Malcolm Noonan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I will address amendments Nos. 14, 31, 144 to 146, inclusive, 197, 198, 236, 238, 253, 335 to 337, inclusive, 345, 350, 358, 374, 375, 426, 448, 481, 534, 538, 542, 546, 615, 616, 618, 793, 794, 1154 and 1188 as tabled by Deputy Steven Matthews. Amendments Nos. 31, 144 to 146, inclusive, 197, 198, 236, 538, 542 and 546 relate to transport-orientated development. Amendment No. 426 relates to the indicative alignment of active travel networks. Amendment No. 793 relates to access to public transport and active travel routes. Amendment No. 794 relates to electric vehicle parking and charging and bicycle and e-bike parking.

Amendment No. 1118 relates to public transport accessibility, while the remainder of the amendments cited relate to the hierarchy of road users model that the Deputy has referenced. Some of the latter group also include references to other areas relating to sustainable transport already mentioned.

There is no doubt but that the alignment between sustainable transport options and spatial land use planning is an essential element of proper and sustainable development, a fact reflected in the growing influence of public transport and active travel in the context of national planning policy. For example, in May 2023, my Department, along with the Department of Transport, published a report outlining the opportunities for transport-orientated development, TOD, for four Dublin local authorities. The report outlined the benefits of TOD that can be attained through strategic placement of new and expanded settlements next to existing and planned public transport infrastructure, most importantly in regard to the environment and how such an approach can benefit national policy objectives such as the Climate Action Plan 2023, Housing for All and various spatial and transport strategies. Officials are currently considering TOD opportunities in the wider Dublin region and the regional cities, and further reports on these opportunities will be published shortly.

However, as outlined in the published report relating to Dublin, TOD is a particular form of development with higher densities located in close proximity to high-frequency public transport nodes and corridors, and thus is not generally applicable to areas without such access, including rural areas. Through engagement with my colleague the Minister for Transport, I am committed to exploring further opportunities for TOD through the development of integrated land use and transport policy and guidance measures, with a need also to consider the delivery mechanisms required to maximise opportunities in this regard. For example, the potential to designate these areas as urban development zones will ensure that State funding will be prioritised to facilitate the timely delivery of development. However, I am of the opinion that it is not necessary or appropriate to include reference to TOD itself in legislation where it would not be appropriate to all locations and circumstances. It is for this reason also that amendments such as No. 75, which seek to replace "promotion of" with "requirement for", cannot be accepted as this cannot at this time be required universally.

Likewise, with regards to the hierarchy of road users model and active travel, over recent years we have seen the emergence in prominence of this model, for example, in updates to the design manual for urban roads and streets, DMURS, and in the Government’s commitment to increased pedestrianisation of streets and delivery of cycle infrastructure, which we are all seeing in our communities across the country. As with TOD, it is considered that these elements are more appropriate to policy measures than to primary legislation, as this will allow for proper consideration, having regard to particular circumstances as they arise in different locations, of the potential for and suitability of these measures.

My colleague, the Minister for Transport, has developed a sustainable mobility policy and is currently developing a national demand management strategy, and officials from my Department are directly engaged in these polices to ensure they are appropriately aligned with spatial planning policy. Similarly, the current revision of the national planning framework, NPF, will need to consider the need for further alignment with sustainable transport options.

While the Government has recognised the value of the hierarchy of road users model, active travel, public transport and transport-orientated development, these measures are better implemented through policy development, which will ensure that the statutory plan-making system facilitated by this Bill, led by the NPF and national planning statements, will be aligned with related policy across Government.

For these reasons, I am unable to accept these amendments.