An Bord Pleanála

Inspector’s Report

Development: Change of use of agricultural shed to indoor horse riding arena, change of use of first floor only of agricultural store to lecture room; parking, access and site works. Minor improvements to the junction of the R265-3 & L23941-1 to include raising of road levels and associated drainage; retention of excavated area & restoration of same to provide a grassed area.

Location: Porthall and Boyagh, Lifford. Co, Donegal

Planning Application

Planning Authority: Donegal County Council

Planning Authority Reg. Ref.: 13/51590

Applicant: Daniel Lusby

Type of Application: Permission

Planning Authority Decision: Grant Permission

Planning Appeal

Appellant: Ian McKean

William McKean

Type of Appeals: 3rd v Grant

Date of Site Inspection: 8th January 2015

Inspector: Dolores McCague

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 1 of 34

1 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

1.1 The site is located in the townlands of Porthall & Boyagh north-east of Lifford in Co. Donegal. The area is rural in character consisting of low lying agricultural pastureland. This is a rural area with only limited dispersed development and small villages and cross road settlements (Porthall village). 1.2 The lands of which the site forms part, are part of the grounds of Port Hall estate, the main feature of which is Port Hall, a Protected Structure that is accessed by a tree-lined avenue, and its associated outbuildings. The house is a two- storey over basement, five bay, former country house with attic level built c 1746. The land slopes gently away to the east, towards the river, and the house presents a three storey rear elevation in this direction. The roof is hidden by a parapet wall. It is described in the NIAH as an impressive and sophisticated small-scale Palladian country house, arguably the finest building of its type and date in Donegal. 1.3 Porthall House, in separate ownership and on separate lands adjoins the Port Hall property, to the north. 1.4 Port Hall is located on the western shore of the River Foyle. To the south of the house is the remains of an original walled garden. Two former warehouse buildings frame the view of the house from the river. The agricultural buildings associated with the farm are located to the north of the house. The rear of the house faces the River Foyle, from which it is separated by low lying land and a canal. A small foot bridge over the canal provides access to the river across flood embankments placed along the banks of the river. There are also a number of open drainage ditches that traverse the site. The full extent of the house is exposed to the rear between the 2 No. two-storey warehouses which flank the sides of the building. 1.5 The site, which is a part of the lands adjoining the house (Port Hall), runs in an east west direction to the north of the tree lined access to the house, and widens north of the house to enclose an area of land which was disturbed by excavation and includes some of the farm buildings. 1.6 The site is accessed via a county road that extends in an eastern direction off the R 265. 1.7 The site is given as 3.45ha.

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 2 of 34

2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

2.1 The proposed development is the change of use of an agricultural shed to indoor horse riding arena, the change of use of the first floor only of agricultural store to lecture room; parking, access and site works; minor improvements to the junction of the R265-3 & L23941-1 to include raising of road levels and associated drainage; and retention of excavated area & restoration of same to provide a grassed area. It is stated that quarrying was carried out in the excavated area.

3 PLANNING AUTHORITY DECISION

3.1 The application was submitted on the 6th January 2014. It was accompanied by a report entitled ‘Screening for Appropriate Assessment for an agricultural shed and associated facilities at Porthall, Lifford, Co Donegal; to support the appropriate assessment process in line with the requirements of Article 6(3) of the EU Habitats Directive’ by Dr Florence Wilson Earthy Matters Environmental Consultants.

3.2 Submissions –Prescribed Bodies

3.3 DAHG, 23 Jan 2014 including: concerns at the potential to have an impact on the character and setting of the protected structure Porthall, registered as a protected structure in the Donegal County Council register of protected Structures Reg No 40907113. A mid Georgian period house of considerable importance build c 1746 and designed by the architect Michael Priestly. The proposal should be forwarded to the Donegal Conservation officer for her comments. The Council may wish to request the applicant to submit an Architectural Heritage Impact Assessment…

3.4 DAHG, 24 Jan 2014 including: The Department is of the view that this development could significantly damage/destroy the habitat of Atlantic Salmon and Otter both of which are species listed in Annex II of the EU Habitats Directive (Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora).

3.5 The potential impacts would be caused by the:

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 3 of 34 Deterioration of the water quality in the River Finn resulting from pollution from surface water run-off during site preparation and construction;

Deterioration of the water quality in the River Finn resulting from pollution from surface water run-off post construction from the development;

Deterioration of the water quality in the River Finn resulting from the inappropriate disposal /landspreading of animal wastes associated with the development.

3.6 The Department has previously reviewed the document entitled ‘Screening for Appropriate Assessment for an agricultural shed and associated facilities at Porthall, Lifford, Co Donegal which was prepared by Earthy Matters Environmental Consultants as part of the planning Ref. 13/50572.

3.7 In order to mitigate for potential impacts, the Department recommends that the following conditions be attached to the grant of permission:

The mitigation measures set out in the report ‘Screening for Appropriate Assessment for an agricultural shed and associated facilities at Porthall, Lifford, Co Donegal by Earthy Matters dated April 2013 should be implemented in full.

All structures should be built in accordance with the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Minimum Specification i.e. S101 Minimum Specifications for the structure of Agricultural Buildings (March 20060 and S108 Minimum Specifications for Manure Pits and Dungsteads (August 2007) etc.

Clean and soiled waters should never be mixed. Any soiled water from open (dirty) yards or the dungstead should be directed into an effluent tank. Open yards should be kept clean at all times. Post construction surface water runoff from hardcore/concrete/tarmacadam areas should be directed into a soakpit. If soakpit disposal is not viable/practicable, then surface water fun-off from these areas should be treated via serviced sediment and oil interceptor traps, prior to discharge into any stream/drainage channel that flows into the River Foyle;

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 4 of 34 All spreading of animal wastes associated with the development should be in accordance with European Communities (Good Agricultural Practice for Protection of Waters) Regulations 2010;

All road works and alterations to the R-265-3 & L-23941-1 should be carried out in accordance with the NRA Environmental Construction Guidelines.

3.8 Reports

3.9 Planning Report 13/2/2014 recommending further information. Access into the site will be taken from the private tree-lined driveway that provides access up to Port Hall. Passing bays along this driveway as well as along the county road L023941-1 are included as part of the overall proposal. Access from the county road network on to the driveway is taken at the junction of the aforementioned county road and the L-23942 county road. No vision lines are shown along these roads. Given the proposed development will generate an increase in traffic utilising this access/egress point the applicant will be requested to show the correct visibility splays to the nearside of the roads and provide consent from the relevant third parties that these splays can be achieved and maintained.

