design of the communal open space.

Lyons' motion was to change the use of 10 apartments from residential to community to bring more amenity.

The first amendment would be non-material, said Mulhern, but the second was major so would take a complete redraft of the scheme. The majority of councillors voted for the first.