Inspector’s Report

Development : The construction of a single storey dwelling house with a domestic wastewater treatment system, landscaping and site development works at Mount Venus Road, Woodtown, Rathfarnham, Dublin 16.

Application

Planning authority: County Council

Planning application reg. no. SD10A/0043

Applicant: Karen McGrath

Type of application: Permission

Planning authority decision: Refusal

Appeal

Appellant: Karen McGrath

Type of appeal: First party -v- Decision

Observers: None

Date of site inspection 21 st July 2010

Inspector : Hugh D. Morrison

______PL06S.236744 An Bord Pleanála Page 1 of 8 Site description

The appeal site is located on the outside of the M50 ring, some 2 km to the south of . This site lies off Mount Venus Road, a link road that runs east/west between Road/ Road (R116) and Stocking Lane/Killakee Road (R115). Its gated entranceway abuts this Road and there are dwellings on either side, i.e. Woodtown Cottages to the east and “Woodfield” a new split level bungalow to the west.

The body of the appeal site is of regular shape and it extends over an area of 0.53 hectares. This site lies to the rear of the Cottages and partly to the side of the split level bungalow. It is a back land/green field site, which is subject to gentle/moderate gradients that generally slope downwards from west to east. To the northeast and northwest (partially), its boundaries abut the aforementioned residential properties, while the remaining boundaries are undefined. A dolmen/portal tomb (recorded monument (DU025-002)) lies in a position surrounded by trees to the southeast of the site.

Proposed development

The proposed development would entail the construction of a single storey, 237.6 sqm, 4 bedroom, dwelling house of contemporary design. This dwelling house would be served by the public mains water supply and a septic tank/percolation area. The existing access would be utilised and extended to serve the dwelling houses and the existing tree/hedgerow cover would be retained.

Planning authority’s decision

Permission was refused for the following three reasons:

• Inadequate road frontage / backland development / precedent / loss of rural amenity / material contravention of zoning objective,

• Suburban design / spoil scenic views from the south / loss of rural amenity / material contravention of zoning objective, and

• Prejudicial to public health: siting of percolation areas outside the appeal site and non-conforming site characterisation study.

Technical reports

Environmental Services and Parks and Landscape Services raise no objection, subject to conditions, while Roads and the HSE draw attention variously to the sub-standard characteristics of Mount Venus Road and hence the undesirability of an additional access and the need for a new site suitability assessment report and the retention of trial pits insitu.

______PL06S.236744 An Bord Pleanála Page 2 of 8 Grounds of appeal

First reason

Attention is drawn to the permission granted to application reg. no. 87A-1348 for access to the current appeal site and the adjoining property to the north. It was always intended that the former access, too, would serve a dwelling. Examples exist of the planning authority permitting clusters of dwellings off the one access, cf. application reg. no. S01A/0129 for a bungalow at Woodtown, Kilakee Road, Co. Dublin.

Second reason

While the critique of the proposal’s contemporary design is not accepted, if this critique is upheld then the applicant is prepared to accept a smaller dwelling of simpler design and fewer finishing materials. (Plans of such a dwelling have been submitted at this stage).

Third reason

The proposed percolation area can be resited inside the appeal site, and

The submitted site characterisation study was carried out in 2006. It does not need to be repeated as the “Code of Practice: Wastewater Treatment and Diposal Systems serving Single Dwellings (2009)” does not require that a different approach be adopted.

Response

The planning authority considers that these grounds do not overcome its reasons for refusal.

Planning history

Appeal site

• SD02A/0462 for a dwelling house, a septic tank and an access, by upgrading the existing entrance to family lands from Killakee Road was granted permission,

• SD09A/0146 for a part single/part two storey dwelling house, a domestic wastewater treatment system and an access off Mount Venus Road was refused permission on the grounds of design/visual obtrusiveness, lack of road frontage/access off sub-standard portion of road and backland development, and

• PP290/09: applicant advised to address reasons for previous refusal.

______PL06S.236744 An Bord Pleanála Page 3 of 8

Adjoining site

• SD04A/0872 for single storey dwelling house, a biocycle wastewater treatment system and modifications to existing access off Mount Venus Road was granted permission.

Development Plan

The appeal site is shown in the South Dublin County Development Plan 2004 – 2010 as lying within a zone that is the subject of objective B “To protect and improve rural amenity and to provide for the development of agriculture.” The use class “residential” is open for consideration in this zone. Copies of the policy on the control of one-off housing within this zone and development control guidelines on such housing are attached as an appendix to this report.