3.10 Storm water is to be directed to the existing strom pipe on the northern boundary. Other information on the disposal of surface / storm water is sparse and therefore the applicant will be asked to submit details on, inter alia, measures for the collection and disposal of all storm/surface water at the site entrance, all roof water and all waters emanating from hard standing areas within the site and shall identify a final point of outfall for all waters. Furthermore given the site’s proximity to the River Finn SAC the applicant will be requested to install sediment and oil traps at appropriate location prior to the discharge of surface water from the site into this existing storm water pipe. No information has been submitted on the storage and disposal methods of manures generated by the proposal. In order to ensure proper measures are to be used the applicant will be requested to submit this information along with the locations of the receiving lands and the capability of these lands to accommodate the same without any loss to surface/groundwater.

3.11 Views into the site should be screened and applicant will be requested to submit a detailed planting scheme within the western area of the site.

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 5 of 34 3.12 Further information request issued on 9 points, including: item 1 – submit an Architectural Heritage Impact Assessment; item 5 – detail uses and activities proposed; item 6 - detail storm water and surface water; item 8 – detailed written statement accompanied by a layout plan to the appropriate scale which details the proposed storage and disposal methods of manures generated by the proposal. Said details shall include the location of spread-lands identified on an accompanying map and capability of such lands to accommodate same.

3.13 Response to further information request 24 Feb 2014, including - an Architectural Heritage Impact Assessment; a survey on site shows that vision lines can be achieved by removing mature trees on clients land; report of traffic survey at the junction with the county road; the roadway is 3.3m wide with grass verges on each side and it provides access to a farm and clients property and is a cul-de-sac; scale of the proposals are much less than those associated with an intense farm holding. Details of storm water system – all gravelled areas are self draining i.e. surface water will dissipate into existing sewers. All roof water will be collected and discharged directly to existing system; all contaminated water including from dungstead will be discharged through a sump/interceptor prior to discharge into existing system. A dungstead is shown. Client owns approximately 300 ac. on which to spread the manure however in most cases the manure is a sought after product and is collected by various other farmers for their own use.

3.14 Planning report on response to request for the further information, 6 March 2014, on item 2 - vision lines of 70m are shown at the junction of the vehicular access to the site and the county road. It is noted that this will require the removal of mature trees on the applicant’s land. However the assessment of the average speeds of vehicles using the public road is inadequate as this was only carried out for just over one hour (from 8.18 am to 9.20 am). A more detailed survey that has been carried out over a longer period of time, will be required.

Item 4a - Access for disabled visitors into and out of the buidlings etc.

Item 4b - The applicant has confirmed that the existing access to the farm will be retained but this is not shown correctly on the submitted layout drawing. In fact this layout drawing shows proposed planting on this access. Further clarification and identification of the access road will be required.

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 6 of 34 Item 7 - Only one petrol interceptor is shown; not next to the car-park area and it is shown that the surface water from this area will be diverted into an existing storm pipe. Position this next to the car park with surface water from the car-park diverted into it and details of the size and type of interceptor. No sediment interceptor has been shown, make provision for this at an appropriate location.

Item 8 - Details of the proposed dungstead have been submitted along with a statement that the manure will be spread on lands owned by the applicant and will be collected by other farmers for spreading on their farm lands. A detailed written statement regarding the proposed storage and disposal methods of manures as well as information on the locations and capability of identified spread-lands for the manure was requested. The information submitted does not adequately address this FI item, further detailed information is requested.

Item 9 - The submitted layout shows proposed planting along the southern boundary of the existing access lane. A planting scheme for the western areas of the site is required.

Item 5 – no information submitted.

3.15 A further request for outstanding information 6 March 2014.

3.16 Additional further information submitted 10 March 2014 –

item 5 – the proposed equestrian development will be run as a riding school offering riding lessons for semi private groups (2-3 people) group lessons up to 8 people, one to one private lessons for adults and children from beginner to advanced; treks for adults and children; coaching in competitive disciplines such as dressage; and show jumping and eventing.

In a group lesson there can be no more than 8 people per instructor and lessons tend to last for duration of 1 hour.

The normal weekly business is outlined – Monday to Thursday – quiet especially in winter; experienced riders 1 hour lesson weekly between 10am - 12 midday; hopes to have 3 to 5 people in advanced category; livery riders come one evening per week; Friday and Saturday lessons 7pm – 9pm – on average 3 people per hour which halves in winter;

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 7 of 34 Sunday 10 am - 1pm, and 2 pm to 6pm – 3-5 people per hour; stable management & exam training – lectures quarterly to annually with, on average, 10 people taking part, evenings for up to 2 hours; livery service to accommodate 7 - 12 horses over the period of a year.

He hopes to engage a freelance instructor during the busy times – Friday & Saturday in summer.

Horses are on site - therefore traffic would be mainly client cars.

3.17 Additional further information submitted 26 March 2014 – stables for eleven horses – these horses produce c50m3 of excreta over a 20 week wintering period, stored over the winter, and exported in spring to a neighbouring named farmer who gives permission to applicant ‘to store horse manure in my covered dung shed’.

3.18 Other technical reports

3.19 Executive Engineer – 19/3/2014 - development charge of €5000 to apply in relation to junction improvements; applicant to set back the boundary of adjacent dwelling to achieve vision lines of 90m x 2.4m. Standard condition regarding setback, to apply to area between road edge and new boundary. Lay-byes to be a minimum of 2.5m x 9m to accommodate vehicle and trailer. Clear and safe pedestrian routes from car park to arena / lecture room to be provided; adequate turning for buses.

3.20 Conservation Officer – 1/4/2014- the building is rated of national importance and of architectural, interior, grouping, personality and setting value.

‘The principle to establish a sustainable use for Porthall and its setting in the first instance is to be supported and I am aware of the applicant’s ongoing endeavours to secure a use for the demesne setting in this regard.’

The immediate setting to the north of Porthall and specifically the subject site is somewhat unkempt.

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 8 of 34 The provision of car-parking and associated turning circle appears poorly considered with no attempt to screen/integrate the proposal within the landscape setting. The applicant is advised to refer to historical reference mapping and as included in the conservation report specifically pg 6/7 to inform the integration of car-parking within the Porthall landscape setting perhaps considering the reinstatement of historical planting to provide a degree of screening. Consider ground finish, boundary treatment, planting layout and scheduling.

With regard to the proposed access and using the existing avenue rather than branching off the existing length of the avenue due south east, consider using the existing county road due north towards Gambles Row, to access proposed car-parking along the length of the existing eastern field boundary, from the top of the established field pattern a distance from Porthall; pg 9 of conservation report aerial view.

3.21 Further clarification of information requested 3rd April 2014 on 6 points –

Item 1 - consider using the county road due north towards Gambles Row, to access proposed car-parking; revised car-parking proposals which considers the car parking within the Porthall landscape setting; provision for turning buses.

