Draft Roscommon Town Local Area Plan 2024 – 2030, principally consideration of the Chief Executive’s report on submissions received on the Draft Plan, (as circulated), in accordance with Section 20(3) of the Planning and Development Act, 2000 (as amended)

 

Greg O’Donnell, A/Director of Services outlined that the format of the Chief Executive’s Report and recommendations contained within, based on submissions received during the pubic consultation stage of the Draft Roscommon Town Local Area Plan. He explained that he would refer to each submission and read each of the Chief Executive’s Recommendations.

 

Submission from the Office of the Planning Regulator (OPR)

 

OPR Theme 1 - Consistency with the Regional Spatial & Economic Strategy

 

CE Recommendation No. 1: The members did not agree to the inclusion of the additional text as recommended  due to issues with residential ‘Opportunity Sites’ as outlined and it was decided to defer this decision until later in the meeting.

 

CE Recommendation No. 2: The members did not agree to the inclusion of the additional text as recommended and it was decided to defer this decision until later in the meeting.

 

CE Recommendation No. 3: The members did not agree to the inclusion of the additional text as recommended citing the lack of a Local Transport Plan and it was decided to defer this decision until later in the meeting.

 

OPR Theme 3 – Population and Compact Growth

 

CE Recommendation No. 4: The members did not agree to the inclusion of the additional text as recommended  due to references to residential ‘Opportunity Sites’ and it was decided to defer this decision until later in the meeting.

 

CE Recommendation No. 5: The members queried if sites could be upgraded by a Members resolution from Tier 2 to Tier 1 or if they could be downgraded. 

 

Brian Farragher, Senior Executive Planner clarified that sites identified as Tier 1 had services, whereas Tier 2 sites may require a potential upgrade of services involving engagement with Uisce Éireann depending on the nature of the development but that there would be no negative consequences from a planning point of view.He also clarified that Uisce Éireann decided on the appropriate classification as Tier 1 or Tier 2 following detailed assessment of the sites.  Uisce Éireann is a statutory body and their technical recommendation cannot be changed. 

 

The Members AGREED the recommendation to amend Residential Site No. 7 (Golf Links Road) from Tier 1 to Tier 2 in respect of water supply and wastewater.

 

 

CE Recommendation No. 6:

AGREED

To include the following additional Policy Objective in Section 4.3 (Compact Growth), under the sub-heading of Residential Development Policy Objectives on page 23 of the Draft LAP and re-number all subsequent policy objectives accordingly:

RN2 - Ensure the delivery of compact residential growth that aligns with the growth ambitions and density ranges for Roscommon Town, in accordance with the Sustainable Residential Development and Compact Settlements, Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2024).

 

CE Recommendation No. 7: Due to the association with residential ‘Opportunity Sites’ Members decided to defer this decision until later in the meeting.

 

CE Recommendation No. 8: Due to the association with residential ‘Opportunity Sites’ Members decided to defer this decision until later in the meeting.

 

 

CE Recommendation No. 9:

AGREED

 

To include the following additional content in Section 11.5 (New Residential) on page 67 of the Draft LAP:

The Planning Authority will continue to exercise discretion in regards to quantitative standards for specific sites, on a case-by-case basis, where site context and the adjoining built urban environment requires careful consideration.

Roscommon County Council is committed to the achievement of residential development that aligns with the ‘Key Town’ status of Roscommon. Notwithstanding the requirements to deliver appropriate densities with a mix of building typologies, consideration of key elements such as site context, protection of amenity of adjoining properties and impact upon the built heritage of the town will also remain key elements in the decision making process. In essence, development proposals will be assessed both in terms of their alignment with both quantitative and qualitative standards.

 

CE Recommendation No. 10:

AGREED

 

To add the following policy objectives after RN 17 in Section 5.3 (Promoting a Vibrant Town Centre) on page 29 of the Draft LAP and re-number all subsequent policy objectives accordingly:

RN (TBC): Support the use of the Croí Cónaithe (Towns) Fund Scheme, to provide grants for the refurbishment of vacant properties for occupation as a principal private residence, including the conversion of a property, which has not been used previously for residential purposes.

 

CE Recommendation No. 11:

AGREED

 

To amend Maps 1, 1A, 1B, 1C and 3 of the Draft Plan as follows:

(a)    Northernmost portion of land, Lisnamult: Extend the ‘Community Infrastructure’ land use zone to include this portion of land which was originally identified as ‘Unzoned’ in the Draft LAP;

(b)    Southernmost portion of land, Lisnamult: Zone the land as ‘New Residential’ instead of the ‘Unzoned’ identification in the Draft LAP;

(c)     Hawthorn Drive: Zone the land as ‘New Residential’ instead of the ‘Unzoned’ identification in the Draft LAP.

In conjunction with the above amendments to land use zones, amend and update Table 11.1 Land Use Zoning Extents and Table 11.2 New Residential Lands on pages 64 and 65 respectively to reflect the altered land extents.

 

CE Recommendation No. 12:

AGREED

 

To add an additional explanatory footnote no. 4 at the ‘Retail’ development type in Figure 11.1 (Roscommon Town Land Use Zoning Matrix) on page 72  of the Draft Plan as set out below and amend all subsequent footnote numbers accordingly:

Where ‘Retail’ is ‘open to consideration’ on land other than the ‘Town Core’ and the ‘Outer Core’ this refers only to (a) a small scale neighbourhood convenience store to serve the immediate surrounding area or (b) minor retail activity ancillary to and demonstrated to be necessary for the operation of an proposed or established industrial / enterprise / community facility.

 

OPR Theme 4 – Transport and Accessibility

 

CE Recommendation No. 13:

The Members indicated that the Roscommon Town Local Area Plan should be informed by a Local Transport Plan and not by the Roscommon Town Approaches and Movement Study, as this document was not subject to any public consultation or environmental assessment.  The Members queried if they could instruct the preparation of a Local Transport Plan at this stage in the Plan preparation process. 

 

Brian Farragher, Senior Executive Planner confirmed that the Roscommon Town Approaches and Movement Study  was prepared by Aecom on behalf of Roscommon County Council, was finalised in 2023 and is a supporting document to this plan. 

 

Mary Grier, Senior Planner informed the Members that further bodies of work could not be instructed to be undertaken as part of the Plan preparation and that Members were required at this meeting to decide to make or amend the Draft LAP.

