Greater Blanchardstown Initiative:

An examination of urban permeability in the Greater Blanchardstown Area

Claire McIntyre and Ciarán Staunton

Fingal County Council

“To improve the quality of life for the people we serve”

• Housing• Transportation• Water Services• Planning• Environment• Waste Management• Economic Development• Community, Recreation &

Amenities

Fingal County Council

• Challenges– Expanding the role of

Local Government– Pace of growth– Complexity of growth– Demand for additional

services– Improving service delivery– Capped/falling staff

numbers

Fingal• Established in 1994 as a result of the

Local Government (Dublin) Act

• Fingal is sometimes known as “North County Dublin”

• It has a mix of outer suburbs of Dublin, large towns, smaller rural villages and rural hinterland

• It has 88km of coastline and borders Meath and Kildare (west), South Dublin (south) and Dublin City

• It is the 3rd most populous county in the state after Dublin City and Cork County

Population• Blanchardstown• Castleknock• Swords• Balbriggan• Skerries• Rush• Lusk• Donabate• Howth/Sutton/Baldoyle• Santry

The Task Council Management Team set a Terms of Reference:

• Examine the permeability of residential, commercial and industrial estates, with regard to physical barriers and design problems

• Verify the existence and coverage of public transport services and stops

• Consider community safety issues connected to permeability especially where safety conflicts, or is perceived to conflict, with permeability

• Analyse locations of key service points and how accessible they are

Definition: Permeability

Working Definition:

“Permeability should be understood as the relative ease with which people may get around and through various types of Urban Development.”

Project Description

• Permeability is the main concern• Focus on Blanchardstown, our biggest urban

area• Multidisciplinary project team: Engineering,

Planning, Architecture, Community Development, Heritage, Information Technology, Statistical Analysis

• GIS used as a modelling environment for all investigations decisions

Location Map

Long-term growth of Blanchardstown

114041

126403

142003

5017655600

71637

90974

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

160000

1991 1996 2001 2006 2011 2016 2021

Permeability: The Challenge on the Ground

What do you see?

Vegetation disrupted and wall cap damaged

What do you see?

Vegetation disrupted and wall cap damaged

Gaps made in fence for shorter journeys

What do you see?

Vegetation disrupted and wall cap damaged

Gaps made in fence for shorter journeys

Improvised access across high wall

What do you see?

Vegetation disrupted and wall cap damaged

Gaps made in fence for shorter journeys

Improvised access across high wall

High difficulty climb

What do you see?

Vegetation disrupted and wall cap damaged

Gaps made in fence for shorter journeys

Improvised access across high wall

High difficulty climb

Wall capping removed

What do you see?

Vegetation disrupted and wall cap damaged

Gaps made in fence for shorter journeys

Improvised access across high wall

High difficulty climb

Wall capping removed

High wall disablespermeability

Definition: Desire Line

Working Definition:

“Desire Lines are indications of a demand for passage through an urban area. Generally they refer to pedestrian behaviour where passage is not ‘officially’ facilitated, or is prevented in some way but used nonetheless”

Policy Influence:Sustainable Communities

Sustainable Communities are places where people want to live and work, now and in the future. They meet the diverse needs of existing and future residents, are sensitive to their environment, and contribute to a high quality of life. They are safe and inclusive, well-planned, built and run, offer equality of opportunity and good services for all

Delivering Homes Sustaining Communities: Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government

In-depth study

(i) Community Survey

(ii) POWCAR (Census 2006)

(iii) Physical Data Capture

(iv) Public Transport Study (Bus)

• A community survey was required because we wanted to know how people on the ground perceived the

issues we are considering• Fieldwork carried out in May 2008 using doorstep interviews• Quota sample used• All respondents were aged 16+ living in the Blanchardstown area • In all, 583 surveys were carried out• Less than -/+ 1% margin of error

(i) Community Survey

Perception of Functional Levels in Area

(Q.16)

(Base: All Greater Blanchardstown Residents)

4212222823

4821

3749

302841

19441

10

2

4

5

1

15

3

3

9

2

2

34

3

Too many Too Few

Pedestrian Crossings

Roundabouts

Foothpaths

Foothpaths not adjacent to roadways

Alleyways

Streetlights & security cameras

School wardens

Traffic calming measures

Public transport links

Heavy/thick planting

Walls/fences

Cycle Lanes

Closed alleyways

Bus Gate

Just Right

55

54

76

70

69

49

77

48

50

65

68

57

71

55

CCTV and public transport links are prominent desires. Residents not seeing the advantages of Roundabouts over traffic lights at junctions.

(ii) Powcar 2006• Place of Work Census of Anonymised Records

• An analysis of POWCAR was necessary to learn about the behaviour especially commuting behaviour of the people in Blanchardstown

• Q31 and 32 on the Census form capture the location where people work and this is re-coded to – County and Electoral Division– Enumerator Area– Approximated grid of 250m x 250m

• We can also see SEX, SEG, INDUSTRY, MODE OF TRAVEL and ORIGIN

• We are lucky that Blanchardstown is covered by Enumerator Areas

Modes in BlanchardstownCar passenger

11%

Other5%

Not stated2%

On foot16% Bicycle

2%

Bus, minibus or coach14%

Car driver42%

Motorcycle or scooter1%

Train, DART or LUAS7%

Daily mode of transportation of persons 5 years and over

In-depth study

(i) Community Survey

(ii) POWCAR (Census 2006)

(iii) Physical Data Capture

(iv) Public Transport Study (Bus)

(iii) Physical Data Capture• Road & Footpath network

• Permeability FacilitatorsE.g. Bridges, walkways, street lights, pedestrian crossings

• Desire Lines

• Physical features which can prevent permeability E.g. heavy planting, walls & fences, closed alleyways

• Neighbourhood Level Services E.g. Schools, bring banks, playgrounds etc.

(iii) Physical Data Capture• Straight line Analysis Example

(iii) Physical Data Capture• Catchment Area along ‘formal’ network

(iii) Physical Data Capture• Catchment Area along ‘informal’ network

(iii) Physical Data Capture• Catchment area encompassing a number of houses

(iii) Physical Data Capture

PRD = Route Distance

Geodetic Distance

• Randals PRD (Pedestrian Route Directness)

(iii) Physical Data Capture• Randals PRD (Pedestrian Route Directness)

(iv) Public Transportation Module

ILTP study of existing public transport services and potential new services- a specialist transportation study was required

- objective to identify the priorities for new routes

Existing Buses

ILTP Proposed Buses

What we learned• GIS is a powerful tool for demonstrating and analysing physical

evidence of issues

• Permeability measures accessibility to a range of services helping us to decide about service locations in the future

• Combining sources of data: POWCAR, Location-based info., permeability calculations and community attitudes gives us greater insights into the reality and complexity of problems and challenges in Blanchardstown

• Interdepartmental, cross-disciplinary working enabled the team:– To have a more integrated understanding of real local problems– To appreciate that Departments have overlapping concerns and

challenges which can be resolved better by working together– To think strategically and co-operatively about how to affect change

Greater Blanchardstown Initiative:

An examination of urban permeability in the Greater Blanchardstown Area

Claire McIntyre and Ciarán Staunton