National planning guidelines

• National Spatial strategy, and

• Sustainable Rural Housing Guidelines

Assessment

I have reviewed the proposed development in the light of the CDP, national planning guidelines, relevant planning history and the submissions of the applicant and the planning authority. Accordingly, I consider that the decision on this appeal turns on the resolution of the following issues:

(i) The applicant’s candidature for a dwelling in this rural area,

(ii) The location of the appeal site,

(iii) The design of the proposed dwelling house,

(iv) The proposed access, and

(v) The proposed percolation areas.

I will discuss each of these issues in turn.

(i) The applicant’s candidature for a dwelling in this rural area.

1.1 The NSS indicative outline of rural area types shows rural areas around Dublin as being under strong urban influence. The CDP shows the appeal site as lying within an area that is zoned objective B, “To protect and improve rural amenity and to provide for the development of agriculture.” Within this area, dwellings will only be permitted on suitable sites where applicants can either establish a genuine need to reside in proximity to their employment, which must be related to the rural community, or where they have close family ties with this community.

______PL06S.236744 An Bord Pleanála Page 4 of 8

1.2 The applicant has submitted copies of documents in support of her application. She has not indicated under which of the two aforementioned headings she is applying. Some of these documents have a bearing on the first heading and some on the second.

1.3 With respect to the former, the applicant is described as being self employed and so she is in a position to assist as needs be with farm work on her parents’ farm. The nature of her employment is not fully elucidated, i.e. there is only a reference to freelance TV producer/director work in 2006, and so I am unable to conclude that she is employed in work related to the rural community.

1.4 With respect to the latter, the applicant has demonstrated that she has close family ties with the rural community, by referring to her background and upbringing on Woodtown Farm, Mount Venus, her local schooling and her current residency with her own family and her parents on this Farm.

1.5 I, therefore, conclude that the applicant is a candidate for a dwelling in this rural area.

(ii) The location of the appeal site.

2.1 Mount Venus Road is subject to the same zoning as the appeal site. Within the vicinity of this site this Road has been developed by means of one-off dwelling houses on their own sites. The majority of these more recent dwelling houses have been developed on sites with frontages, which are dimensionally of the order of 60m in length.

2.2 The CDP envisages two approaches to the siting of rural dwellings. The preferred approach is the clustering of dwellings. The Sustainable Rural Housing Guidelines also advocate this approach and they indicate that clusters should be set well back from the public road and be served by an individual entrance. The other approach entails the development of one-off dwellings on individual sites with a road frontage of at least 60m “so as to preserve the rural quality of the area and to avoid a suburban form of development.”

2.3 The CDP’s preference for clustering is expressed in terms of only acceding to the alternative approach if it cannot be achieved. The pattern of development exhibited along Mount Venus Road accords with this alternative approach. While it maybe anachronistic to interpret this outcome as indicating that clustering was unachievable in the past, for clustering now to be proposed would risk the two approaches occurring side by side and, in aggregate, both a greater loss of countryside to residential development and an over concentration of such development.

2.4 The proposed development of the appeal site would represent neither of the two aforementioned approaches, i.e. as a single dwelling it would not form part of a cluster and yet as such it would have a road frontage of only 12m. As the body of this site lies to the rear of Woodtown Cottages and

______PL06S.236744 An Bord Pleanála Page 5 of 8 partly to the side of Woodfield, all of which are residential properties that front onto Mount Venus Road, it represents a back land site that the CDP does not envisage being developed for housing in a rural area.

2.5 The applicant draws attention to the permission that was granted to application reg. no. 87A-1348. This permission was for a vehicular access to the dwelling at Mount Venus House and a proposed field gate entrance, the two sharing a single bellmouth on Mount Venus Road. This permission was implemented and the resulting bellmouth serves the existing dwelling house immediately to the southeast and the field within which lies the appeal site. The applicant refers to this field gate entrance and states that “It was always intended that this separate entrance would be used for a house but was not developed at the time.” However, the description of the same as a field gate entrance does not give expression to this intention.

2.6 The applicant also indicates that the proposed dwelling house would form a cluster with the dwelling at Mount Venus House. However, these two dwellings would only share access off the aforementioned bellmouth and so they would not represent a clustered form of development.

2.7 I, therefore, conclude that the location of the appeal site, as a backland site, debars its development for housing under the CDP.

(iii) The design of the proposed dwelling house.

3.1 As originally submitted, the proposed dwelling house would have been of single storey form and contemporary design. Its height would have varied under an intricate/complicated roofscape, which would have comprised mono-pitched planes at different gradients. External finishes would also have comprised a variety of materials.