Item 2 - undertake and submit an assessment of the average speeds of vehicles on the local road serving the site using the method described in advisory document TA 22/81, Vehicle Speed Measurement on All Purpose Roads. It will be necessary to establish the 85th percentile speed of vehicles in order to enable the planning authority to determine whether the reduced vision line standards can be applied in this case. Revised site layout plan detailing how vision lines are to be provided in accordance with table 23 County Development Plan 2012-2018 (as varied, based on the results of the vehicle speed survey and with any revised entrance proposal.

Item 3 - drawings of access arrangements for disabled users/visitors.

Item 4 - breakdown of vehicle types and numbers associated with the proposed development. The absence of a considered response which comprehensively mitigates any potential impact on Porthall is likely to result in an unfavourable decision.

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 9 of 34 Item 5 – oil /petrol interceptors to serve the car park and two serviced sediment interceptor traps on all storm drainage lines prior to outfall to any waterbody.

Item 6 - detailed planting scheme for the western area of the site.

3.22 Letter from a member of Donegal County Council expressing concern re use of access from road towards Gambles Row, etc.

3.23 Submission of further information, 25th July 2014, which includes:

3.24 Revised car park, existing farm type roadway restored to field; formal planting; result of vehicle speed measurement, vision lines; access for disabled persons; traffic movements generated by development; interceptors and sediment traps; planting proposals per drawing submitted.

3.25 Further Submissions / Reports

3.26 The Loughs Agency, 10 Sept 2014 – the Loughs Agency is the statutory body charged with the conservation, protection and development of inland fisheries within the Foyle and Carlingford systems, the promotion of development of Loughs Foyle and Carlingford, and catchments for commercial and recreational purposes in respect of marine, fishery and aquaculture issues and the development of marine tourism. Applicant should demonstrate best environmental practice when working close to watercourses. Impacts on the aquatic environment such as a decrease in water quality can cause a significant impact upon various life history stages of fish species. It is an offence under S 41 of the Foyle fisheries Act (1952) to cause pollution which is detrimental to fisheries interests.

3.27 Notice of significant further information, 15 Sept 2014.

3.28 Planning report, 8 Oct 2014.

3.29 Decision to grant permission 9th October 2014, subject to 15 conditions, including:

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 10 of 34 1 b) Prior to the commencement of any other development the proposed upgrade works to the county road L-23941-1 and the Regional Road R-265-2 shall be carried out and completed to the written satisfaction of the Planning Authority in strict accordance with drawing no. 5011/105 ’A’ submitted on the 12th December 2013.

2 a) Site preparation and construction works shall adhere to best practice and conform to the Inland Fisheries Ireland ‘Requirements for the protection of Fisheries Habitat during Construction and Development Works at River Sites.’

b) All road works shall be carried out in accordance with the NRA Environmental Construction Guidelines.

Reason: To preserve the ecological integrity of the River Finn SAC.

3 b) The facility herein permitted is not authorised to hold or facilitate public events without a separate grant of planning permission and/or written agreement of the Planning Authority as applicable.

4 The existing silage pit within the site shall not be roofed without a separate grant of planning permission.

Reason: To preserve the ecological integrity of the River Finn SAC.

5 Prior to commencement of development a permanent visibility splay of 70m shall be provided in each direction at a point 2.4m back from the road edge at location of the vehicular entrance from the public road. Visibility in the vertical plane shall be measured from a driver’s eye height of 1.05m and 2m positioned at the setback distance in the direct access to an object height of between 0.26m and 1.05m. Vision splays to be calculated and presented as per Figure 7, of Section 10.2.10 of Chapter 10 (Development and Technical Standards), County Development Plan 2012-2018 (as varied).

Reason: To cater for orderly development and in the interests of traffic safety.

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 11 of 34 10 Prior to commencement of development, a detailed landscaping scheme, including a timetable for implementation, shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for written agreement. Said scheme shall include substantial semi-mature broad-leafed trees native to the area. All sound trees, shrubs and hedgerow shall be retained save as herein otherwise required and any proposed or existing tree or shrub species subsequently dying shall be replaced during next planting season.

Reason: To preserve the amenities of the area

11 a) Car parking and turning areas shall be surfaced with Cranford Self-binding gravel with adequate surface water drainage system capable of collection and disposal of all uncontaminated surface water without discharging onto adjacent properties.

b) All internal radii within car park shall be minimum 6 metres.

Reason: To cater for orderly development.

12 The development shall be carried out and operated in strict accordance with the mitigation Measures set out in Section 5 of the Screening Statement carried out by Earthy Matters dated April 2013 and submitted in support of the application.

Reason: To preserve the amenities of the area

13 a) No soiled waters shall enter or discharge to open drainage channels, sheoughs, streams or waterbodies and the applicant shall ensure that all necessary steps are taken to ensure that all soiled waters are collected and discharged to appropriate sealed receptacles.

b) All unsoiled waters shall discharge through a petrol interceptor and silt trap prior to final outfall.

Reason: In the interests of public health and to prevent water pollution.

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 12 of 34

14 Development Charge

15 Bond.

3.30 The decision was in accordance with the planner’s recommendation. The decision was accompanied by advice to applicant including re: road opening, compliance with European Communities (Good Agricultural Practice for Protection of Waters) Regulations 2009 (SI No 101 of 2009) and should have regard to relevant guidance contained within any current Rural Environmental Protection Scheme.

3.31 Observations on the file have been read and noted.

4 PLANNING HISTORY

07/40604 planning permission for the erection of stable block incorporating 47 loose box stables with office and associated facilities and all site development works including sewage disposal to new sewage treatment plant – refused 5/10/07 for 4 reasons: 1) scale, mass and design taken in conjunction with the concurrent application on the adjoining site (07/40605) together with the proximity of the development to the avenue serving Porthall House, it is considered that the proposed development would materially alter the setting of the house and its attendant grounds ; 2) traffic would endanger traffic safety on tertiary county road; 3) absence of parking provision; 4) no overall landholding or documentary evidence of consent from relevant third party(s) that adequate vision lines can be provided at the junction of the county road with the regional road.

07/40605 planning permission for the erection of another stable block incorporating 47 loose box stables with office and associated facilities and all site development works including sewage disposal to new sewage treatment plant – refused 5/10/07 for 3 reasons; similar to reasons 1 – 3 of 07/40604.

233609, PA reg ref 08/40324, third party appeal against the planning authority decision to grant permission for two barn style stable buildings for up to 100 horses, mechanical horse walker, staff facilities, parking, sewage treatment plant access and landscaping within the curtilage of a

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 13 of 34 Protected Structure at Porthall, Lifford. Co, Donegal; refused for one reason - location of the site within an area liable to flooding.