 

Greg O’Donnell stated that a lack of a Transport Plan is a failing in the Local Area Plan and suggested that maybe this could be proposed at the next Municipal District meeting instead and any future Transport Plan could be linked to the Local Area Plan.

 

The Members REJECTED CE Recommendation No. 13 (i.e. to publish the Roscommon Transport Approaches and Movement Study (RTAMS) (February 2023) as a specialist prepared supporting document to the Local Area Plan as an Appendix to the LAP)

 

And

 

On the PROPOSAL of Cllr. Leyden

            SECONDED by Cllr. Fitzmaurice

It was AGREED to request the preparation of a Local Transport Plan, which would be subject to environmental assessment and full public consultation.  This should be linked to the Roscommon Town Local Area Plan, which would necessitate a variation to the plan.  The Roscommon Town Approaches and Movement Study 2023 should not be included as part of the Roscommon Town Local Area Plan.

 

 

CE Recommendation No. 14:

NOT ACCEPTED as it contained reference to the Roscommon Town Approaches and Movement Study.

 

The Members asked if the Roscommon Town Approaches and Movement Study would go out to public consultation. Greg O’Donnell advised that normally a report prepared by consultants on a technical matter would not go out for public consultation.

 

CE Recommendation No. 15:

The first and fifth part of the recommendation were NOT ACCEPTED as the Roscommon Town and Approaches Movement Study 2023 was referenced.

 

The second, third and fourth part of the recommendation were AGREED as follows:

Add the following Policy Objectives to Section 7.4 (Roscommon Town Approaches and Movement Study (RTAMS)) on page 46 of the Draft LAP under the sub-heading ‘Sustainable Transport Policy Objectives’ and re-number all subsequent policy objectives accordingly:

RN (TBC) - Facilitate and encourage appropriate new infrastructure development that will improve accessibility and movement around Roscommon town and its hinterland, reduce dependency on private car transport, and increase permeability in the town.

RN (TBC) - Support the use of energy efficient forms of transport through the promotion of walking, cycling and public transport.

RN (TBC) - Promote the maintenance and expansion of active travel infrastructure in order to provide for and encourage increased movement around Roscommon town and its hinterland by non-vehicular means.

 

CE Recommendation No. 16:

AGREED

 

To include the following additional content in a text box format immediately before the green banner title ‘Sustainable Transport Policy Objectives’ on page 46 of the Draft LAP:

The following policy objectives should be read in conjunction with the governing policy objectives on transport as set out in Chapter 7, Volume I of the RCDP 2022-2028 (Policy Objectives ITC 7.14 to ITC 7.17, ITC 7.20 and ITC 7.21 refer).

 

CE Recommendation No. 17: The Members decided to defer a decision on this until later in the meeting.

 

OPR Theme 5 – Flood Risk Management

 

Greg O’Donnell, Acting Director of Service advised that this was closely related to flood risk management as raised in Submission No. 2.24 from the Office of Public Works, and therefore recommended that CE Recommendation No. 28 (in response to the OPW submission) be considered at this time.  He also introduced David L’Estrange, Environmental Consultant from CAAS Ltd, who prepared the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment, which accompanied the Draft Roscommon Town Local Area Plan. 

 

Members posed a range of questions relating to flood risk and the preparation of the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment.

 

David L’Estrange, CAAS Ltd. explained that CE Recommendation No’s 28 and 29 related to submissions from the OPW and the identification of flood zones on the land use zoning maps. He explained that the Local Area Plan was obliged to include and identify areas of flood risk and that each flood zone had a different level of risk.  CAAS carried out this analysis using all available, up to date flood risk indicators published by the OPW. The Strategic Flood Risk Assessment was carried out in accordance with The Planning System and Flood Risk Management – Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2009).  Mr L’Estrange also explained that the absence of local knowledge of a history of flooding does not mean that land is not within Flood Zone A or Flood Zone B and provided explanation on what constituted Flood Zones A and B.    

 

CE Recommendation No. 28: (in response to Submission 2.24 - Office of Public Works (OPW) and in reply to the OPR’s Theme 5).

 

AGREED to:

(a)    Update the Flood Zone mapping in the SFRA as identified by the OPW; 

(b)    Update Map 2 (Flood Risk)in the Plan to:

•             Show land use zoning objectives; and

•             Reflect changes to Flood Zones from SFRA (the area covered by the combined Flood Zone A and Flood Zone B will not change).

 

CE Recommendation No. 29: (in response to Submission 2.24 - Office of Public Works (OPW) and in reply to the OPR’s Theme 5)

AGREED

To add the site on the Lanesborough Road, zoned’ Strategic Industrial / Enterprise Zone’ to the Justification Table in the SFRA.

 

Greg O’Donnell then advised that consideration would return to the remainder of the CE Recommendations in response to the submission from the Office of the Planning Regulator.

 

CE Recommendation No. 18:

In response to queries from Members, David L’Estrange clarified that an example of a small-scale expansion is an extension to an existing building or changes to facilitate emergency access, with every planning application being subject to individual assessment.

 

Following this clarification the Members AGREED CE Recommendation No. 18 as follows:

Include the following policy objectives in Section 9.4 (Constrained Land Use) on page 58 of the Draft LAP and re-number all subsequent policy objectives accordingly:

RN (TBC): Ensure all development proposals within constrained land use zones are informed by Site Specific Flood Risk Assessments, carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority and in accordance with The Planning System and Flood Risk Management Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2009) or any subsequent updated Guidelines.

 

RN (TBC): Facilitate small scale expansion proposals for existing premises on constrained land use zones, subject to the provision of site specific flood risk assessment, which demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority that such proposals shall not give rise to significant flooding issues, will not obstruct important flow paths, introduce a significant additional number of people into flood risk areas or entail the storage of hazardous substances.

 

 

CE Recommendation No. 19

 

The Members expressed their concerns that the wording of the text is weak and that the Roscommon Town Flood Relief Scheme needs to be prioritised.  David L’Estrange clarified the flood relief scheme is based on the OPW Catchment Flood Risk Assessment and Management (CFRAM) Programme.   The Members reiterated their views on the need for an updated analysis of the River Jiggy, setting out pinch points and maintenance works required to ensure that flood defence walls were required as the last option.  They also noted many obstacles to carrying out work on the River Jiggy, including environmental impact assessment. 

 

David L’Estrange explained that the flood relief scheme is under the control of the OPW and is a separate process to the preparation of this Roscommon Town Local Area Plan. 

