Chief Executive s Report on the Submissions Received on the Proposed Material Amendments to the Draft Louth County Development Plan

Transcription

1 Chief Executive s Report on the Submissions Received on the Proposed Material Amendments to the Draft Louth County Development Plan September 2015

2

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1: Introduction and Overview of Manager s Report 1.1 Introduction Pg Preparation of the draft Louth County Development Plan Pg Public Consultation draft Louth County Development Plan Pg Public Consultation Proposed Amendments to the draft Louth Pg 4 County Development Plan Section 2: Legislative Background to Chief Executive s Report 2.1 Statutory Contents of The Chief Executive s Report Pg Procedure Following Preparation of Manager s Report Pg 5 Section 3: Submissions Pg 7-96 Appendix 1: Pg 97 Appendix 2: Pg 100 Appendix 3: Pg 101

4 SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW OF MANAGER S REPORT 1.1 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to provide a description of the public consultation undertaken for the display of proposed amendments to the draft Louth County Development Plan , to respond to issues raised in the submissions and observations made during the public consultation and to make recommendations for modifications to the amendments as deemed appropriate. Consultation on the proposed material amendments to the draft Development Plan took place between 30 th June 2015 and 28 th July 2015 and consultation on Addendum No. 1 took place between 22 nd July 2015 and 19 th August 2015, during which time a total of 57 written submissions were received. This report comprises five separate sections: Section 1 provides an introduction and overview of the report and procedures for the preparation of the draft Development Plan. It also describes the public display process for the proposed amendments to the draft Plan. Section 2 details the legislative background and requirements for the report. Section 3 provides a discussion of the issues raised during the consultation phase on the proposed amendments to the draft Plan, the Chief Executive s response to same and recommendations for changes to the proposed amendments. This report forms part of the statutory procedure for the preparation of the Louth County Development Plan and is being submitted to the Elected Members of Louth County Council for their consideration on 3 rd September

5 1.2 PREPARATION OF THE DRAFT LOUTH COUNTY DEVELOPMENT PLAN The preparation of a new Development Plan for Louth began on 6 th November 2013 when formal notice was published by Louth County Council of the review of the Louth County Development Plan At the same time, a period of pre -draft public consultation was undertaken which took place from 6 th November 2013 to 10 th January The public consultation was advertised through a number of media platforms including a local newspaper advertisement, the Louth County Council website as well as, Facebook and Twitter feeds. In addition prescribed authorities were notified and also other interested parties. An Issues Paper was prepared for the purposes of raising awareness of the nature of both the Development Plan and the review process. The preparation of the Issues Paper was notified in a public advertisement and the document was made available for download from the Louth County Council Website. Four public information evenings were held in order to provide an opportunity for members of the public to learn about the review process, to highlight some of the strategic issues facing the County and to facilitate feedback from the public about issues they felt should be taken into account in the preparation of the draft Development Plan. Submissions were invited from the public during this pre- draft consultation period and could be made electronically, sent via post or via survey monkey. A total of 34 submissions were received. A more detailed account of this public consultation phase can be found in the Manager s Report Feb 2014 Pre-draft Stage which can be accessed on Louth County Council s Website. 1.3 PUBLIC CONSULTATION DRAFT LOUTH COUNTY DEVELOPMENT PLAN The public consultation stage for the draft Louth County Development Plan took place from Monday 6 th October 2014 Wednesday 17 th December 2014, inclusive. The public consultation stage was advertised through a number of media platforms: Notification on Louth County Council website, Notification from Louth County Council s Facebook and Twitter feed, Advertisement in the local newspaper, Notification on local radio, 2

6 Formal notification was issued to the required statutory bodies, notification to other interested parties. Submissions were invited from the public during the consultation period and could be made electronically or sent via post. A total of 226 submissions were received. A series of public information sessions were held in order to provide an opportunity for members of the public to learn about the draft Plan. The events were held in the following locations: Dunleer Library, Station Road, Dunleer, Louth County Council, Boyne Centre, Patrick Street, Drogheda, Mid Louth Civic Service Centre, Fairgreen, Ardee, Carlingford Heritage Centre, Carlingford, County Hall, Millennium Centre, Dundalk. Following completion of the public consultation period, a Chief Executive s Report was prepared on the submissions summarising the issues raised, detailing the Chief Executive s response to them and outlining recommended changes to the draft Development Plan. This report can be accessed from the Louth County Council Website. The report was distributed to the Members of Louth County Council.The members discussed the report at a series of workshop meetings held on the 15 th and 28 th April, 13 th, 25 th and 26 th May. At a Special Council Meeting held on the 9 th June the Council formally resolved to place amendments to the draft Development Plan on public display. 3

7 1.4 PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE DRAFT LOUTH COUNTY DEVELOPMENT PLAN The proposed amendments to the draft Louth County Development Plan were placed on public display from 30 th June 2015 and 28 th July 2015 and Addendum No. 1 was on public display between 22 nd July 2015 and 19 th August The display of the proposed amendments was advertised through the following media platforms: The Louth County Council websites. Louth County Council s Facebook and Twitter feed. Advertisement in the local newspaper. Formal notification to the required statutory bodies. The proposed amendments were available to view at: The Louth County Council Website, Louth County Council Customer Services Desks ; Millennium and Civic Centres Dundalk, Drogheda and the Mid Louth Civic Service Ardee, Public Libraries in Dundalk, Drogheda, Ardee, Dunleer and Carlingford. In total 57 submissions were received on the proposed amendments. 4

8 SECTION 2 LEGISLATIVE BACKGROUND TO CHIEF EXECUTIVE S REPORT 2.1 STATUTORY CONTENTS OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE S REPORT Section 12(8) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) requires that the Chief Executive prepare a report on the submissions and observations received during the consultation period for the proposed amendments to the draft Development Plan and submit same to the Elected Members of Louth County Council for their consideration. The Act requires that the Chief Executive Report shall: (a) List the persons or bodies, who made submissions or observations, (b) Summarise the issues raised by other bodies and people, (c) Give the response of the Chief Executive to the issues raised, taking account of: Any directions issued by the members of Louth County Council under Section 11(4), The proper planning and sustainable development of the area, The statutory obligations of any local authority in the area, Any relevant policies or objectives for the time being of the Government or of any Minister of the Government 2.2 PROCEDURE FOLLOWING PREPARATION OF MANAGER S REPORT The Manager s Report must be prepared and submitted to the members of Louth County Council not later than 8 weeks from the date of publication of the proposed amendments to the draft Development Plan. This report is being issued to the members on the 3 rd September In accordance with section 12(9)(b) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) the members must complete their consideration of the Chief Executive s Report and the draft Development Plan within 6 weeks of receiving the Chief Executive s Report. Following this, the members must resolve to make the Development Plan, either with or without the proposed amendments. A further modification to an amendment may be made but only where it is minor in nature and therefore not likely to have significant effects on the environment or adversely affect the integrity of a European Site. A further modification to an amendment cannot be made where it relates to an increase in the area of land zoned for any purpose or an addition to or deletion from the Record of Protected Structures. 5

9 In making the Development Plan the Council shall be restricted to considering the proper Planning and Sustainable Development of the area to which the Development Plan relates, the statutory obligations of any Local Authority in the area and any relevant policies or objectives of the Government or any Ministers of the Government. The adopted Development Plan shall come into effect 4 weeks from the day that it is made. Please note in this document omissions from the text denoted using strikethrough and additions by using red text. 6

10 SECTION 3: SUBMISSIONS Submission No: 1 National Roads Authority Summary: Section ; Local Needs Qualifying Criteria Amendment 1. With respect to the proposed amendment to the text of Section , (Local Needs Qualifying Criteria, Page 34, Chapter 2, dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Alterations, Page 5) the Council are requested to consider the inclusion of a cross reference with TC 12 (Page 224 Chapter 7 dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Alterations, Page 12) and the DECLG Spatial Planning and National Roads Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2012). 2. Policy TC 10 (Page 219, Chapter 7, dlcdp ) and Table 7.2 (National Routes Restrictions & Exemptions on Access, Page 218, Chapter 7, dlcdp ) require revision to conform to the provisions of the DECLG Spatial Planning and National Roads Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2012). Carrickcarnon Junction ; Carrickcarnon Economic/ Business Zone 3. Section 2.7 of the DECLG Spatial Planning and National Roads Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2012) considers development at national road interchanges or junctions. The designation of the Carrickcarnon Economic/ Business Zone is not supported by the evidence base required by Section 2.7 of the DECLG Spatial Planning and National Roads Guidelines. National Road Junctions/ Interchanges 4. NRA is disappointed and concerned that there are no amendments proposed in relation to Policy EDE 12 (Page 184,Chapter 6, dlcdp ) concerning the development at urban related national road interchanges. The NRA s position remains as set out in our initial submission to the draft Plan. The aforementioned submission was summarised in the Chief Executive s Report on Submissions in relation to draft Louth County Development Plan March 2015, as follows: M1 and associated interchanges continue their strategic role for major inter urban and inter regional transport requirements. Location and capacity of these is at road planning process 7

11 within a design horizon of 20 years and greater. There is concern with the continuation of Policy EDE 12 for development at urban interchanges and the lack of review of the impact of development at these interchanges on a network that is protected in Chapter 7. NRA recognises importance of Dundalk and Drogheda but that development should be sustainable, with regard to planning, land use and transportation. Despite previous submissions and appeals to ABP, there is a lack of transport assessment documentation of potential effect of planned development on the national network. Notwithstanding TTA s, there is no substitute for prior overall assessment of fundamental issues relating to land use and transportation. Council should undertake Strategic Transport Assessment (STA) to support draft Plan particularly where planned development has interface with national road network. Policy EDE 35; Retail Policy (Page 202 Chapter 6 dlcdp ) 5. No objection in principle but concern that removal of the Policy EDE 35 (Page 202 Chapter 6 dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 10) could generate a demand for large scale regional developments in rural locations proximate to the strategic national road network contrary to the provision of official policy. 6. Consideration should be given to inclusion of a policy in relation to a general presumption against large scale retailing adjacent or close to existing, new or planned national roads. 7. Should the Planning Authority consider that there are exceptional circumstances where a less restrictive approach to the control of development on national roads or at national road junctions might apply, such cases should be brought forward in accordance with Section 2.6 and 2.7 of the DECLG Spatial Planning and National Roads Guidelines, as part of the Development Plan process. 8. The NRA s position concerning the provision of Table 7.2 of (National Routes Restrictions & Exemptions on Access Page 218 Chapter 7 dlcdp ) the draft Plan which outlines the Councils proposed restrictions and exceptions on accesses to national roads remain as set out in their initial submission. Exemptions included in the draft Plan are at variance with the DECLG Spatial Planning and National Roads Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2012) especially when applied with other policy objectives throughout the draft Development Plan. 8

12 Policy TC 37; Car Park and Share Facilities (Page 235 Chapter 7 dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 13) 9. Identification of individual park and ride sites is an inappropriate and un- integrated methodology to deliver sustainable park and ride policy. They should be identified within the context of a wider public transport study. It would be appropriate to undertake Strategic Transport Assessments for individual sites. 10. Park and Ride Schemes should be developed in association with the primary strategic role of the national road network. 11. A Park and Ride Strategy should be prepared and the NRA would welcome consultation. Service Areas 12. The proposal to update Section Motorway Services (Page 216 Chapter 7 dlcdp) outlined in the Chief Executive s Report on Submissions received in relation to the draft Louth County Development Plan March 2015, does not appear in the amendments document. The NRA would welcome such an update. Tier 3 Map Amendments 13. With regard to the Collon Composite Map and the Employment Uses thereon the Council is requested to progress any development proposals on the subject lands in recognition of the provisions of the DECLG Spatial Planning and National Roads Guidelines. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: Section ; Local Needs Qualifying Criteria Amendment (Page 34, Chapter 2, dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 5) 1. Changes made in this case impose additional restrictions on planning policy imposed on rural area and as such would not have a negative impact on the roads network. 2. This comment does not relate to a proposed material amendments. Under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time. It is not proposed to make changes to Policy TC 10 (Page 219, Chapter 7, dlcdp

13 2021) or Table 7.2. (National Routes Restrictions & Exemptions on Access Page 218 Chapter 7, dlcdp ) Carrickcarnon Junction; Carrickcarnon Economic / Business Zone. 3. The concern of the Authority is noted and should be considered by the Elected Members in making their final decision. The Chief Executive would note that the zoning at Carrickcarnon has been referred to in the NRA s submission. The provision of the Carrickcarnon Economic / Business Zone is contrary to Policy EDE 13 (Page 184, Chapter 6, dlcdp) of draft Louth County Development Plan : to resist development at rural related motorway interchanges. This policy refers to a number of ruralrelated motorway interchanges, including Carrickcarnon. With regard to traffic issues as per the Chief Executive s Report on Submissions received in relation to the Draft Louth County Development Plan, the Chief Executive s remains opposed to the zoning for the following reasons: The provision of an economic business zone would result in the area becoming a destination in its own right at this location, a fact which has been alluded to by the Bord in its refusal for planning permission. This would give rise to additional traffic generation and movements on a proposed protected regional route (R132) in addition to traffic movements off the motorway. An Bord Pleanala in a previous application for commercial development at this location considered that the site would serve traffic and draw significant trade from the motorway at a rural related interchange, and Wider policies relevant to proper planning and sustainable development such as Smarter Travel Strategy, Spatial Planning & National Roads and Sustainable Urban Residential Development Guidelines, all advocate the need to promote compact urban development, reduce car dependency and promote sustainable mobility. In this regard it is recommended that the location of significant uses such as employment and commercial uses should be closely linked with and integrated with locations for future housing development as identified in the Core Strategy. Indeed, Planning Authorities should ensure sufficient lands for employment uses at suitable locations taking account of national planning policies such as those identified above in addition to the required physical infrastructure, particularly access and water services. A 10

14 development plan shall include objectives for the promotion of sustainable settlement and transportation strategies in urban and rural areas. As per the Chief Executive s Report on Submissions received in relation to the draft Louth County Development Plan, the Chief Executive also remains opposed to the zoning for following reasons; the site adjoins an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, potential adverse impact on adjoining residential properties, contrary to the county rural development and Core Strategies and in addition, An Bord Pleanala upheld the decisions of the Planning Authority and similarly refused permissions for various forms of commercial activity at the site. National Road Junctions/Interchanges 4. The Council did not make any material amendments in relation to Policy EDE 12. Under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time. It is not proposed to make changes to EDE12 (Page 184, Chapter 6, dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 10) 5. Regardless of whether or not Policy EDE 35 (Page 202, Chapter 6, dlcdp ) was included in the draft Plan, the Council must give consideration to the Retail Planning: Guidelines for Planning Authorities 2012, when determining planning applications for retail development. 6. It is considered that the issue regarding the location of large out of town retail centres in particular those located adjacent or close to existing, new or planned national roads / motorways is already adequately covered by the Retail Planning: Guidelines for Planning Authorities 2012, which are referred to under Policy EDE 32 (page 202, Chapter 6, dlcdp ). It is not therefore necessary that an additional policy be included in the Plan. 7 & 8. Noted-see response to Point There has been continuous use of the hard shoulder in proximity to motorway junctions by long distance commuters. TC 37 (Page 235, Chapter 7, dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 13) recognises this ongoing problem and it will commit us to undertake the necessary studies including a feasibility study with regard to park and ride schemes if required, to meet these needs. The NRA will be consulted accordingly. The proposed material amendment to Policy TC 37 is considered to sufficiently deal with park and ride schemes. 11

15 12. The Council did not make any material amendment in relation to this matter. Under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time. Please note that this matter has been addresses and included as a non material amendment to the Plan. 13. This observation does not raise any specific issues in relation to material amendments. Under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time. Chief Executive s Recommendation: Policy RD 39 (Page 86 Chapter 3 dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 6) shall read as follows: To consider developments falling within the following categories; limited one-off housing*, agricultural developments, extensions to existing authorised uses and farms, appropriate farm diversification projects; developments to be used for leisure, recreation and tourism; holiday accommodation including cottages and lodges where these are part of an existing or proposed integrated tourism complex; hotels/ guest houses / B & B s (only where the proposal involves the re-use or diversification of an existing building); extensions to existing authorised commercial and industrial developments; renewable energy schemes, public utility infrastructure, certain resource based and location specific developments of significant regional or national importance and, critical infrastructure projects. Nursing homes/analogous services ** and Economic Business zone at Carrickcarnon.*** Multi-unit residential, conventional industrial and commercial development appropriate to existing settlements, developments directly adjacent to rural motorway interchanges would not be considered appropriate within this zone. *Refer to Section for Qualifying Criteria ** In the location identified by dot on Map 3.1 entitled Development Zones. *** In the location identified by??? dot on Map 3.1 entitled Development Zones. 12