13/50572 application for: 1) change of use of a section of an existing agricultural shed to an indoor horse riding arena; 2) change of use of first floor only of agricultural store to lecture room; 3) construction of new agricultural shed for the storage of farm machinery, animal feed & covered dungstead, parking, access and site works; withdrawn 19/9/13.

5 GROUNDS OF APPEAL

5.1 A third party appeal has been submitted by Harley Newman, Planning Consultants on behalf of Mr Ian McKean, Porthall House, Porthall, Lifford, Co Donegal. The grounds includes:

5.2 The development proposed to utilise an existing agricultural shed located c 15 m to the north of the house and to change the use of an existing shed to a horse riding arena, change of use of the first floor of a store (formerly the coach house) located adjacent to the proposed arena, to a lecture room (to accommodate 15 persons as shown) for the arena and equestrian facility. The development also includes a parking area to the west of the protected structure and permission for the restoration of said area as a grassed area. The development also includes road improvement works at the junction of the county road with the regional road.

5.3 Land ownership is unclear, it should have been accompanied by a letter of consent from Herbert Lusby.

5.4 Proposal would be detrimental to setting of protected structure. As they exist they do nothing to enhance Port Hall.

5.5 Use of the building by the public and for commercial purposes would be detrimental to the setting and character of Port Hall.

5.6 The conservation officer recommended against the use of the access road, but it is being used and passing bays provided.

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 14 of 34 5.7 In the original application the applicant stated that there would be 6 vehicles per hour – 78 per day. Clarification that there would be 14 vehicle movements per day Mon-Thurs; 18 on a Friday and 44 on a Saturday 76 additional movements per week is a significant increase. Three passing bays shown as existing features are questionable. They do not seem to form part of the application description nor to have the benefit of a previous permission and may be unauthorised. Flooding/drainage – reference is made to the previous Board decision and to the fact that a risk of flooding remains in the current application. The method of storm water collection and disposal would appear to be inadequate. The proposed development appears to indicate the connection of the dungstead into the storm water system. All drainage from all sources are shown ending up combined in the sediment interceptor traps. The circumstances in this case to include the ground levels, proximity of the site to the river and SAC, the historical flooding as per previous refusal, the storm water infrastructure proposed and the combination of all in the creation of the potential for flooding of the area to the rear of Port Hall, dictate that the proposed development, to include the location of sediment interceptor traps within the floodplain, would result in increased runoff and storage of water within an area prone to flooding which would contribute to increased flooding and potential pollution of the river and SAC.

5.8 The dungstead does not meet the specifications of the Nitrates Directive Regulations as it is located a mere 15 metres from a fresh water stream on the appellants lands. The regulations state a 50m minimum distance and that an effluent tank must be present. The site contains no effluent tanks for the 82 horses kept on site, the dungstead is piped directly into a storm water drain. It is possible that the screening for appropriate assessment should have moved to a full appropriate assessment. Because of the retention element the LA would be precluded from accepting any application that required appropriate assessment.

5.9 The application does not include any permanent or proper toilet facilities or infrastructure to accommodate the public; a single temporary portable toilet is shown.

5.10 The conclusion of the AA, that there is no risk of flooding, is at variance with the Board’s previous refusal. The proposed mitigation is questionable. The storm water treatment and disposal has not referred to the inherent flooding risk and the AA has not therefore assessed all of the environmental factors.

5.11 Unauthorised development –

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 15 of 34 There is an outdoor sand based arena for jumping, and grassed area used for jumping and giving lessons. The present use for equestrian activities is unauthorised.

The building intending to accommodate the lecture room underwent a roof replacement recently from natural slate to tin, the works should have been the subject of architectural assessment and a planning application.

Excavated area / quarry – the subject site has been quarried since 2005, north west of the protected structure, shown in aerial photographs provided by the appellant. This should have been subject to S261.

The validity of the current application is queried.

The screening statement for appropriate assessment makes no mention of the quarry. No proper ecological screening has been conducted.

Application should be refused for the reasons:

Traffic hazard;

Impact on the setting and character of protected structure and unauthorised development.

Inadequacies in the screening for appropriate assessment: lack of consideration of flooding potential and inappropriate storm water disposal which calls the process into question;

Flooding potential and contamination of SAC.

5.12 A third party appeal has been submitted by Mr William McKean, Porthall House, Porthall, Lifford, Co Donegal.

5.13 The minor road L23941-1 is 3m in width and is inadequate in width and structure for the commercial traffic that will be generated. It is a busy narrow road which has always been used to serve local traffic. Proposed development will add 44 vehicles per day.

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 16 of 34 5.14 Third party moves large agricultural machinery across this minor road to carry out essential field work on his farm at Carrickmourne, St Johnston, daily and has done so for years as have four generations before him.

5.15 The minor improvements to the junction at the R-265-3 and L-2394-1 will do nothing to make it suitable for an extra 44 vehicle movements per day.

5.16 A reason for refusal in 2007 is cited; the road has not changed since the refusals on traffic grounds.

5.17 The road will start to be used by horse riders, which third party has witnessed already. Given the narrowness of the verge this will pose a serious danger.

5.18 Landowners were approached by Mr Herbert Lusby to purchase land along the L23941-1 for road widening and rejected the offer.

5.19 The road is used by pedestrians walking their dogs, and mothers pushing prams and it is difficult to safely manoeuvre large agricultural machinery around them. The increase in traffic will pose a very serious risk to all road users.

5.20 The road can only accommodate one vehicle at a time, in one direction. It services 5 private properties.

5.21 Road officials refer to passing bays in a letter on 13/50572 these are not suitable and are entrances to a forestry and a driveway and would need third party consent to so use.

5.22 The number of vehicles stated has varied from a maximum of 6 cars per hour to 5 people per lesson per day. Why are 19 car park spaces proposed?

5.23 The permission allows 73 hours of business per week. Third party is of the view that the business will intensify without limit and that his farm and its viability will be seriously compromised. Previous hire of facilities for horse & pony clubs and Donegal Harriers resulted in traffic congestion on a major scale. They could not gain access on the L23943

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 17 of 34 which was blocked by 4x4s horse boxes and cars from 10am to 5pm. The L23941-1 was also blocked.

6 RESPONSES

6.1 The Planning Authority The Planning Authority has responded to the grounds appeal. The proposed change of use will result in a form of rural economic development with that will utilise and renovate existing agricultural buildings within an established farmyard complex. The only new part is the car park. Details presented indicated that there would be 14 vehicular movements per day Mon-Thurs, 18 Fri and 44 Saturday. The concurrent applications in ‘07 sited a large stable farmyard complex 8.8m high with a floor area of 1,236m2 to the west whereas the ‘08 application would have resulted in the construction of two American style barns and a mechanical horse trainer amongst other things with a floor area 2,560m2 south of Porthall. The nature and scale of the development currently proposed is different. This is a small scale rural horse riding training school. Conditions ensure that the car-parking is screened from view, oil/sediment interceptors will be installed, there will be restricted hours of operation and adequate vision lines. The Council’s Roads section was not concerned except for the upgrade referred to in condition 1b). The planning authority requests that the decision be upheld.

