An Bord Pleanála

Inspector’s Report

PL09.239130

House, Garage and Associated Works at Athgarrett Crossroads, Eadestwon, , Co.

PLANNING APPLICATION

Planning Authority: Kildare County Council

Planning Authority Reg. No: 11/403

Applicant: Jamie Johnson

Planning Authority Decision: Refuse Permission

APPEAL

Appellants: Jamie Johnson

Type of Appeal: First Party – V- Decision

DATE OF SITE INSPECTION: 19 th of September 2011

Inspector: Caryn Coogan

______PL09.239214 An Bord Pleanála Page 1 of 10

1.0 THE SITE

1.1 The appeal site is 1km south of Eadestown village, and 7Km south of Naas in rural Co. Kildare. Athgarrett Crossroads is a rural area, where the land is predominantly used for agriculture, but it is obvious the road frontage has suffered a considerable level of development pressure in the form of one off housing. In close proximity to the subject site there are 3No. recently constructed dwellings aligning the narrow county road to the immediate north of the site. 1.2 The site is an infill site with dwellings on both sides, and it is 0.42 ha and rectangular in shape. It is relatively flat site, with the lad rising to the rear. The site faces the road in a south-westerly direction, with broken hedgerows hedgerow boundaries along three boundaries i.e. the north-eastern, south-eastern and north western. There is a derelict building along the roadside boundary adjacent to the site entrance. To the north west there is a bungalow looking into the site because the site is exposed along this boundary.

1.3 Trial holes were dug out and left exposed in the field. The soil is clearly free draining with no waterlogging evident on site. The road fronting the site is a narrow rural road. There is an existing site entrance at the eastern extremity of the roadside boundary.

2.0 THE PLANNING APPLICATION

2.1 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The development is a dormer style dwelling with a detached double garage, with a recessed entrance, on site effluent treatment system, percolation area and all associated site works.

The application was accompanied by a comprehensive planning report outlining the applicant’s local needs.

2.2 SUBMISSIONS RECIEVED

There were no objections to the proposal.

2.3 PLANNING AUTHORITY’S REPORTS

The Departmental reports from the EHO, Water Services, and Transportation had no objection to the proposed development.

Planning Report The applicant has not demonstrated compliance with the local need criteria as the site is 10km from his parents dwelling. There are no other immediate family members in proximity to the site. The dwelling is inappropriate in terms of scale and massing and bears no relationship to the dwellings in the area. The applicant’s father was previously refused planning permission on the site. A Refusal is recommended.

Environmental Section

______PL09.239214 An Bord Pleanála Page 2 of 10

Further information is required regarding a cross section in compliance with Section 6 Annex C.3 of the EPA Code of Practice for Wastewater Treatment Systems.

Road Report No objections subject to certain conditions.

Water Services No objections subject to certain conditions

2.5 PLANNING AUTHORITY’S DECISION Kildare County Council refused the proposed development for 4No. reasons:

1. The applicant does not comply with the local need policies of the current development plan 2. The proposal materially contravenes RH3 of the CDP in relation to Rural housing policies 3. It is an inappropriate design and materially contravenes Policy RH 5 of the CDP. 4. It is contrary to the RPG.

3.0 THE APPEAL

3.1 THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL

Vincent Farry has made an appeal on behalf of the applicant. There were four reasons of refusal. There are three related to rural housing policy with the Council concluding the applicant had no links to the area. The applicant has submitted on appeal that he complies in full with the rural housing policy of the current development plan. He was born and reared in the area, he is a returning immigrant and he seeks to erect a house on lands owned by his father. I will summarise the relevant grounds of appeal in order to avoid undue repetition.

(i) Rural housing Policy

(a) National Planning Policy National policy seeks to permit houses in rural areas, especially to those who have lived in a rural area wishes to erect a new dwelling in the countryside. Section 3.2.3 of the Sustainable Rural Housing allows for returning emigrants to return to their home place to which they have social, cultural and economic ties.

(b) Local Planning Policy The applicant is a fulltime farmer on family land and he complies with adopted hierarchy of the settlement strategy for a dwelling in a rural area.

(ii) Rural Housing Eligibility Test

(a) Family Background The applicant’s mother was raised in the area and her extended family live locally and her father farmed land locally. Her husband Dermot Johnson was from the outskirts of Naas, and they built their martial home near Calliaghstown, where the applicant was raised. The family were involved in various local clubs. The applicant was born in 1988 and made his Holy Communion 1 km from the site. He attended Rathmore N.S. and ______PL09.239214 An Bord Pleanála Page 3 of 10 was a member of Eadestown GAA Club. The family own two separate farms in the locality, one owned by his father and the other owned by his uncle, 3kms from the subject site.

