An Bord Pleanála
Inspector’s Report
PL 07.240206
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: Temporary permission to construct six classroom educational building, staff room, office and associated works.
LOCATION: Kilcolgan, County Galway.
PLANNING APPLICATION
Planning Authority (P.A.): Galway County Council
P.A. Reg. Ref.: 11/755
Applicants: Thomas and Nancy Neilan
Application Type: Permission (Temporary)
P.A. Decision: Grant temporary permission, subject to conditions.
PLANNING APPEAL
Appellant: Alan Kelly
Type of Appeal: Third Party – v – Grant
Site Inspection: 5 June, 2012
Appendices: Photographs and Key Map; Development Plan Extracts; Site Location Sketch.
______PL 07.240206 An Bord Pleanála Page 1 of 16
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 This is a third party appeal against the decision of Galway County Council to grant a temporary permission for a six classroom school building including staff room and office. The proposed school would be serviced by an on-site wastewater treatment facility with percolation area etc.
1.2 The Board will be aware that a permission was granted, upheld on appeal for a primary (“Educate Together”) school complex elsewhere in Kilcolgan, earlier this year. Applicants state in correspondence, on the current file, that the current proposal is being put forward separately from any Educate Together proposal.
1.3 The temporary permission conditioned by the Planning Authority is in response to the submission of the applicant seeking only a temporary permission. Clarification on the purpose of the temporary permission was sought and offered in “further information” at planning application stage.
1.4 I have read the file and visited the site and can now report as set down below.
2.0 SITE CONTEXT AND DESCRIPTION
2.1 Site Location
2.1.1 The site is located within the generally built-up area of Kilcolgan village. It has frontage on the N18 National Primary Route (part of the main Galway-Ennis Road) to the east of the site, and frontage on a minor road on the northern site boundary. Access to/from the site is proposed on this northern road frontage.
2.1.2 On the opposite side of the roads adjoining the appeal site there is a mixture of mainly residential and commercial/retail and some access to agricultural lands. The development on the eastern side of the N18 in this vicinity is set back from the main road carriageway and separated from it by a stone wall and service road comprising what appears to be the old main road in this area.
2.1.3 The 60kph speed limit applies throughout Kilcolgan, including the road from which access is proposed.
2.1.4 The appeal site (and most of the remainder of the field of which it forms part) appears as elevated ground in the local landscape, notably as viewed from the northern main road approach to the village. From this viewpoint the profile of the site is visible as a backdrop to the nearby Post Office. The wider environment in the vicinity is characterised by mature trees including some rooted within the northern boundary of the appeal site. The trees in the vicinity have a significant screening effect on the built-up area as viewed from the minor scenic road in the valley/estuary of the Kilcolgan River to the north-west.
______PL 07.240206 An Bord Pleanála Page 2 of 16
2.2 Site Description
2.2.1 The site itself comprises overgrown grassland. To the north it is bounded by a stone wall with overgrown hedgerow including trees, with a single gated agricultural access. To the east there is a stone wall edge to the back of the footpath adjoining the N18 public road. To the south and west the site is open to the field of which it forms part.
2.2.2 The field including the site is mainly level and appears well drained. There is a gentle fall in the ground to the north and a steeper embankment close to the eastern site boundary, probably associated with the historic cut of the widened main road in the vicinity.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY
3.1 The planning reports for the Planning Authority prepared at planning application stage list nineteen planning applications stated to have been “within 150 metres of this application”. Site location maps have not been provided, and none is distinguished as being particularly relevant to the current planning application/appeal case. However both the applicants and the appellant have highlighted particular cases in their submissions on file, which I shall include in a summary of potentially relevant cases, below. Most of the cases in the summary list below were the subject of appeals to An Bord Pleanála. All of those listed relate to sites in the townland of Kilcolgan. It may be noted that this townland extends from the village of Kilcolgan westwards and northwards to the tidal shoreline of the Kilcolgan River estuary.
3.2 The summary list of potentially relevant cases is divided into cases relating to the current appeal site and others in the vicinity. Although some of the cases are dated, they are included for completeness of information in the context of submissions made to An Bord Pleanála by the parties to the appeal.
3.2.1 Site History
98/2250 (PL07.112989) Refusal upheld on appeal (year 2000) for mixed development including supermarket/post office/4 no. retail units, petrol filling station, 7 no. apartments and on-site wastewater treatment facilities.
