An Bord Pleanála Reference: PL27.227479

An Bord Pleanála

Inspector’s Report

Development: Single-storey courtyard house with chimney, a septic tank and attendant percolation area, a new road entrance and any ancillary works above and below ground to facilitate the development at Killegar Road, Enniskerry, County .

Planning Application

Planning Authority: Wicklow County Council

Planning Authority Reg. Ref.: 07/1531

Applicant: Padraic Hayden

Type of Application: Permission

Planning Authority Decision: Refuse Permission

Planning Appeal

Appellants: Padraic Hayden

Type of Appeal: First Party -V- Refusal

Observers: None

Date of Site Inspection: 31 st May 2008

Inspector: Gerry Farrington

Appendices

Appendix 1 Site location map Appendix 2 Extracts from the Development Plan Appendix 3 Photographs and key map

PL27.227479 An Bord Pleanála Page 1 of 10 An Bord Pleanála Reference: PL27.227479

1.0 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

The site is located approximately 1 kilometre southwest of The Scalp and some 2 kilometres northwest of Enniskerry, from which it is approached via the R117 and Killegar Road, a minor road that connects to the R116 a kilometre south of Kiltiernan.

The site consists of part of the side garden of the appellant’s parent’s home, ‘Capistrano’ and the corner of the adjoining field. This field, which is currently sown for crop farming, is large and slopes gently to the southeast. The site is bounded to the north by a mature hedgerow that includes mature broadleaf trees and separates the site from the minor road. The southwestern boundary consists of part of the hedge separating ‘Capistrano’ from another large field part of which is used for car parking associated with the ‘Crossfire’ paint ball enterprise that is accessed from Killegar Road 70 metres west of the entrance to ‘Capistrano’. The other site boundaries are undefined. From the site of the proposed dwelling there is a fine panorama that includes , Little and Great Sugar Loaf, and .

The site can be seen from Killegar Road some 100 metres to the east opposite the entrance to ‘St. Exupery’. Otherwise the roadside hedge screens the site from the road. Killegar Riding Stables, which attracts a considerable volume of traffic, is situated some 700 metres further west along the minor road. The junctions with the R116 and R117 at either end of Killegar Road are characterised by substandard visibility and poor junction geometry.

2.0 PLANNING HISTORY

The planning authority reports that there is no recent history on the site. The appellant has drawn attention to two recent permissions granted for houses on Killegar Road (04/1871 and 06/6231) that use the junction of Killegar Road with the R117.

3.0 THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

It is proposed to erect a four bedroom single storey dwelling with a stated floor area of 253 square metres and a roof height of 3.35 metres above ground level. The dwelling would be constructed using a concrete frame and coursed stonewalls. It is proposed to install mechanical aeration and polishing water treatment system. The application was accompanied by a site suitability assessment.

4.0 PLANNING AUTHORITY’S DECISION

By Order dated 17 December 2007 Wicklow County Council issued a notification of decision to refuse permission for the following reasons.

1. “It is considered that the proposed development would endanger public safety by reason of serious traffic hazard because:

PL27.227479 An Bord Pleanála Page 2 of 10 An Bord Pleanála Reference: PL27.227479

a) The proposed development would generate additional turning movements on a local public road that is deficient in width and horizontal alignment that is serviced by an extremely substandard junction with the regional road R117 b) The applicant has not indicated sufficient consent/legal interest on the necessary lands in order to achieve adequate visibility at the proposed site entrance by way of boundary setback.

2. The development is located in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Zone as defined in the current County Development Plan. The carrying out of necessary boundary improvement works that would be required in order to provide increased sight visibility at the junction of the public road and internal access road, would result in the loss of natural roadside boundaries and existing mature tree screening on site, would lead to the erosion of the area's existing character and therefore would be contrary to Development Plan policy which states that development will be controlled in such landscapes to maintain scenic values, recreational utility and existing character.

3. The proposed development would not represent a necessary dwelling in this Landscape Zone designated Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, contrary to the provisions of Section 4.3, Chapter 3 of the County Development Plan 2004-2010. These provisions are required to maintain scenic amenities, recreational utility, existing character, and to preserve views of special amenity value and special interest and to conserve the attractiveness of the county for the development of tourism and tourist related employment.