(b) Migration The applicant emigrated in 2008 and currently resides in Australia, working on a 9000acre farm in Victoria, Australia. He now wishes to return home to work on lands owned by his uncle Sean Dowling, where he worked as a child.

(c) Submission The Board is invited to assess the proposal in light of Section 3.2.3 of the Sustainable Rural Housing Guidelines. The applicant squarely falls within the category ‘Persons who are an intrinsic part of the rural community’, and returning emigrants. The applicant Is prepared to enter into a legal agreement restricting the occupancy of the proposed dwelling for seven years. It is similar to case PL09.23802.

(iii) The Built Environment The height of the proposed two storey dwelling is 7.2metres, it has been designed to appear as a single storey dwelling when viewed from the front boundary. The building line is setback 47.3metres and the garden will be landscaped.

(a) Visual Amenity It is unacceptable for persons with strong rural ties to an area to be forced to live in urban locations and commute to the rural area. The site is relatively level with no scenic features. There are no features on the site. Given the maturity of existing boundary vegetation and proposals to undertake additional planting and mounding, the visual impact of the dwelling will impose a reasonable level of tolerance. The dwelling is of low profile also. There will be no overlooking, overshadowing, visual intrusion as a result of the proposal.

Grounds of Appeal Three of the reasons for refusal relate to housing policy. The planning authority has not acknowledged that the applicant will built on his father’s land and that the applicant has connections with the locality. The key issue relates to the actual distance between the appeal site and the applicant’s former home, and the policy states must be within 5Kms of the original family home. It is stated that 5Km should be taken as a guideline and not a rule.

Appendix A contains a map which identifies 26 sites where the applicant’s relatives reside between Eadestown and .

In this case, the appellant’s future workplace is in the locality, which is 3kms from the site. If the applicant were to construct a house at his original home, he would be 7ms from his workplace.

The planning histories for the Kilteel/ Rathmore area suggest the elevated topography and sloping terrain are not suitable for housing, and if the applicant were to build a house near his original home, it would be at variance with the County Development for absorbing housing in that area.

There is no disputing between the parties that the applicant Mr. Johnson is from the area and he wishes to return to work with his uncle on family owned land.

The dwelling by reason of it’s size, bulk and design would not be out of character in the rural area.

______PL09.239214 An Bord Pleanála Page 4 of 10

4.0 PLANNING HISTORY

07/2977 Permission was refused to the applicant’s father on the site in 2007 for a dwelling on the site. The reasons for refusal related to non-compliance with the rural housing policy contained in the County Development Plan 2005-2011.

5.0 STATURY FRAMEWORK

National Planning Policy

1. Sustainable Development: A Strategy for Ireland

2. National Spatial Strategy

3. Rural Settlement Strategy

4. Sustainable Rural Housing Guidelines for Planning Authorities

These guidelines, published in April 2005, were foreshadowed in the National Spatial Strategy. They follow on from and elaborate on the guidance in the National Spatial Strategy.

The guidelines set out overarching policy objectives for planning authorities as follows: -

▪ The importance of supporting development needed to sustain and renew established rural communities. ▪ The need to ensure that the planning system guides development to the right locations in rural areas, in the interest of protecting natural and manmade assets in those areas. ▪ The need to analyse the different types of economic, social and physical circumstances of different types of rural areas and to tailor planning policies to respond to these differing local circumstances.

The guidelines repeat the need for planning authorities to identify and distinguish the four types of rural area categorised in the National Spatial Strategy namely, rural areas under strong urban influence, stronger rural areas, structurally weaker rural areas and areas with clustered settlement patterns.

They continue to divide rural housing into that which is urban-generated and that, which is rural-generated. They advise that in defining persons with rural-generated housing needs, development plans should not be over-prescriptive, citing the example of over- restricting the definition to persons engaged in fulltime agriculture. They also counsel against an overly vague approach.