 

Members queried if the flood risk maps can be amended at their request.  Mr L’Estrange explained that Members do not have the authority to change an OPW designated flood zone, which is what is represented on the flood risk maps.  The Members expressed their concern at the amount of land within the ‘constrained land use zone’ in the Draft LAP. David L’Estrange explained that the ‘Constrained Land Use Zone’ corresponds to Flood Zones A and B, as identified by the OPW.  The Flood Zones represents the probability of a flooding event occurring in any given year with some areas having very low odds of a flooding occurrence such as 1:1000. 

 

The Members wanted a more proactive approach to future flooding events and

On the PROPOSAL of Cllr. Leyden

            SECONDED by Cllr. McDermott

 

It was AGREED to accept CE Recommendation No. 19 to include the following policy objective in Section 9.3 (Flood Risk) on page 58 of the Draft LAP and re-number all subsequent policy objectives accordingly:

RN (TBC): Support the development of the Roscommon Town flood relief scheme, and engage with all stakeholders to ensure development proposals support and do not impede the progression of any planned flood relief measures.  

AND also AGREED TO

Include the following text “Prioritise work with the OPW to develop a strategy and a revised study to maintain, upgrade and improve the River Jiggy and the River Hind”

 

CE Recommendation No. 20:

AGREED

To amend Map 3 (Constrained Land Use) to differentiate and create a clear contrast to identify Flood Zone A and Flood Zone B separately and reflect this in the Map legend.

 

OPR Theme 6 – Climate Action

 

CE Recommendation No. 21:

AGREED

To include the following policy objectives in Section 9.2 (Integrating Climate Action into Roscommon Town) on page 56 of the Draft LAP and amend all subsequent policy objective numbers accordingly:

RN (TBC): Support the policy measures and actions set out in the County Roscommon Climate Action Plan to promote the integration of energy efficient building systems, renewable technologies and EV charging points, throughout the built environment of Roscommon town, in order to contribute towards a more carbon neutral and environmentally sustainable urban setting.  

RN (TBC): Support green initiatives arising from Roscommon town’s status as a designated Decarbonising Zone and any associated implementation plans promoting measures to reduce Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions and improve the natural and built environment of the town.

RN (TBC): Promote and encourage positive community and/or co-operative led climate action initiatives and projects in Roscommon town that seek to reduce carbon emissions, improve energy efficiency, enhance green infrastructure and encourage awareness on climate change issues.

 

 

CE Recommendation No. 22:

AGREED subject to the following text being removed “aided in particular by the implementation of recommendations contained in the accompanying Roscommon Approaches Town and Movement Study (RTAMS)”.

 

The extent of the recommendation as agreed is to introduce a new section in Chapter 1(Introduction) titled Section 1.4 - Implementation and Monitoring and include the following text: 

This Plan sets out a clear and strategic development strategy for the regeneration and growth of Roscommon town over the Plan period. The strategy aligns with Roscommon’s designated role as a ‘Key Town’ as set out in the Northern and Western Regional Assembly’s Regional Spatial and Economic Strategy 2020 – 2032, and further seeks to develop the town as an economic, recreational and community destination.

The Council is fully committed to achieving the Strategic Vision which is set out in Section 3.1 of this Plan. This vision is in accordance with the role identified for the Roscommon in a national, regional and county context, where in addition to its designation as a ‘Key Town’ in the region, at a county level it is also the principal town and administrative centre. In order to achieve the stated vision, it is essential that the policy approach and measures outlined in this LAP are successfully delivered. 

The development of the Local Area Plan is based on a number of key sustainable principles, including:

-          The promotion of compact growth and the application of the ‘sequential approach’;

-          Regeneration of the ‘Town Core’ and ‘Outer Core’ land use zones;

-          Repopulation of central areas of the town; and

-          Promoting and facilitating sustainable transport patterns

It is recognised that ongoing, positive and proactive engagement with a range of agencies and stakeholders will be central to implementing the vision and key principles referenced above. Other crucial ingredients for successful implementation relate to positive political input and support, and the economic climate, which will be central to securing strategic funding for projects throughout Roscommon town.

The Planning Department will, in conjunction with key stakeholders, implement and monitor the policies and objectives of this Local Area Plan. The Plan will be monitored to assess progress and will be subject to periodic internal review, particularly in response to the introduction of new legislation or guidelines, in order to determine continued compliance or otherwise determine where amendments are required, and in such circumstances, a variation of the Local Area Plan will be necessary.

 

SUBMISSIONS FROM PRESCRIBED BODIES

 

Submission No. 2.2 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

The Members noted the contents of the submission and ACCEPTED the Chief Executive’s recommendation of no change.

 

Submission No. 2.4 Department of Education.

CE Recommendation No. 23

AGREED

To amend the text in Section 2.5 (Education), on page 13 of the Draft LAP as follows: “There are currently twoprimary schools in Roscommon – St. Coman’s Wood Primary School, and Gaelscoil de hÍde.

 

Submission No. 2.6 Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII)

The Members noted that associated Chief Executive’s Recommendation No’s 13, 14 and 15 were previously rejected.

The Members noted that a related Chief Executive’s Recommendation No. 12 was previously accepted.

 

Submission No. 2.8 Northern and Western Regional Assembly (NWRA)

 

Greg O’Donnell explained that the NWRA submission sets out a number of ‘Recommendations’ and Observations’ on which a number of related Chief Executive’s Recommendations had been made and already discussed as part of the consideration of the submission from the OPR, with some of those Chief Executive’s Recommendations having been agreed and others rejected.  There were no new Chief Executive’s Recommendations for consideration in response to the issues raised in the submission from the NWRA.

 

The Members indicated their intention to address the subject matter raised the NWRA’s Recommendation No’s 1 and 2, in the context of LAP boundary extensions that they wished to discuss later in the meeting.

 

Submission No. 2.12 National Transport Authority

The Members noted that associated Chief Executive’s Recommendation No’s 13, 14 and 15 were previously rejected.

 

Submission No. 2.18 Department of Transport

CE Recommendation No. 24

AGREED

To amend Policy Objective RN 29, Section 7.4 on page 46 of the Draft LAP as follows:

RN 29 Ensure new development proposals are designed to comply with the Design Manual for Urban Roads and Streets (2019) and supplementary (2020) Interim Advice Note – Covid 19 Pandemic Response and ensure provision is made for pedestrian and cycle infrastructure, along with opportunities to improve connectivity and accessibility to the town.