The Council’s settlement strategy policy is to encourage further growth of existing settlements and to restrict rural housing development to cases where there is a bona fide necessity to live in the rural area instead of in existing settlements. It is considered that the applicant does not come within the scope of the housing need criteria as set out under Policy SS9 of the County Development Plan as insufficient evidence has been supplied to fully assess the applicant’s housing need. The proliferation of non-essential housing in rural landscape areas erodes the landscape value of these areas and seriously detracts from views of special amenity value.”

Inter-departmental reports:

Environmental Health Officer: applicants to submit a revised site layout plan indicating the intended location of the proposed well taking into account the minimum EPA wastewater manual separation distances. The location of the effluent disposal system and well of the adjacent dwelling should also be indicated.

Area Engineer: No response

External Consultations: Consultation letters were sent to the following proscribed bodies under Article 28 (1): National Parks & Wildlife Regional Office; National Park; Department of Environment Heritage and Local Government; An Taisce; and Failte . No responses reported.

PL27.227479 An Bord Pleanála Page 3 of 10 An Bord Pleanála Reference: PL27.227479

Planning Officers Assessment (in summary):

Report dated 30.08.07

• Residential development permitted in accordance with policy SS9 of the county development plan. No current supporting documentation relating to the period of the applicant’s residence. Applicant is employed in Dublin.

• Given the proximity of the family dwelling and trees and hedges the proposed dwelling would not impact unduly on visual amenity.

• Sight distances have not been indicated. The applicant has not indicated consent from the adjoining landowner to carry out the necessary works.

• The junction of Killegar Road with R117 is substandard and very hazardous. Any development that would lead to increased turning movements at this junction could not be permitted. The local road network is seriously deficient and has been a barrier to development in the vicinity of the site.

• Whilst requiring further details, the EHO would not appear to have any fundamental objection to the proposed arrangements for wastewater treatment.

Longhand addendum to Report dated 03.12.08

• Unsolicited further information submitted on 12.11.07 and revised site plans have not overcome refusal reasons 1 (a), 1 (b) and 2. Insufficient information has been submitted to overcome the concerns in relation to local need.

5.0 SUMMARY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL

1. The applicant has acquired a site immediately beside his parents' house and proposes to build a dwelling designed to integrate more sensitively in the landscape than the standard dormer bungalow.

Reason 1 a)

2. The proposed development would not "generate additional turning movements" through the junction with the R117 as the applicant resides on Killegar Road.

3. In relation to the Killegar Road/R 117 junction: • Two dwellings have been permitted on Killegar Road in the last two years - references 06/6231 pound 04/1871 thereby setting a precedent for new dwellings along Killegar Road for those who qualify for local need. • Although aware of the junction issue for many years the County Council has taken no action despite the owner of the necessary land being agreeable to its acquisition. • Significant non-local traffic uses the road to access the paint ball course and stables. These people present a greater risk to safety than the appellant who is familiar with the junction.

PL27.227479 An Bord Pleanála Page 4 of 10 An Bord Pleanála Reference: PL27.227479

• It appears that the junction is being used to prevent some applicants from obtaining permission for houses. The road engineer has stated that the road junction is not so unsafe as to prevent all development along the road. • The proposed development is of a scale in keeping with existing uses on the road, does not materially change the use of the road and is similar to a proposal that received permission six months ago along the same road. • As a chef the applicant does not add to traffic at rush hour periods.

Reason 1 b)

4. With regard to this reason: • Drawing 017 ABP 001 shows a layout for the road entrance on land within the applicant’s ownership and demonstrates that the access would not involve removal of any mature trees. • This entrance is located on the site of an old entrance to the applicant's parents’ house closed some 12 years ago to allow for landscaping works. Sightlines of 50 m in either direction are achievable without incursion onto land outside the applicant's control. • Alternative layout (B) achieves sightlines of over 60 m in both directions. It involves a slightly wider entrance and one sightline, which passes over land owned by the applicant's parents (letter of consent to layout submitted). • The council was not so concerned when it consented to the removal of a significant length of hedgerow when it granted consent for sightlines to Patrick McGuire (06/6231).