Map 1 of the guidelines is developed from a map in the National Spatial Strategy and gives an indicative outline of rural area types. However, Section 3.2 of the guidelines cautions that it is to be expected that all planning authority areas which are predominantly rural will contain, to varying extents, at least three of the rural area types defined in the National Spatial Strategy, namely: -

1. Areas under strong urban influence, ______PL09.239214 An Bord Pleanála Page 5 of 10

2. Areas within a traditionally strong agricultural base, 3. Structurally weak areas.

On Map 1 of the Guidelines, the appeal site would be located in an area under strong urban influence. Appendix 3 of the guidelines sets out recommended development plan objectives and issues for rural areas. In relation to areas under strong urban influence, in the area of the development plan, policies should normally include reference to the types of situations considered as constituting rural generated housing, the measures that would be put in place to facilitate the availability of an appropriate level of housing options in smaller settlements, the criteria that would be applied by the planning authority generally in assessing rural generated housing proposals and the measures to be adopted to ensure that development permitted to meet the requirements of those with links to the rural community continued to meet the requirements for which it was permitted.

Under Section 3.2.3 recognizes returning immigrants that lived for a substantial part of their lives grew up in a particular area, returning home to reside beside family members, or to work locally etc should be accommodated.

5. The Regional Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area 2010 – 2022 The Regional Planning Guidelines is a policy document which aims to direct the future growth of the Greater Dublin Area (the area covered by Dublin City Council and the county councils of Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown, Fingal, South Dublin, Kildare, Meath and Wicklow) over the medium to long term. It works to implement the strategic planning framework set out in the National Spatial Strategy. It provides a clear policy link between national policies – the National Development Plan and the National Spatial Strategy and other national policy documents and guidance and local authority planning policies and decisions. It replaces the first Regional Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area which were adopted in 2004 and reviews and updates this document and looks forward to 2022.

Chapter 5 of the guidelines is on rural development. Section 5.2 is on rural housing. It notes that, as would be expected from the spatial distribution and settlement hierarchy of the Greater Dublin Area, the mid-east region counties of Kildare, Wicklow and Meath have the highest number of one-off houses in rural areas proportionate to overall housing in each of the counties, accounting for just over 21% in counties Kildare and Wicklow and just over 34% in Meath. It advises that in addition to the four broad rural settlement and housing framework objectives set out in the National Spatial Strategy, local authority policies need to take account of the different types of rural housing demands in varying rural contexts and be tailored accordingly. This requires different responses to managing housing in (a) rural areas under strong urban influence, (b) rural areas in strong rural areas, and (c) rural areas which are structurally weak and/or dispersed settlement areas. In general, urban generated rural housing need should be directed to existing settlements, built up areas or identified lands (such as zoned lands), through a plan-led process.

Where local needs assessment criteria have been satisfied, and subject to satisfying good practices or stated requirements in relation to site location, landscape/environmental sensitivities, design and layout, access, drainage and impacts on soils, watertable and water quality, rural generated housing needs should be accommodated where they arise. It is considered necessary that local needs assessment criteria should be provided in order to manage the demands for housing in rural locations (particularly in those areas under increasing development pressure) and that such criteria should be included in relevant development plans.

6. DOEHLG Circular Letter SP5/08 ______PL09.239214 An Bord Pleanála Page 6 of 10

Local Planning Policy

Kildare County Development Plan 2011

Table 4.3 contains categories one of which must be complied with in order to satisfy the Council of an applicants need for a dwelling. These categories should be read in conjunction with Map 4.1 Rural Housing Policy Zones.

The subject site is located within Rural Housing Policy Zone 1: Northern, central and eastern areas of the county (along the border with Wicklow) – more populated areas with higher levels of environmental sensitivity and significant development pressure. There are five categories of local need outlined in this zone. All applicants must comply with at least one of the categories in full.

Please see the copies of extracts from the Development Plan in the Appendix of this report which includes Table 4.3 and Map 4.1.

6.0 ASSESSMENT

6.1 The salient issue of this appeal is weather the applicant complies with the local needs criteria outlined in the Kildare County Development Plan 2011. The appellant has criticised the rigid implementation of the planning authority of it’s policy in this instance. In order for the planning authority to remain consistent and fair to all rural housing applicants, I believe it is important the applicant satisfies at least one of the criteria in Table 4.3 of the County development Plan. As the site is located within a Rural Housing Policy Zone 1, the criteria on the left hand-side of the table is applicable. In this instance, the planning authority concluded the applicant did not meet any of the five categories of the policy to satisfy it’s local needs policy. The Board has to decide if the planning authority was correct in it’s assessment and conclusions.