16 Changes to Table 6.3 (Louth Economic Forum 10 Point Action Plans Page 181 Chapter 6 dlcdp ), see Appendix 1 Zoning on Map 3.1 (pertaining to Economic/ Business Zone at Carrickcarnon) shall be omitted Submission No: 2 Cian O Mahony EPA Summary: 1. Amended policies and objectives strengthen commitment to protect environment. 2. Even with removal of Policy EDE 35 (Page 202, Chapter 6, dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 11) the Plan should remain consistent with the Regional Planning Guidelines. Nature of regional large scale development should be clarified in the context of the determination of a neutral effect on the environment. Aspects such as the loss of greenfield sites, biodiversity impacts, infrastructure pressures/capacity, traffic patterns, settlement patterns and flood risk, should be considered in making a determination for allowing large scale regional development. Cumulative and trans-boundary impacts should also be considered. 3. With regard to Policy TC 39 (Page 237, Chapter 7, dlcdp ) the requirements of the SEA Directive should also be considered. 4. Welcome additional environmental policy in Chapter 8 (after ENV 4 Page 239, Chapter 8, dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments Page 14) but it would be useful to consider the inclusion of text in relation to same. 5. Following adoption of the Plan four points to be included in the SEA Statement Information on the Decision are outlined. Chief Executive s Opinion & Response: 1. Noted. 2. It is considered that Policy EDE 35 (Page 202,Chapter 6,dLCDP & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 11) is already adequately covered by the Retail Planning: Guidelines for Planning Authorities 2012, which are referred to under Policy EDE 32 (Page 202, Chapter 6, dlcdp ). It is not therefore necessary that Policy EDE 35 be 13

17 included in the Plan. Any planning application received for a large scale regional development shall be subject to normal planning considerations including impact on environment, traffic and flooding. 3. Policy TC 39 (Page 237, Chapter 7, dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 13 ) shall be further revised to read: To support the development and expansion of the ports of Drogheda, Greenore, Dundalk and Clogherhead subject to the preparation of a masterplan and compliance with all relevant EU policies such as the Water Framework, Habitats, SEA and EIA Directives 4. This is not considered a material amendment but instead a minor alteration and will be carried out accordingly. Under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time 5. Comments regarding the content of the SEA Statement are noted. This observation does not raise any specific issues in relation to material amendments, under Section 12(7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time. Chief Executive s Recommendation: Policy TC 39 shall be amended to read: To support the development and expansion of the ports of Drogheda, Greenore, Dundalk and Clogherhead subject to the preparation of a masterplan and compliance with all relevant EU policies such as the Water Framework, Habitats, SEA and EIA Directives Submission No: 3 Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources on behalf of Geological Survey of Ireland. Summary: 1. No comment to make in relation of the proposed Addendum No The County Geological Sites (CGS) should be protected as per Policies HER 8 and 9 (Page 127 Chapter 5 dlcdp ) 14

18 3. Request to be consulted at planning stage and in the preparation of an EIA / EIS or SEA for any proposed development. 4. Cognisance should be taken of any Guidelines produced by the Geological Survey of Ireland or any other relevant body in the planning of any development. Chief Executive s Opinion & Response: 1 & 2. Noted. 3. The Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources is a statutory body and as such shall be consulted by the Planning Authority upon receipt of any relevant planning application and at the required stages of the Development Plan process. 4. The Council took cognisance of all required and relevant guidelines in the making of this Plan. Chief Executive s Recommendation: No Change Submission No: 4 Hanley Taite Design Partnership on Behalf of Mr Michael Mc Coy Summary: 1. Amend zoning arrangements for lands at De La Salle House, Moorhall Street, Ardee, Co Louth. 2. De La Salle House is a protected structure and the lands in questions are zoned as Community Facilities in the Ardee Local Area Plan It is intended to renovate De La Salle House and create a restaurant. Chief Executive s Opinion & Response: 1-3. The issues raised are noted however they pertain to lands located within the settlement boundary of the Ardee Local Area Plan. A review of the Ardee Local Area Plan shall be undertaken in due course. Notwithstanding the above under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time. 15

19 Chief Executive s Recommendation: No Change Submission No: 5 Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht Summary: 1. Unclear if previous comments in relation to the map for wind energy and bird flight paths have been taken on board. 2. With regard to new policy TC 42 (Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 13) (development of Dundalk Port) the impact of Natura 2000 sites needs to be taken into account. 3. The aforementioned issues has not been raised in the SEA / AA screening of the proposed new policy, rather it is stated that it should be read in compliance with TC 39 (Page 237,Chapter 7, dlcdp ). Chief Executive s Opinion & Response: 1. Under En CO 12 (Page 263, Chapter 9, dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 14 ) any environmental issues will be considered and the draft Plan will be compliant with both the SEA and Habitats Directive. During the production of any draft Plan or policy the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht will be consulted. 2. Policy TC 42) shall be revised to read: Louth County Council will explore the potential development of Dundalk Port as a centre for future recreation and leisure use. Any proposals shall be subject to compliance with all relevant EU policies such as the Water Framework, Habitats SEA and EIA Directives. 3. It is noted that the screening assessment for TC 42 is linked with TC 39 (Page 237 Chapter 7 dlcdp ). The final Environmental Reports and NIA Report will further expand on this assessment but the Council is confident that the material alteration of these policies should have no significant environmental effect. Chief Executive s Recommendation: Policy TC 42 shall be further revised to read: 16

20 Louth County Council will explore the potential development of Dundalk Port as a centre for future recreation and leisure use. Any proposals shall be subject to compliance with all relevant EU policies such as the Water Framework, Habitats SEA and EIA Directives. Submission No: 6 Keep Ireland Open Summary: 1. Frustrated with the manner in which previous submissions have been treated. 2. The Plan will contravene the Planning and Development Acts and in particular the 2010 Amendment Act regarding the mapping and listing of public rights of way as well as, the National Spatial Strategy, DoECLG Guidelines, Development Plan Guidelines, provisions in Plans of adjoining counties and the Border Regional Planning Guidelines. Chief Executive s Opinion & Response: 1. I am wholly satisfied that all submissions/observations received at every stage of this Development Plan process have been considered fully. 2. I am content that the Plan is compliant with the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended), the National Spatial Strategy, DECLG Guidelines, Development Plan Guidelines, provisions of Plans in adjoining counties and the Border Regional Planning Guidelines. Policy TC27 (Page 230, Chapter 7, dlcdp ) deals with the mapping and listing of public rights of way in the County over the lifetime of the Development Plan. These comments do not raise any specific issues in relation to proposed material amendments. Under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time. Chief Executive s Recommendation: No Change 17

21 Submission No: 7 Irish Wind Energy Association Summary: 1. Welcomes opportunity to comment on the proposed draft County Development Plan. 2. IWEA has made submissions throughout this process in support of Co Louth s renewable energy ambitions and reiterate comments as they are applicable to this draft County Development Plan. 3. Welcomes statement regarding range of new and developing technologies in Section 9.4. (Renewable Energy, Page 262, Chapter 9, dlcdp ). 4. Supports Policy EnCo 12 (Page 263, Chapter 9, dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 14 ) and calls for work on Renewable Energy Strategy to proceed at earliest possible opportunity. 5. Welcomes new text in the Section on renewable energy policy citied in EnCo 8 EnCo 12 (Page 263, Chapter 9, dlcdp ) and focus on Renewable Energy and commitments contained in TC Statement in paragraph 9.4.1: Wind Energy (Page 264, Chapter 9, dlcdp ) it is possible that future large scale wind generation maybe located off the Louth coast as opposed to inland locations. Should be removed pending a detailed Renewable Energy Strategy and applications should be on a case- by case basis and subject to EIA, NIS and AA. 7. In the County Development Plan the Department s Guidelines should be referenced as follows; Wind Energy Developments must meet the requirements and standards set out in the DECLG Wind Energy Development Guidelines 2006 or any subsequent related Guidelines. 8. Concern that the Development Plan is not overly prescriptive and flexibility is provided to allow for alternative technologies and the development of the grid infrastructure. 9. There should be no blanket prohibition on renewable energy in or adjacent to Natura 2000 sites and should be open to consideration as opposed to no- go areas. Chief Executive s Opinion & Response: 1-5. Noted. 6. This is not considered to be a material amendment rather a minor alteration and shall be carried out accordingly. 18

22 7. These comments did not raise any specific issues in relation to proposed material amendments. Under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time 8. Noted. 9. The Development Plan does not impose a blanket ban on development in Natura 2000 sites. Chief Executive s Recommendation: No Change Submission No: 8 Stephen Ward Summary: 1. The Louth County Core Strategy is not sufficiently adaptable; it should be monitored and reviewed on an annual basis. A Monitor and Review policy should be added to the County Development Plan. 2. There should be meaningful and constructive consultation with all relevant landowners and stakeholders. 3. With regard to Table 2.5, (Potential Housing & Population Growth Within Settlements Page 18,Chapter 2, dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 20) Strategic Reserve land should be omitted from calculation of available land supply for residential development. 4. Undeveloped land available should take into account willingness of landowners to release land and any infrastructure deficits. 5. With regard to the Termonfeckin Settlement Plan, it is crucial that lands which are in the ownership / control of a party and which are expected to be released for development are zoned appropriately and prioritised for development. 6. Allocation of one additional site for residential development does not provide for sufficient market choice and does not offer proper price competition. 19

23 Chief Executive s Opinion & Response: 1 & 2. Comments in relation to items 1-2 do not raise any specific issues in relation to proposed material amendments. Under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time. 3. Table 2.5 refers to Existing Undeveloped Land with the 13no. Level 3 Settlements. In Table 2.6, (Residential Zoning in Level 3 Settlements Page 20, Chapter 2,dLCDP & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 21) this is clearly broken down into the amount of Undeveloped Land Available and Strategic Land Available Comments in relation to items 4-5 do not raise any specific issues in relation to proposed material amendments. Under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time 6. There is sufficient undeveloped land zoned residential in Termonfeckin and indeed all Level 3 Settlements (including 50% headroom) to cater for market choice and for the projected population increase up to Chief Executive s Recommendation: No Change Submission No: 9 Stephen Ward on behalf of GCM Construction Summary: 1. Submission relates to the reinstatement of two parcels of land in Collon as follows: Southern Field (1.1ha) zoned Residential (New) Northern Field (1.0ha) zoned Strategic Reserve. Aforementioned lands should be reinstated as: The percentage of undeveloped land in Collon is less than other settlements There have been no applications for multi- unit developments in Collon since

24 There is only one site designated as Residential (New) in the village & therefore choice is limited in terms of the location of new residential development. The designated Strategic Reserve Sites in Collon are constrained. Planning permission was previously granted for residential units upon lands formerly zoned as Residential (New). Zoning of the subject site is necessary to achieve a sustainable level of growth in the settlement. Infill sites cannot make a substantial contribution towards housing provision. 2. Insertion of policy that Core Strategy shall be monitored and reviewed on an annual basis. 3. Section 7.2 (Population & Housing, Collon Settlement Plan, Appendix 2, Page 30 dlcdp ) the draft Collon Village Plan refers to 5 hectares of undeveloped land when in fact there are only 2.3ha of undeveloped land. Chief Executive s Opinion & Response: 1. There is sufficient undeveloped land zoned residential in Collon and indeed all Level 3 Settlements (including 50% headroom) to cater for the projected population increase up to I would not recommend that any additional residential land is zoned for the period and there is no requirement for any additional lands to be zoned strategic reserve. 2&3. Comments in relation to items 2&3 do not raise any specific issues in relation to proposed material amendments Under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time Chief Executive s Recommendation: No Change 21

25 Submission No: 10 Stephen Ward on behalf of Westhill Atlantic Limited. Summary: 1. Insertion of policy into the County Core Strategy whereby brownfield lands within defined village envelopes are excluded from the phasing requirements of the County Core Strategy thereby ensuring consistency with the Drogheda and Dundalk Plans. Definition of brownfield lands provided in accordance with the Residential Density Guidelines (DoEHLG 2009 Section 5.7). 2. The submission refers to lands to the south of Termonfeckin zoned as Strategic Reserve. It is stated that planning permission was previously granted for 51 no. dwellings and there has been substantial investment on the site including construction of a link road and 2no. dwellings. The submission states that the subject lands are located within the village boundary and are considered to be a brownfield site. 3. With regard to Table 2.6 (Residential Zoning in Level 3 Settlements, Page 20, Chapter 2 dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Alterations Page 5 & 21) support is given to the exclusion of strategic reserve lands from the amount of housing land available. However it is stated that the figure for strategic reserve lands in Termonfeckin should be 13.8ha. 4. Planning permission has been granted and development commenced on lands to the north of the settlement zoned residential new. It is stated that these lands should be amended to residential existing and that the undeveloped land figure within Table 2.6 be reduced accordingly. 5. Proposed material alterations to Table 2.6 significantly overestimates the housing and strategic reserve lands available. Chief Executive s Opinion & Response: 1 & 2. Comments in relation to items 1&2 do not raise any specific issues in relation to proposed material amendments. Under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time Table 2.6 has been re-examined and errors corrected 22

26 Chief Executive s Recommendation: Revisions to Table 2.6 See Appendix 1. Submission No: 11 EHP Services on behalf of Mr Bill and Anne Doran of Harristown House, Ardee (Previous submission No. 176). Summary: 1. Objection to the inclusion of Harristown House within the RPS. Previous submission in relation to Harristown House (No. 176) ought to be properly and thoroughly reassessed. Chief Executive s Opinion & Response: 1. This submission does not raise any specific issues in relation to proposed material amendments. Under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time Chief Executive s Recommendation: No Change Submission No: 12 P Herr & Associates on behalf of Frish Ltd Summary: 1. Submission relates to a parcel of land at the northern end of Castlebellingham. The northern portion is zoned as strategic reserve and the southern portion as residential new. Planning permission consequent was granted for 23no. residential units on lands zoned residential (new). It is requested that the entire site is zoned as Residential (New). 2. It is stated that the de-zoning of greater portion of the subject site to Strategic Reserve creates 1) inflexibility 2) prejudices the submitters existing and continued development plans for the subject site, 3) the strategic reserve zoning will artificially inflate prices for serviceable plots and completed residential units. 23

27 3. Submissions made on behalf of Parma Development for lands on opposite side of the road resulted in land being zoned as Residential (New), this represents a bias towards an individual land owner. 4. Radical reduction in the provision of residentially zoned land is too severe. If Castlebellingham is to be a key local centre it is necessary that more residentially zoned lands are provided. Growth cannot be based upon the development of so few parcels of zoned land. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response. 1-4 This submission does not raise any specific issues in relation to proposed material amendments, under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time. Chief Executive s Recommendation: No Change Submission No: 13 Department of Environment, Community and Local Government Summary: Flood Risk Assessment 1. Introduction of Composite Maps are welcomed. 2. Lands zoned new residential in several of the Level 3 Settlements are within the identified Flood Zones A & B. 3. Lands within the development boundary of several Level 4 Settlements are within the identified Flood Zones A & B. 4. A specific objective is necessary to require a site specific flood risk assessment for such development proposals at Level 4 Settlements. 5. Objective should be provided requiring the future variation to the Plan regarding the zoning of lands at risk of flooding in the Development Plan in accordance with the Planning System and Flood Risk Management Guidelines (2009) within 6 months of the adoption of the Plan. 6. If the Planning authority does not comply with the request regarding full flood risk assessment the Minister will have no option but to consider the use of the powers of Ministerial direction under the Planning and Development Acts to direct the Planning Authority accordingly. 24

28 Protection of National Road Network Infrastructure New accesses to National Roads (Section 2.6 of the Guidelines) 7. Draft LCDP includes policies and objectives that are not compliant with the Spatial Planning and National Roads Guidelines in relation to: Exemptions to the restriction on new accesses to National Primary and Secondary Roads. These should only be in exceptional circumstances and must be indentified at the Plan making stage in consultation with the NRA. 8. As it is not possible to introduce new amendments to remove the road access exemptions contained in Policy TC 10, (Page 19, Chapter 7, dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Alterations, Page 12) Table 7.2, (Page 18 Chapter 7 dlcdp ) & Section (Protected National & Regional Routes, Page 217, Chapter 7, dlcdp ) Objective should be provided requiring the future variation to the Plan revising the provision of the LCDP in accordance with the Planning System and National Roads Guidelines within 6 months of the adoption of the Plan. Development at National Road Interchanges (Section 2.7 of the Guidelines) 9. Carrickcarnon which is in proximity to Junction 20 of the Motorway is to be zoned as an Economic/Business Zone. The zoning has the potential to generate traffic volumes to limit the operation of the nearby motorway interchange. 10. Proposed Material Alterations to Policy RD 39 (Page 86, Chapter 3, dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Alterations, Page 3) and Table 6.3 (Louth Economic Forum 10 Point Action Plan, Page 181, Chapter 6, dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Alteration, Page 11, 23 ) of the draft LCDP are not compliant with the Spatial Planning and National Roads Guidelines and should be omitted. 11. If the Planning Authority does not comply with the aforementioned request the Minister will have no option but to consider the use of the powers of Ministerial direction under the Planning and Development Acts to direct the Planning Authority accordingly. 25