00/4631 Permission granted in 2004 for retail units including post office, off-licence and hardware store and on-site wastewater treatment plant. Conditions attached included certain conditions relating to building line and finished floor levels, including certain details to be agreed with the Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development. The development was not undertaken and the relevant permission is understood to have now withered.
3.2.2 Lands in the Vicinity
07/1060 (PL07.225974) Refusal on appeal (2008) for 23 no. unit housing development including on-site wastewater treatment system. Reasons for refusal were
______PL 07.240206 An Bord Pleanála Page 3 of 16
three, relating to: absence of planned physical infrastructure; piecemeal development in the absence of a local plan; risk of groundwater pollution.
08/114 (PL07.229855) Permission refused on appeal (2008) for a mixed use development including 56 no. houses, crèche, retail, offices and on-site treatment plant. Reasons for refusal were four, relating to: physical infrastructural deficiencies, piecemeal development; risk of groundwater pollution; and traffic hazard.
10/462 Refusal of permission for a single dwelling with on-site treatment unit (2010). Reasons for refusal were two based on traffic hazard and effluent impact on ground and surface waters, prejudicial to public health and harmful to the environment including Natura 2000 sites.
11/679 (PL07.239559) Permission granted, upheld on appeal this year for a primary school, crèche and medical centre (file available for reference). This permission does not appear to have been acted upon to date.
4.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING AUTHORITY DECISION
4.1 Proposed Development
4.1.1 The proposed development is described in the planning application and public notices as being an application for: “… temporary planning permission to construct a six classroom educational building to include staff room, resource rooms, office and toilets to Department of Education specifications; treatment unit, percolation area and all associated site services…”
4.1.2 Site area is stated to be 0.8590 hectares. Gross floor space of the proposed works is stated to be 690 square metres.
4.1.3 Source of water supply is stated to be public mains.
4.1.4 Wastewater treatment is proposed by way of an onsite wastewater treatment plant (details provided, and elaborated in further information).
4.1.5 Surface water disposal is stated to soak-pit.
4.1.6 A covering letter was submitted with the application (OPC Design & Planning). The main points made in this letter may be summarised:
- need for more educational facilities at Kilcolgan: currently school children must be enrolled in Clarinbridge, Oranmore, Kinvara and Gort; - at “pre-planning” stage the Planning Authority has indicated development to be acceptable in principle; - site planning history has included permission granted for a petrol station and shop, never implemented; - lands to the west and south of the site have been the subject of “successful high density planning applications”;
______PL 07.240206 An Bord Pleanála Page 4 of 16
- access, parking and transport arrangements have been designed to maximise safety/sustainable travel patterns and comply with the requirements of the development plan for the area, moreover the county road – from which access is proposed – forms a low volume junction with the N18 at “non-peak hours”; - design is consistent with the Department of Education standards for temporary structures; - on-site wastewater treatment has been designed and specified in accordance with prevailing EPA Standards.
4.2 Initial Assessment for Planning Authority
4.2.1 The initial assessment for the Planning Authority is set out in the Planning Report dated 18 July 2011. There were no fundamental objections in principle raised, although a query was raised over the precise purpose of a temporary permission in the context presented.
4.2.2 The assessment concluded with a recommendation to seek further information under four headings:
• roads issues; • justification/purpose of “temporary permission sought”; • clarification on adequacy of wastewater treatment percolation area; • landscaping proposals.
4.3 Further Information Sought and Obtained
By letter dated 19 July 2011 the Planning Authority sought further information as recommended in the Planning Report to which I have referred, above. A submission in response to the further information queries raised was submitted to the Planning Authority on 23 December 2011 under cover of a letter prepared by OPC Design and Building. The submission includes technical reports produced by RPS (roads’ issues including an autotrack analysis and road safety audit); and Biorock (wastewater treatment), and landscape proposals.
4.4 Final Assessment for Planning Authority
4.4.1 The final Planning Report appears to be unsigned and undated but included a single paragraph assessment (page 6 of Report refers). The Report opined that the proposed building would not be suitable on a permanent basis and that there were issues outstanding in respect of setback distance from the National Route and finished floor level.