6.2 I have considered the comprehensive appeal submission and the attached appendix. In short, the applicant’s parents own the site, which is 0.4147Ha. The applicant’s father had applied for planning permission for a dwelling on the site in 2007, under planning reference 07/2977, however this was refused for three reasons relating to rural housing planning policy in place at the time. The map accompanying the appeal clearly outlines the context of the site in terms of the applicant’s parent’s house, his relatives residing in wider hinterland, and a broad range of community links. As a boy he went to school, was confirmed and played games within the local community in Eadestown/ Rathmore. The applicant is now twenty three years old and is currently working in Victoria, Australia as a farm manager. His uncle has offered the applicant a job to work on his farm (130acres) in Rathmore which is 3Kms from the site. He wishes to return home and build a house on the subject site.

6.3 Having examined the Rural Housing Policy Zone 1 of the County Development Plan whereby there are five categories of local need recognised in the areas under development pressure, the relevant category is as follows:

Persons who have grown up or spent substantial periods of their lives (12 years) living in the area, who have moved away and now wish to return to reside near to, or to care ______PL09.239214 An Bord Pleanála Page 7 of 10

for, immediate family members, seeking to build on the family landholding or on a site within 5km of the original family home. Immediate family members are defined as mother, father, son, daughter, brother , sister or guardian.

The applicant has demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that he was born in the locality, he was reared in the locality and he has strong family ties to the locality. The term ‘locality’ is used loosely by myself, as the subject site is detached from these connections. It is clear that the site is a stand alone site, with the immediate family and wider family residing in other townslands north of the subject site. The family do not own any other land in the general vicinity at Nunsland/ Attgarrett Crossroads, apart from the subject site, which is 0.4147Ha and in my opinion, is not a viable landholding but is classified a ‘ site’ . Therefore in terms of the above category, yes the applicant meets with the first element of the statement, but fails to meet with the latter half of the criteria, in that the ‘site’ is greater than 5km from the original family at Kilteel.

6.4 The planning authority came to a similar conclusion as myself. The Planning Report dated the 16/06/11 states that applicant had not demonstrated compliance with the local need criteria as the site is circa 10km from his parents house. There are no other immediate family members (as defined in the category) in proximity to the site. The category has been clearly stated, there is no room for ambiguity, and it is apparent the applicant fails to comply with the category or any of the four remaining categories.

6.5 On appeal, the applicant has presented a counter argument on this issue. It is recognised that the key issue in this case relates to the actual distance between the appeal site and the applicant’s former home (parent’s home). The applicant sates, it should be accepted that there will be occasional departures from the general pattern of living within 5kms of the family home or a central hub such as a village or a rural node, and this is recognised in Chapter 3 of the Development Plan which treats Eadestown and Rathmore as a single village for the proposes of the settlement strategy. Therefore, the 5km separation distance should be viewed as a guideline and not as a rule. It is submitted, the planning authority is also implying the intervening area of 10kms between the subject site and the applicant’s original home is void and contains no linkages. These linkages are clearly demonstrated on appeal. It is incorrect to conclude that the subject site by reason of it’s distance from the appellant’s original home is somewhat remote from the local community with which the applicant has strong connections. The applicant further states flexibility in applying such tests is envisaged in the Guidelines Sustainable Rural Housing which states Councils are to avoid being so prescriptive as end up with a very rigid development control system when considering whether individuals comply with the adopted criteria. The Council has not taken into consideration the appellant’s future workplace relative to the subject site, and if the applicant were to erect a dwelling at his original home place, he would be living 7km from his future workplace as opposed to 3kms. In addition, the recent planning histories and development plan policies relating to the applicant’s home place in Kilteel/ Rathmore suggest the landscape cannot absorb housing and he could be refused at this location, as there is a series of recent planning applications refused on visual/ scenic grounds.

6.6 In the previous development plan for Kildare County, the planning authority had devoted an entire Chapter of the County Development Plan to the issue of rural housing policy. Under the current development plan the policy this has been further refined and carefully measured against hundreds of planning applications during the term of the previous plan. The applicant may consider the planning authority’s approach to be rigid, but the categories outlined in Rural Housing Policy Zone 1 and Rural Housing Policy Zone 2 cover a wide range of local need circumstances, and because Rural Housing Policy Zone 1 is under relentless pressure for one off housing in the countryside, the planning authority has adopted a strict approach in order to be fair and consistent to ______PL09.239214 An Bord Pleanála Page 8 of 10

current and future applicants. In my opinion, the required criteria for demonstrating local needs is reasonable and encompasses a broad range of scenarios which would meet with genuine local needs applicants. In addition the Rural Housing Policy has to be in line with the Sustainable Rural Housing Guidelines which counsel against an overly vague approach to such policies. The policy has to be in line with National and Regional planning policy, and in my opinion, the current policy has been through a painstaking planning process from the previous plan and adopted process of the current plan. Although the planning authority is being prescriptive in the current case, I regard this to be a more appropriate approach to the rural housing issue as opposed to a vague and open-minded approach which could lead to inconsistencies and contradictions.