 

Submission No. 2.21 Department of Environment, Climate & Communication (DECC)

CE Recommendation No. 25

AGREED

 

To amend the final sentence in text box (blue) in Section 9.2 (Integrating Climate Action into Roscommon Town), on page 55 of the Draft LAP as follows:

This LAP aims to support both the Government’s current Climate Action Plan and the Council’s current Climate Action Plan and any subsequent updated CAPs, which provide the framework for the transition of Roscommon town towards a low carbon and climate resilient settlement.

CE Recommendation No. 26

AGREED

 

Toinclude the following policy objective in Section 9.2 (Integrating Climate Action into Roscommon Town) on page 56 of the Draft LAP and re-number all subsequent policy objectives accordingly:

RN (TBC): Promote the electrification of heating solutions to both new and existing homes, which use clean electricity thereby reducing dependency on fossil fuels and supports a move towards reducing carbon levels within the built environment of Roscommon town.

 

CE Recommendation No. 27

AGREED

To include the following policy objective in Section 9.2 (Integrating Climate Action into Roscommon Town) on page 56 of the Draft LAP and re-number all subsequent policy objectives accordingly:

RN (TBC): Engage with all stakeholders seeking to develop the potential of district heating schemes, including district heating derived from waste heat where technically feasible, cost effective and in accordance with all relevant planning considerations.

 

Submission No. 2.24 Office of Public Works (OPW)

Greg O’Donnell explained that this submission and associated Chief Executive’s Recommendation No. 28 were previously discussed and agreed as part of the consideration of flood related matters as raised in the submission from the Office of the Planning Regulator.

 

Submission No. 2.31 Uisce Eireann

CE Recommendation No. 30

AGREED

To add a new section in Chapter 7 (Infrastructure and Transport), after page 46 of the Draft LAP, dealing with water and wastewater infrastructure, as per the text set out below:

Section 7.5 Water and Wastewater Infrastructure

Water services in Roscommon Town are maintained and provided by Uisce Éireann. In respect of water supply, the town is supplied by the Roscommon Central Water Resource Zone and it has been indicated by Uisce Éireann that there is adequate capacity to cater for the projected population increase over the Plan period of 2024 – 2030. 

In relation to wastewater infrastructure, the Roscommon Main Drainage Scheme was recently completed and the works undertaken are considered to assist in planning for the future growth and development of the town.  It has been confirmed that there is potential spare capacity at the Roscommon Town wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) to cater for the majority of the projected population increase over the plan period. Uisce Éireann anticipate that a strategic assessment and feasibility study for the Roscommon WWTP will commence in the short term and should the requirement for an upgrade project be identified, this would advance for funding and governance approval in the investment period of 2025-2029.

CE Recommendation No. 31

AGREED

Add a text box after the new Section 7.5 content recommended in Recommendation No. 30 (above) to state the following:

The following policy objectives should be read in conjunction with the governing policy objectives on water and wastewater infrastructure as set out in Chapter 7, Volume 1 of the Roscommon County Development Plan 2022-2028 (Policy Objectives ITC 7.34 – ITC 7.44).

 

CE Recommendation No. 32

AGREED

To add the following new policy objectives after the new Section 7.5 text recommended in Recommendation No. 30 and re-number all subsequent policy objectives accordingly:

RN (TBC) – Promote water conservation and demand management measures amongst all water users inRoscommon town, and support Uisce Éireann in implementing water conservation measures such as leakagereduction and network improvements.

RN (TBC) – Require the protection or where appropriate, the diversion of Uisce Éireann assets within any proposed development site. In the event that the assets of Uisce Éireann are required to be altered or diverted, the proposer of the development shall liaise with Uisce Éireann in relation to any necessary diversion agreement.

 

CE Recommendation No. 33

AGREED

 

To amend Figure 11.1 – Roscommon Town Land Use Zoning Matrix, on page 72 of the Draft LAP to identify ‘Infrastructure and Utilities’ in the ‘Agriculture’ land use zone in yellow shading to denote it being ‘open to consideration’ (i.e. replacing the red shading denoting ‘not normally permitted’ as detailed in the Draft LAP). 

 

Submission No. 2.32 The Heritage Council

The Members ACCEPTED the contents, but also wished to have it on record that they did not agree with the commentary in the Chief Executive’s Response in relation to residential ‘Opportunity Sites’ and the Greenbelt.

 

Submission No. 2.55 Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage (DHLGH)

 

CE Recommendation No. 34

AGREED

To add the following descriptive text to Section 8.2 (Built Heritage – Town Profile) on page 48 of the Draft LAP, immediately prior to sub-section 8.2.1.

Recent archaeologically monitored groundworks for the Urban Renewal Scheme uncovered remains of the medieval town gate and portions of the town walls at Main Street, and wells at Market Square. These newly discovered features of the town’s rich archaeological heritage, have been preserved in situ, contributing to the modern streetscape, and presenting tangible evidence of the rich archaeological potential lying just below street level throughout the town.

CE Recommendation No. 35

AGREED

 

To add the following additional policy objective to the Built Heritage Policy Objectives on page 50 of the Draft LAP, after RN 33 and re-number all subsequent policy objectives accordingly:

Ensure the protection of the archaeological heritage of Roscommon town through the safeguarding of upstanding archaeological remains. Developments proposing groundworks at any Recorded Monuments shown on the Record of Monuments and Places maps, or in zones of notification shown on the online Historic Environment Viewer of the National Monuments Service, should be preceded by archaeological impact assessment and carried out subject to appropriate archaeological mitigation.

 

GENERAL SUBMISSIONS

 

Greg O’Donnell recommended, in order to facilitate a timely departure by David L’Estrange, Environmental Consultant, that submissions relating to the subject of flooding should be considered first, instead of in the order detailed in the Chief Executive’s Report.  The Members agreed.

 

Submission No. 2.27 Antogher Roads Residents c/o Collins Boyd

In response to Members queries regarding whether or not there was potential to remove areas from the flood zone as identified on the Flood Risk Maps,  David L’Estrange, Environmental Consultant from CAAS Ltd. explained that the extent of lands identified on the Flood Risk Maps cannot be altered and the maps have to be included in the Local Area Plan.  The Members ACCEPTED this but expressed their hope that earlier proposals to prioritise maintenance work on the rivers might address this in the future.