3.2 The planning authority’s second reason for refusal critiqued the design of the proposed dwelling house within its open, upland, rural context. The applicant has responded to this critique by submitting a smaller and simpler version of the proposed dwelling house, which would be more in line with the CDP’s design guidelines for rural dwellings.

3.3 I concur with the planning authority’s critique of the original proposal, insofar as the roofscape and range of finishing materials of the dwelling house would exhibit too much variety. However, the applicant’s alternative design would be unduly plain, by comparison, and its virtually square plan form would result in unattractive, elongated, gabled end elevations. The CDP introduces the design guidelines on the basis that they are general in nature and so, while they should influence the design approach adopted, site specific and contextual factors are also of relevance. It also states that no one particular architectural style will be insisted upon, except where there is an accepted vernacular. In the case of the appeal site, its context includes examples of dwellings exhibiting modern architecture and so an appropriate design approach would be informed by both the guidelines and this context.

______PL06S.236744 An Bord Pleanála Page 6 of 8 3.4 I conclude that the neither of the two design proposals for the appeal site would be an appropriate response to the twin influences of the CDP’s design guidelines for rural dwellings and the context of the site itself.

(iv) The proposed access.

4.1 Access to the proposed dwelling house would be by means of the existing field gate entrance from Mount Venus Road, described above. The gravel roadway to this access from within the appeal site is presently overgrown and so I consider that it is likely that it is only used very occasionally. As discussed above, it is authorised for agricultural use. I anticipate that, under the proposed development, its usage would increase markedly.

4.2 The portion of Mount Venus Road in the vicinity of the access has a narrow two lane carriageway and no footways. As it passes the access it both curves and falls away in an easterly direction. It is subject to a continuous white centreline. I estimate that, from a 2.4m set back position, the eastern and western sightlines would/would be capable of extending 80m in either direction. (The latter sightline would require the relevant splay forward of the front boundary wall to Woodfield to be cleared of existing vegetation). They would, therefore, exceed the minimum of 70m for a 50 kmph zone.

4.3 Given the sub-standard characteristics of Mount Venus Road, the anticipated increased usage of the existing access would not be desirable. However, I do not consider that such usage would warrant outright objection.

4.4 I, therefore, conclude that the use of the existing access can be acceded to.

(v) The proposed percolation areas.

5.1 As originally submitted, the proposed percolation areas would have been sited in lands adjoining the appeal site to the south, in the applicant’s ownership. The planning authority’s third reason for refusal took exception to this siting on the basis that it would lie outside the envisaged curtilage of the proposed dwelling house. This reason also critiqued submission of a site characterisation report that did not reflect the EPA’s latest advisory guidelines.

5.2 The applicant has responded to this reason by resiting the percolation areas within the appeal site. The siting of the proposed dwelling house (alternative design) would be adjusted to facilitate the same, i.e. it would migrate 13.1m to the north to display a clearance distance of 15.3m from the site’s north western boundary. She has dismissed the complaint concerning the submitted report on the basis that the new guidelines do not introduce any changes of relevance to the investigations already undertaken.

______PL06S.236744 An Bord Pleanála Page 7 of 8 5.3 In substantive planning terms, I consider that the applicant’s response is sufficient to overcome the planning authority’s third reason for refusal. However, I am concerned that procedurally the proposed resiting of the dwelling house and its redesign represent material changes to the application, as originally submitted, and so, in the event that the Board are minded to grant permission, this application should be the subject of a fresh public consultation exercise.

5.4 I conclude that the proposed percolation areas would per se be appropriate.

Recommendation

In view of my assessment, I recommend that the construction of a single storey dwelling house with a domestic wastewater treatment system, landscaping and site development works at Mount Venus Road, Woodtown, Rathfarnham, Dublin 16, be refused permission.

Reasons and considerations

1. The proposed dwelling house would be sited on a back land site within an open, upland, rural area. The South Dublin County Development Plan 2004 – 2010 does not envisage the siting of one-off dwelling houses on such sites and so the proposed dwelling house would represent an unwarranted encroachment into the countryside, which would fail to preserve its rural quality. Accordingly, the siting of the dwelling house would contravene the Development Plan and, as such, be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

2. The submitted designs for the proposed dwelling house would fail to reflect both design guidelines for rural dwellings in the South Dublin County Development Plan 2004 – 2010 and the contextual influences of existing buildings within the vicinity of the application site. Accordingly, these designs would represent sub-optimal design solutions for this site and so they would fall short of the standard appropriate for this scenic, rural, upland area. The proposed dwelling house would, therefore, be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

Hugh D. Morrison Inspector 29 th July 2010

______PL06S.236744 An Bord Pleanála Page 8 of 8