6.7 The relevant category clearly states a person now wishing to return home to reside near to, or to care for, immediate family members, must build build on the family landholding or on a site within 5km of the original family home. Immediate family members are defined as mother, father, son, daughter, brother, sister or guardian. It is not cousin, uncle, grand parent, great aunt and great uncle as presented by the applicant. In terms of the offer of employment from Sean Dowling the applicant’s uncle, there is no information on file about his family status. There appears a number of Dowling cousins residing in close proximity to the farm Furryhill, and yet there is no mention how these cousins are related to the landowner, or if they currently work on the farm or intend to do apply for planning permission for houses on the landholding to accommodate immediate members of the Dowling family or work at the farm also.

6.8 I would advise the Board against overruling the planning authority’s decision in this instance as it could undermine the future implementation of the Rural Housing Policy, which in my opinion, is clear, concise and reasonable. From my reading of the rural housing policy in relation to this case, it is not open to interpretation or contradicted by any other objectives in the Plan.

6.9 The issue of house design is a subjective issue, and indeed an emotive issue for certain individuals. In my opinion, the proposed house design is interesting and imaginative with a cruciform footprint and configuration, and is a welcome diversion from the standard uniform ribbon development. The house is designed to look like a single storey dwelling when it is viewed from the road. Unfortunately I do consider the overall design. However, in my opinion this particular design and layout is inappropriate for this site because the bulk of the dwelling, and it’s main elevation and including the front door, lobby and main windows are all orientated directly towards the neighbouring dwelling on the site to the north-west. The neighbouring house is exposed as there is no boundary between or screening between the properties, and has a conservatory and it’s private garden area within clear view of the proposed dwelling. A certain level of obtuse overlooking is acceptable between neighbours, but to orientate the main elevation of the dwelling towards the abutting house is unacceptable and will lead to an undue loss of privacy and represent an over-dominating and obtrusive elevation when viewed from the neighbouring property which is located in close proximity to the proposed dwelling. I believe the proposal should be refused on this basis.

6.10 I examined the sight lines in both directions at the proposed entrance, they were considered adequate. The road is narrow, however the subject site is situated a short distance from the crossroads, so therefore minimising the travel distance along the narrow county road. The new roadside boundary will be setback into the site, in line with the new roadside boundaries of the neighbouring sites. Having examined the trial holes on site it is clear the soil is free draining, and the proposed sewage treatment and disposal are acceptable.

______PL09.239214 An Bord Pleanála Page 9 of 10

7.0 RECOMMENDATION

I recommend the Board refuse the proposed development for the following reasons

REASONS AND CONSIDERATIONS

1. The proposed development would be located in an area defined as the Hinterland Area under the Regional Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area, 2010–2022, wherein it is a core principle of its strategic vision that development will be focused on growth and consolidation in key identified towns separated from each other by extensive areas of strategic greenbelt land. The site is also in an area under strong urban influence, as defined in the Sustainable Rural Housing Guidelines for Planning Authorities, issued by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government in April, 2005, wherein it is recommended that urban-generated development should be directed to cities, towns and villages. The subdivision of County Kildare into a northern and eastern Rural Housing Policy Zone 1 and a southwestern Rural Housing Policy Zone 2 in the current development plan for the area, and the restriction of rural housing to defined categories of local need within each zone are considered to be reasonable and to accord with the aforementioned guidelines. It is considered that the applicant does not come within the scope of the criteria for rural housing need as required by Rural Housing Policy Zone 1 and that the proposed development would be in conflict with the Sustainable Rural Housing Guidelines, and would, therefore, be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

2. Having regard to the design and layout of the proposed dwelling, it’s proximity and relationship to the existing dwelling on the abutting site north-west of the subject site, in terms of overlooking, loss of privacy and an over dominating presence, it is considered the proposed development would result in seriously injury to the existing residential amenities of the neighbouring dwelling, and would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

______

Caryn Coogan Inspector

29 th of September 2011

______PL09.239214 An Bord Pleanála Page 10 of 10