6.2 The First Party

The First Party has responded to the grounds of appeal. Previous planning applications are referred to in the grounds of appeal; this application is of a modest nature and will generate less activity than a working farm.

The lands are owned by Herbert Lusby and leased to Daniel Lusby and will be transferred to him in due course. The building housing the riding arena will be refurbished. It has no detrimental effect on the setting and character of the protected structure.

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 18 of 34 The route of access branches off before the formal avenue commences and has no detrimental effect on the environs of the protected structure.

76 vehicles a week is one per hour.

Passing bays formed by Coillte during the 1990s adequately cater for traffic generated by that company.

The proposal includes separation of all roof drainage which will discharge indirectly to the drainage ditches. All contaminated water will be collected in a sealed interceptor prior to discharge. No additional drainage is proposed as parking areas will be surfaced on porous finish. There will be a maximum of 12 horses, some in livery and some which will arrive for lessons only.

There is a contract with Mr Brown to take the manure.

Herbert Lusby has up to 80 horses on the farm of approx. 300 ac. and the sand based arena is used for private training of young stock from the stud farm.

The proposal is of a very limited nature and if successful will support improvements to the protected structure. Proposal will improve the drainage/effluent disposal. The road is for the benefit of all and there will not be a traffic problem arising. Photographs attached show traffic movements and the use of passing places.

6.3 The First Party The Third Parties concur with each other’s appeals.

7 OBSERVER

7.1 An Taisce An Taisce has submitted an observation on the appeal, which includes:

Donegal County Council did not refer the application to them.

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 19 of 34 Porthall is the most significant Georgian house in Donegal. It comprises a main house with symmetrical wings. The western front is approached by a formal treelined axial avenue while the east side faces the River Foyle. The landscape setting of Porthall is an intrical part of its national importance and historic design quality. The land area now remaining with the ownership is limited in extent and there is only full legal title to part of the entrance avenue, the western part of which is shared with the Lusby family. The site is unkempt and insensitive to the setting of Porthall. An Taisce is concerned that the proposed development will not be carried out in a compliant manner given the manner of presentation of the scheme in an ad-hoc manner and unaware of its surrounds in a demesne landscape.

An Taisce does not agree that the change of use to an equestrian facility is a sustainable use given that it will result in increase in traffic generation and wastewater discharge in a site vulnerable to flooding. There is a risk from more extreme weather events in the future and application should be refused due to an unacceptable risk of flooding.

8 PLANS AND POLICIES

8.1 The Donegal County Development Plan 2012 – 2018 is the relevant policy document.

Relevant policies include:

BH-P-1 It is a Policy of the Council to conserve and protect all structures (or parts of structures) and sites contained in the Record of Protected Structures that are of special architectural, historic, archaeological, artistic, cultural, scientific, social or technical interest. Port Hall is listed under ref no. 40709113 in table 32 of the plan, as a protected structure.

NH-P-1 It is a policy of the Council to ensure development proposals do not damage or destroy any sites of international or national importance, designated for their wildlife/habitat significance.

NH-P-2 It is a policy of the Council to ensure the protection of Natura 2000 sites in accordance with the EU Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) and have regard to the relevant conservation objectives, qualifying interests and threats to the integrity of these Natura 2000 sites..

ED-P-9 It is a policy of the Council to permit economic development uses in the countryside which comply with the following provisions:- _

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 20 of 34 Farm Diversification schemes – provisions set out in Policy ED-P-10. etc. All other proposals for economic development in the countryside will only be permitted under this Policy in exceptional circumstances where the proposal comprises a development of regional or national significance and no suitable site exists within a settlement in the locality which can accommodate the proposal.

ED-P-10 It is a policy of the Council to permit Farm Diversification Schemes where the diversification scheme is to be run in conjunction with the agricultural operations of the farm. As far as possible the proposed development should reuse or adapt existing redundant farm buildings. Any new proposed building must be of a scale, form and design appropriate to the rural area. The proposed diversification scheme must comply with all other policies of this Plan and meet the relevant criteria of Policy ED-P-16. Where there are deficiencies in water infrastructure and/or where it is not possible to connect to the public systems, the developer will be required to demonstrate that bespoke development-led solutions can be identified, agreed in writing, implemented, and maintained which will address those deficiencies.

9 ASSESSMENT

9.1 The issues which arise in relation to this development are: appropriate assessment, built heritage, roads, flood risk, and other issues and the following assessment is addressed under these headings.

9.2 Appropriate Assessment 9.3 In accordance with obligations under the Habitats Directives and implementing legislation, to take into consideration the possible effects a project may have, either on its own or in combination with other plans and projects, on a Natura 2000 site; there is a requirement on the Board, as the competent authority, to consider the possible nature conservation implications of the proposed development on the Natura 2000 network, before making a decision on the proposed development. The process is known as appropriate assessment. In this regard a guidance document ‘Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland’ was published by the DoEH&LG on the 10 December 2009.

9.4 Screening Statement 9.5 To facilitate the carrying out this function the applicant has submitted a Screening Statement. This is provided as a report entitled ‘Screening for

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 21 of 34 Appropriate Assessment for an agricultural shed and associated facilities at Porthall, Lifford, Co Donegal; to support the appropriate assessment process in line with the requirements of Article 6(3) of the EU Habitats Directive’ by Dr Florence Wilson, Earthy Matters Environmental Consultants, which accompanied the planning application. 9.6 The area to which the Screening Statement relates, is marginally smaller than the subject site. The development covered by the report is described as: change of use of section of an existing agricultural shed to an indoor horse riding arena; change of use of first floor only of existing agricultural store to a lecture room associated with proposed indoor horse riding arena; construction of new agricultural shed for the storage of farm machinery, animal feed & covered dungstead, also all associated site works including parking and access through existing entrance. 9.7 It is worth noting that the development, the subject of the current application does not include construction of an agricultural shed or covering of the silage pit; but it does include additional items not included in the description of development in the screening report: minor improvements to the junction of the R265-3 & L23941-1 and retention of excavated area. It appears that the screening report was prepared for the previous application ref. no. 13/50572, referred to earlier, which application was withdrawn. There is however a considerable area of overlap between the two applications. 9.8 In the description of the designated site the report includes: The Finn system is one of Ireland’s premier salmon waters and is important in an international context in that its populations of spring salmon appear to be stable while declining in many areas of Ireland and Europe. The Porthall and surrounding areas bordering the River Finn (which is part of the River Finn system) are known for spring salmon fishing activities which are strictly regulated (Loughs Agency and North West Fisheries). The otter is widespread throughout the system. 9.9 In the identification and significance of potential impacts the report includes: The proposed development is in the least sensitive part of the River Finn SAC given the absence of blanket bogs, lowland oligotrophic lakes or other habitats for which the SAC has been selected; and the distance from the spawning grounds of salmon, which are at the headwaters of the Mourne and Derg Rivers, Lough Derg and Belshade and the tidal stretch of the Foyle. No impacts on salmon or otter are foreseen.