 

Submission No. 2.37 Anya Greally c/o Dolan & Associates

The Members noted that a Flood Risk Assessment accompanied the submission and asked David L’Estrange to comment on this relative to the SFRA identification of the lands being in a flood zone.  David L’Estrange provided comment, noting that the Flood Risk Assessment submitted did not take into account up to date information and he also stated that the lands referred to in this submission are lower lying and nearer to the river and are at a risk of future flooding and their identification on the Flood Risk Maps and the proposed zoning as ‘Greenbelt’ remains appropriate.  Mr L’Estrange also advised Members that it would be wreckless of them to consider zoning the lands for residential purposes as requested in the submission and to do so may have the potential for personal liability.

 

The Members ACCEPTED the Chief Executive’s recommendation of no changes, having regard to the detailed information and explanation provided by CAAS Ltd.

 

Submission No. 2.64 Noel Beattie c/o James Lohan

CE Recommendation No. 44

AGREED as follows:

 

Based on revised flood information, undertake the following suite of actions:

(a)    Amend Map 1, Map 1A, Map 1B, Map 1C and Map 3 to zone the portion of the land which corresponds to Flood Zones B and C as ‘Strategic Industrial / Enterprise’ instead of the proposed ‘Greenbelt’ zoning identified in the Draft LAP but retain the proposed ‘Greenbelt’ zoning on the area towards the rear of the site which is within Flood Zone A;

(b)    Amend the flood zone information contained in Map 2 (Flood Risk) and Map 3 (Constrained Land Use) to reflect the updated flood information;

(c)     Amend the land use zoning extents in Table 11.1 (page 64 of the Draft LAP) to reflect the amendments to lands zoned as ‘Strategic Industrial / Enterprise Zone’ and ‘Greenbelt’;

(d)    Update the SFRA to reflect the revised flood information. 

 

 

Submission No. 2.65 Richard Keavney (Submission No 1 of 2)

Members queried what documentation was provided with the submission. Brian Farragher, Senior Executive Planner and David L’Estrange, Environmental Consultant from CAAS Ltd. confirmed that an ‘Engineers Report’ referred to in the submission had not been provided with the submission. 

 

Notwithstanding the absence of the stated ‘Engineers Report’, David L’Estrange assisted Members in identifying the extent of Flood Zones A and B in relation to the subject site.  Members thanked him for clarifying this.

 

The Members noted the contents of the submission and ACCEPTED the Chief Executive’s recommendation of no change.

 

 

Greg O’Donnell advised Members that this concluded consideration of all submissions in which flooding issues has been raised and that the remaining submissions would be considered in the order set out in the Chief Executive’s Report. He also thanked David L’Estrange for attending the meeting and for the advice provided.

 

Submission No. 2.1 Personal Reps. of the late Anthony King c/o Gaynor Architectural & Design Services Ltd

The Members noted the contents of the submission and ACCEPTED the Chief Executive’s recommendation of no change.

 

Submission No. 2.3 Jonathan Larkin

The Chief Executive’s Recommendation of no change in response to matters raised in the submission was NOT ACCEPTED.

 

On the PROPOSAL of Cllr. Leyden

            SECONDED by Cllr. McDermott

It was AGREED to change the land use zoning of lands at Edenville House from ‘Outer Core’ as proposed in the Draft LAP to ‘Community Infrastructure.’

 

Mary Grier, Senior Planner advised against this land use zoning change, and explained, as set out in the Chief Executive’s Report, that the ‘Outer Core’ land use zone would provide significantly greater flexibility in relation to any future use, whereas the ‘Community Infrastructure’ land use zone was more limited in what could be accommodated, as per the land use zoning matrix.

 

Submission No. 2.5 Galway and Roscommon Education and Training Board (GRETB)

CE Recommendation No. 36

AGREED

 

To remove the identification of the lands as residential ‘Opportunity Site 1 – Circular Road, through the following amendments to the Draft LAP:

(a)    Remove the details of ‘Opportunity Site No. 1 – Circular Road’ set out on page 32 of the Draft LAP;

(b)    Re-number all remaining ‘Opportunity Sites’ detailed on pages 33-38 accordingly;

(c)     Amend Map 1, Map 1A, Map 1B, Map 1C and Map 3 to remove the hatching on the subject site, which represented it’s identification as a residential ‘Opportunity Site.’ 

 

 

 

Submission No. 2.7 Alan Beirne c/o James Lohan

The Members noted the contents of the submission and ACCEPTED the Chief Executive’s recommendation of no change.

 

Submission No. 2.9 An Post c/o RMLA

The Members noted the contents of the submission and ACCEPTED the Chief Executive’s recommendation of no change.

 

Submission No. 2.10 Mayo Roscommon Hospice

CE Recommendation No. 37

AGREED

 

To amend Map 1, Map 1A, Map 1B, Map 1C and Map 3 to extend the ‘Community Infrastructure’ land use zone to include the subject portion of land, instead of the ‘Agriculture’ land use zone detailed on the Draft LAP maps.

Submission No. 2.11 John Crean

The Members noted the contents of the submission and ACCEPTED the Chief Executive’s recommendation of no change.

 

Submission No. 2.13 John & Helen Earley

The Members noted the contents of the submission and ACCEPTED the Chief Executive’s recommendation of no change.

 

Submission No. 2.14 Sean Doyle

The Members noted the contents of the submission and ACCEPTED the Chief Executive’s recommendation of no change.

 

Submission No. 2.15 Tommy Mullaney

The Chief Executive’s Recommendation of no change in response to matters raised in the submission was NOT ACCEPTED.

 

On the PROPOSAL of Cllr. Dineen

            SECONDED by Cllr. Leyden

It was AGREED to extend the LAP boundary to include the subject lands and to zone the lands as ‘New Residential.’

 

Members provided a map to identify the extent of the lands to be included and zoned.

 

Greg O’Donnell, Acting Director of Service advised that this exceeds the core strategy residential zoning requirements and may not be accepted by the OPR.

 

Submission No. 2.16 Abbey Street Residents

The Chief Executive’s Recommendation of no change in response to matters raised in the submission was NOT ACCEPTED.

 

On the PROPOSAL of Cllr. Leyden

            SECONDED by Cllr. Shanagher

It was AGREED to remove the identification of this land as residential ‘Opportunity Site No. 3’, including removal of text on page 34 of the Draft LAP and all map identification.