4.4.2 The Report concluded with a recommendation to grant permission subject to conditions.
______PL 07.240206 An Bord Pleanála Page 5 of 16
4.5 Planning Authority Decision
By order dated 26 January 2012 the Planning Authority decided to grant permission subject to twelve conditions. In the context of the current planning appeal and other significant planning issues, I draw the attention of the Board to the following:
condition no. 2 states that the permission is a temporary permission for five years, in the interest of clarity. condition no. 4 requires a setback from the national route of “a further 15m or a distance satisfactory to the Planning Authority…”; and a lowering of finished floor level by 1 metre, all in the interest of visual amenity.
condition no. 4 also requires revised layout showing compliance with EPA requirements.
condition no. 5 requires compliance with all recommendations of the road safety audit.
condition no. 10 sets down certain drainage requirements, in the interest of proper planning and sustainable development.
condition no. 11(i) requires that the proprietary treatment system shall be designed, installed and operated in accordance with EPA Code of Practice.
5.0 APPEAL AND CORRESPONDENCE
5.1 The Appeal
5.1.1 The appeal is submitted by Enplan Consultants Limited in the name of Alan Kelly (understood to be a Director of Enplan).
5.1.2 The appeal is set out in approximately 12 pages of text plus appendices (1-7). The first two sections (numbered 1 and 2) of the appeal outlines certain background information including planning history relating both to the current appeal site and to sites in the vicinity. Cases noted include those as set out in Section 3.2 of my report, above. The history section in the appeal seeks to highlight what is submitted to be a consistent approach by An Bord Pleanála in the area in discouraging stand-alone wastewater treatment units, and what is submitted to be a less consistent approach taken by the Planning Authority in an area characterised by karst and a high groundwater vulnerability.
5.1.3 Sections 3 and 4 of the submitted appeal state the grounds of appeal, summary and conclusions.
______PL 07.240206 An Bord Pleanála Page 6 of 16
5.1.4 The grounds of appeal are set out in detail in Section 3 of the submission and may be summarised as set down below.
• Submitted traffic impact assessment (TIA) flawed by reference to certain assumptions and analyses including autotrack analysis. • Submitted road safety audit (RSA) deficient by reference to analysis of conflict points and failure to justify reduced sightlines relative to the requirements of Galway County Development Plan. • Paucity of on-site cycle parking and continuous internal footpaths, including inadequate provision for safe on-site movement of mobility impaired persons. • On-site bin storage absent. • Building setback from national route inadequate. • Effluent treatment proposals inadequate by reference to:
- general lack of detail in respect of overall site services including drainage levels, falls etc.; - soak-away details inadequate, with no proposals for attenuation incorporating a bypass separator; - planning history references to sensitivity of local environment notably An Bord Pleanála Register nos. 219719, 225974 and 229855; - the implications of Planning Authority proposed condition no. 4 vis-á- vis distance setback requirements per EPA Guidelines; - wastewater treatment buffer zone encroaches on neighbouring lands outside the control of the applicant.
• Discordant physical feature on an elevated site. • Substandard development by reference to Department of Education Guidelines. • Provision of an unjustified new build temporary school facility at a key central village location would not be in the interest of the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. • The subject development should be the subject of a Natura Impact Statement (NIS) by reason of its proximity to and physical relationship with a European Site. • Planning Authority judgement in relation to significance of further information sought and obtained, was flawed: further information should have been publicly notified, having regard to its significance in the matter of road safety and traffic.
5.2 Planning Authority Response to Appeal
The Planning Authority has not responded to the current appeal.
5.3 Applicants’ Response to Appeal
5.3.1 The applicants responded to the appeal in a letter dated 9 March 2012.
______PL 07.240206 An Bord Pleanála Page 7 of 16
5.3.2 The main points of the submission may be summarised as set down below:
• Appeal is vexatious in nature. • Notwithstanding current proposals for an Educate Together facility at Kilcolgan, An Bord Pleanála should note that the closest established national schools in the area are at Ballinderreen and Clarinbridge, both of which are at capacity; and the closest Gael Scoil provision is at Gort and at Oranmore. • Planning history cases referred by appellant do not refer to developments characterised by a similarity to the currently proposed development in terms of nature, scale or access arrangements. • Regarding roads issues, it is submitted that:
- proposed access via county road will have limited impact, moreover junction arrangements between the N18 and the county road have recently been improved; - TIA assumption of average 28 pupils per classroom is consistent with Department of Education Guidelines; - village location will encourage sustainable travel patterns; - there will be a footpath between the N18 and the school entrance.