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 22 of 34 9.10 The report considers potential impacts on the quality and quantity of surface water and impact on downstream bodies. All yard runoff is collected and treated via serviced sediment and oil interceptor traps, prior to discharge into the existing storm drain. No effluent is likely to enter any of the surface water bodies. Farmyard waste stored on site is well bunded. No direct or indirect impacts to the qualifying interests of the River Finn SAC are foreseen. If measures are put in place to protect water quality the development would not affect the water quality of the River Finn. 9.11 Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measures should be considered as part of the development: All site preparation and construction should adhere to best practice and should conform to the Inland Fisheries Ireland ‘Requirements for the protection of Fisheries Habitat during Construction and Development Works at River Sites.’ Contamination of water with fuels, oils, dust, sediments or other pollutants should be avoided by taking precautionary measures and careful management during construction. The Contractor shall ensure that chemicals and concrete agitator washings are not deposited in watercourses. In the event of any spoil or debris from the construction works being deposited on adjacent land or any silt washed down to any area, then such spoil shall be immediately removed and the affected areas restored to their natural state. All yard surface water runoff should be treated via serviced sediment and oil interceptor traps, prior to discharge into the existing storm drain. At all times, all bulk fuel storage tanks should be properly bunded with a bund capacity of at least 110% that of the fuel tanks and (applicant should ensure) that underground oil pipes are properly installed and protected. Farmyard waste stored on-site must be disposed of according to Dept of Agriculture guidelines. 9.12 The conclusion of the screening is the finding of no significant effects.

9.13 Characteristics of the Proposed Development: The proposed development is as described in paragraph 2.1.

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 23 of 34 9.14 European sites that might be affected: 9.15 The only European site that might be affected is the River Finn SAC, which is located approx. 100m from the site. 9.16 The proposed development includes change of use of existing buildings. A letter accompanying the application states that at present there are 82 no. horses including 20 breeding mares on the holding. The applicant intends to keep 12-15 horses/ponies on a permanent basis for the Equestrian Centre. It is stated that Mr Herbie Lusby previously kept up to 200 horses for breeding stock and employed 8 no. men up to last year excluding himself and Daniel (i.e the current applicant). 9.17 In view of the fact that the proposed development involves the conversion and change of use of existing buildings, which currently include stables, to a horse riding arena and lecture room, it can be stated that the proposed development will not generate a greater amount of farmyard effluent that that currently generated. 9.18 The subject development proposes a temporary portable toilet to service the lecture hall, per drawing no 5011/100 ’D’. This facility will not generate effluent for disposal on site. 9.19 As part of the proposal for the car parking and circulation area it is proposed to provide a yard water collection system to discharge via a petrol interceptor and sediment ponds (drawing no. 5011/100 ’E’) to open drains. 9.20 All of the foregoing features are part of the development for consideration by the Board. 9.21 The Board will note that screening should be undertaken without inclusion of mitigation unless such mitigation constitutes an integral and fundamental part of the project itself. 9.22 The Board may wish to consider whether certain aspects of the project constitute integral and fundamental parts of the project itself. The design has evolved during the course of the application at local authority stage. I consider that at this stage, the features identified in the responses to the further information / clarification requests can be stated to be fundamental parts of the project; and also that it can be stated that compliance with the Inland Fisheries Ireland ‘Requirements for the protection of Fisheries Habitat during Construction and Development Works at River Sites;’ and compliance with European Communities (Good Agricultural Practice for Protection of Waters) Regulations 2009 (SI No 101 of 2009), can be stated to be fundamental parts of the project. In light of the foregoing, I do not consider that such mitigation should be excluded from the appropriate assessment screening.

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 24 of 34 9.23 The OPW commented on the previous application (PL05D233609), and submitted a map extract for the area which shows the land benefiting from the Deele and Swillyburn Arterial Drainage Scheme. A copy of the map is attached as appendix 4 to this report. It can be seen that the subject site is not within the area which is indicated as benefitting land. 9.24 A flood report on the previous file, PL05D233609, which is referred to in the inspector’s report on the file, stated that the level of 49.5m was free from historic flooding. In the subject application, the levels given in the layout drawings (e.g. no. 5011/100 ’C’) indicate that the proposed development is above this level. 9.25 The conservation objectives of River Finn SAC is to maintain or restore the favourable conservation status of habitats and species of community interest. The features of interest of the River Finn SAC (site code 2301) are: Annex I habitats: Oligotrophic waters containing very few minerals of sandy plains (Littorelletalia uniflorae) Northern Atlantic wet heaths with Erica tetralix Blanket bog (*active only), and Transition mires and quaking bogs; and Annex II species: Salmon and Otter 9.26 The spreading of slurry and fertiliser has been identified in the site synopsis as a threat to the water quality of the river and agriculture is the only project which in-combination with the proposed development is likely to give rise to significant effects. It appears from the documents on this file that the proposed change of use, will involve a reduction in the intensity of the farming use carried on at this location. 9.27 A pathway via surface water drainage is established between the proposed development (source) and the river (receptor). If the development is not carried out as proposed, there is a risk of pollution to the river. 9.28 Having regard to the nature and scale of the proposed development and based on the detail provided, I consider that the proposed development will not pose a risk of water pollution and accordingly that there is not a risk of significant effects on the Natura site and that appropriate assessment, stage 2, is not required. 9.29 It is reasonable to conclude on the basis of the information available, which I consider adequate in order to issue a screening determination, that the proposed development, individually and in combination with other plans or projects would not be likely to have a significant effect on

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 25 of 34 any European site and in particular specific site number 2301 in view of the site’s conservation objectives and an appropriate assessment (and submission of a NIS) is not therefore required.