 

Greg O’Donnell reminded Members of the obligation to accommodate 30% of residential development on infill and brownfield lands, to which this land had the potential to contribute.

 

Submission No. 2.17 Marian Keigher

The Chief Executive’s Recommendation of no change in response to matters raised in the submission was NOT ACCEPTED.

 

Members noted that the zoning of the Edenville House lands was changed by an earlier proposal.

 

Submission No. 2.19 John Reilly c/o PJ Moran

The Members noted the contents of the submission and ACCEPTED the Chief Executive’s recommendation of no change.

 

Submission No. 2.20 Roscommon Heritage Group

The Chief Executive’s Recommendation of no change in response to matters raised in the submission was NOT ACCEPTED.

 

On the PROPOSAL of Cllr. Leyden

            SECONDED by Cllr. Shanagher

It was AGREED to reinstate the Protected Views on the maps, as shown on the maps of the previous Local Area Plan 2014 -2020.

 

Submission No. 2.22 Frank and Sarah-Kate Wall

CE Recommendation No. 38

AGREED

 

To amend Map 1, Map 1A, Map 1B, Map 1C and Map 3 to extend the ‘Existing Residential’ land use zone to include the subject portion of land, instead of the ‘Agriculture’ land use zone detailed on the Draft LAP maps.

Submission No. 2.23 Mark Gannon on behalf of Image Furnishings

The Members noted the contents of the submission and ACCEPTED the Chief Executive’s recommendation of no change.

 

Submission No. 2.25 Noel Beirne

The Members noted the contents of the submission and ACCEPTED the Chief Executive’s recommendation of no change.

 

Submission No. 2.26 Sean Leydon

The Chief Executive’s Recommendation of no change in response to matters raised in the submission was NOT ACCEPTED.

 

Cllr. Leyden stated, in the interests of clarity and disclosure, that she was not related to Mr. Leydon and noted that their surnames were spelt differently.

 

On the PROPOSAL of Cllr. Leyden

            SECONDED by Cllr. McDermott

It was AGREED to zone these lands for ‘Strategic Industrial and Enterprise Use.’

 

Greg O’Donnell, Acting Director of Service advised that the lands are a distance outside the Draft LAP boundary and the proposal represents un-coordinated development.

 

Submission No. 2.28 Glenman Corporation

The Members noted the contents of the submission and ACCEPTED the Chief Executive’s recommendation of no change.

 

Submission No. 2.29 & 2.30 Two submissions from Seamus Hayden

The Chief Executive’s Recommendation of no change in response to matters raised in the submission was NOT ACCEPTED.

 

On the PROPOSAL of Cllr. Dineen

            SECONDED by Cllr. Leyden

It was AGREED to extend the Draft LAP boundary to include these lands and zone them as ‘New Residential’.

 

Associated with the foregoing boundary amendment,

On the PROPOSAL of Cllr. Leyden

            SECONDED by Cllr. Fitzmaurice

It was AGREED to further extend the Draft LAP in the north east in the vicinity of The Walk and Clooneybeirne to include existing housing and to zone the identified lands as ‘Existing Residential.’

 

The Members provided a map identifying the extent of additional lands to be included and zoned. 

 

Submission No. 2.33 Pat McCrann

CE Recommendation No. 39

AGREED

 

In order to correct a typographical error, amend the legend detail contained in Map 1 (Land Use Zoning) of the Draft LAP as follows:

See Section 12– Zoning Strategy

Submission No. 2.35 Councillor Anthony Waldron (1^st submission)

The Members noted the contents of the submission and ACCEPTED the Chief Executive’s recommendation of no change.

 

Submission No. 2.36 Councillor Anthony Waldron (2^nd submission)

The Chief Executive’s Recommendation of no change in response to matters raised in the submission was NOT ACCEPTED.

 

Members noted that the zoning of the Edenville House lands was changed by an earlier proposal.

 

Submission No. 2.38 The Melting Pot

CE Recommendation No. 40

AGREED

 

To alter the details in Figure 11.1 (Roscommon Town Land Use Zoning Matrix) to identify the ‘Community’ development type as ‘open to consideration’ in the ‘Greenbelt’ zoning and accordingly identified in yellow at the intersection of ‘Community’ and ‘Greenbelt’ (instead of ‘not normally permitted’ and red as per the Draft LAP.  In conjunction with this, include a footnote within the ‘Community’ and ‘Greenbelt’ intersection box to state the following:

Low intensity community use only, primarily for horticultural or recreational pursuits which do not require the development of permanent structures.

 

Submission No. 2.39 South Roscommon Family Resource Centre

The Chief Executive’s Recommendation of no change in response to matters raised in the submission was NOT ACCEPTED.

 

Members noted that the matter of a Local Transport Plan was discussed earlier. 

 

 

Submission No. 2.40  Sarah Browne

CE Recommendation No. 41[1]

AGREED

 

Toamend Policy Objective RN 12 on page 28 of the Draft LAP as follows:

‘Encourage new retail, commercial and social enterprise proposals towards the town centre, with a focus on the uptake of vacant properties or brownfield sites. Development proposals should demonstrate that these central sites have been sequentially assessed and justifiably discounted, prior to advancing applications towards more peripheral and/or greenfield sites.’

Members stated that they did not agree with some of the remainder of the Chief Executive’s Response and recommendation of no change in response to other matters raised in the submission.  They noted that such matters included the lack of a Local Transport Plan, which was the subject of earlier discussion.

 

Submission No. 2.41 Roscommon Transition Towns

The Chief Executive’s Recommendation of no change in response to matters raised in the submission was NOT ACCEPTED.

 

Members noted that matters raised had been discussed and were the subject of earlier proposals by Members.

 

 

Related to earlier considerations arising from Submission No. 2.15 (Tommy Mullaney)

On the PROPOSAL of Cllr. Dineen

            SECONDED by Cllr. Leyden

It was AGREED to extend the Draft LAP boundary to include additional lands to the south, in the Ballinagard area, and to zone the identified areas as ‘Existing Residential.’

 

Members provided a map to identify the proposed boundary amendment and lands to be zoned.

 

Submission No. 2.42 Roscommon Town Team Ltd.

Members noted that the Chief Executive’s Recommendation No. 36 as referred to in the submission had previously been AGREED.

The Chief Executive’s Recommendation No’s 13 and 14 as referred to were NOT ACCEPTED and it was noted that this was discussed earlier.