• Regarding effluent treatment issues:
- the Environment Section of the Planning Authority has approved the system, having regard to information including further information provided; - proposal is in compliance with EPA Guidelines.
• Regarding design and siting issues raised:
- the building will be of a suitably high standard of finish, as used elsewhere in County Galway; - setback requirements as per planning condition proposed by the Planning Authority, will be addressed in due course.
5.3.3 An Bord Pleanála is requested to treat the appeal as vexatious and frivolous, and accordingly it should be dismissed.
5.4 Further Submissions
Although An Bord Pleanála circulated the applicants’ appeal response to the other parties to the appeal, for information and any observations, there were no further submissions made.
5.5 Other Correspondence
There have been no other submissions made to An Bord Pleanála in the context of the current appeal. However at planning application stage, it should be noted that there were third party observations made by the two interested persons/groups, in addition
______PL 07.240206 An Bord Pleanála Page 8 of 16
to a submission made at the time by the now current appellant. The two other submissions may be summarised as set down below:
- Kilcolgan Educate Together National School (KETNS letter of 27 June 2011) stated that they have no role in the subject planning application (County Galway Reg. No. 11/755 [current appeal case]) and the proposed facility is not designed for KETNS and does not meet KETNS requirements for a new school and associated facilities;
- Clarinbridge Oyster Co-Op Society Limited (26 June 2011) submitted that granting permission for standalone treatment systems in the Kilcolgan and Clarinbridge areas “… adds to the deterioration of the water quality of the Clarinbridge oyster.” The letter also outlined the context of slow progress in the planning/funding for a Galway East Waste Water Treatment Plant which would allow the pumping of effluent from both Kilcolgan and Clarinbridge. The submission warns that any development allowed on the current appeal site could in time lead to larger development proposals necessitating a discharge licence which would be opposed by the Co-Op.
6.0 OFFICIAL POLICY
In the context of the issues raised in the current appeal, and other relevant planning considerations, I consider relevant policy to this case is contained in the County Development Plan and the EPA publication entitled “Treatment Systems for Small Communities, Business, Leisure Centres and Hotels”.
6.1 County Development Plan
6.1.1 Relevant sections of the Galway County Development Plan 2009-2016 are highlighted on extracts from the Plan attached herewith to my report.
6.1.2 There is no Local Area Plan (LAP) in existence for Kilcolgan.
6.2 EPA Manual
A photograph of Table 4 of the relevant manual is included attached herewith to my report.
7.0 ASSESSMENT
7.1 Principle of Development
7.1.1 There is no LAP in existence for Kilcolgan. The planning reports for the Planning Authority, prepared at planning application stage, state certain general Development Plan provisions relating to the current appeal site:
______PL 07.240206 An Bord Pleanála Page 9 of 16
• proximity to a floodplain; • area of low landscape sensitivity; • proximity to a national road; • location within the “GTPS” area; • location within an area designated at Rkc regionally important groundwater zone characterised by conduit karst aquifer where development potential is limited; • drainage by the Kilcolgan River; • within a zone of influence at Galway Airport.
7.1.2 In the context of issues raised in the current appeal, and other important planning considerations, I consider the matters of drainage, flooding, landscape sensitivity and proximity to a national route to be the most significant of the policy issues signalled in the planning reports. Location considerations vis-á-vis GTPS area and Galway Airport are not very relevant having regard to the nature and scale of development proposed. I shall refer to the policy context(s) raised in the planning reports as appropriate in the various sections of my assessment, below.
7.1.3 In the absence of any LAP, I consider the nodal point location of Kilcolgan and the existing/historic pattern of development in the area to be significant considerations. In the first instance the village of Kilcolgan includes the junction of the N18 National Primary Route (main Galway/Sligo – Limerick/Ennis Road) with the N67 National Secondary Route which links the N18 with Kilkee/Kilrush via Ballyvaughan and Ennistymon. There is also a cross country signposted route via third class roads to/from Craughwell to the north-east. Kilcolgan is therefore an established node accessible to a wide catchment area. It is stated in appeal correspondence that the nearest existing primary school facilities are at Clarinbridge (approximately 3 kilometres to the north) and Ballinderreen (approximately 3.5 kilometres to the south- west). I noted also an existing school at Killeeneenmore to the east. It is also stated in appeal correspondence that an existing Kilcolgan Educate Together National School (KETNS) facility in the village has reached or exceeded its enrolment capacity. In principle therefore catering for future primary school enrolments at Kilcolgan would appear to be a reasonable/desirable expectation or prospect. Kilcolgan is a designated Local Service Centre in the Galway County Development Plan 2009-2015.