9.30 Built Heritage 9.31 Porthall is a protected structure, listed in table 32 of the County Development Plan (ref. 40907113) as of national importance, and included in the national inventory of architectural heritage (house: NIAH no 40907113, and two storey warehouses: NIAH no 40907121). 9.32 The third party refers to confusion in the use of the description ‘Porthall House’, when referring to the house on the subject site. Porthall House is to the north, in the ownership of the third party. The confusion is only with regard to the name. 9.33 An Architectural Heritage Impact Assessment was submitted, prepared by Gregg Smeaton, MRIAI, architect accredited in conservation grade 3. This refers to the development of: change of use of section of an existing agricultural shed to an indoor horse riding arena; change of use of first floor only of existing agricultural store to a lecture room associated with proposed indoor horse riding arena; construction of new agricultural shed for the storage of farm machinery, animal feed & covered dungstead, also all associated site works including parking and access through existing entrance. 9.34 It is worth noting that the development, the subject of the current application does not include construction of an agricultural shed or covering of a silage pit; but it does include additional items not included in the Architectural Heritage Impact Assessment report: minor improvements to the junction of the R265-3 & L23941-1 and retention of excavated area. It appears that the report was prepared for the previous application ref. no. 13/50572, referred to earlier, which application was withdrawn. However there is a considerable area of overlap between the two applications, with the notable omission, on this occasion, of the roofing of the dungstead.

9.35 The report refers to the wider curtilage/ grounds of the house which have been changed substantially and are now used as a general farm yard including silage pit, silos, farm sheds and concrete hardstands; greatly detracting from the house and its immediate surroundings. 9.36 The conclusion refers to concerns regarding the roofing of a structure, not part of the subject application; otherwise the report concludes that

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 26 of 34 the development will have little negative impact on the protected structure.

9.37 The third party raises as a concern, that the proposed development would be detrimental to setting of the protected structure, although acknowledging that, as they exist, the buildings do nothing to enhance Port Hall. 9.38 The change of use will involve little alteration to the external appearance of the existing farm buildings. 9.39 The existing outdoor yard areas which are part of the subject development for access and car parking, are currently in an unkempt condition and the proposed development is likely to enhance rather than detract from their appearance.

9.40 Also of concern to the third party is that the use of the building by the public and for commercial purposes would be detrimental to the setting and character of Port Hall. 9.41 I don’t consider that either the use by the public or the use for commercial purposes of these farm buildings would be detrimental to the setting or character of the protected structure. It could be considered to be a benefit arising from the proposed development, that some members of the public will have the opportunity to see the protected structure by visiting this location, which is removed from the public road and not readily visible from a public road. It could be considered to be a benefit arising from the proposed development, that a commercial use will be made of agricultural buildings within the curtilage of a protected structure, which has the potential to help to support the maintenance of the protected structure.

9.42 The third party objects to the proposed development on the basis that the conservation officer recommended against the use of the access road, but that it is being used, and passing bays provided. 9.43 The proposed access to the site is from the existing private access road where it is proposed create an access, in advance of the gated access to the front of the house, by constructing a spur road running north along the field boundary. 9.44 This service road, from which the access will be taken, is also a tree lined avenue. It is proposed to create three passing bays along this service road. 9.45 The Board may wish to consider whether or not three passing bays are required on a straight road of 145m where there are opportunities to pull

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 27 of 34 in at either end. I have no objection to the provision of passing bays, which have been agreed to by the planning authority but, having regard to the volume and type of traffic which would be generated by the proposed development, the three passing bays could be considered unnecessary. The road is otherwise adequate to cater for the traffic likely to be generated by the proposed development. 9.46 The planning authority gave consideration to the creation of an entrance from the L 23943, which would be closer to the third parties property, but an objection to this option was raised and it was not pursued. 9.47 I consider that the location of the proposed access point, close to the house access, is acceptable. 9.48 In my opinion the impact on the built heritage of Porthall is not such as to require a refusal of permission.

9.49 Roads 9.50 The Board will note that improvements to the junction of the R-265-2 and the local road L23941-1 are proposed as part of the subject development and that these proposals have been assessed and approved by the planning authority. 9.51 The third parties are concerned that the proposed development will impact on their use of the public road, that the increased traffic will cause traffic congestion. There is very limited development along these rural roads. The local road L23941-1, the existing service road and two other local roads: the L23942 running south and the L23943 running north, form a crossroads west of the site. It is possible to reach the R-265-2 via the L23942, as well as via the L23941-1. The subject development proposes to use the L23941-1 but the other option is available to other road users. 9.52 The third parties refer to the volume of traffic which will be generated by the proposed development. Various figures have been given at various stages in the application process. The figures given in the most recent correspondence are: Monday to Thursday 3-5 people/vehicles per hour, 10 - 12 noon, and Friday evenings 7 - 9pm and Saturdays, 3 people/vehicles per hour; which represent very modest traffic increases. These figures are more likely to represent the number of patrons required for the start-up of the business, rather than what they would hope to achieve in the long run. Nevertheless, there is a low density of settlement in this area and a limited amount of movement on the local roads and it appears to me that there is adequate capacity to cater for the additional traffic which is likely to be generated by the proposed development.

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 28 of 34 9.53 I note the third part’s reference to a large event which took place on these lands in recent years blocking access to his farm, which is accessed via the L23943 to the north of the subject site. It would be of concern that there would be any difficulty in gaining access to a property, however a large event is an entirely different matter to the subject development which will generate very limited traffic. Any permission the Board may be disposed to grant, in relation to the subject application, will not permit a large event. 9.54 The third party is concerned that the proposed development may lead to the use of the public road by horses and riders, which he considers will pose a serious danger. I acknowledge that use of green roads or bridle paths by horse riders, is preferable to the use of public roads, even those lightly trafficked such as in the present case. I note that the buildings on site are some distance from a public road and also that the lands to the south, owned by Herbert Lusby, have a number of historic driveways running through them, which might be suitable for horse riding, if the business prospers. In my opinion road safety should not be a reason to refuse permission.

9.55 Flood Risk

9.56 In the previous appeal, ref. no. 05D233609, the Board decided to refuse permission based on the risk of flooding in the following terms: Having regard to the location of the site within an area liable to flooding, the Board is not satisfied on the basis of the information submitted in connection with the planning application and the appeal, that the proposed development would not result in increased surface water discharges and would not give rise to an unacceptable risk of flooding. The proposed development would, therefore, be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. 9.57 In that application / appeal the development was largely new build, and largely to the east of the house, i.e. between the house and the river. 9.58 In the subject application no new buildings are proposed. 9.59 A flood report on the previous file, PL05D233609, which is referred to in the inspector’s report on that file, stated that the level of 49.5m was free from historic flooding. In the subject application, the levels given in the layout drawings (e.g. no. 5011/100 ’C’) indicate that the proposed development is above this level. 9.60 The area identified on the previous file, PL05D233609, by the OPW as benefitting land, has been avoided. A copy of the OPW map is attached as appendix 4 to this report.

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 29 of 34 9.61 I consider that flood risk should not be a reason to refuse permission.