Reason 2:

5. As demonstrated by the photomontages submitted with the application the house is designed to sit into the landscape without intrusion. It represents a contemporary reworking of Irish courtyards with a low contour hugging form and sensitivity in the choice of materials. There are no ancillary buildings and the scheme screens and minimises the hardstanding areas. A significant planting scheme maintaining roadside vegetation is proposed and the house will be invisible from the road. The council's planning assessment acknowledges that the proposed dwelling would not impact unduly on visual amenity.

6. The access would not involve removal of any mature trees (Drawing 017 ABP 001). The entrance will only involve the removal of brambles and will be designed to respect the character of the road boundary. Reinforcement planting for all the site boundaries would enhance the character of the local area.

Reason 3

7. The applicant qualifies as having local need under point1 of policy SS9: • For over three generations the Haydens have been a significant element in the local community. • Apart from 1983-1988 when the family lived in Belgium Padraic has resided since childhood in the family home immediately adjoining the site. • The applicant continues to reside at his parent’s home

PL27.227479 An Bord Pleanála Page 5 of 10 An Bord Pleanála Reference: PL27.227479

• He is not proposing the house as speculation • He currently resides in his parents’ house. He wishes to reside beside his parents as they grow older and to settle in the area in which he grew up • The applicant and his partner do not own any property. • The applicant’s circumstances exactly match those of case studies provided in the Council’s ‘Preplanning Guide No. 1 Single Rural Houses’. • The council appears to be exerting a tighter control than prescribed in policy SS9 but is obligated to respect its own development plan under which the applicant qualifies to construct a dwelling. • The local Garda Siochana has indicated that they would be pleased to provide confirmation of the applicant’s residence at Killegar since birth on foot of an approach from An Bord Pleanála. • The applicant has won the Young Chef of the Year Competition. He is currently employed in a prestigious hotel in Ballsbridge but hopes in the future to become involved in the catering industry in the area (including working in a home office) and thereby to contribute personally to the employment and tourism objectives of the Wicklow County Development Plan.

8. Documents submitted with the application and / or appeal include: • Letters from schools attended by the applicant to the effect that his address during the periods September 1982 – September 1983 and September 1989- June1994 was Killegar, Enniskerry; • A letter from Bank of Ireland dated 23 October 2007 stating that the applicant has been a customer of a local branch since August 19997 and that since then bank statements have been issued to him at the address Killegar, Enniskerry. • A letter dated July 1976 to the applicant’s father from the ESB regarding the connection of electricity to his house in Killegar and an invoice for same • Documents in relation to the applicant’s parent’s residency in the local area • Report detailing the applicant’s great-grandfather’s involvement in the War of Independence in the Enniskerry area. • Family photographs of the applicant as a young boy at Killegar • Letters from the applicant’s parents and from a neighbour agreeing to the sale of their lands to facilitate the erection of the proposed dwelling.

6.0 THE AUTHORITY’S RESPONSE TO THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL

None received.

7.0 NOTIFICATION OF PRESCRIBED BODIES

See ‘External Consultations’ on page 3.

PL27.227479 An Bord Pleanála Page 6 of 10 An Bord Pleanála Reference: PL27.227479

8.0 NATIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY AND SUSTAINABLE RURAL HOUSING GUIDELINES

The National Spatial Strategy 2002 (NSS) recognizes the long tradition of people living in rural parts of Ireland and promotes sustainable rural settlement as a means of delivering more balanced regional growth. The NSS makes a distinction between demand for rural and urban generated housing. The NSS emphasises that in general and subject to good planning practice rural generated housing needs should be accommodated where they arise. With regard to urban generated housing in the open countryside the NSS identified four broad categories of rural areas 1. Rural areas under strong urban influence. 2. Areas with the traditionally strong agricultural base. 3. Structurally weak areas. 4. Areas in which there are distinctive settlement patterns.