7.1.4 Regarding the pattern of development at Kilcolgan, most of the established village building development is located east of the main N18 road, stretching between the N18/N67 junction at the south and the Post Office/Garda Station junction at the north (north-eastern point of appeal site).There is also some modern development west of the N18 in this vicinity, notably south of the appeal site. The appeal site itself forms part of a green field effectively located in the centre of the existing village of Kilcolgan.
7.1.5 The siting of a development of the nature proposed at this location should in principle be seen as appropriate in the context as outlined by me above. However in the absence of certain physical infrastructure at Kilcolgan, notably a public sewerage system, there is a significant constraint on development imposed by the sensitive underlying hydrogeological regime as highlighted in planning reports on file. Issues of
______PL 07.240206 An Bord Pleanála Page 10 of 16
wastewater disposal have been raised in the appeal and must necessarily be addressed. Against this background I do not consider there can be any automatic presumption in favour of granting permission in the case.
7.2 Review of Issues
Having studied the appeal file and visited the site and its environs, I consider the appeal may best be assessed by reference to the following headings:
• Vexatious Appeal • Drainage considerations • Visual amenity • Roads/access/traffic considerations • Appropriate Assessment • Other issues
7.3 Vexatious Appeal
I have noted the submission of the applicants in response to the appeal. They submit that the appeal is vexatious and argue that as such it should be dismissed. Having read the appeal and noted all available reports and submissions, I consider that substantive planning issues have been raised. The appeal should therefore be considered on its merits and decided accordingly by the Board. I do not recommend dismissal of the appeal.
7.4 Drainage Considerations
7.4.1 Regarding foul drainage , I note that at planning application stage the appellant submitted in an objection to the Planning Authority that the proposed raised bed percolation area would be totally inadequate, because that one then described is/was intended for the development of a single rural house with a maximum p.e. of 10. At further information stage the Planning Authority raised this point with the applicants and requested that they ensure that the wastewater treatment system complies in all regard to the EPA manuals.
7.4.2 I find it surprising that a social or commercial type development of some scale was presented in the first instance supported by photocopied diagrams from the EPA Code of Practice manual for Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems Serving Single Houses . As highlighted by the then objector (current appellant), the sensitivity of ground conditions at Kilcolgan have been noted in planning cases in the past. However, in the event, at further information stage, the applicant presented certain information including a description of a proposed sand polishing filter to be designed and installed in strict accordance with “… the EPA Wastewater Treatment Manual”. Although the precise title of the EPA manual to which the further information documentation refers is/was unstated, the proposed total surface area is/was stated to be 208 square metres with distribution under pressure (pumped). [It is understood that the EPA manual here referred to is/was the 1999 publication on Treatment Systems for Small Communities, Business, Leisure Centres and Hotels]. Most of the remainder of the information provided for the applicants at this stage appears to have been
______PL 07.240206 An Bord Pleanála Page 11 of 16
brochure type information for a certified packaged proprietary domestic wastewater treatment plant designed for p.e. range 6 – 50.
7.4.3 At appeal stage the appellant argues that in principle the proliferation of standalone treatment units in the Kilcolgan area should be deemed unacceptable because of the high groundwater vulnerability rating and karst geological features of the area. In detail the appellant submits that the site layout demands imposed by the Planning Authority decision (proposed condition no. 4) makes it impossible to comply with relevant EPA guidance. It is further argued that a desirable buffer zone required around the proposed treatment percolation area cannot be provided within the confines of the site.
7.4.4 I consider that, notwithstanding acceptable soil suitability and trial hole test characteristics presented in support of the planning application, the arguments of the appellant are generally well founded. In response to the appeal the applicant refers to approval of the wastewater drainage arrangements by the Environment Section of the Planning Authority. The Board may note that there do not appear to be any Environment Section reports on file, and none is referred in the planning reports prepared for the Planning Authority. The final recommendation for, and decision of the Planning Authority, relies on proposed condition no. 4 to resolve any outstanding issues relating to wastewater treatment percolation area setback distances etc. In response to the appeal, the Planning Authority has made no observations in defence of its decision; and the applicant has effectively ignored the substantive criticisms of the appellant.