9.62 Other Issues 9.63 The third party refers to the fact that the shed which is the subject of the change of use to lecture theatre, underwent a roof replacement in recent years from natural slate to tin, and argues that this is unauthorised development. 9.64 The change of use is the matter which concerns the Board and any enforcement issues are matters for the Planning Authority. 9.65 In one observer’s submission to the planning authority reference is made to the fact that the roofing material of the agricultural shed, where the indoor horse riding arena is proposed, is made of asbestos. The roofing material is identified on the drawings on file as ‘existing corrugated fibre cement roof sheeting’. Part of the wall cladding is identified as ‘existing corrugated fibre cement side sheeting’. From my site inspection I cannot state precisely what materials either the roof or walls are made from, beyond the description given. The proposed riding arena will be a workplace and will therefore come under the control of the Health and Safety Authority, who have expertise in this area. The further information submitted on the 24th February 2014 included plans for a proposed manure pit, labelled ‘dungstead’ on the drawings submitted, which it is proposed to connect to the surface water system discharging to a storm pipe via a petrol interceptor and sediment tanks. Although it is clear from the drawings that a manure pit is proposed, the Board may wish to have this confirmed. Connection of the manure pit and yard surface water to discharge to existing storm water pipe is unacceptable. A soiled water tank should be provided to which the liquid fraction from the manure pit, existing farmyard and buildings, should be conveyed for storage pending disposal to land.

10 RECOMMENDATION

In light of the foregoing assessment it is considered that the proposed development would not detract from the setting or character of the protected structure, would not constitute a risk to the adjacent Finn River, which is a Natura site, would not tend to cause traffic congestion or obstruction to road users or a risk to traffic safety, or detract from the amenities of the area, would accord with the policies of the County Development and would accordingly be in accordance with the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 30 of 34

Conditions

1. The development shall be carried out and completed in accordance with the plans and particulars lodged with the application except as may otherwise be required in order to comply with the following conditions. Where such conditions require details to be agreed with the planning authority, the developer shall agree such details in writing with the planning authority prior to commencement of development and the development shall be carried out and completed in accordance with the agreed particulars.

Reason: In the interest of clarity.

2. Prior to the commencement of any other development the proposed upgrade works to the county road L-23941-1 and the Regional Road R- 265-2 shall be carried out and completed to the written satisfaction of the Planning Authority in strict accordance with drawing no. 5011/105’A’ submitted on the 12th December 2013.

Reason: In the interest of traffic safety.

3. Prior to commencement of development a permanent visibility splay of 70m shall be provided in each direction at a point 2.4m back from the road edge at the junction of the service road with the public road. Visibility in the vertical plane shall be measured from a driver’s eye height of 1.05m and 2m positioned at the setback distance in the direct access to an object height of between 0.26m and 1.05m. Vision splays to be calculated and presented as per Figure 7, of Section 10.2.10 of Chapter 10 (Development and Technical Standards), County Development Plan 2012-2018 (as varied).

Reason: In the interests of traffic safety.

4 a) Site preparation and construction works shall adhere to best practice and conform to the Inland Fisheries Ireland ‘Requirements for the protection of Fisheries Habitat during Construction and Development Works at River Sites.’

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 31 of 34 b) All road works shall be carried out in accordance with the NRA Environmental Construction Guidelines.

Reason: To preserve the ecological integrity of the River Finn SAC.

5 This permission does not authorise any use other than the uses described in the application documents and in particular public events are not hereby authorised.

Reason: In the interest of clarity.

6 Prior to commencement of development, a detailed landscaping scheme, including a timetable for implementation, shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for written agreement. Said scheme shall include substantial semi-mature broad-leafed trees native to the area. All sound trees, shrubs and hedgerow shall be retained save as herein otherwise required.

Reason: To protect the amenities of the area

7 Water supply and drainage arrangements for the site, including the disposal of surface and soiled water, shall comply with the requirements of the planning authority for such works and services.

Reason: In the interest of environmental protection and public health.

8 All soiled water from the farmyard and buildings, including the proposed manure pit (labelled dungstead on the drawings supplied) shall be conveyed through properly constructed channels to an effluent holding tank, for disposal by land spreading and no effluent or slurry shall discharge or be allowed to discharge to any stream, river or watercourse, or to the public road.

Reason: In the interest of environmental protection and public health.

9 All uncontaminated roof water from buildings and clean yard water shall be separately collected and discharged in a sealed system to

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 32 of 34 existing drains, streams or adequate soakpits and shall not discharge or be allowed to discharge to the foul effluent drains, foul effluent and slurry storage tanks or to the public road.

Reason: In order to ensure that the capacity of effluent and storage tanks is reserved for their specific purposes.

10 Effluent generated by the proposed development shall be disposed of by spreading on land, or by other means acceptable in writing to the planning authority. The location, rate and time of spreading (including prohibited times for spreading) and the buffer zones to be applied shall be in accordance with the requirements of the European Communities (Good Agricultural Practice for the Protection of Waters) Regulations, 2010 (SI no. 610/2010).

Reason: To ensure the satisfactory disposal of waste material, in the interest of amenity, public health and to prevent pollution of watercourses.

11 The developer shall pay to the planning authority a financial contribution of €3,291 (three thousand two hundred and ninety one euro) in respect of public infrastructure and facilities benefiting development in the area of the planning authority that is provided or intended to be provided by or on behalf of the authority in accordance with the terms of the Development Contribution Scheme made under section 48 of the Planning and Development Act 2000. The contribution shall be paid prior to the commencement of development or in such phased payments as the planning authority may facilitate and shall be subject to any applicable indexation provisions of the Scheme at the time of payment. The application of any indexation required by this condition shall be agreed between the planning authority and the developer or, in default of such agreement, the matter shall be referred to the Board to determine.

Reason: It is a requirement of the Planning and Development Act 2000 that a condition requiring a contribution in accordance with the Development Contribution Scheme made under section 48 of the Act be applied to the permission.

12 Prior to commencement of development, the developer shall lodge with the planning authority a bond of an insurance company, a cash deposit, or other security to secure compliance with condition no. 2,

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 33 of 34 coupled with an agreement empowering the planning authority to apply such security or part thereof to the satisfactory completion of any part of the development. The security to be lodged shall be as follows -

(a) an approved insurance company bond in the sum of €5,000 (five thousand euro), or

(b) a cash sum of €5,000 (five thousand euro) to be applied by the planning authority at its absolute discretion if such services are not provided to its satisfaction, or

(c) such other security as may be accepted in writing by the planning authority.

Reason: To ensure the satisfactory completion of the work.

______

Dolores McCague Date

Inspectorate

Appendix 1 Map and Photographs

Appendix 2 Copy extracts from Donegal County Development Plan 2012-2018

Appendix 3 Conservation Objectives, Site Synopsis and map of the River Finn SAC site code 2301

Appendix 4 OPW flood risk map copied from PL05D233609

Appendix 5 Extracts from the NIAH database

PL 05E.244028 An Bord Pleanála Page 34 of 34