OPR Recommendation:

Having regard to national and regional policy objectives which support compact growth, the sustainable development of rural areas and promote the proportionate growth of rural towns, namely NPO 3c, NPO 15, and NPO 18a, and section 4.19 of the Section 28 Development Plans Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2007) in respect of the sequential approach, the planning authority is required to omit the following zoning amendments from the draft Plan:

        i.            MA160 Athleague, as the proposed settlement boundary extension would promote leapfrogging of development to a peripheral location removed from services and be inconsistent with national and regional policy objectives promoting sequential development and proportionate growth of rural towns and villages;

       ii.             MA164 Taghmaconnell, as the proposed settlement boundary extension is unwarranted in view of the extent of undeveloped lands already included in the boundary and the unserviced nature of the settlement and would be inconsistent with national and regional policy objectives promoting sequential development and proportionate growth of rural towns; and

     iii.            MA167 Hodson Bay/Barrymore, as the proposed settlement boundary extension would promote further unsustainable low density residential development in a location under strong urban influence where there is a lack of social and community services.

Chief Executive Recommendation No 5:

(a)    That the Plan be made without Material Amendments MA160, MA164 and MA167.

(b)    Amend the boundaries in the Village Plans for Athleague and Taghmaconnell and the Hodson Bay Area Plan to omit the lands outlined in (i), (ii) and (iii) above respectively.

The changes arising from the above recommendations are reflected in the amended Settlement Maps in Appendix 2 of this report.

The members discussed recommendation MA160 – Athleague:

·         There is a substantial part of Athleague on a flood plain that cannot be developed and it also has a historical area.

·         We can address the OPR recommendation by keeping land zones and highlight those not suitable for development

The Director commented that there is enough land included for development.

On the PROPOSAL of Cllr. Fallon

SECONDED by Cllr. Ward

It was AGREED NOT TO accept the Chief Executive recommendation No 5 in relation to Athleague MA160

On the PROPOSAL of Cllr. Keogh

SECONDED by Cllr. Naughten

It was AGREED to accept the Chief Executive recommendation No 5 in relation to Taughmaconnell MA164

The Members discussed the recommendation in relation to MA167 – Hodson Bay/Barrymore:

·         There has been significant investment in the Hodson Bay area and the members made a reasonable proposal

·         A desktop exercise is different to the situation on the ground – there are substantial areas in this zone that cannot be developed.

·         There is huge potential in the Hodson Bay area for development.

·         It is important that this issue is addresses, the property owner also owns white lands that will never be developed but would have been more appropriate for development and it makes sense to include these lands.

·         This rationale should be conveyed to the OPR

On the PROPOSAL of Cllr. Ward

SECONDED by Cllr. Keogh

It was AGREED NOT TO accept the Chief Executive recommendation No 5 in relation to Hodson Bay/Barrymore MA167