29 Core Strategy 12. Core Strategy Table 2.5 (Potential Housing & Population Growth within Settlements Page 18, Chapter 2, dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Alterations, page 4, 20) should be re- examined for any inadvertent errors. 13. Clarity regarding title shortfall/ excess. 14. Clarity required regarding how potential housing yield from Level 3 Settlements is derived and how this relates to Core Strategy allocation for Level 3 Settlements. 15. Discrepancy between allocated lands and undeveloped lands available is of concern. 16. Statement Phasing proposal related to two phases of development ; one for the duration of this plan and a second phase Strategic Reserve for beyond 2021 should be reinstated. Rural Housing 17. The statement normally having spent a substantial period of their lives living in rural areas as members of the established rural community doesn t appear to be included as a Proposed Material Alteration. 18. Chief Executive Report states that the commitment to facilitate persons operating a full time business from their home doesn t appear to be included as a Proposed Material Alteration. Council should provide clarification regarding these inclusions. Environmental Report 19. Screening regarding proposed Material Alterations in relation to Strategic Environmental Assessment and Appropriate Assessment of the Plan are combined into one report. 20. Screening exercises are clearly separate and record separate conclusions. 21. Planning Authority must be satisfied that it has fulfilled the requirement of the SEA and Habitats Directives. Chief Executive s Opinion & Response: 1-6 These comments do not raise any specific issues in relation to proposed material amendments, under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time. 26

30 It should be noted that the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) based on current available data is adopted as a living document and as such will be subject to modification by emerging datasets of maps and plans as they become available. A review of the SFRA will be carried out as soon as the AFA mapping process currently underway by the OPW is finalised. The review will be undertaken with the objective of ensuring that the issue of Flood Risk has been addressed in a manner consistent with the Flood Risk Management Guidelines and will inter alia re examine the zoning of the Level 3 Settlements in accordance with the sequential approach. A variation of the County Development Plan will be proposed, if required to make appropriate amendments Protection of National Road Network Infrastructure. New Accesses to National Roads (Section 2.6 of the Guidelines) 7 & 8. These comments do not raise any specific issues in relation to proposed material amendments, under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time. Development at National Road Interchanges (Section 2.7 of the Guidelines). 9 & 10. The provision of the Carrickcarnon Economic / Business Zone is contrary to Policy EDE 13 of draft Louth County Development Plan : to resist development at rural related motorway interchanges. This policy refers to a number of rural- related motorway interchanges, including Carrickcarnon. With regard to traffic issues as per the Chief Executive s Report on Submissions received in relation to the draft Louth County Development Plan, the Chief Executive remains opposed to the zoning for the following reasons: The provision of an economic business zone would result in the area becoming a destination in its own right at this location, a fact which has been alluded to by the Bord in its refusal for planning permission. This would give rise to additional traffic generation and movements on a proposed protected regional route (R132) in addition to traffic movements off the motorway. An Bord Pleanala in a previous application for commercial development at this location considered that the site would serve traffic and draw significant trade from the motorway at a rural related interchange, and 27

31 Wider policies relevant to proper planning and sustainable development such as Smarter Travel Strategy, Spatial Planning & National Roads and Sustainable Urban Residential Development Guidelines, all advocate the need to promote compact urban development, reduce car dependency and promote sustainable mobility. In this regard it is recommended that the location of significant uses such as employment and commercial uses should be closely linked with and integrated with locations for future housing development as identified in the Core Strategy. Indeed, Planning Authorities should ensure sufficient lands for employment uses at suitable locations taking account of national planning policies such as those identified above in addition to the required physical infrastructure, particularly access and water services. A development plan shall include objectives for the promotion of sustainable settlement and transportation strategies in urban and rural areas. As per the Chief Executive s Report on Submissions received in relation to the draft Louth County Development Plan, the Chief Executive also remains opposed to the zoning for the following reasons; the site adjoins an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, potential adverse impact on adjoining residential properties, contrary to the county rural development and core Strategies and in addition, An Bord Pleanala upheld the decisions of the Planning Authority and similarly refused permissions for various forms of commercial activity at the site. 11. Noted. Core Strategy 12. Tables 2.5 and 2.6 have been re-examined and errors corrected. 13. Shortfall/excess column shall be titled excess see amended Table 2.5 above. 14. These comments do not raise any specific issues in relation to proposed material amendments, under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time. 15. It is acknowledged that there is a difference between the amount of housing land required and that zoned. This has a risen as a result of the public consultation process. On the whole it is 28

32 considered that the amount of additional land zoned for residential purposes is not overly excessive. 16. I consider that it was correct to omit the statement regarding strategic reserve as it could be misleading. The purpose of strategic reserve is not necessarily to provide for a second phase of development rather a series of phases over a number of plan periods. Furthermore as per section 2.10 (Phasing & Release of Residential & Zoned Lands, Page 18, Chapter 2, dlcdp ) of the draft Plan the inclusion of such lands as Strategic Reserve will not in any way imply a prior commitment on the part of Louth County Council regarding their future zoning during the preparation of subsequent County Development Plan for the period Thus the lands identified as strategic reserve in the draft LCDP may not necessarily be identified as such in future development plans Rural Housing 17 & 18 Comments Noted. Environmental Report The Chief Executive is satisfied that the final SEA and AA will be updated to take into account any material alterations and shall be a stand alone assessment. Chief Executive Recommendation: Revisions to Tables 2.5 & 2.6 See Appendix 1. Policy RD 39 (Page 86 Chapter 3 dlcdp ) shall read as follows: To consider developments falling within the following categories; limited one-off housing*, agricultural developments, extensions to existing authorised uses and farms, appropriate farm diversification projects; developments to be used for leisure, recreation and tourism; holiday accommodation including cottages and lodges where these are part of an existing or proposed integrated tourism complex; hotels/ guest houses / B & B s (only where the proposal involves the re-use or diversification of an existing building); extensions to existing authorised commercial and industrial developments; renewable energy schemes, public utility infrastructure, certain resource based and location specific developments of significant regional or national importance and, critical infrastructure projects. Nursing homes/analogous services ** and Economic Business zone at Carrickcarnon.*** 29

33 Multi-unit residential, conventional industrial and commercial development appropriate to existing settlements, developments directly adjacent to rural motorway interchanges would not be considered appropriate within this zone. *Refer to Section for Qualifying Criteria ** In the location identified by dot on Map 3.1 entitled Development Zones. *** In the location identified by??? dot on Map 3.1 entitled Development Zones. See Table 6.3 (Louth Economic Forum 10 Point Action Plans Page 181 Chapter 6 dlcdp ), see Appendix 1 Zoning on Map 3.1 (pertaining to Economic/ Business Zone at Carrickcarnon) shall be omitted Submission No. 14 Armagh City, Banbridge and Craigavon District Council. Summary: 1. No comment to make. Chief Executive s Opinion & Response: 2. Noted Chief Executive s Recommendation: No Change 30

34 Submission No. 15 Department of Agriculture, Food and Marine Summary: 1. No comment to make. Chief Executive s Opinion & Response: 2. Noted Chief Executive s Recommendation: No Change Submission No. 16 Meath County Council Summary: 1. Note revised policy EDE23 (Page 194, Chapter 6, dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Alterations, Page 10) and support the development of walking and cycling routes which will positively contribute to the development of tourism in the Boyne Valley Area. 2. Additional information to Table 6.3 Louth Economic Forum 10 Point Action Plans (Page 181, Chapter 6 dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 11 21) to identify areas to be developed including The Boyne Valley and Cooley/ Mourne/ Gullion Region. Meath support the sustainable development of the Boyne Valley Region for tourism. Meath welcome the continuing positive engagement with Louth County Council regarding economic matters of mutual interest. Chief Executive s Opinion & Response: 1. Noted. 2. The objectives pertaining to Tourism and Heritage have not been amended at the Proposed Material Alterations stage however Meath County Councils comments are noted. Chief Executive s Recommendation: No Change 31

35 Submission No: 17 BT Services. Summary: 1. Essential that you contact the if you believe BT services will be affected or need diversion in relation to any development. Chief Executive s Opinion & Response: 1. This comments do not raise any specific issues in relation to proposed material amendments, under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time. Chief Executive s Recommendation: No Change Submission No. 18 Forward Planning Section - Department of Education and Skills. Summary: 1. No comment to make. Chief Executive s Opinion & Response: 1. Noted Chief Executive s Recommendation: No Change 32

36 Submission No: 19 Dr Michael O Hora Summary: An area to the north of Greenore Village and now a large area to the south of the village is zoned for port/port related activities. Zoning alteration conflicts with other stated objectives of the draft Plan; ACA, amenity value of Carlingford Louth, protection of Coastal area by EU Habitats Directives. Reconsider zoning alterations on the following grounds: 1. Zoning definition port/ port- related is extremely broad. 2. Zoned area threatens unique setting and architectural character of the ACA. 3. Coastal area protected by EU Habitats Directives must be considered. 4. One of the objectives in designating Greenore as an ACA is to protect the landscape setting of the village and views outward. Zoning will potentially impose unsympathetic development in front of existing protected structures. 5. Port related activities may not create any significant employment. 6. The scale of zoning is out of proportion with capacity of Greenore Port and road infrastructure. 7. Suitable compromise would be to zone area immediately south of Greenore Village ACA as residential. Industrial development should not encroach further than present extend. Portrelated industrial activity should be zoned further south to minimise impact of development on the environment. Chief Executive s Opinion & Response: Background Information Submissions (No. 133 & 151) were received to the draft Plan requesting the extension of Greenore Port. The Chief Executive s Report on Submissions received to the draft Louth County Development Plan states: Lands to be included as port/port related activity would be as follows: Greenore Port as identified on Map 3.7a (5.8hectares) N.B lands to the north of the Village. Lands to the south of Greenore Village and east of R175 in the ownership of Greenore Port and Hanlon Transport as identified as identified on Map 3.7a which are 33

37 substantially developed and where there are extant permissions for industrial/port related development (29hectares of which hectares are undeveloped). McParland Lands The McParland Lands are located to the southern extreme of the submission lands and extend to 14 hectares. They are undeveloped agricultural lands and have no direct access onto the R175. There are no extant permissions for port or port related activity. Having regard to the hectares of undeveloped land to the north, which is located closer to the port itself and some of which has the benefit of extant permissions for port related development, it is considered that any extension of the Port/Port-Related zoning at this location would be premature at this time. The Chief Executive s opinion remains as per the previous report. The 5.8ha of land to the north of Greenore directly abuts the port and the lands are currently in use for Port/Port Related Activity. It is considered that this is the most appropriate form of development and the lands should be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/ Port related Activity. The hectares to the south of Greenore comprises of existing commercial development in addition some lands have the benefit of extant permissions for industrial/port related activities. It was considered appropriate that the said lands should be consolidated and included with the development boundary for Port/Port Related Activity. It should also be noted that the lands were previously included within Development Control Zone 5 and Policy RD39 clearly outlines the types of development which may be considered within this zone such as extensions to authorised uses, extensions to existing authorised commercial and industrial development as well as certain resource based and location specific developments of significant regional or national importance. The designation of Development Control Zone 5 did not reflect what was physically on the ground i.e a working port with port related commercial activity. Given that the most southerly 14ha of land is in undeveloped agricultural use with no extant planning permissions. The Chief Executive remains of the opinion that it would be premature to include the aforementioned lands within the development boundary for Port/Port Related Activity at the present time given the availability of other lands. At a Council meeting held 9 th June 2015 the elected members resolved to make the Plan with amendments including the inclusion of all lands identified in Submission No. 133, (5.8ha to the north, 12.66ha to the south and the most southerly 14ha), as Port/ Port related activities. 34

38 1. It is acknowledged that the zoning definition, Port/ Port- Related Activity is broad. However Greenore Port is of regional importance and it is considered that this zoning shall allow for a wide range of commercial activities. Each application shall be assessed on its own merits and shall be considered in accordance with normal planning considerations including roads infrastructure, EU directive, impact on ACA, protected structures and views. 2. As previously stated the 5.8ha parcel of land to the north Greenore abuts the port, comprises of existing port/port related activity and should be included within the settlement boundary for the same. The hectares to the south of the village comprise of commercial activities as well as a number of extant permission and it was considered appropriate that such development should be consolidated. Given the existing commercial nature of the aforementioned lands it is not considered that including lands within the development boundary for Port/Port Related Activity will erode the existing character of the ACA. Furthermore any application for development which will affect the ACA will be assessed in accordance with ACA policy in the draft Louth County Council Development Plan , namely HER43-52 (Page 16, Chapter 5, dlcdp ) 3. The Strategic Environmental Report Appropriate Assessment for the Proposed Amendments to the draft Louth County Development Plan states that impact of the amendments are neutral and will not alter the conclusion of the environmental assessment in the SEA or NIA. Furthermore any future development proposals will be subject to mandatory environmental and development control compliance. 4. See Point 2 above. 5. Ports have a number of functions including port company operators, ship operation and movement, ship loading/unloading, cargo services, land transport and storage as well as involvement with government agencies. It is extremely likely that the aforementioned activities shall generate direct and indirect employment opportunities. 6. The Chief Executive remains of the opinion that it would be premature to include within the development boundary the of most southerly parcel of land extending to 14 ha for port/port related activity at the present time. 7. There are no lands within Level 4 Settlements zoned for residential development notwithstanding this there is sufficient undeveloped land zoned residential in the County (including 50% headroom) to cater for market choice and for the projected population increase up to

39 Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. Submission No: 20 Sean & Marie Breen Summary: 1. Stumbled upon Material Alterations to draft Development Plan. 2. Material Alterations to Greenore following Submissions No. 133 and 151 granted by the Chief Executive. 3. Re- zoning of Residential/Industrial land to port related activity cannot be slipped in after Development Plan reaches final stages on the suggestion of vested interests who can only profit from its implementation. 4. Draft Development Plan was well advertised and inspected- cannot say the same about Material Alterations. Surprised councillor didn t see it their duty to consult local residents and committees. 5. Greenore is a unique purpose built Victorian village. Planning proposals ought to be considered very carefully. 6. Infilling of the Greenbelt would ruin character of the village and overwhelm settlement, 7. Protection of Greenore s visual, historic, and unique character is recognised in the RPS and NIAH. 8. In denying planning permission previously the CE stated Greenore is a unique planned railway village, all buildings are an integral element. 9. Boundaries of the proposed re-zoning comprises, NHA, SPC & SPA. Village has architectural protection and foreshore abuts a Site of Geological interest. 10. Previous industrial development is planned, screened and set back & does not detract from settlement. 11. Planning permission should be refused for any developments that overshadows or detracts from village. 36

40 Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1 & 4 Throughout the Plan process I am wholly satisfied that the public consultation was carried out in accordance with Section 12 (7) (b) (i) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended). A notice was place in local paper stating the proposed amendment of the draft development may be inspected at a stated place and at stated times during a stated period. In addition the display of the proposed amendments was advertised through the following media platforms: the Louth County Council website as well as, Louth County Council s Facebook and Twitter feed. The material amendments that were placed on display and to which the Chief Executive is responding came about as a result of submissions correctly made to the draft Plan when on public display from Monday 6 th October 2014 Wednesday 17 th December 2014 in compliance with statutory procedures. Following a decision by the Council to include part of these lands the material alterations went on public display and your submission was made in response to that advertisement. 1 & 3. Submissions (No. 133& 151) were received to the draft Plan requesting the extension of Greenore Port. The Chief Executive s Report on Submissions received to the draft Louth County Development Plan states : Lands to be included as port/port related activity would be as follows: Greenore Port as identified on Map 3.7a (5.8hectares) N.B lands to the north of the Village. Lands to the south of Greenore Village and east of R175 in the ownership of Greenore Port and Hanlon Transport as identified as identified on Map 3.7a which are substantially developed and where there are extant permissions for industrial/port related development (29hectares of which hectares are undeveloped). McParland Lands The McParland Lands are located to the southern extreme of the submission lands and extend to 14 hectares. They are undeveloped agricultural lands and have no direct access onto the R175. There are no extant permissions for port or port related activity. Having regard to the hectares of undeveloped land to the north, which is located 37