7.4.5 Applicants submit that in the absence of a public sewerage scheme at Kilcolgan, existing and proposed projects provide on-site treatment in accordance with relevant guidelines. In my view this presupposes suitable assimilative capacity in the local environment. However the sensitivity of the local receiving environment is well established. Accordingly I consider there is an onus on an applicant/developer to demonstrate clearly that necessary environmental requirements can be satisfied. It has not in my view been demonstrated that this can be achieved within the confines of the currently presented appeal site. The applicant does not indicate the availability of neighbouring or other lands to secure all setback distances and the buffer zone referred in the appeal. Moreover it is not appropriate that an effect of the proposed development would be to sterilise certain neighbouring lands in other ownership, in proximity to the historic/established built-up village area.
7.4.6 Regarding surface water drainage , I accept the thrust of the appeal that more information could have been provided. However under this heading I have noted certain conditions proposed by the Planning Authority (notably conditions no. 7/8/9) and I consider that in the event of permission being granted in the case, such conditions or similar should be restated and imposed by An Bord Pleanála.
7.4.7 In conclusion in relation to drainage considerations, I consider the appeal should be generally upheld. The applicant has failed to demonstrate an ability to overcome the substance of objections relating to foul drainage, which I consider to be generally well founded.
______PL 07.240206 An Bord Pleanála Page 12 of 16
7.5 Visual Amenity
7.5.1 The site appears elevated in the local landscape, as viewed from certain locations, notably on the main road approach from the north, and in the vicinity of the road junction at the north-eastern corner of the site. The Planning Authority has implied some concern on the appropriateness of permitting on a temporary basis a building of prefabricated character on a highly visible site as proposed. However the solution adopted by the Planning Authority has been to seek a lowering of finished floor level by an unspecified amount to within 1 metre of road level at the proposed entrance to the site. I consider this to be a pragmatic but very crude design intervention. Considerable on-site infrastructure is required and proposed in the currently proposed development. A high quality design and a positive landmark should be sought at this key location within the village.
7.5.2 In the event of permission being granted however, proposed conditions nos. 4 (finished floor level) and 6 (landscaping) should be restated by An Bord Pleanála, in the interest of visual amenity.
7.6 Roads/Access/Traffic Considerations
7.6.1 There has been no objection in principle from the Roads Design section of the Planning Authority under this heading. At planning application stage there was certain further information sought and obtained from the applicant. I have noted the contents of the further information submitted and I have noted proposed condition no. 5 in the Planning Authority decision in the case.
7.6.2 The appeal site is located within the village of Kilcolgan where a 60kph speed limit applies on the N18 and adjoining roads. Presumably a 50kph limit would apply if the main road did not form part of the national route network. In any event having visited the site and the area, I consider the minor road providing site access to be characterised by low volumes of slow moving traffic. The submitted Road Safety Audit (RSA) seeks to minimise traffic hazard. I consider the applicant/developer should be responsible for the funding of all RSA recommendations. In addition, having regard to certain technical issues raised by the appellant, in the event of permission being granted I consider there should be a special financial contribution sought to cover additional traffic calming and school warning signage etc. on the minor road serving the appeal site.
7.6.3 At the higher level the appellant has queried certain assumptions underpinning analyses contained in RPS submission at further information stage. In the context presented, having regard to my observations on the principle of development in paragraph 7.1.3 of my report above, I consider the catchment area consideration should override road traffic technical considerations. I do not consider the proposed development should be refused for reasons suggested in the appeal under this heading.
7.6.4 Regarding the criticisms of the autotrack analysis, I consider this to be a matter of some detail. Any shortcomings could be overcome by site enlargement required in any event for other reasons.
______PL 07.240206 An Bord Pleanála Page 13 of 16
7.7 Appropriate Assessment (AA)
7.7.1 There does not appear to be any reference made in planning reports for the necessity for AA screening in this case. This is somewhat surprising given the planning history of the area, which includes a refusal of permission for a single house development with on-site wastewater treatment for reasons including impact on a European Site. The current appeal includes a submission that, given the proximity of the site to the Galway Bay Complex (SPA/SAC) and Kilcolgan River, a Natura Impact Statement (NIS) should have been submitted with the planning application.