 

The Chief Executive’s Recommendation of no change in response to other matters raised in the submission was NOT ACCEPTED.

 

Members discussed the potential identification of an extended or additional Architectural Conservation Area. 

 

Greg O’Donnell, A/Director of Services advised against the identification of an ACA and its inclusion in the Local Area Plan without the benefit of assessment by conservation experts. In the event of a recommendation from such experts to designate an ACA, it could subsequently be included in the Local Area Plan. 

 

Mary Grier, Senior Planner noted that the submission requested the extension of the existing ACA and explained that as per the definition of an ACA, much of the area between the existing ACA and the Railway Station complex and Edenville House do not accord with the definition of an Architectural Conservation Area.  She also advised that the identification of any new ACA should typically be informed by an assessment by architectural conservation experts.

 

On the PROPOSAL of Cllr. Leyden

            SECONDED by Cllr. McDermott

It was AGREED that an Architectural Conservation Area (ACA) be identified around Edenville House, Roscommon Railway Station and the Railway Station Master’s House.

 

The Members provided a map identifying the extent of the new Architectural Conservation Area, which they propose to designate.

 

In respect of residential Opportunity Site 4 (Castle Lane) as identified in the Draft LAP:

On the PROPOSAL of Cllr. Leyden

            SECONDED by Cllr. Shanagher

It was AGREED to remove the identification of this land as residential ‘Opportunity Site No. 4’, including removal of text on page 35 of the Draft LAP and all map identification.

 

Members accepted that the Castle Lane land use zoning would other remain as ‘Town Core.’

 

Submission No. 2.43 Rob McGuinness

The Chief Executive’s Recommendation of no change in response to matters raised in the submission was NOT ACCEPTED. Members noted however, that issues raised had been addressed earlier in the meeting. 

 

Submission No. 2.44 Niall & Fiona Greene (on behalf of Niall & Fiona Greene & Markus & Joanne Homes)

The Members noted the contents of the submission and ACCEPTED the Chief Executive’s recommendation of no change.

 

Submission No. 2.45 Rita Kearney

The Chief Executive’s Recommendation of no change in response to matters raised in the submission was NOT ACCEPTED. Members noted however, that issues raised had been addressed earlier in the meeting. 

 

 

 

Submission No. 2.46 Noelle Jeffreys

The Members noted the contents of the submission and ACCEPTED the Chief Executive’s recommendation of no change.

 

Submission No. 2.47 Mote Park Conservation Group

CE Recommendation No. 42

AGREED

 

To include the following additional text as the final paragraph in Section 2.7 (Open Space, Sporting and Amenity Facilities) on page 13 of the Draft LAP:

Mote Park, located a short distance south of Roscommon Town is a key heritage and amenity asset to the area. The park serves as a nature-based destination for outdoor activities for people of all ages and interests. Mote Park forests span approximately 650 acres and as well as an amenity facility, it has a vital role in sustaining a wide range of habitats and wildlife species. It represents a valuable asset, not only to Roscommon Town, but also to the region, as a key outdoor recreation and amenity space.

 

CE Recommendation No. 43

AGREED

 

To amend the list of Protected Structures detailed in Appendix 2 (Record of Protected Structures – Roscommon Town) on pages 76 – 78 of the Draft LAP, to omit the Protected Structures, which are located outside the identified LAP boundary.

 

Submission No. 2.48 John R Sweeney

Members noted that this related to ‘Opportunity Site No. 3’ and was dealt with earlier in the meeting.

 

Submission No. 2.49 John Hynes

The Members noted the contents of the submission and ACCEPTED the Chief Executive’s recommendation of no change.

 

Submission No. 2.50 Goldcross Developments Ltd c/o McCutheon Halley

The members discussed the lands in question and existing houses which are dependent for access on this minor local road and the ongoing problem of turning out at the junction on to the N61 opposite Roscommon University Hospital.

The Members noted the contents of the submission and ACCEPTED the Chief Executive’s recommendation of no change.

 

Submission No. 2.51 Lisnamult Tenants & Residents Association, Lisnamult Community Enterprise, Roscommon Community Sports Committee

Members noted that a number of issues raised were previously dealt with in the meeting, including the ‘white land’ zoning in Lisnamult, the land use zoning at Edenville House and the Architectural Conservation Area. 

 

In respect of the request relating to the land use zoning of the GRETB / Youthreach, the Members noted that the ‘Outer Core’ zoning as per the Draft LAP is more flexible and therefore ACCEPTED the Chief Executive’s Recommendation of no change.

 

Submission No. 2.52 Eilish and Noel Feeley

Members noted that some issues raised were previously dealt with in the meeting, including in relation to Mote Park and Edenville House.

 

In respect of the issues raised in the submission in relation to Opportunity Site No. 7 The Spinney, the Members ACCEPTED the Chief Executive’s Recommendation of no change.

 

Submission No. 2.53 Councillor Orla Leyden

Members noted that several issues were dealt with already.

 

On the PROPOSAL of Cllr. Leyden

            SECONDED by Cllr. Shanagher

It was AGREED that the Draft LAP boundary to the North West be extended and that the additional land be zoned as ‘Greenbelt’ as previously identified in the Roscommon Town Local Area Plan 2014 – 2020.

 

Members provided a map to identify the area. 

 

Submission No. 2.54 Councillor Kathleen Shanagher

Members noted that all issues raised were dealt with earlier.

 

Submission No. 2.56 Councillor Marty McDermott (1 of 2 submissions)

Members noted that the issue raised was dealt with earlier.

 

Submission No. 2.57 Councillor Marty McDermott (2 of 2 submissions)

Members noted that the issue raised was dealt with earlier.

 

Submission No. 2.58 Church Street – Main Street Business

Members noted that the Chief Executive’s Recommendation refers to CE Recommendation No’s 2 and 3, which it earlier decided to defer.

 

Submission No. 2.59 Councillor Pascal Fitzmaurice

On the PROPOSAL of Cllr. Fitzmaurice

            SECONDED by Cllr. Leyden

It was AGREED that the two indicative link roads detailed in the submission be included on the maps for the Roscommon Town Local Area Plan 2024 – 2030, and located on the boundary of the green belt or just outside.

 

Members provided a map identifying the extent of the indicative link roads.

 

Submission No. 2.60 Property Owners & Residents Church Street c/o John Crean

Members noted that the Chief Executive’s Recommendation refers to CE Recommendation No’s 2 and 3 which it earlier decided to defer.