41 closer to the port itself and some of which has the benefit of extant permissions for port related development, it is considered that any extension of the Port/Port-Related zoning at this location would be premature at this time. It was the Chief Executive s opinion that only the 5.8ha parcel of land to the North and 12.66ha parcel of land to the south be included within the development boundary for Port/Port-related activity. In accordance with Section 12 (6) following the consideration of the draft development plan and the Chief Executive Report, at a Council meeting held 9 th June 2015 the Elected Members resolved to make the Plan with amendments including the inclusion of all lands identified in Submission Nos. 133 & 151, (5.8ha to the north, 12.66ha to the south and the most southerly 14ha), as Port/ Port related activities. It should be noted that I am still of the opinion that only the 5.8ha parcel of land to the North and 12.66ha parcel of land immediately south of the village should be included within the development boundary for Port/Port-Related Activity. 6. The 5.8ha of land to the north of Greenore directly abuts the port and the lands are currently in use for Port/Port Related Activity. It is considered that this is the most appropriate form of development and the lands should be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/ Port related Activity. The hectares to the south of the village comprises of commercial activities as well as a number of extant permission and it was considered appropriate that such development should be consolidated. Given the existing commercial nature of the aforementioned lands it is not considered that the port/port- related zoning will erode the existing character of the village nor overwhelm the settlement. 5, 7 &11. Any planning application for development in Greenore will be assessed on its own merits and shall be considered in accordance with normal planning considerations including impact on ACA, impact on protected structures, pnha, SPA, SAC, Sites of Geological Interests, character of the village and overshadowing. As with all planning applications including those pertaining to Greenore, the public are invited to a make objections/ submissions, which shall be fully considered. 8. Noted. 9. The Strategic Environmental Report Appropriate Assessment for the Proposed Amendments to the draft Louth County Development Plan states that impact of the amended zoning is neutral and will not alter the conclusion of the environmental assessment in the SEA or NIA. 38

42 Furthermore any future development proposals will be subject to mandatory environmental and development control compliance. 10. Noted Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. Submission No: 21 Doreen and Noel Smyth Summary: Object to the proposed Material Alterations for the following reasons. Field at top of Euston Street, Greenore is not suitable for zoning as port related activity (industry ) for the following reasons: 1. Proximity to ACA, 2. Proximity to Protected Structures, 3. Proximity to Carlingford Lough (SAC/SPA/pNHA) 4. Proximity to protected eastern shoreline (SPA) 5. File is prone to flooding as per attached composite map 6. Historical zoning of Residential / Industry Proposed alteration of the overall zoning plan (of circa 70 acres on the eastern side of the R175);- 7. Enclose village on four sides, settlement and community will eventually die away. 8. Disproportionate in scale to size of enclosed heritage village 9. Contrary to good planning and is not balanced or fair. 10. Contrary to the Local Government Reform Act 2014 and provision of Effective Government, Putting People First. 11. History of Louth County Council accommodating planning applications from a private company operating at Greenore Port. 39

43 Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1, 2 & 6 The 5.8ha of land to the north of Greenore directly abuts the port and the lands are currently in use for Port/Port Related Activity. It is considered that this is the most appropriate form of development and the lands should be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/ Port related Activity. Given the existing commercial nature of the aforementioned land it is not considered that its inclusion within the development boundary for Port/Port Related Activity will erode the existing character of the ACA. Any planning application for development in Greenore will be assessed on its own merits and shall be considered in accordance with normal planning considerations including impact on ACA, SAC, SPA, pnha and protected structures. As with all planning applications including those pertaining to Greenore, the public are invited to a make objections/ submissions, which shall be fully considered. 3 & 4. The Strategic Environmental Report Appropriate Assessment for the Proposed Amendments to the draft Louth County Development Plan states that impact of the amended zoning is neutral and will not alter the conclusion of the environmental assessment in the SEA or NIA. Furthermore any future development proposals will be subject to mandatory environmental and development control compliance. 5. Development in any area at flood risk will be subject to an appropriate site specific flood risk assessment. 7, 8 & 9. The ha parcel of land immediately south of the village comprises of commercial activities as well as a number of extant permissions it was deeded appropriate that such development should be consolidated. It is not considered that the inclusion of the aforementioned land within the Development Boundary for Port /Port Related Activity is disproportionate to the size of the village nor will it have detrimental impact on the settlement or community therein. Given that the most southerly 14ha of land is in undeveloped agricultural use with no extant planning permissions. The Chief Executive remains of the opinion that it would be premature to include the aforementioned lands within the development boundary for Port/Port Related Activity at the present time given the availability of other lands. 10 & 11 These comments do not raise any specific issues in relation to proposed material amendments, under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time. 40

44 Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. Submission No: 22 Name : Summary : St Peters, Demense Road, Dundalk is for Sale. Submitters requests information regarding 2no. empty premises at the rear Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: Submission shall be forwarded to relevant Section. Under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the planning and development Act (as amended ) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time Chief Executive s Recommendation: No Change Submission No: 23 Name : David Mulcahy on behalf of Mr Tony Meegan Summary : Amend RD39 (Page 86, Chapter 3 dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 6 ) to including the following: consideration will also be given to established, small- medium scale, family run businesses in exceptional circumstances where it can be demonstrated that such business provide local employment, would generally be considered bad neighbours in an urban setting, do not generate significant traffic volumes, so not have a significant visual impact and do not pose a significant threat to the natural environment. Such businesses should be bases on existing buildings as opposed to Greenfield sites. Retail developments will not qualify 41

45 Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: I am of the opinion that RD39 as amended is sufficient to cater for rural based agricultural, commercial and industrial development at appropriate locations and there is no necessity to include additional wording. Chief Executive s Recommendation: No Change Submission No. 24 Sandra Smyth Field at top of Euston Street, Greenore is not suitable for zoning as port related activity (industry ) for the following reasons: 1. Proximity to ACA, 2. Proximity to Protected Structures, 3. Proximity to Carlingford Lough (SAC/SPA/pNHA) 4. Proximity to protected eastern shoreline (SPA) 5. File is prone to flooding as per attached composite map 6. Historical zoning of Residential / Industry Proposed alteration of the overall zoning plan (of circa 70 acres on the eastern side of the R175);- 7. Enclose village on four sides, settlement and community will eventually die away. 8. Disproportionate in scale to size of enclosed heritage village 9. Contrary to good and proposed planning and is not balanced and fair. 10. Contrary to the Local Government Reform Act 2014 and provision of Effective Government, Putting People First. 11. History of Louth County Council accommodating planning applications from a private company operating at Greenore Port. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1, 2 & 6 The 5.8ha of land to the north of Greenore directly abuts the port and the lands are currently in use for Port/Port Related Activity. It is considered that this is the most appropriate form of development and the lands should be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore 42

46 for Port/ Port related Activity. Given the existing commercial nature of the aforementioned land it is not considered that its inclusion within the development boundary for Port/Port Related Activity will erode the existing character of the ACA. Any planning application for development in Greenore will be assessed on its own merits and shall be considered in accordance with normal planning considerations including impact on ACA, SAC, SPA, pnha and protected structures. As with all planning applications including those pertaining to Greenore, the public are invited to a make objections/ submissions, which shall be fully considered. 3 & 4. The Strategic Environmental Report Appropriate Assessment for the Proposed Amendments to the draft Louth County Development Plan states that impact of the amended zoning is neutral and will not alter the conclusion of the environmental assessment in the SEA or NIA. Furthermore any future development proposals will be subject to mandatory environmental and development control compliance. 5. Development in any area at flood risk will be subject to an appropriate site specific flood risk assessment. 7, 8 & 9. The ha parcel of land immediately south of the village comprises of commercial activities as well as a number of extant permissions it was deeded appropriate that such development should be consolidated. It is not considered that the inclusion of the aforementioned land within the Development Boundary for Port /Port Related Activity is disproportionate to the size of the enclosed heritage village nor will it have detrimental impact on the settlement or community therein. Given that the most southerly 14ha of land is in undeveloped agricultural use with no extant planning permissions and the Chief Executive is of the opinion that it would be premature to include these lands within the Development Boundary for Port/Port Related Activity. 10 & 11 These comments do not raise any specific issues in relation to proposed material amendments, under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time. Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. 43

47 Submission No. 25 DAA Summary : No comment to make. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: Noted Chief Executive s Recommendation: No Change Submission No. 26 Aine Quinn Summary : 1. Strongly object to the proposed re-zoning of Greenore Village 2. Beautiful village should be treasured not swamped by commerce and concrete. 3. Consider residents, visitors, golfers, fishermen, holiday makers and day trippers. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1. Submissions (No. 151 & 133) were received to the draft Plan requesting the extension of Greenore Port. The Chief Executive s Report on Submissions received to the draft Louth County Development Plan states: Lands to be included as port/port related activity would be as follows: Greenore Port as identified on Map 3.7a (5.8hectares) N.B lands to the north of the Village. Lands to the south of Greenore Village and east of R175 in the ownership of Greenore Port and Hanlon Transport as identified as identified on Map 3.7a which are substantially developed and where there are extant permissions for industrial/port related development (29hectares of which hectares are undeveloped). McParland Lands 44

48 The McParland Lands are located to the southern extreme of the submission lands and extend to 14 hectares. They are undeveloped agricultural lands and have no direct access onto the R175. There are no extant permissions for port or port related activity. Having regard to the hectares of undeveloped land to the north, which is located closer to the port itself and some of which has the benefit of extant permissions for port related development, it is considered that any extension of the Port/Port-Related zoning at this location would be premature at this time. The 5.8ha of land to the north of Greenore directly abuts the port and the lands are currently in use for Port/Port Related Activity. It is considered that this is the most appropriate form of development and the lands should be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/ Port related Activity. The hectares to the south of Greenore comprises of existing commercial development in addition some lands have the benefit of extant permissions for industrial/port related activities. It was considered appropriate that the said lands should be consolidated and be included within the Development Boundary. It should also be noted that the lands were previous included within Development Control Zone 5 and Policy RD39 (Page 86 Chapter 3 draft Louth County Development Plan & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 6) clearly outlines the types of development which may be considered within this zone such as extensions to authorised uses, extensions to existing authorised commercial and industrial development as well as certain resource based and location specific developments of significant regional it national importance. The designation of Development Control Zone 5 did not reflect what was physically on the ground i.e a working port with port related commercial activity. Given that the most southerly 14ha of land is in undeveloped agricultural use with no extant planning permissions. The Chief Executive remains of the opinion that it would be premature to include the aforementioned lands within the development boundary for Port/Port Related Activity at the present time given the availability of other lands. At a Council meeting held 9 th June 2015 the elected members resolved to make the Plan with amendments including the inclusion of all lands identified in Submissions No. 133 & 151, (5.8ha to the north, 12.66ha to the south and the most southerly 14ha), as Port/ Port related activities. 2. Given the commercial nature and existence of extant permissions, on the parcels of land immediately north and south of Greenore it is not considered that the inclusion of lands for Port/ Port Related Activity will not have a detrimental impact on the character of the area. 3. Noted 45

49 Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. Submission No. 27 Orla Smyth Summary: Object to the proposed Material Alterations for the following reasons. Field at top of Euston Street, Greenore is not suitable for zoning as port related activity (industry ) for the following reasons: 1. Proximity to ACA, 2. Proximity to Protected Structures, 3. Proximity to Carlingford Lough (SAC/SPA/pNHA) 4. Proximity to protected eastern shoreline (SPA) 5. File is prone to flooding as per attached composite map 6. Historical zoning of Residential / Industry Proposed alteration of the overall zoning plan (of circa 70 acres on the eastern side of the R175);- 7. Enclose village on four sides, settlement and community will eventually die away. 8. Disproportionate in scale to size of enclosed heritage village 9. Contrary to good and proposed planning and is not balanced and fair. 10. Contrary to the Local Government Reform Act 2014 and provision of Effective Government, Putting People First. 11. History of Louth County Council accommodating planning applications from a private company operating at Greenore Port. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1, 2 & 6 The 5.8ha of land to the north of Greenore directly abuts the port and the lands are currently in use for Port/Port Related Activity. It is considered that this is the most appropriate form of development and the lands should be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore 46

50 for Port/ Port related Activity. Given the existing commercial nature of the aforementioned land it is not considered that its inclusion within the development boundary for Port/Port Related Activity will erode the existing character of the ACA. Any planning application for development in Greenore will be assessed on its own merits and shall be considered in accordance with normal planning considerations including impact on ACA, SAC, SPA, pnha and protected structures. As with all planning applications including those pertaining to Greenore, the public are invited to a make objections/ submissions, which shall be fully considered. 3 & 4. The Strategic Environmental Report Appropriate Assessment for the Proposed Amendments to the draft Louth County Development Plan states that impact of the amended zoning is neutral and will not alter the conclusion of the environmental assessment in the SEA or NIA. Furthermore any future development proposals will be subject to mandatory environmental and development control compliance. 5 Development in any area at flood risk will be subject to an appropriate site specific flood risk assessment. 7, 8 & 9. The ha parcel of land immediately south of the village comprises of commercial activities as well as a number of extant permissions it was deeded appropriate that such development should be consolidated. It is not considered that the inclusion of the aforementioned land within the Development Boundary for Port /Port Related Activity is disproportionate to the size of the enclosed heritage village nor will it have detrimental impact on the settlement or community therein. Given that the most southerly 14ha of land is in undeveloped agricultural use with no extant planning permissions. The Chief Executive remains of the opinion that it would be premature to include the aforementioned lands within the development boundary for Port/Port Related Activity at the present time given the availability of other lands. 10 & 11 These comments do not raise any specific issues in relation to proposed material amendments, under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time. Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. 47

51 Submission No. 28 PAC Studio Limited on behalf of: Michael Clarke & Gerard Clarke Summary: Relates to Proposed Protected Structure D500 Ice House, The Demesne, Dundalk 1. Contends that the structure is not of such quality or significance to merit inclusion on the register. 2. The building was not considered of sufficient conservation importance to be included in the original list for addition to the Record of Protected Structures. It was only added following a request from a member of the public. 3. The structure is in a derelict condition due to vandalism and fire. 4. The value of the structure would be significantly decreased by its inclusion. 5. The cost of insuring the structure would rise significantly. 6. The future development potential of the site would be severely diminished. 7. All of the above would put the owners under undue financial burden. 8. The site was the subject of extensive pre-planning process for a Primary Healthcare Centre since The site has been acknowledged by the planning department as having a key position in the context of the Ice House Hill Park and development of the site would be welcomed in terms of forming an edge to the park and encouraging active passive surveillance of the park. Addition to the RPS would effectively sterilize the site. 9. Louth County Council had previously proposed that the site be subject of a CPO and a link road constructed through it. 10. An Engineer s report from P. Herr & Associates (with 8 photos) on the structural integrity of the building following two separate fires has also been submitted. The entire building is boarded up with plywood and metal plates. Externally the building has multiple cracks caused by the expansion of the masonry walls from the fires. The internal walls, ceiling and floors are damaged beyond repair and any remaining charred floor timbers are deemed dangerous. The structure has been unoccupied for ten years and wild ivy and vegetation has caused further structural damage to the rear walls and roof. The structure cannot be economically salvaged and restored to its original condition without demolition and reconstruction being carried out. 48

52 Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: As per the Chief Executive Report on submissions received in relation to the draft County Development Plan (March 2015) The property is one of the few 1930s Modern Movement houses in Dundalk and is of architectural interest. It was rated of Local Interest by the NIAH draft survey. It is notable that it is designed by a local architectural firm, still practicing in Dundalk. The Chief Executive s opinion remains the same. Recommend its inclusion in the Record of Protected Structures. Chief Executive s Recommendation: No Change Submission No. 29 Siobhan Kennedy Summary : 1. The re-zoning area lies along Greenore Golf course thus endangering nature at its most beautiful. 2. The area would be subject to noise pollution, air pollution and ruined views. 3. Greenore Golf Club is a major draw and attraction to the area and this could be put at risk should these plans go ahead. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1 & 3 The golf course is located to the south east of Greenore. The 5.8ha of land to the north of Greenore directly abuts the Port and the lands are currently in use for Port/Port Related Activity. It is considered that this is the most appropriate form of development and the lands should be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/ Port Related Activity. The hectares to the south of Greenore comprises of existing commercial development in addition some lands have the benefit of extant permissions. It was considered appropriate that the said lands should be consolidated and included within the Development Boundary as Port/ Port- Related Activity. Given the existing commercial nature of the lands it not considered that the inclusion of land for Port/Port Related Activity will have a detrimental impact on the character of the area. Given that the most southerly 14ha of land is in 49

53 undeveloped agricultural use with no extant planning permissions. The Chief Executive remains of the opinion that it would be premature to include the aforementioned lands within the development boundary for Port/Port Related Activity at the present time given the availability of other lands. 2. Any planning application for development in Greenore will be assessed on its own merits and shall be considered in accordance with normal planning considerations including views, noise and air pollution. As with all planning applications including those pertaining to Greenore, the public are invited to a make objections/ submissions, which shall be fully considered. Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. Submission No. 30 Gary Smyth Object to the proposed Material Alterations for the following reasons. Field at top of Euston Street, Greenore is not suitable for zoning as port related activity (industry ) for the following reasons: 1. Proximity to ACA, 2. Proximity to Protected Structures, 3. Proximity to Carlingford Lough (SAC/SPA/pNHA) 4. Proximity to protected eastern shoreline (SPA) 5. File is prone to flooding as per attached composite map 6. Historical zoning of Residential / Industry Proposed alteration of the overall zoning plan (of circa 70 acres on the eastern side of the R175);- 7. Enclose village on four sides, settlement and community will eventually die away. 8. Disproportionate in scale to size of enclosed heritage village 9. Contrary to good and proposed planning and is not balanced and fair. 10. Contrary to the Local Government Reform Act 2014 and provision of Effective Government, Putting People First. 50