The Sustainable Rural Housing: Guidelines for Planning Authorities is a Ministerial document issued under the provision of section 28 of the Planning and Development Act 2000. The guidelines have been drafted in the context of the rural housing policy set out in the National Spatial Strategy 2002. The guidelines set out in detail how the Government’s policies on rural housing are to be implemented by planning authorities in their development plans and in the operation of the development control system to ensure a vibrant future for all rural areas. In summary the guidelines provide that: 1. People who are part of and contribute to the rural community should be facilitated by the planning system in all rural areas including those under strong urban-based pressure. 2. Anyone wishing to build a house in rural areas suffering persistent and substantial population decline will be accommodated, subject to good planning practice in siting and design. In a national context, the environs of the appeal site fall within an Area under Strong Urban Influence as shown on Map 1 of the Guidelines.

9.0 DEVELOPMENT PLAN

The relevant documents are the Wicklow County Development Plan 2004-2010 (WCDP) and Variation No. 3 2006. The site lies outside any settlement in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) (Map 3B).

The Plan recognises the need for residential development to house those who are indigenous to and/or have a bone fide necessity to live in the rural area. All applications for one-off housing development in rural areas will be subject to all normal planning considerations including: traffic-safety, sanitation, heritage, design and siting. Policy SS9 states residential development will be considered in the countryside only when it is for the provision of a necessary dwelling in the circumstances set out in detail in fifteen categories. (WCDP Chapter 3 [as varied] Section 4.3 – see Appendix 2)

Policy SS13 states that residential development in the countryside shall be developed in accordance with Table 3.6 “Criteria for residential development in Landscape

PL27.227479 An Bord Pleanála Page 7 of 10 An Bord Pleanála Reference: PL27.227479

Zones”. Section 6.1.1 a) on page 80 of the Plan explains that the AONB Zone encompasses those areas (of landscape) which are the most vulnerable and sensitive and which are considered to be of greatest scenic value. They are described as being under severe development pressure.

In the Enniskerry Local Area Plan 2002 the site is in an area zoned GB "to protect and improve rural amenities and character".

10.0 INSPECTOR’S ASSESSMENT

Based on my examination of the file and of the submitted the statements together with my inspection of the site and taking into account the policy provisions of the development plan, I consider the following to be the key material points for consideration.

Rural Housing Policy: The relevant policies are contained in Chapter 3 Section 4.3 – One-off Rural Housing in the Development Plan. WCDP Variation No. 3 2006 (4.1.2) defines a ‘permanent native resident’ as a person who was either born or reared in the family home in the immediate vicinity or resided in the immediate environs for at least 10 consecutive years prior to the application for permission. I am satisfied that the evidence listed at paragraph 5 (8) above is adequate proof that the appellant is a ‘permanent native resident’ for the purposes of interpreting the plan. In so concluding I attach particular significance to: • The appellant’s parents’ residency apart from the period 1983-1988 in ‘Capistrano’ since the house was completed in 1976. • The documentary and photographic evidence that the appellant, who was born in 1976, was reared and resided in the family home until 1983, and in the 20 years since 1988. As a permanent indigenous resident who qualifies under both limbs (reared and 10- year residency) of the definition at Variation No. 3 4.1.2, the applicant qualifies for consideration for a one-off rural housing under development plan policy SS9 (1). If the Board is minded to grant permission, a condition should be attached requiring the applicant to enter a Section 47 agreement restricting the occupation of the dwelling in accordance with the terms of WCDP Variation No. 3 Policy SS11.

Section 4.3 states that ‘all applications for one-off housing development in rural areas will be subject to all normal planning considerations’. Therefore, the supremacy accorded to Policy SS9 cannot be interpreted as licence to disregard other applicable rural housing policies and the rural residential development guidelines. In this case, in which a one-off dwelling is proposed within a Landscape Zone of Outstanding Natural Beauty, the relevant policy framework (in addition to the SS9 and restrictive occupancy considerations) requires compliance with the ‘Wicklow Rural Residential Development Guidelines’ (WCDP Chapter 5 Sections 8.1 – 8.7), visual impact assessment and other normal planning criteria including traffic and sanitation.

