THE con­tro­ver­sial plan to build a cre­ma­to­rium on the site of the for­mer Duhal­low Park Ho­tel has once again come un­der the spot­light fol­low­ing a re­quest for more in­for­ma­tion on the pro­posal by County Coun­cil plan­ners.

The lodg­ing of the ap­pli­ca­tion for the de­vel­op­ment by Clas­sic Lodges (Ire­land) Ltd last No­vem­ber sparked much dis­quiet lo­cally, with more than 30 ob­ser­va­tions lodged with the au­thor­ity in re­la­tion to the pro­posal.

It has now emerged that plan­ners have writ­ten to Clas­sic Lodges say­ing they con­sid­ered that in­for­ma­tion sub­mit­ted in their ap­pli­ca­tion in re­la­tion to the pro­posed de­vel­op­ment was ‘not yet suf­fi­cient to en­able the plan­ning au­thor­ity to make a de­ci­sion in this case’.

Se­nior staff of­fi­cer Peter Var­ian wrote that in or­der to en­able the au­thor­ity ‘ to give fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion to your ap­pli­ca­tion’ they must sub­mit fur­ther in­for­ma­tion in re­la­tion to 13 key points.

The most de­tailed of these re­lated to traf­fic and road safety, with Mr Var­ion writ­ing the au­thor­ity had ‘se­ri­ous con­cerns’ about right turn­ing move­ments into the site from the N72 and the queu­ing of traf­fic on the na­tional road.

‘ The ap­pli­ca­tion is also con­sid­ered to be de­fi­cient in the in­for­ma­tion sub­mit­ted in re­la­tion to ac­cess ar­range­ments, com­par­i­son data in the traf­fic as­sess­ment re­port and the rec­om­men­da­tions out­lined within do not ap­pear to have been in­cor­po­rated into draw­ings sub­mit­ted,’ wrote Mr Var­ian.

He wrote that a com­par­i­son be made be­tween traf­fic gen­er­ated by the pro­posed cre­ma­to­rium and that of the for­mer ho­tel and doc­u­men­ta­tion be re­vised to ‘clearly de­tail’ an­tic­i­pated traf­fic lev­els as­so­ci­ated with the new de­vel­op­ment.

The au­thor­ity also ad­vised them to en­gage with Trans­port In­fra­struc­ture Ire­land (TII ) and the Na­tional Roads Of­fice (NRO) on a num­ber of spe­cific is­sues, in­clud­ing the pro­vi­sion of a ded­i­cated right turn­ing lane into the site and a new cen­trally lo­cated en­trance/exit.

They were also asked to state what mea­sures would be in place to en­sure there was no over­lap be­tween cre­ma­tion ser­vices as this might im­pact on the level of park­ing pro­vided and cause de­lays en­ter­ing the site from the main road.

Plan­ners also re­quested that Clas­sic Lodges sub­mit an air and noise as­sess­ment, clar­ify that a mer­cury and dioxin abate­ment plant would be in­stalled on the site and pro­vide an out­line con­struc­tion and en­vi­ron­men­tal man­age­ment plan in­clud­ing de­tailed pro­pos­als for the pro­tec­tion of on-site water cour­ses dur­ing con­struc­tion and the stor­age of any ex­ca­vated ma­te­ri­als .

They were also asked to con­firm de­tails in re­la­tion to the de­sign and height of the stack, if a mains gas con­nec­tion is re­quired de­tails of a pro­posed hy­dro­car­bon in­ter­cep­tor and is­sues re­lat­ing to the pro­vi­sion pub­lic light­ing along the pub­lic road within the site bound­ary.

The let­ter pointed out the re­quest for fur­ther in­for­ma­tion was ‘with­out prej­u­dice to any de­ci­sion the Coun­cil may take, to refuse or grant per­mis­sion, with or with­out con­di­tions’.

It said that should Clas­sic Lodges fail to sup­ply all of the fur­ther in­for­ma­tion re­quested within six months of the re­quest be­ing is­sued ‘ the ap­pli­ca­tion shall be de­clared with­drawn’.

A full copy of the re­quest, in­cor­po­rat­ing a break­down of the 13 key points raised within it, is avail­able to view by fol­low­ing the link to the plan­ning en­quiry sec­tion at www. cork­

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Ireland

© PressReader. All rights reserved.