54 11. History of Louth County Council accommodating planning applications from a private company operating at Greenore Port. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1, 2 & 6 The 5.8ha of land to the north of Greenore directly abuts the port and the lands are currently in use for Port/Port Related Activity. It is considered that this is the most appropriate form of development and the lands should be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/ Port related Activity. Given the existing commercial nature of the aforementioned land it is not considered that its inclusion within the development boundary for Port/Port Related Activity will erode the existing character of the ACA. Any planning application for development in Greenore will be assessed on its own merits and shall be considered in accordance with normal planning considerations including impact on ACA, SAC, SPA, pnha and protected structures. As with all planning applications including those pertaining to Greenore, the public are invited to a make objections/ submissions, which shall be fully considered. 3 & 4. The Strategic Environmental Report Appropriate Assessment for the Proposed Amendments to the draft Louth County Development Plan states that impact of the amended zoning is neutral and will not alter the conclusion of the environmental assessment in the SEA or NIA. Furthermore any future development proposals will be subject to mandatory environmental and development control compliance. 5 Development in any area at flood risk will be subject to an appropriate site specific flood risk assessment. 7, 8 & 9. The ha parcel of land immediately south of the village comprises of commercial activities as well as a number of extant permissions it was deeded appropriate that such development should be consolidated. It is not considered that the inclusion of the aforementioned land within the Development Boundary for Port /Port Related Activity is disproportionate to the size of the enclosed heritage village nor will it have detrimental impact on the settlement or community therein. Given that the most southerly 14ha of land is in undeveloped agricultural use with no extant planning permissions. The Chief Executive remains of the opinion that it would be premature to include the aforementioned lands within the development boundary for Port/Port Related Activity at the present time given the availability of other lands. 10 & 11 These comments do not raise any specific issues in relation to proposed material amendments, under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only 51

55 written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time. Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. Submission No. 31 Breffini Martin Summary : 1. Revised Policies SS53 & SS54 ( Chapter 2, Page 49, dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 4) require Appropriate Assessment Screening and should the impact prove to be significant, a full Natura Impact Assessment. Said changes undermine the conclusion of the existing SEA & AA. 2. Assessment of Impacts is provided in document entitled, Report on Proposed Material Alterations to the draft Louth County Council Development Plan dated June Document offers no actual assessment as required in guidelines entitled Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland- Guidance for Planning Authorities. 3. The Report does not include any sequential steps simply offers a bland statement. 4. Original AA/ SEA of the draft LCP identifies a number of critical factors in assessing environmental impacts of the Plan (Section 3.0, Stage 2, Appropriate Assessment). The following considerations are listed; loss / reduction of habitat area, disturbance of key species, habitat or species fragmentation, reduction in species density, changes in key factors of conservation value. Development is clearly and correctly identified as the biggest factor in relation to adverse impact on Natura 2000 sites. 5. There are a number of Natura 2000 sites in County Louth were an increase in housing along public roads will have clear significant impacts on those sites e.g Mooretown, Stabannon and Bragenstown - are designated for geese. Further is the impact of human activity associated with increased housing. Most of the coastline and Cooley Mountains are similarly vulnerable. 6. Revised polices would need to be assessed, the decrease from 400m to 150 meters undermines AA conclusions and the entire exercise needs to be undertaken from the start. 52

56 Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1-6 Louth County Council are satisfied as the competent authority that the Appropriate Assessment screening, when combined with the Natura Impact Assessment of the draft Plan complies with the Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland- Guidance for Planning Authorities and other EU guidelines available. The Strategic Environmental Report Appropriate Assessment for the Proposed Amendments to the draft Louth County Development Plan states that impact of the amendments are neutral and will not alter the conclusion of the environmental assessment in the SEA or NIA. Comments on SEA and /or AA Screening which were on public display at Material Alteration Stage where only the final determinations. The significance of effects of the revised policy SS 53 & SS 54 was examined in light of Section of the guidelines and based on the strategic nature of the policy and those settlements included a conclusion of no significant effect was included. Any proposed developments submitted on foot of the revised policy must comply with all environmental guidelines and, therefore each site will be independently and cumulatively assessed for impacts on Natura 2000 sites. As per the Chief Executive s Report on Submissions made to the draft Louth County Development Plan. It is considered that a separation of 400 metres is reasonable as it provides a clear distinction between the settlement areas and the rural areas. In relation to SS 53 it is considered that a separation of only 150 metres would damage the appearance of the rural area and would lead to expanses of linear development along the public road with little or no interruptions. With regard to SS54 it is considered that a separation of 150 metres would damage the appearance of the rural area and would detract from the setting of town and villages as there would be no clear distinction between the settlement areas and the rural areas. It is therefore recommended that policies SS53 and SS54 are revised accordingly. Chief Executive s Recommendation: SS53 shall read as follows: To prevent the creation of ribbon development by not permitting more than four houses in a row along any public road. A minimum gap of 150 metres 400 metres shall be maintained between such developments. An exception to this requirement may be considered where the dwelling is required to meet the housing needs of a son/daughter/foster child of a qualifying landowner and 53

57 where the planning authority is satisfied that there is no other suitable site available on the landholding SS54 shall read as follows: To preserve a clear break of a minimum of 150 metres 400 metres between the boundary of existing settlements and any permitted development along adjoining roads Submission No. 32 Dylan Macauley Summary : 1. Proposed re-zoning only came to submitters attention in recent days. Concern regarding operation of current process. Grounds of Objection: 2. Impact on Greenore s residential community: 2a. Removal of potential land for residential development 2b. Increase in port activity including dirt and fumes and danger form vehicles 3. Loss of ability to develop residential dwelling in field to rear of property. 4. Loss of peaceful enjoyment of property 5. Failure to develop and sustain communities 6. Failure to protect protected structures. Loss of right of way. 7. Potential impact on SPA. Redefining the SPA between Greenore Point and Bellurgan Point for the purpose of the application is curious. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1. Throughout the Plan process I am wholly satisfied that the public consultation was carried out in accordance with Section 12 (7) (b) (i) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended). A notice was place in local paper stating the proposed amendment of the draft development may be inspected at a stated place and at stated times during a stated period. In addition, the display of the proposed amendments was advertised through the following media platforms: the Louth County Council website as well as, Louth County Council s facebook and 54

58 twitter feed. The material amendments that were placed on display and to which the Chief Executive is responding came about as a result of submissions correctly made to the draft Plan when on public display from Monday 6 th October 2014 Wednesday 17 th December 2014 in compliance with statutory procedures. Following a decision by the Council to include part of these lands the material alterations went on public display and your submission was made in response to that advertisement. 2.a, 3, 5. There are no lands within Level 4 Settlements zoned for residential development notwithstanding this there is sufficient undeveloped land zoned residential in the County (including 50% headroom) to cater for market choice and for the projected population increase up to In addition there are currently drainage constraints in Greenore which limit future residential development. 2b, 4, & 6. All applications received on lands included within the Development Boundary for Port/ Port Related Activity shall be assessed on their own merits and shall be considered in accordance with normal planning considerations including traffic, impact on residential amenity, impact upon SPA, traffic and Protected Structures. As with all planning application including those pertaining to Greenore, the public are invited to a make objections/ submission, which shall be fully considered. Existence of a right of way is not a matter for consideration when determining appropriate zoning of land. 7 The Strategic Environmental Report Appropriate Assessment for the Proposed Amendments to the draft Louth County Development Plan states that impact of the amendments are neutral and will not alter the conclusion of the environmental assessment in the SEA or NIA. Furthermore any future development proposals will be subject to mandatory environmental and development control compliance. The Map referred to in submission does not pertain to the Material Amendments to this Plan. Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. 55

59 Submission No. 33 Annie Blakely Summary: Objections to the proposed amendments affecting Greenore. Zoning is inappropriate given Greenore s protected structures. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: Submissions (No. 151 & 133) were received to the draft Plan requesting the extension of Greenore Port. The Chief Executive s Report on Submissions received to the draft Louth County Development Plan states : Lands to be included as port/port related activity would be as follows: Greenore Port as identified on Map 3.7a (5.8hectares) N.B lands to the north of the Village. Lands to the south of Greenore Village and east of R175 in the ownership of Greenore Port and Hanlon Transport as identified as identified on Map 3.7a which are substantially developed and where there are extant permissions for industrial/port related development (29hectares of which hectares are undeveloped). McParland Lands The McParland Lands are located to the southern extreme of the submission lands and extend to 14 hectares. They are undeveloped agricultural lands and have no direct access onto the R175. There are no extant permissions for port or port related activity. Having regard to the hectares of undeveloped land to the north, which is located closer to the port itself and some of which has the benefit of extant permissions for port related development, it is considered that any extension of the Port/Port-Related zoning at this location would be premature at this time. The Chief Executive s opinion remains as per the previous report. The 5.8ha of land to the north of Greenore directly abuts the Port and the lands are currently in use for Port/Port Related Activity. It is considered that this is the most appropriate form of development and the lands should be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/ Port Related Activity. The hectares to the south of Greenore comprises of existing commercial 56

60 development in addition some lands have the benefit of extant permissions for industrial/port related activities. It was considered appropriate that the said lands should be consolidated and be included within the Development Boundary. It should also be noted that the lands were previous included within Development Control Zone 5 and Policy RD39 (Chapter 3, Page 86, draft Louth County Development Plan & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 6) clearly outlines the types of development which may be considered within this zone such as extensions to authorised uses, extensions to existing authorised commercial and industrial development as well as certain resource based and location specific developments of significant regional or national importance. The designation of Development Control Zone 5 did not reflect what was physically on the ground i.e a working port with port related commercial activity. Given that the most southerly 14ha of land is in undeveloped agricultural use with no extant planning permissions. The Chief Executive remains of the opinion that it would be premature to include the aforementioned lands within the development boundary for Port/Port Related Activity at the present time given the availability of other lands. At a Council meeting held 9 th June 2015 the elected members resolved to make the Plan with amendments including the inclusion of all lands identified in Submissions No. 133 & 151, (5.8ha to the north, 12.66ha to the south and the most southerly 14ha), as Port/ Port related activities. Given the commercial nature and existence of extant permissions, on the parcels of land immediately north and south of Greenore it is not considered that the inclusion of lands for Port/ Port Related Activity will have a detrimental impact on the character of the area. All applications received on land included within the Development Boundary for Port/ Port Related Activity shall be assessed on their own merits and shall be considered in accordance with normal planning considerations including impact upon Protected Structures. As with all planning application including those pertaining to Greenore, the public are invited to a make objections/ submission, which shall be fully considered. Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. 57

61 See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. Submission No. 34 Cormac O Donnchu and Georgina Caraher Summary: 1 (a ) Removal of Greenbelt and encapsulation of heritage village with industrial port related activity will render heritage village unsustainable as residential settlement. Re-zoning for Port related activity includes greenfield site. 1 (b).bounded on two side by protected structures and third side by SAC and SPA. Zoning contradicts Councils policy of protection of built heritage. 2. Removal of all residential zoning will render settlement unsustainable. 3a. Village is an ACA- it is a significant, underutilised, tourism and heritage asset. Sited directly in a section of the North Eastern Tourism route. Hope that this route will in the future be developed in manner akin to the Wild Atlantic Way. Ferry between Greenore and Greencastle will be a key component to the opening and promotion of such a cross border route. Zoning of lands on this proposed route adjacent to the scenic protected structures will be detrimental to its development. Contrary to People Place and Policy Growing Tourism A no. of planning decisions in favour of port related development have curtailed development of tourism. Situation in Greenore is in contrast to Carlingford which has blossomed. 3b. Settlement will be suffocated by Port related activities. Re-zoning the entrance to the village as solely port related activity will result in irreparable damage to village. 4. Rezoned lands are liable to flooding. 5. Re- zoning of land for the benefit of a commercially owned port cannot be regarded as being in the best interest of either the protection of the Environmental, built assets or local community. 6. Between 2008 and 2013, the port has witnessed an approximate 50% decrease in gross tonnage from 755 tonnes to 423 tonnes. 58

62 7. Limited time for public consultation 8. Zoning was based on the interest of self interest of individuals rather than greater interest of communities. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1 (a), 5 &8. Submissions (No. 151 & 133) were received to the draft plan requesting the extension of Greenore Port. The Chief Executive s Report on Submissions received to the draft Louth County Development Plan states: Lands to be included as port/port related activity would be as follows: Greenore Port as identified on Map 3.7a (5.8hectares) N.B lands to the north of the Village. Lands to the south of Greenore Village and east of R175 in the ownership of Greenore Port and Hanlon Transport as identified as identified on Map 3.7a which are substantially developed and where there are extant permissions for industrial/port related development (29hectares of which hectares are undeveloped). McParland Lands The McParland Lands are located to the southern extreme of the submission lands and extend to 14 hectares. They are undeveloped agricultural lands and have no direct access onto the R175. There are no extant permissions for port or port related activity. Having regard to the hectares of undeveloped land to the north, which is located closer to the port itself and some of which has the benefit of extant permissions for port related development, it is considered that any extension of the Port/Port-Related zoning at this location would be premature at this time. The Chief Executive s opinion remains as per the previous report. The 5.8ha of land to the north of Greenore directly abuts the Port and the lands are currently in use for Port/Port Related Activity. It is considered that this is the most appropriate form of development and the lands should be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/ Port Related Activity. The hectares to the south of Greenore comprises of existing commercial development in addition some lands have the benefit of extant permissions for industrial/port related activities. It was considered appropriate that the said lands should be consolidated and be included within 59

63 the Development Boundary. It should also be noted that the lands were previous included within Development Control Zone 5 and Policy RD39 (Chapter 3, Page 86, draft Louth County Development Plan & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 6 ) clearly outlines the types of development which may be considered within this zone such as extensions to authorised uses, extensions to existing authorised commercial and industrial development as well as certain resource based and location specific developments of significant regional it national importance. The designation of Development Control Zone 5 did not reflect what was physically on the ground i.e a working port with port related commercial activity. Given that the most southerly 14ha of land is in undeveloped agricultural use with no extant planning permissions. The Chief Executive remains of the opinion that it would be premature to include the aforementioned lands within the development boundary for Port/Port Related Activity at the present time given the availability of other lands. At a Council meeting held 9 th June 2015 the elected members resolved to make the Plan with amendments including the inclusion of all lands identified in Submissions No. 133 & 151, (5.8ha to the north, 12.66ha to the south and the most southerly 14ha), as Port/ Port related activities. Given the commercial nature and existence of extant permissions, on the parcels of land immediately north and south of Greenore it is not considered that the inclusion of lands for Port/ Port Related Activity will have a detrimental impact on the character of the area. 1(b) and 3 (b). Any planning application for development in Greenore will be assessed on its own merits and shall be considered in accordance with normal planning considerations including impact on ACA, protected structures, character of the village, SAC and SPA. As with all planning applications including those pertaining to Greenore, the public are invited to a make objections/ submissions, which shall be fully considered. 2. There are no lands within Level 4 Settlements zoned for residential development notwithstanding this there is sufficient undeveloped land zoned residential in the County (including 50% headroom) to cater for market choice and for the projected population increase up to In addition there are currently drainage constraints in Greenore which limit future residential development. 3a. Chapter 6, Section 6.4 of the draft Louth County Development Plan , pertains to the promotion of tourism within the County. Any application for tourism development in Greenore or the County as a whole shall be assessed in accordance with the policies contained therein. 60

64 4 Development in any area at flood risk will be subject to an appropriate site specific flood risk assessment. 6. Noted 7. Throughout the Plan process I am wholly satisfied that the public consultation was carried out in accordance with Section 12 (7) (b) (i) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended). A notice was place in local paper stating the proposed amendment of the draft development may be inspected at a stated place and at stated times during a stated period. In addition the display of the proposed amendments was advertised through the following media platforms: the Louth County Council website as well as, Louth County Council s Facebook and Twitter feed. The material amendments that were placed on display and to which the Chief Executive is responding came about as a result of submissions correctly made to the draft Plan when on public display from Monday 6 th October 2014 Wednesday 17 th December 2014 in compliance with statutory procedures. Following a decision by the Council to include part of these lands the material alterations went on public display and your submission was made in response to that advertisement. Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. Submission No. 35 John & Bronagh Daly Summary: 1. The field at the southern end of Euston Street, Greenore is not suitable for a zoning of portrelated activity on the grounds that; (a) Protected Structures The village of Greenore contains 31 protected structures and 11 proposed protected structure and having a port related activity in such close proximity would be completely at odds with each other. 61