7.7.2 I accept that EPA/Geological Survey information and the planning history of the area indicate a significant sensitivity in the local environment. There is potential for adverse hydrological linkage between the appeal site and the Kilcolgan River estuary which forms part of the Galway Bay European Site. However I consider the site characterisation information presented with the current planning application does satisfactorily demonstrate the suitability of the overall lands including the appeal site for the safe disposal of effluent. I make this observation without prejudice to my conclusions in respect of drainage considerations generally in section 7.4 of my report, above.
7.7.3 The appeal relies mainly on references to local planning history decisions as a basis for seeking an NIS in this case. Here I must observe that the townland of Kilcolgan straddles a wide area ranging from the tidal shoreline in the valley of the Kilcolgan River, to areas including the appeal site lands more than 10 metres above sea level. The appeal site is slightly elevated in its immediate local environment. I consider the submission for the applicant, in response to the appeal, that the planning history wastewater references are not directly relevant to the subject site, is a point well made. On balance I do not consider it necessary or appropriate in this case for the applicant to be requested for further information under this heading. My conclusion is that the possibility of adverse impact on the SPA/SAC arising from the proposed development may reasonably be ruled out and there is no basis for forcing the applicants through a further stage of AA beyond the screening as outlined herein, above.
7.8 Other Issues
7.8.1 Regarding the flooding issue referred to in the Planning Authority planning reports (policy considerations), the site is elevated in the local landscape and has not been the site of flooding historically. The site appears to be well above and outside the floodplain of the Kilcolgan River valley/estuary. I have noted the planning conditions proposed by the Planning Authority relating to surface water drainage matters. In the event of permission being granted, such conditions should be restated or repeated in some form by the Board.
7.8.2 Regarding the issue of public notification of significant further information received by the Planning Authority at planning application stage, this is now an historic procedural matter not amenable to further consideration in the context of the appeal. The reality is that the appellant has had the opportunity to raise relevant planning issues in the context of the appeal, which he has done. The appeal has also provided
______PL 07.240206 An Bord Pleanála Page 14 of 16
the opportunity for any other third party to submit observations to An Bord Pleanála. No such other observations have been made in the context of the appeal. Please refer to section 7.6 of my assessment in respect of roads and traffic issues raised in the appeal.
7.8.3 Regarding references to compliance with Department of Education Building Guidelines , this is not a planning issue per se. The applicant/developer would only be permitted to carry out development in accordance with the permission. New plans would have to be the subject of a fresh planning application.
7.8.4 Regarding bin storage , in the event of permission being granted by the Board, it would be appropriate to attach a condition requiring facilities provision to the written satisfaction of the Planning Authority.
8.0 CONCLUSION
• Kilcolgan should be regarded as a suitable location for a primary school facility, subject to the provision of adequate on-site and/or public services.
• Having regard to the central location and elevated character of the subject site, there are shortcomings in the proposed development vis-à-vis visual amenity and wastewater disposal in full compliance with prevailing guidelines.
• It is not appropriate that temporary facilities be permitted at a locally prominent and strategic location where amenity issues arising must in any event be properly addressed in the first instance in the interests of the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
9.0 RECOMMENDATION
Refuse permission for the following reasons and considerations.
REASONS AND CONSIDERATIONS
1. Having regard to the location of the proposed development on a prominent site and central location in the village of Kilcolgan, which is a designated Local Service Centre in the development plan for the area, it is considered the provision of a structure designed for temporary use would seriously injure the visual amenities of the area and, having regard to the significant on-site and supporting infrastructure required, would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
______PL 07.240206 An Bord Pleanála Page 15 of 16
2. Having regard to the proposals for on-site wastewater treatment and disposal and the necessity for full compliance with prevailing requirements for the safe disposal of effluent having regard to the protection of amenities of property in the vicinity, the Board is not satisfied on the basis of the submissions and reports on file that the site is adequate for the satisfactory achievement of the said requirements. The proposed development would therefore be prejudicial to public health, would seriously injure the amenities of property in the vicinity and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
______Keith Sargeant Senior Planning Inspector
11 th June, 2012.
______PL 07.240206 An Bord Pleanála Page 16 of 16