Rural Residential Development Guidelines (RRDG): The guidelines place emphasis on the need for sensitive development in rural areas in the siting and design of one-off housing in the countryside (WCDP Chapter 5 Section 8.1). The proposal is an innovative design. The form is simple and a comprehensive scheme of

PL27.227479 An Bord Pleanála Page 8 of 10 An Bord Pleanála Reference: PL27.227479 landscaping is proposed. The profile is unusually low facilitating integration into the landscape earlier than normal. However, the fact that the site lies within a Landscape Zone of Outstanding Natural Beauty, where there is a very high vulnerability to development pressure, increases the importance of sensitivity in the control of development. According to the RRDG, buildings should be nestled into the landscape; new buildings should be located sympathetically within their surroundings and should avoid open field or exposed locations (WCDP Chapter 5 Section 8.3).

Visual Impact: Despite its low profile when viewed from the Killegar Road the proposed dwelling would appear conspicuous in the landscape occupying a plot artificially cut out of a large open field in a visually exposed location. Moreover, in combination with ‘Capistrano’, it would add to the proliferation of development building up along this rural road (see drawing 017 ABP 001) that threatens to degrade the landscape in this Zone of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The adverse visual impact would be worse if there were a need to remove a significant amount of the roadside vegetation to achieve satisfactory sightlines either side of the driveway entrance.

Road Safety: The supremacy accorded to policy SS9 in event of policy conflict does not apply where the proposed development would be a likely traffic hazard. My site inspection confirmed the deficient width and horizontal alignment of Killegar Road and the dangerously substandard visibility and poor geometry of the junctions with R116 and R177. I accept the point that as the appellant already resides on the road his use of the junctions will be unaffected by his occupancy of the new dwelling. However, the establishment of a home with his partner is likely to lead to additional traffic generation, which could increase further if they were to have a family. There is no employment related or other need for the appellant to establish his family home on Killegar Road that might justify increased traffic using these dangerous junctions such as arguably applied in the case of applications 06/6231 and 04/1871.

The 50 metre and 60 metre sightlines claimed to be shown respectively on drawing 017 ABP 001 Options A and B have been measured to the closest point that a car will just start coming into view. Applying a splay measured to the nearside carriageway edge reveals sightlines to the right emerging of 2 metres x 26 metres (Option A) and 2 metres x 30 metres (Option B), neither of which would give adequate visibility of approaching traffic. Increasing the sight splay would require land outside the appellant’s control. Achieving satisfactory visibility in either direction would necessitate the removal of additional hedgerow vegetation increasing the exposure of both dwellings to view. This in turn would increase the adverse visual impact on this area of outstanding natural beauty, which is very vulnerable to development pressure.

Sanitation: During my site inspection I saw no reason to disagree with the conclusion of the submitted Site Suitability Assessment. When I inspected the site the trial pit had been backfilled and it was not possible to view the soil profile. However, the photographs confirm an absence of bedrock and medium density soil conditions with little or no indication of preferential pathways.

Conclusion

I conclude for the reasons and considerations set out overleaf that the appeal should fail and that planning permission should be refused.

PL27.227479 An Bord Pleanála Page 9 of 10 An Bord Pleanála Reference: PL27.227479

11.0 RECOMMENDATION

REFUSE permission for the proposed development based on the reasons and considerations set out below.

REASONS AND CONSIDERATIONS

1. Having regard to the location of the site in an exposed open field in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Landscape Zone as defined in the current development plan for the area it is considered that the proposed development would add to the proliferation of development threatening to degrade the landscape along this section of rural road and consequently would result in the erosion of the area's existing rural character and scenic quality. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to the development plan and the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

2. It is considered that the proposed development would endanger public safety by reason of serious traffic hazard because:

a) The proposed development would generate additional traffic movements on a narrow local public road that has an extremely substandard junction with the regional road R117.

b) The applicant has not indicated sufficient consent/legal interest on the necessary land required in order to achieve adequate visibility at the proposed site entrance.

______G. FARRINGTON 3rd July 2008 Inspector

PL27.227479 An Bord Pleanála Page 10 of 10