65 The zoning would guarantee future increases in port-related traffic, noise and pollution and the movement of industrial vehicles between two separate port areas would make the village uninhabitable. (b) Architectural Conservation Area (ACA) Greenore village is designated as an Architectural Conservation Area and there are objectives in the Plan to preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the ACA and that any development should respect the character and setting of the ACA in scale, design and materials (Policy CON26). (HER 43, Chapter 5, Page 160, dlcdp) It is considered that the port-related activity located a few yards from the ACA would be contrary to the ACA objective CON26 and that the proposed material alteration will undoubtedly have a major impact on the ACA. (c) Removal of all residential Zoning from Greenore The rezoning of the field at the southern end of Euston Street from Industrial/Residential to port-related activity will remove all residential zoning from Greenore, which it is argued, is contrary to proper planning or sustainable development. Removing this existing buffer zone will take away the communities only possibility of expansion in the future by zoning the area as port-related activity and would condemn the community to certain decline and eventual death. 2. Scale of proposed material alteration is disproportionate The proposed alteration would see 71 acres of land being zoned for port-related activity on the opposite side of the village to the existing port facility of 14 acres and would essentially create a port with a heritage village of 10 acres sandwiched in the middle of it. This is disproportionate in scale to the size of the village and would engulf same and is therefore contrary to proper planning and sustainable development. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1 (a) & (b) Any planning application for development in Greenore will be assessed on its own merits and shall be considered in accordance with normal planning considerations including impact on protected structures, character of the Village, the ACA and traffic implications. As with all planning applications including those pertaining to Greenore, the public are invited to a make objections/ submissions, which shall be fully considered. 62

66 1(c) There are no lands within Level 4 Settlements zoned for residential development notwithstanding this there is sufficient undeveloped land zoned residential in the County (including 50% headroom) to cater for market choice and for the projected population increase up to In addition, there are currently drainage constraints in Greenore which limit future residential development. 2. The 5.8ha of land to the north of Greenore directly abuts the Port and the lands are currently in use for Port/Port Related Activity. It is considered that this is the most appropriate form of development and the lands should be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/ Port Related Activity. The hectares to the south of Greenore comprises of existing commercial development in addition some lands have the benefit of extant permissions. It was considered appropriate that the said lands should be consolidated and included within the Development Boundary as Port/ Port- Related Activity. Given the existing commercial nature of the lands it not considered that the inclusion of land for Port/Port Related Activity will have a detrimental impact on the character of the area. Given that the most southerly 14ha of land is in undeveloped agricultural use with no extant planning permissions. The Chief Executive remains of the opinion that it would be premature to include the aforementioned lands within the development boundary for Port/Port Related Activity at the present time given the availability of other lands. Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. Submission No. 36 Sean O Hanlon Summary: 1. The submitter objects to the zoning of lands near Greenore Port on the basis that there has been coastal erosion in the last 12 months and damage has been caused to roads in the area. Major works have taken place along the foreshore in Greenore to protect the existing commercial buildings. The lands at the front of the foreshore have eroded by at least 20 feet in 63

67 places and most of the land rezoned is floodplain land. It is submitted that no proper reports and no site visits have taken places to view these problems prior to considering the rezoning of these lands. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1. Development in any area at flood risk will be subject to an appropriate site specific flood risk assessment. This location is part of the Dundalk Bay Coastal Erosion Study currently underway. This study will assess the extent of the erosion and will consider measures to address the same. Development will have regard to the findings of the study Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. Submission No. 37 Fergus & Margaret Hanley Summary: 1. The field on the right-hand side as one enters the village of Greenore is currently zoned industrial/residential but it is now proposed to change this to port-related activity. If this is developed, it would smother the village because there would be a port on one side and a possible storage/development area on the other side. 2. Also, any development would be in total contrast to the Bungalows which are protected structures. 3. The piece of land currently zoned residential/industrial should be retained. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1. The 5.8ha of land to the north of Greenore directly abuts the Port and the lands are currently in use for Port/Port Related Activity. It is considered that this is the most appropriate form of development and the lands should be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/ Port Related Activity. The hectares to the south of Greenore comprises of existing commercial development in addition some lands have the benefit of extant permissions. It was considered appropriate that the said lands should be consolidated and 64

68 included within the Development Boundary as Port/ Port- Related Activity. Given the existing commercial nature of the lands it not considered that the inclusion of land for Port/Port Related Activity will have a detrimental impact on the character of the area. The most southerly 14ha of land is in undeveloped agricultural use with no extant planning permissions the Chief Executive remains of the opinion it would be premature to include these lands within the Development Boundary for Port/Port Related Activity. 2. Any planning application for development in Greenore will be assessed on its own merits and shall be considered in accordance with normal planning considerations including, impact on protected structures. As with all planning applications including those pertaining to Greenore, the public are invited to a make objections/ submissions, which shall be fully considered. 3. There are no lands within Level 4 Settlements zoned for residential development notwithstanding this there is sufficient undeveloped land zoned residential in the County (including 50% headroom) to cater for market choice and for the projected population increase up to In addition there are currently drainage constraints in Greenore which limit future residential development. Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. Submission No. 38 Ian Smyth Summary: 1. The field at the top of Euston Street is not suitable for port-related activity on the grounds that; a. Its proximity to an ACA, Protected Structures ( The Bungalows and 5 Coastguard Houses), Carlingford Louth which has SAC, SPA and pnha status, proximity to protected eastern shoreline (SPA), b. The field is prone to flooding and it has an historical zoning of residential/industry. 2. The proposed zoning of circa 70 acres on the eastern side of the R175; a. Will enclose the village on all four sides resulting in the settlement eventually dying away, 65

69 b. Is disproportionate in scale to the size of the enclosed heritage village, c. Is contrary to good and proper planning and is not balance and fair, d. Is contrary to Local Government Reform Act 2014 which makes legal provision of reforms for Effective Local Government, Putting People First. 3. There has been a haphazard approach to planning regarding industrial units and storage in the vicinity of Greenore Port, the Village and surrounding areas. 4. Greenore Port is smothering the village. Planning should be fair to all, proper planning should not allow mass storage at the entrance to the village, it should allow for proper planning of village life and safety of children. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1a, 2 (a-c), 3 & 4. The 5.8ha of land to the north of Greenore directly abuts the Port and the lands are currently in use for Port/Port Related Activity. It is considered that this is the most appropriate form of development and the lands should be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/ Port Related Activity. The hectares to the south of Greenore comprises of existing commercial development in addition some lands have the benefit of extant permissions. It was considered appropriate that the said lands should be consolidated and included within the Development Boundary as Port/ Port- Related Activity. Given the existing commercial nature of the lands it not considered that the inclusion of land for Port/Port Related Activity will have a detrimental impact on the character of the area. The most southerly 14ha of land is in undeveloped agricultural use with no extant planning permissions the Chief Executive remains of the opinion it would be premature to include these lands within the Development Boundary for Port/Port Related Activity at this time. Any planning application for development in Greenore will be assessed on its own merits and shall be considered in accordance with normal planning considerations including impact on ACA, protected structures, SAC, SPA and pnha, and traffic. As with all planning applications including those pertaining to Greenore, the public are invited to a make objections/ submissions, which shall be fully considered. It should also be noted The Strategic Environmental Report Appropriate Assessment for the Proposed Amendments to the draft Louth County Development Plan states that impact of the amendments are neutral and will not alter the conclusion of the environmental 66

70 assessment in the SEA or NIA. Furthermore any future development proposals will be subject to mandatory environmental and development control compliance. 1b. Development in any area at flood risk will be subject to an appropriate site specific flood risk assessment. There are no lands within Level 4 Settlements zoned for residential development notwithstanding this there is sufficient undeveloped land zoned residential in the County (including 50% headroom) to cater for market choice and for the projected population increase up to In addition there are currently drainage constraints in Greenore which limit future residential development. 2 (d) Noted. Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. Submission No. 39 Anthony & Mary Hanley Summary: 1. The submitter would like to see the existing zoning of the field on the right hand side as you enter the village retained as Residential/Industrial to protect Greenore Village from being surrounded by industrial storage and noise. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1. The hectares to the south of Greenore comprises of existing commercial development in addition some lands have the benefit of extant permissions. It was considered appropriate that the said lands should be consolidated and included within the Development Boundary as Port/ Port- Related Activity. Given the existing commercial nature of the lands it not considered that the inclusion of land for Port/Port Related Activity will have a detrimental impact on the character of the area. It should be noted that there are no lands within Level 4 Settlements zoned for residential development notwithstanding this there is sufficient undeveloped land zoned residential in the 67

71 County (including 50% headroom) to cater for market choice and for the projected population increase up to In addition there are currently drainage constraints in Greenore which limit future residential development. Any planning application for development in Greenore will be assessed on its own merits and shall be considered in accordance with normal planning considerations including noise. As with all planning applications including those pertaining to Greenore, the public are invited to a make objections/ submissions, which shall be fully considered Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. Submission No. 40 Greenore Residents & Tidy Town Limited (Brian Larkin & John Daly) Summary: 1. The rezoning dramatically extends the Greenore development boundary as Port/Port Related Activity and removes all residential zoning from the village. This will have a hugely detrimental impact on the community of Greenore. 2. Settlement Sustainability/Rural Development a. Greenore lies at the tip of a peninsula and it expansion is constrained on three sides. The future development at the southern end of Euston Street, currently zoned residential/industrial would be the determining factor in the future sustainability of the community and the village as these lands affords the only opportunity for the village to expand the community. b. If this land is developed as port-related activity then the community will become completely enclosed on all four sides with no potential for future growth. This would be contrary to Policy RD4 (Page 74, Chapter 3, dlcdp ) which seeks to secure vibrant and viable rural communities by promoting sustainable development and settlement patterns in rural areas and would be contrary to RD20 (Page 78, Chapter 3, dlcdp ) which seeks to resist 68

72 development along the coast which would detract from its visual appearance or conflict with its recreational and leisure facilities. 3. Scale of alteration is disproportionate a. The proposed material alteration which seeks to zone circa 85 acres of lands as port/portrelated on either side of a heritage village area of circa 10 acres is totally disproportionate to the settlement area. b. The zoning of the existing port facility to the north of the village as port activity and the expansion of the Greenore development boundary to incorporate this area is reasonable. However, the decision to zone an additional 71 acres on the opposite side of the village is disproportionate. c. It is difficult to understand how an area of 85 acres of land would be required to be zoned port/port-related activity when the port annual gross tonnage has declined in recent years, it can accommodate two small to medium sized vessels, accounts for one-fifth of one percent of Ireland gross national tonnage and is not serviced by a rail-link. 4. Zoning of Field at southern end of Euston Street. The field is not ideally suited to an industrial zoning as it is located between Carlingford Lough on one side and Greenore Village on the other side. Carlingford Lough is a pnha and an SAC as well as a SPA and the council policies CON11, (Page 46, Chapter 2, LCDP ) CON14 ( Page 49, Chapter 2, LCDP ) and CON15 (Page 51, Chapter 2 LCDP ) seek to resist development that would be harmful to the international landscape classifications outlined above. The foreshore adjacent to the field at the southern end of Euston Street is a Candidate site of Geological Interest. CON 12 ( Page 47, Chapter2, LCDP ) in the draft Development Plan which relates to such sites seeks to promote awareness and protect where appropriate, area of geological interests. The foreshore is also classified as a raised beach thought to deate from post-mesolithic period and contains stones that are thought to be rolled flint implements dating from the same time. The geodiversity of the beach should be taken into consideration. 5. Built Heritage Issues 69

73 Greenore is a designated ACA and contains 31 protected structures and 11 proposed protected structures. There are objectives in the Plan to preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the ACA and that any development should respect the character and setting of the ACA in scale, design and materials (Policy CON26) (Page 63, Chapter 2 LCDP ). It is considered that proposal to zone the field at the top of Euston Street would be contrary to Council Policy pnha s, SAC s, SPA s, ACA s and Protected Structures. 6. Tourism Greenore is a unique Victorian Railway Village. It continues to attract a large number of visitors each year to participate in leisure activities. Planning permission has been granted for a touristferry operating between Greenore and Greencastle, thereby linking the Cooley Peninsula with the Mountains of Mourne. There is huge potential for further development of the village from a tourism perspective. It is stated that the proposed zoning of a massive port-related industrial area around the heritage village of Greenore would be detrimental to the development of tourism in Greenore and the greater Cooley area and is contrary to the Council s policy on tourism (TOU2 (Page 191, Chapter 7, LCDP ) and TOU4 (page 191, Chapter 7, LCDP ). In addition, it is considered unacceptable that the promenade of Greenore appears to have been completely disregarded and removed from the Greenore Composite Map. 7. Flood Zones Greenore is identified as an area requiring further Flood Risk Assessment. Part of the field at the southern end of Euston Street is shown as being possibly prone to flooding, Such an area is unsuited to any type of industrial zoning and would be more suited to residential development. Large amounts of land further south of Greenore that are proposed to be zoned for port/portrelated activity are identified on the Greenore Composite Map as being in Flood Zone A. It is stated that the proposed zoning of this land is entirely unsuitable and is contrary to proper planning. 8. Impact on Greenore 8(a) There would be a huge impact on the residents and visitors to Greenore should be proposed material alterations proceed insofar as the port-related activity would monopolise the village. 70

74 (b) The associated traffic and noise to make Greenore uninhabitable. 9. Greenore Development Sucessive County Development Plans have been varied or materially altered to facilitate the incumbent owners of Greenore Port. This proposed material alteration would see circa 85 acres of land zoned as port/port-related activity at the request of the current owners of Greenore Port is not balance and sustainable. It clearly prioritises Port development over the sustainability of the Greenore Settlement and is therefore contrary to good and proper planning. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1, 2a, 2b, 3a, 3b, 8(a) & 9. Submissions (No. 151 & 133) were received to the draft plan requesting the extension of Greenore Port. The Chief Executive s Report on Submissions received to the draft Louth County Development Plan states: Lands to be included as port/port related activity would be as follows: Greenore Port as identified on Map 3.7a (5.8hectares) N.B lands to the north of the Village. Lands to the south of Greenore Village and east of R175 in the ownership of Greenore Port and Hanlon Transport as identified as identified on Map 3.7a which are substantially developed and where there are extant permissions for industrial/port related development (29hectares of which hectares are undeveloped). McParland Lands The McParland Lands are located to the southern extreme of the submission lands and extend to 14 hectares. They are undeveloped agricultural lands and have no direct access onto the R175. There are no extant permissions for port or port related activity. Having regard to the hectares of undeveloped land to the north, which is located closer to the port itself and some of which has the benefit of extant permissions for port related development, it is considered that any extension of the Port/Port-Related zoning at this location would be premature at this time. The Chief Executive s opinion remains as per the previous report. The 5.8ha of land to the north of Greenore directly abuts the Port and the lands are currently in use for Port/Port 71

75 Related Activity. It is considered that this is the most appropriate form of development and the lands should be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/ Port Related Activity. The hectares to the south of Greenore comprises of existing commercial development in addition some lands have the benefit of extant permissions for industrial/port related activities. It was considered appropriate that the said lands should be consolidated and be included within the Development Boundary. It should also be noted that the lands were previous included within Development Control Zone 5 and Policy RD39 (Chapter 3, Page 86, dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 6) clearly outlines the types of development which may be considered within this zone such as extensions to authorised uses, extensions to existing authorised commercial and industrial development as well as certain resource based and location specific developments of significant regional it national importance. The designation of Development Control Zone 5 did not reflect what was physically on the ground i.e a working port with port related commercial activity. Given that the most southerly 14ha of land is in undeveloped agricultural use with no extant planning permissions the Chief Executive remains of the opinion that it would be premature to include these lands within the Development Boundary for Port/Port -Related Activity. At a Council meeting held 9 th June 2015 the elected members resolved to make the Plan with amendments including the inclusion of all lands identified in Submissions No. 133 & 151, (5.8ha to the north, 12.66ha to the south and the most southerly 14ha), as Port/ Port related activities. There are no lands within Level 4 Settlements zoned for residential development notwithstanding this there is sufficient undeveloped land zoned residential in the County (including 50% headroom) to cater for market choice and for the projected population increase up to In addition there are currently drainage constraints in Greenore which limit future residential development. 3c. Comments Noted. 4, 5 & 8b. The Strategic Environmental Report Appropriate Assessment for the Proposed Amendments to the draft Louth County Development Plan states that impact of the amendments are neutral and will not alter the conclusion of the environmental assessment in the SEA or NIA. Furthermore any future development proposals will be subject to mandatory environmental and development control compliance. 72

