Breakthrough in 11-year Mallow planning saga

THE long-running saga over a plan to build a residential estate on land at Annabella in Mallow seems to have finally reached a breakthrough after the project was given the green light by An Bord Pleanála.

Now the town looks set for its first substantial residential development since the financial crash of 2008.

Canonbridge Ltd has been given permission to build 85 houses at a 3.15 hectare site, bounded by the Annabella Park and Woodview Drive areas.

The issue dates back to 2006 when the then Mallow Town Council approved a plan by Canonbridge Ltd to build 78 houses, 104 duplex apartments in three separate three-storey blocks, 265 car-parking spaces and ancillary works on the site.

However, since then the project has been bogged down in delays and concerns over its size and impact on the locality. At times over the years the plans proved highly contentious locally.

Last October a fresh application by Canonbridge for an 88-house development on the site was given the green-light, subject to 61 conditions covering such issues as public safety, visual amenity and protection of water quality in the Blackwater catchment. However, that was referred to the appeals board following the lodging of a third party observation/submission. Now, An Bord Pleanála has approved 85 houses on the site, subject to terms and conditions.

THE long running saga over a plan to build a residential estate on land at Annabella in Mallow seems to have finally reached an end after the project was given the green light by An Bord Pleanála.

The issue dates back to 2006 when the then Mallow Town Council approved a plan by Canonbridge Ltd to develop a 3.15 hectare site, bounded by Annabella Park and Woodview Drive and linked by an existing access road to Kennel Hill. It made provision for 78 houses, 104 duplex apartments in three separate three-storey blocks, 265 car-parking spaces and ancillary works.

In November of 2012 an application to extend the duration of the planning permission was refused after planners ruled an appropriate assessment of the development had not been undertaken prior to the granting of the original application. A key concern for officials was protection of water sources and the natural environment.

At the time a council spokesperson said the refusal “effectively drew a line under” the development.

However, the saga took an unexpected turn in October 2013, when Canonbridge sought permission for an almost identical development on the site, with the total number of units reduced to 102.

This was also shot down with council officials expressing concerns about a number of issues, including potential traffic hazards and its potential impact on the local environment, in particular the River Blackwater. This decision was upheld on appeal by An Bord Pleanála.

Last October a fresh application by Canonbridge for an 88-house development on the site was given the green-light, subject to 61 conditions covering such issues as public safety, visual amenity and protection of water quality in the Blackwater catchment.

One of the conditions also stipulated that Canonbridge pay a ‘special contribution’ of €178,000 for the provision of s roundabout at Kennel Hill and the relocation/upgrade of the Annabella Roundabout and for the provision of amenity facilities.

That was referred to the appeals board following the lodging of a third party observation/submission in the name of Margaret and Dominic McEntee and an appeal by chartered planning consultant McCutcheon Hall on behalf of Canonbridge Ltd.

In their submission McCutcheon Hall said the sum of €178,000 within the ‘special contribution’ for amenity facilities was “neither exceptional or specific” to their client’s development and combined with a general development contribution of €187,446 effectively constituted a “double charge”.

They insisted the €178,000 charge should be omitted, pointing out that An Bord Pleanála had previously done so in circumstances similar to their appeal.

Upholding the decision the appeals board agreed, saying the council did not demonstrate there were “specific exceptional costs in terms of the provision of recreation and amenity facilities” that would benefit the development

“Therefore, it is considered that the special financial contribution proposed does not come within the scope of the Planning and Development Act and accordingly, would be unwarranted,” they ruled.

While An Bord Pleanála officials ruled the overall development would not seriously injure the amenities of the area and was acceptable in terms of access and traffic safety, they did impose 22 conditions, one of which was to restrict the number of houses within the development to 85.