Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Grounds for Refusal of Planning Permission II
Having regard to the failure to provide sufficient public and private amenity space in line with the Department of Environment Heritage & Local Government’s “Residential Density Guidelines for Local Authorities”, and the failure to provide an integrated and accessible hierarchy of public open space for the proposed scheme as a whole, it is considered that the proposed development would result in a substandard form of development of poor environmental quality and would provide an unacceptable level of amenity for occupants of the proposed residential units. The proposed development would contravene the objectives of the Navan Development Plan 2003-2009, with regard to provision of public and private amenity space, and therefore would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Again, Nikki's comment:
F1 Zoning is “To provide for and improve open spaces for active and passive recreation amenities”
In the Navan Development Plan it states that for New Residential Areas open space …”should be well designed from a visual perspective and functionally accessible to the maximum number of dwellings within a residential area. A well-designed open space will be based on the principles of overlooking, supervision and accessibility.” … “open space should be distributed throughout housing areas and neighbourhoods, ranging from small areas where children can play in sight of their homes to larger areas where older children can indulge in casual ball playing and other play activities. It is desirable that large areas of public open space be located adjacent to existing or proposed neighbourhood centres and community facilities in order to facilitate multi-purpose use”
The Planning Application NA800584 clearly had ONLY ONE ‘open space’, which was right beside their proposed attenuation pond, and was not readily accessible to those on the fringes of the development, especially the elderly, young children or the disabled, therefore it was in contradiction to the Navan Development Plan.
Their ‘open space’ was not in compliance with the “Residential Density Guidelines”, which state that ‘open space’ should not be allowed where it is inadequately overlooked, supervised or accessible. Their ‘open space’ was exactly that.
The Navan Development Plan, states that new residential developments should surround a ‘Neighbourhood Centre’ as ‘’it is essential when trying to foster a sense of ownership and create sense of place, where new residents can mix and socialise. This in turn is central to creating a sustainable environment’’. There was no ‘Neighbourhood Centre’ proposed in the planning application, therefore it was in contradiction to the Navan Development Plan
Post a Comment