76 Any planning application for development in Greenore will be assessed on its own merits and shall be considered in accordance with normal planning considerations including impact on ACA, protected structures, SAC, SPA, pnha, candidate geological Sites, traffic and also noise As with all planning applications including those pertaining to Greenore, the public are invited to a make objections/ submissions, which shall be fully considered. 6. Chapter 6, Section 6.4 of the draft Louth County Development Plan , pertains to the promotion of tourism within the County. Any application for tourism development in Greenore or the County as a whole shall be assessed in accordance with the policies contained therein. The Greenore Composite Map shall be amended to shown amenity. Please note this area is outside Greenore Development Boundary. 7. Development in any area at flood risk will be subject to an appropriate site specific flood risk assessment. Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. Composite Map shall be amended to shown amenity. See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. Submission No. 41 OPW Summary: 1. OPW welcomes the C.E s opinion and response to the OPW s comments to the draft Development Plan. 2. Regarding the revised Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA), the OPW interpret that the Stage 2 FRA s for Level 3 settlements are solely contained within this Plan, as opposed to Level 1 and 2 Settlements which will have an individual SFRA s prepared during their individual Plans. 73

77 3. OPW comment that is it apparent that a lot of work has taken place in the gathering of the range of flood risk information including site walkovers, particularly through Level 3 Settlements and that the individual Walkover Survey Report tables are very beneficial. 4. It is suggested that for each of the Level 3 settlements, a paragraph could be included that reference all sources of flood risk information. 5. It is suggested that specific text is used to reference the application of the Planning Guidelines Sequential Approach and where applicable, the Justification Test toward each of the proposed settlement development areas, which should include reference to Planning Guidelines Box It is suggested that specific text is used to reference the application of the Planning Guidelines Sequential Approach and where applicable, the Justification Test toward each of the proposed settlement development areas, which should include reference to Planning Guidelines Box 4.1. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1-3. Noted 4-6. A review of the SFRA will be carried out as soon as the AFA mapping process currently underway by the OPW is finalised and suggestions 4-6 will be incorporated in this review. The review will be undertaken with the objective of ensuring that the issue of Flood Risk has been Chief Executive s Recommendation: No Change. Submission No. 42 Inland Fisheries Ireland Summary: No objection to the material alterations. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: Noted Chief Executive s Recommendation: No Change. 74

78 Submission No. 43 Brian Larkin Summary: 1. It is put forward that The Port as it operates today, provides little towards the commerce of the village either through the provision of local employment or by way of opportunity while retaining a significant land bank which surrounds the village perimeter. 2. With approximately 25/30 acres of storage area immediately adjacent to the pier wall plus an additional 20 acres of storage areas on the periphery of the village, it is difficult to visualise the need for further lands to be zoned for port-related activity. 3. The proposal to rezone the lands at the southern end of Euston Street from industry/residential to Port related Activity flies in the face of the aesthetics of the Victorian Village. 4. The former Pan Pak factory complex should be demarcation line for such port related development, to the rear of this property towards the industrial areas contained in these rezoning proposals provides ample opportunity for Port related activity while allowing the village to breathe and develop in conjunction. 5. If the lands around the village are zoned for port-related activity and industrial type uses, the village will eventually die. 6. The lands at the south end of Euston Street should be zoned Residential as they are in proximity to the village and they overlook the sea. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1. Comments noted. 2, 4 & 5. The 5.8ha of land to the north of Greenore directly abuts the Port and the lands are currently in use for Port/Port Related Activity. It is considered that this is the most appropriate form of development and the lands should be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/ Port Related Activity. The hectares to the south of Greenore comprises of existing commercial development in addition some lands have the benefit of extant permissions. It was considered appropriate that the said lands should be consolidated and included within the Development Boundary as Port/ Port- Related Activity. Given the existing commercial nature of the lands it not considered that the inclusion of land for Port/Port Related Activity will have a detrimental impact on the character of the area. The most southerly 14ha of land is in 75

79 undeveloped agricultural use with no extant planning permissions the Chief Executive remains of the opinion it would be premature to include these lands within the Development Boundary for Port/Port Related Activity at this time. 3. Any planning application for development in Greenore will be assessed on its own merits and shall be considered in accordance with normal planning considerations including character of the village. As with all planning applications including those pertaining to Greenore, the public are invited to a make objections/ submissions, which shall be fully considered. 6 There are no lands within Level 4 Settlements zoned for residential development notwithstanding this there is sufficient undeveloped land zoned residential in the County (including 50% headroom) to cater for market choice and for the projected population increase up to In addition there are currently drainage constraints in Greenore which limit future residential development. Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. Submission No. 44 Raymond & Sheila Ballantine Summary: With specific reference to Submissions 133 and 151; 1. No Public Representatives explained the reasoning behind the proposed change, including the two Public representatives who proposed the submissions. 2. Rezoning totally encapsulates Greenore between two areas of Port/Port-related Activity. Provisions need to be made for some residential development. 3. The draft Plan recognises Greenore is of unique character and built form and proposed to create an ACA as well as protecting some 40 structures as protected structures. Totally surrounding this with industrial development seems to be the total opposite of what is required to meet statutory requirements in Part IV of the Planning & Development Act,

80 4. It is the submitters contention that if the submissions are adopted, the village will eventually die. It is requested that their concerns are taken seriously before voting on the submissions and remember to Put People First as it states in the Local Govern Reform Act, Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1. This comment does not raise any specific issue in relation to proposed material amendments, under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time. 2. The 5.8ha of land to the north of Greenore directly abuts the Port and the lands are currently in use for Port/Port Related Activity. It is considered that this is the most appropriate form of development and the lands should be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/ Port Related Activity. The hectares to the south of Greenore comprises of existing commercial development in addition some lands have the benefit of extant permissions. It was considered appropriate that the said lands should be consolidated and included within the Development Boundary as Port/ Port- Related Activity. Given the existing commercial nature of the lands it not considered that the inclusion of land for Port/Port Related Activity will have a detrimental impact on the character of the area. The most southerly 14ha of land is in undeveloped agricultural use with no extant planning permissions. The Chief Executive remains of the opinion it would be premature to include these lands within the Development Boundary for Port/Port Related Activity at this time. In addition there are no lands within Level 4 Settlements zoned for residential development notwithstanding this there is sufficient undeveloped land zoned residential in the County (including 50% headroom) to cater for market choice and for the projected population increase up to In addition there are currently drainage constraints in Greenore which limit future residential development. 3. Any planning application for development in Greenore will be assessed on its own merits and shall be considered in accordance with normal planning considerations including impact on ACAo and protected structures. As with all planning applications including those pertaining to Greenore, the public are invited to a make objections/ submissions, which shall be fully considered. 4. Comments Noted. 77

81 Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. Submission No. 45 Jackie Murtagh Summary: 1. The changing of landuse from Residential/Industrial to Port/Port-Related activity is not in keeping with the current environment of Greenore. It is contended that there is more than enough industrial zoned land to facilitate the needs of Greenore Port. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1. The 5.8ha of land to the north of Greenore directly abuts the Port and the lands are currently in use for Port/Port Related Activity. It is considered that this is the most appropriate form of development and the lands should be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/ Port Related Activity. The hectares to the south of Greenore comprises of existing commercial development in addition some lands have the benefit of extant permissions. It was considered appropriate that the said lands should be consolidated and included within the Development Boundary as Port/ Port- Related Activity. Given the existing commercial nature of the lands it not considered that the inclusion of land for Port/Port Related Activity will have a detrimental impact on the character of the area. The most southerly 14ha of land is in undeveloped agricultural use with no extant planning permissions the Chief Executive remains of the opinion it would be premature to include these lands within the Development Boundary for Port/Port Related Activity at this time. Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. 78

82 Submission No. 46 Laura Ballantine Summary: 1. The changing of landuse from Residential/Industrial to Port/Port-Related will totally enclose the village of Greenore with industrial land. It is contended that there sufficient industrial zoned land to facilitate the needs of Greenore Port. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1. The 5.8ha of land to the north of Greenore directly abuts the Port and the lands are currently in use for Port/Port Related Activity. It is considered that this is the most appropriate form of development and the lands should be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/ Port Related Activity. The hectares to the south of Greenore comprises of existing commercial development in addition some lands have the benefit of extant permissions. It was considered appropriate that the said lands should be consolidated and included within the Development Boundary as Port/ Port- Related Activity. Given the existing commercial nature of the lands it not considered that the inclusion of land for Port/Port Related Activity will have a detrimental impact on the character of the area. The most southerly 14ha of land is in undeveloped agricultural use with no extant planning permissions the Chief Executive remains of the opinion it would be premature to include these lands within the Development Boundary for Port/Port Related Activity at this time. Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. Submission No. 47 Ellen Ballantine Summary: 1. The submitter refers to a change of use of a field in Greenore, though it is not specified which field she is referring to. It is stated that the children in the area still play in the field and it is also 79

83 used for agricultural purposes (grazing) and animals such as foxes, hares and rabbits use the field. If the field was changed, the animals would have nowhere to go. There are other fields behind Pan Pak not being used and rather than annoying the residents of Greenore village, those fields could be used. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1. The 5.8ha of land to the north of Greenore directly abuts the Port and the lands are currently in use for Port/Port Related Activity. It is considered that this is the most appropriate form of development and the lands should be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/ Port Related Activity. The hectares to the south of Greenore comprises of existing commercial development in addition some lands have the benefit of extant permissions. It was considered appropriate that the said lands should be consolidated and included within the Development Boundary as Port/ Port- Related Activity. Given the existing commercial nature of the lands it not considered that the inclusion of land for Port/Port Related Activity will have a detrimental impact on the character of the area. The most southerly 14ha of land is in undeveloped agricultural use with no extant planning permissions the Chief Executive remains of the opinion it would be premature to include these lands within the Development Boundary for Port/Port Related Activity at this time. Any planning application for development in Greenore will be assessed on its own merits and shall be considered in accordance with normal planning considerations including impact upon protected species. As with all planning applications including those pertaining to Greenore, the public are invited to a make objections/ submissions, which shall be fully considered. Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. 80

84 Submission No. 48 Sarah Ballantine Summary: 1. The submitter objects to the changing of landuse from Residential/Industrial to Port/Port- Related on the grounds that the unique Victorian village of Greenore needs this residential land as it has the potential to extend the community/village into the future and keep the village alive and maintaining the unique characteristics for future generations. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1. The 5.8ha of land to the north of Greenore directly abuts the Port and the lands are currently in use for Port/Port Related Activity. It is considered that this is the most appropriate form of development and the lands should be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/ Port Related Activity. The hectares to the south of Greenore comprises of existing commercial development in addition some lands have the benefit of extant permissions. It was considered appropriate that the said lands should be consolidated and included within the Development Boundary as Port/ Port- Related Activity. Given the existing commercial nature of the lands it not considered that the inclusion of land for Port/Port Related Activity will have a detrimental impact on the character of the area. The most southerly 14ha of land is in undeveloped agricultural use with no extant planning permissions the Chief Executive remains of the opinion it would be premature to include these lands within the Development Boundary for Port/Port Related Activity at this time. There are no lands within Level 4 Settlements zoned for residential development notwithstanding this there is sufficient undeveloped land zoned residential in the County (including 50% headroom) to cater for market choice and for the projected population increase up to In addition there are currently drainage constraints in Greenore which limit future residential development. Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. 81

85 Submission No. 49 Betty McNulty Summary: 1. The submitter objects to the rezoning of lands from Residential/Industrial to Port/Port- Related. It is contended that there sufficient industrial zoned land to facilitate the needs of Greenore Port carrying out its duties. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1. The 5.8ha of land to the north of Greenore directly abuts the Port and the lands are currently in use for Port/Port Related Activity. It is considered that this is the most appropriate form of development and the lands should be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/ Port Related Activity. The hectares to the south of Greenore comprises of existing commercial development in addition some lands have the benefit of extant permissions. It was considered appropriate that the said lands should be consolidated and included within the Development Boundary as Port/ Port- Related Activity. Given the existing commercial nature of the lands it not considered that the inclusion of land for Port/Port Related Activity will have a detrimental impact on the character of the area. The most southerly 14ha of land is in undeveloped agricultural use with no extant planning permissions the Chief Executive remains of the opinion it would be premature to include these lands within the Development Boundary for Port/Port Related Activity at this time. Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. 82

86 Submission No. 50 Sean McNulty Summary: 1. The submitter objects to the rezoning of lands from Residential/Industrial to Port/Port-Related. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1. The 5.8ha of land to the north of Greenore directly abuts the Port and the lands are currently in use for Port/Port Related Activity. It is considered that this is the most appropriate form of development and the lands should be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/ Port Related Activity. The hectares to the south of Greenore comprises of existing commercial development in addition some lands have the benefit of extant permissions. It was considered appropriate that the said lands should be consolidated and included within the Development Boundary as Port/ Port- Related Activity. Given the existing commercial nature of the lands it not considered that the inclusion of land for Port/Port Related Activity will have a detrimental impact on the character of the area. The most southerly 14ha of land is in undeveloped agricultural use with no extant planning permissions the Chief Executive remains of the opinion it would be premature to include these lands within the Development Boundary for Port/Port Related Activity at this time. There are no lands within Level 4 Settlements zoned for residential development notwithstanding this there is sufficient undeveloped land zoned residential in the County (including 50% headroom) to cater for market choice and for the projected population increase up to In addition there are currently drainage constraints in Greenore which limit future residential development. Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. See Map Greenore Composite Map in Appendix 2. 83

87 Submission No. 51 Stephen Ward Summary: 1. Request that Site A be re-zoned as Residential New. Site A (and lands to the south) benefit from an extant planning permission: Ref 14/485 for 25no. detached dwellings which is due to expire on the 27 th May Request that Site B be zoned as Strategic Reserve In the event that Site B is retained in the Countryside the site be identified for a nursing home. The Core Strategy for Village is overly restrictive Table 2.6 (Residential Zoning in Level 3 Settlements, Page 20, Chapter2 dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 21) states that there are 1.96ha of undeveloped land available in Baltray with no strategic reserve. There are three sites identified as residential new; a portion of Site A and 2no. sites accessed from Colliers lane. No applications for multi-use development have been submitted along Colliers Lane therefore indicating that there are constraints including willingness of landowners to release land. The Baltray Settlement Plan should zone lands in accordance with existing permissions, willingness of land owners to release land and how well a site is suited to residential development. There should also be lands zoned as strategic development for the next Plan Period. Removal of strategic reserve lands will add to the pressure for one- off housing. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1. There is sufficient undeveloped land zoned residential in Baltray and indeed all Level 3 Settlements (including 50% headroom) to cater for the projected population increase up to I would not recommend that any additional residential land is zoned for the period There is no requirement for any additional lands to be zoned strategic reserve. Chief Executive s Recommendation: No Change. 84

88 Submission No. 52 Bilfinger/ GVA on behalf of Tesco Ireland Limited. Summary: There is a requirement to identify appropriate and accessible Opportunity Sites in Ardee. 1. Opportunity sites 1-3, in Ardee are unsuitable for large modern floorplate retailer. 2(a) OS 4 will also fail to deliver an improvement in the retail convenience in Ardee for the following reasons: Supervalu is already located on site which only leave a small residual amount of land. Residual land is owned by same landowner as Supervalu therefore unlike to allow new convenience retail unit. Site is located within an ACA which limits possibility of redeveloping site. 2(b) 2(c) Requirements of modern retailer are outlined; appropriately sized site, easily accessed by car and foot, appropriate site topography, transitional zone between town centre and residential area, ability to accommodate car parking requirements. None of the proposed opportunity sites meet the aforementioned requirements. Alternative site to the south of the town core, on the edge of the town is identified. This would deliver a large convenience retail operation in Ardee, improve choice and completion and deliver the additional floorspace that is planned as part of the draft Retail Strategy. Request that the new opportunity site at Supervalu is reconsidered and the edge of centre site be considered instead. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1,2(b)&2(c) These comments do not raise any specific issues in relation to proposed material amendments, under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time. 85

89 2(a) It is considered that the identification of the Supervalu site as an Opportunity Site (OS 4) was in accordance with the Guidelines for Planning Authorities Retail Planning 2012; the site is located along core retail area, is available suitable for development and will broaden the retail offer of the town centre. Chief Executive s Recommendation: No Change. Submission No. 53 Cllr Mark Dearey and Cllr Marianne Butler Green Party Summary: 1. The SEA/ AA screening regarding the reduction in gap along the edge of settlements from metres states that it would cause no significant effect, however no documentation is available supporting this statement. 2. Council are required by Article 6 of the Habitats Directive to have a revised Appropriate Assessment to measure the impact of these variations and that it is not adequate or compliant with the Habitats Directives that other measures in our Development Plan will provide the required protection. SS54 and Ribbon Development 2 If there are 3 houses along a country road, a further two can be developed within 150m, either side. No account has been taken of these new rural densities in the Transportation chapter or indeed any chapter of the Plan relating to delivery of services. Biodiversity 4. Intensification of rural density will result in increase loss of hedgerow and lead to loss of biodiversity. Water Course and Sewage Threat to Natura Site. 5. Dundalk Bay is a Natura 2000 Site. Intensification of rural housing contiguous with the Bay and along river and water courses which flow into the Bay, should be reassessed for appropriateness. A new Appropriate Assessment should be conducted as required by Habitats Directive 6.3 and

90 Undermines Settlement Strategy. 6. Rural building reliefs combined with alterations to SS53 & SS54 (Page 49, Chapter 2 dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 4 ) will threaten Settlement Strategy. Strategic Objectives specifically SO 2, SO3, SO4, SO5 and SO6 (LCDP , Page 20, Chapter 1, Section 1.4) 7. Councillors have obligations under the Planning and Development Act. Members are required to uphold the principle of sustainable development. Members may only direct the Manager (CE) to alter the Plan in a way that is consistent with the principles of sustainable development. If this Planning Authority concludes that the Chief Executive is being directed to make alterations that do not constitute proper planning and sustainable development then Members must be informed that they have acted outside the restrictions imposed by Section (f) of the Act and the alterations cannot be adopted. Economic Development at Carrickcarnon. 8. Classic developer led planning. At odds with OS 1 and OS 3. RD39 ( Page 86, Chapter 3, dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 6 ) as amended should not be adopted as it directs the CE to alter the Plan to allow for unsustainable development contrary to Section (f) of the 2000 Planning and Development Act. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1, 2 & 5. Louth County Council are satisfied as the competent authority that the Appropriate Assessment screening, when combined with the Natura Impact Assessment of the draft Plan complies with the Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland- Guidance for Planning Authorities and other EU guidelines available. The Strategic Environmental Report Appropriate Assessment for the Proposed Amendments to the draft Louth County Development Plan states that impact of the amendments are neutral and will not alter the conclusion of the environmental assessment in the SEA or NIA. Comments on SEA and /or AA Screening which were on public display at Material Alteration Stage where only the final determinations. The significance of effects of the revised policy SS 53 & SS 54 was examined in light of Section of the guidelines and based on the strategic nature of the policy and those settlements 87

91 included a conclusion of no significant effect was included. Any proposed developments submitted on foot of the revised policy must comply with all environmental guidelines and, therefore each site will be independently and cumulatively assessed for impacts on Natura 2000 sites. 3 & 6. As per the Chief Executive s Report on Submissions made to the draft Louth County Development Plan, it is considered that a separation of 400 metres is reasonable as it provides a clear distinction between the settlement areas and the rural areas. In relation to SS 53 it is considered that a separation of only 150 metres would damage the appearance of the rural area and would lead to expanses of linear development along the public road with little or no interruptions. With regard to SS54 it is considered that a separation of 150 metres would damage the appearance of the rural area and would detract from the setting of town and villages as there would be no clear distinction between the settlement areas and the rural areas. It is therefore recommended that policies SS53 and SS54 are revised accordingly. 4. Polices contained in the dlcdp , Chapter 5 Heritage (Natural and Built) pertain to protection of Hedgerows. 7. This comments do not raise any specific issues in relation to proposed material amendments, under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time. 8. The provision of the Carrickcarnon Economic / Business Zone is contrary to Policy EDE 13 (Page 184, Chapter 6, dlcdp ) of draft Louth County Development Plan : to resist development at rural related motorway interchanges. This policy refers to a number of rural- related motorway interchanges, including Carrickcarnon. With regard to traffic issues as per the Chief Executive s Report on Submissions received in relation to the draft Louth County Development Plan, the Chief Executive remains opposed to the zoning for the following reasons: The provision of an economic business zone would result in the area becoming a destination in its own right at this location, a fact which has been alluded to by the Bord in its refusal for planning permission. This would give rise to additional traffic generation and movements on a proposed protected regional route (R132) in addition to traffic movements off the motorway. An Bord Pleanala in a previous application for commercial development at this location considered 88

92 that the site would serve traffic and draw significant trade from the motorway at a rural related interchange, and Wider policies relevant to proper planning and sustainable development such as Smarter Travel Strategy, Spatial Planning & National Roads and Sustainable Urban Residential Development Guidelines, all advocate the need to promote compact urban development, reduce car dependency and promote sustainable mobility. In this regard it is recommended that the location of significant uses such as employment and commercial uses should be closely linked with and integrated with locations for future housing development as identified in the Core Strategy. Indeed, Planning Authorities should ensure sufficient lands for employment uses at suitable locations taking account of national planning policies such as those identified above in addition to the required physical infrastructure, particularly access and water services. A development plan shall include objectives for the promotion of sustainable settlement and transportation strategies in urban and rural areas. As per the Chief Executive s Report on Submissions received in relation to the draft Louth County Development Plan, the Chief Executive also remains opposed to the zoning for following reasons; the site adjoins an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, potential adverse impact on adjoining residential properties, contrary to the county rural development and core Strategies and in addition, An Bord Pleanala upheld the decisions of the Planning Authority and similarly refused permissions for various forms of commercial activity at the site. Chief Executive s Recommendation SS53 shall read as follows: o To prevent the creation of ribbon development by not permitting more than four houses in a row along any public road. A minimum gap of 150 metres 400 metres shall be maintained between such developments. An exception to this requirement may be considered where the dwelling is required to meet the housing needs of a son/daughter/foster child of a qualifying landowner and where the planning authority is satisfied that there is no other suitable site available on the landholding SS54 shall read as follows: o To preserve a clear break of a minimum of 150 metres 400 metres between the boundary of existing settlements and any permitted development along adjoining roads 89

93 Revisions to Tables 2.5 & 2.6 See Appendix 1.(Page 18 & 20, Chapter 6, dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 4,5) Policy RD 39 ( Page 86 Chapter 3 dlcdp ) shall read as follows: To consider developments falling within the following categories; limited one-off housing*, agricultural developments, extensions to existing authorised uses and farms, appropriate farm diversification projects; developments to be used for leisure, recreation and tourism; holiday accommodation including cottages and lodges where these are part of an existing or proposed integrated tourism complex; hotels/ guest houses / B & B s (only where the proposal involves the re-use or diversification of an existing building); extensions to existing authorised commercial and industrial developments; renewable energy schemes, public utility infrastructure, certain resource based and location specific developments of significant regional or national importance and, critical infrastructure projects. Nursing homes/analogous services ** and Economic Business zone at Carrickcarnon.*** Multi-unit residential, conventional industrial and commercial development appropriate to existing settlements, developments directly adjacent to rural motorway interchanges would not be considered appropriate within this zone. *Refer to Section for Qualifying Criteria ** In the location identified by dot on Map 3.1 entitled Development Zones. *** In the location identified by??? dot on Map 3.1 entitled Development Zones. See Table 6.3 (Louth Economic Forum 10 Point Action Plans,Page 181, Chapter 6, dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 23 ), in Appendix 1 Zoning on Map 3.1 (pertaining to Economic/ Business Zone at Carrickcarnon) shall be omitted 90

94 Submission No. 54 Mr William Cummins Summary: 1. Frustrated at the delay at being able to examine the relevant information 2. Opposition to the removal of occupancy condition Policy SS21 (Page 39, Chapter 2,dLCDP ) 3. Introduction of housing need to SS10 (Page 31, Chapter 2, dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 5 ) 4. SEA/AA Screening (p48) Group Housing has not been implemented in villages. 5. SEA/ AA Screening reduction of land holding of the qualifying landowner from years should have no effect on the environment. Reduction in the criteria is an invitation to land speculation and land hoarding. Distinction between town and country continues to be eroded and ignored. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1. Comments Noted. 2 & 4. These comments do not raise any specific issues in relation to proposed material amendments, under Section 12 (7) (b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) only written submissions or observations with respect to the proposed amendment of the draft can be considered, at this time. 3. Comments Noted. 5. Text in Section , (page 40 dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 5 ) provides a definition of a qualifying land owner. For the purposes of this Plan, Qualifying Landowner is defined as a being where a person owned a landholding of at least 3 hectares for a minimum of 25 years. Submission (No. 128) was received to the draft plan requesting that the definition of the Qualifying landowner be reduced from 25 to 10 years. The Chief Executive s Report on Submissions received to the draft Louth County Development Plan states: This policy was developed to cater for the genuine needs of landowners in Co. Louth and not speculative development. 91

95 At a Council meeting held 9 th June 2015 the elected members resolved to make the Plan with amendments including a Qualifying Landowner is defined as a being where a person owned a landholding of at least 3 hectares for a minimum of 10 years. The Chief Executive s opinion remains as per the previous report Chief Executive s Recommendation: Text Page 40, Section shall read; Definition of Qualifying Land Owner For the purpose of this Plan, Qualifying Landowner is defined as being a where a person owned a landholding of at least 3 hectares for a minimum of 10 years 25 years Submission No. 55 Mr Jim Brogan on behalf of Ann Hartigan. Summary: 1. Table 2.6 (Residential Zoning in Level 3 Settlements, Page 20, Chapter 2, dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, Page 21) of the draft Plan indicates that the area allocated for housing in Baltray was 1.96ha for the period , and that there were 10 hectares of Strategic Reserve zoned. Proposed Material Alterations omits clients lands, which were previously zoned as Strategic Reserve. Proposed Material Alteration includes a Revised Strategic Flood Risk Assessment. Maps distinguish between Residential (New) and (Existing). Text pertaining to the proposed material alterations does not refer to this change this and Table 1.1 has not been amended to reflect this change. These omissions should be addressed. The revised SFRA includes a walkover survey. The Report recommends that Site 2 should not be developed because of its vulnerability to flooding and that a site specific FRA is required. 92

96 A significant area of the client s land zoned for residential purposes are within the site identified as Site 2 and It is unlikely that any permitted or open for consideration uses except public open space would be granted planning permission on these lands. Having regard to the circumstances outlined above it is proposed that the village boundary be extended to included area coloured yellow and these lands zoned for residential purposes. It should be noted this land presently benefits from an extant permission for 4no. houses. Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1. There is sufficient undeveloped land zoned residential in the County (including 50% headroom) to cater for market choice and for the projected population increase up to Chief Executive s Recommendation No Change Submission No. 56 Ray Kenny Summary: 1. Objection to revised Policy SS53 & 54 (Page 19, Chapter 2, dlcdp & Report on Proposed Material Amendments, page 4 ) Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1. As per the Chief Executive s Report on Submissions made to the draft Louth County Development Plan. it is considered that a separation of 400 metres is reasonable as it provides a clear distinction between the settlement areas and the rural areas. In relation to SS 53 it is considered that a separation of only 150 metres would damage the appearance of the rural area and would lead to expanses of linear development along the public road with little or no interruptions. With regard to SS54 it is considered that a separation of 150 metres would damage the appearance of the rural area and would detract from the setting of town and villages as there would be no clear distinction between the settlement areas and the rural areas. It is therefore recommended that policies SS53 and SS54 are revised accordingly. 93

97 Chief Executive s Recommendation: SS53 shall read as follows: To prevent the creation of ribbon development by not permitting more than four houses in a row along any public road. A minimum gap of 150 metres 400 metres shall be maintained between such developments. An exception to this requirement may be considered where the dwelling is required to meet the housing needs of a son/daughter/foster child of a qualifying landowner and where the planning authority is satisfied that there is no other suitable site available on the landholding SS54 shall read as follows: To preserve a clear break of a minimum of 150 metres 400 metres between the boundary of existing settlements and any permitted development along adjoining roads Submission No: 57 Laurence K. Lennan & Patrice M Foley. Summary: 1. Extension to village boundary and zoning of additional lands as port/ port related activity is premature and disproportionate. 2. Gross tonnage has been reduced. 3. Severe visual impact and loss of amenity 4. Further degrade town for tourism purposes making it less attractive for visitors. 5. Removal of residential zoning is a drastic measure. 6. Loss of views 7. Negative impact on the environment. 8. Increase flood risk 9. Will be checking for compliance with various EU directives 10. Increased traffic and speeding trucks 11. Impact on ACA and Protected Structures. There should be a heritage assessment in relation to any major changes in zoning. 12. Urge councillors to reverse decision. 94

98 Chief Executive s Opinion and Response: 1. The 5.8ha of land to the north of Greenore directly abuts the Port and the lands are currently in use for Port/Port Related Activity. It is considered that this is the most appropriate form of development and the lands should be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/ Port Related Activity. The hectares to the south of Greenore comprises of existing commercial development in addition some lands have the benefit of extant permissions. It was considered appropriate that the said lands should be consolidated and included within the Development Boundary as Port/ Port- Related Activity. Given the existing commercial nature of the lands it not considered that the inclusion of land for Port/Port Related Activity will have a detrimental impact on the character of the area. The most southerly 14ha of land is in undeveloped agricultural use with no extant planning permissions the Chief Executive remains of the opinion it would be premature to include these lands within the Development Boundary for Port/Port Related Activity at this time. 2. Noted 3,6, 7, 9, 10, 11, Any planning application for development in Greenore will be assessed on its own merits and shall be considered in accordance with normal planning considerations including visual impact, flooding, impact on views, amenity ACA s and Protected Structures, compliance with EU Directives, traffic, views and environmental impacts. As with all planning applications including those pertaining to Greenore, the public are invited to a make objections/ submissions, which shall be fully considered. 8. Development in any area at flood risk will be subject to an appropriate site specific flood risk assessment. 4. Chapter 6, Section 6.4 of the draft Louth County Development Plan , pertains to the promotion of tourism within the County. Any application for tourism development in Greenore or the County as a whole shall be assessed in accordance with the policies contained therein. 5. There are no lands within Level 4 Settlements zoned for residential development notwithstanding this there is sufficient undeveloped land zoned residential in the County (including 50% headroom) to cater for market choice and for the projected population increase up to In addition there are currently drainage constraints in Greenore which limit future residential development. 95

99 12. Comments Noted Chief Executive s Recommendation: The most southerly 14ha of land should not be included within the Development Boundary of Greenore for Port/Port Related Activity. 96

100 Appendix 1 Table 2.5 Potential Housing and Population growth within Settlements Extrapolated Population Levels 2016 Population Target Levels 2021 Household Allocation to 2021 Average Density Existing Undevelop ed Land Housing Land Allocated Required (ha) up to 2016 Housing Land Required (ha) up to 2021 Shortfall/Excess (including Strategic Reserve) Dundalk & Environs 42,300 46,622 4, Drogheda & 35,373 37,944 2, Environs Ardee 4,841 4, Dunleer 1,688 1, Level 3 Settlements 13,669 14, Level 4 2,003 2, Settlements Rural Area 32,774 33, Total 132, ,050 8,

101 Table 2.6 Residential Zoning in Level 3 Settlements Settlement Target Populatio n Allocation 2021 Househol d Allocation Allocate d Housing Land Allocated Housing Land (Ha) Aver. Density unit/ ha Undevelope d Land Available (Ha) Strategi c Reserve ^ (Ha) (Ha) Annagassan 2 Infill Baltray 1.96 Infill Carlingford Castlebellingham/ Kilsaran Clogherhead 4 Infill Collon Dromiskin Knockbridge Louth Village Omeath 1.62 Infill Tallanstown Termonfeckin Tullyallen Total

102 Table 6.3: Chapter 6, Economic Development Tourism & Retail Table 6.3 Louth Economic Forum 10 Point Action Plans Action Plan Foreign Direct Investment Sustainable Energy Objectives Attract 3,000 new jobs in foreign owned enterprises. Focus on pharmaceuticals, clean technology and internationally traded services sectors Aims to make Louth the Country s first smart green county Indigenous Industry Capitalise on Louth s traditional strengths in engineering, food and drink. Promote new international services and products. Provide dedicated Business Support Unit * Tourism and Heritage Tourists see destinations, not counties. Identifies areas to be developed including The Boyne Valley and Cooley/ Mourne/ Gullion Region. Age Friendly Business Initiatives to position Louth as a leader in agefriendly business development. Education and Training Agriculture and Fisheries Ensure that the education and training sector within the County addresses the changing needs of business and industry Development of the agriculture, food and fisheries section of the Region Broadband The draft Broadband Action Plan is nearing completion. Making Louth the Best County to do Business The Drogheda, Dundalk Newry Economic Corridor Drafting due to commence Winter 2014 Drafting due to commence Winter 2014 *In addition to the aims of Louth Economic Forum regarding Indigenous Industry, Louth County Council shall strive to support and retain existing indigenous industry throughout the County and ensure there is an adequate supply of land serviced and available to accommodate industrial parks suited to indigenous Irish Manufacturing. In this regard and Economic and Business Zone has been identified at Carrickcarnon as identified by a yellow dot on Map 3.1 entitled Development Zones. 99

103 Appendix 2 Greenore Composite Map 100