 

Submission No. 2.61 Castle Street Residents c/o Kathleen Holmes & Mary O’Hara

Members noted that the issue raised was dealt with earlier.

 

Submission No. 2.62 Sean Hanly c/o Gaynor Architectural & Design Services Ltd

The Members noted the contents of the submission and ACCEPTED the Chief Executive’s recommendation of no change.

 

Submission No. 2.63 County Roscommon Famine Commemoration Committee c/o Francis Beirne

The Chief Executive’s Recommendation of no change in response to matters raised in the submission was NOT ACCEPTED.

 

On the PROPOSAL of Cllr. Waldron

            SECONDED by Cllr. Dineen

It was AGREED to zone the area referred to as ‘Bullys Acre’ as ‘Community Infrastructure’ instead of ‘Agriculture’ as per the Draft LAP.

 

A map was provided to demonstrate the extent of the proposed rezoning.

 

Submission No. 2.65 Richard Keaveney

The Members noted the contents of the submission and ACCEPTED the Chief Executive’s recommendation of no change.

 

Submission No. 2.67 Irene Walsh

A discussion took place regarding the former Taggart Homes site at Ballinagard on the Galway Road.

On the PROPOSAL of Cllr. Fitzmaurice

            SECONDED by Cllr. Leyden

It was AGREED that a portion of the lands be zoned “New Residential.”

 

On the PROPOSAL of Cllr. Leyden

            SECONDED by Cllr. Fitzmaurice

It was AGREED to extend the Draft LAP boundary on the Galway Road to include this site according to the map provided.

 

Greg O’Donnell advised that this concluded consideration of all General Submissions and reminded that a number of Chief Executive’s Recommendations relating to the submission from the Office of the Planning Regulator had been deferred and now needed to be considered.

 

Submission for the Office of the Planning Regulator (OPR) continued

 

CE Recommendation No. 1

AGREED

 

To add the following text and associated footnote after the 3^rd paragraph in Section 5.3 (Promoting a Vibrant Town Centre) on page 28 of the Draft LAP:

Roscommon County Council, in recognition of national, regional and local level policy, seeks to actively reduce vacancy, revitalise and repopulate the urban environs of Roscommon town within the lifetime of the Plan. This can be delivered through funding mechanisms such as URDF and through development incentives.  With the latter in mind, the Council is committed to a re-examination of development contribution rates, in order to ensure that any new Development Contribution Scheme appropriately incentivises the development of identified Opportunity Sites, Vacant Sites,[2] Derelict Sites[3] and lands, which are subject to liability for the Residential Zoned Land Tax.[4]

In exceptional circumstances where centrally located, accessible, serviced lands remain undeveloped, the Council may consider interventions such as site assembly using CPO, demolition and clearance or and the provision of facilitating infrastructure.

 

CE Recommendation No. 2

AGREED

 

Toadd the following text at the end of Section 5.4 (Town Centre Living) on page 29 of the Draft LAP:

In addition to the specifically identified Opportunity Sites, which are generally readily accessible from the public domain, it is recognised that substantial backland areas also exist in the town centre, which have the potential to facilitate redevelopment and the creation of new well planned urban blocks, on a scale commensurate with the surroundings. Such backland areas are typically underutilised areas, in fragmented ownership, and located to therear of town centre buildings. Many examples of this are apparent immediately to the rear of buildings with street frontage, particularly onto Main Street.  While the piecemeal development of individual backland plots is generally not appropriate, such areas provide significant potential for the delivery of co-ordinated master planned development.  Opportunities of this nature will continue to be explored and promoted by Roscommon County Council during the lifetime of this Plan. Proactive approaches from and engagement with stakeholders is welcomed and encouraged. 

 

CE Recommendation No. 3

AGREED

 

To add the following policy objective after RN 20, Section 5.5, on page 31 of the Draft LAP and re-number all subsequent policy objectives accordingly:

Work with stakeholders to examine and identify opportunities to create additional non-vehicular access from the main thoroughfares of the ‘Town Core’ in order to facilitate the opening up of underutilised areas and provide for further improved connectivity in the town.

 

CE Recommendation No. 4

AGREED

 

To include the following additional text and associated footnotes after Section 4.2.1 (Residential Development Strategy) on page 21 of the Draft LAP:

 

4.2.2 Housing Yields

This Plan supports residential development on appropriate vacant, infill or brownfield lands within the central urban area of the town, and developed to accord with the Core Strategy requirements and development management standards of the Roscommon County Development Plan 2022-2028 and the recently published Sustainable Residential Development and Compact Settlements - Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2024).To this end, Residential Opportunity Sites have been identified (see Section 5.5 – Residential Opportunity Areas), with the identified lands considered to have the potential to accommodate suitably designed residential development schemes which reflect the principles set out in the above referenced Guidelines and which broadly align with the lower end of the density range[5] identified for Key Towns, such as Roscommon, as set out in the Guidelines.

On lands outside of the ‘Town Core’ and ‘Outer Core’ where a wide range of existing residential development types exist, including multi-unit housing developments of varying scales, densities and design concepts (but predominantly in semi-detached and detached two storey form), detached dwellings of individual design which have been developed as part of master planned serviced site initiatives, and also larger dwellings on independent, individual plots. New residential proposals in some of these areas may provide scope for increased densities beyond the broadly established patterns, subject to siting and design being demonstrated to accord with the principles set out in Section 4.0 (Quality Urban Design and Placemaking) and Section 5.0 (Development Standards for Housing) of the Sustainable Residential Development and Compact Settlements - Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2024). However, it remains vital that adequate consideration is given to the prevailing site context and character of the area and that the protection of existing residential amenity is ensured in all development proposals. Proposals will be assessed on a site specific case by case basis having regard to the above parameters. Early pre-planning engagement with the Planning Authority is encouraged, in order to ensure that the Planning Authority and stakeholders work collectively towards the creation of innovative housing developments, which provide attractive, liveable and well-designed homes for the growing community in the town. 

As outlined above, flexibility with density levels will enable the delivery of appropriate residential schemes, at a scale which allows their successful integration and assimilation into their settings. The delivery of residential schemes in the inner urban environs offer opportunities to maximise efficient use of serviced lands and create higher density developments with an average of 40 dwellings per hectare, subject to site specific considerations. This in turn will enable the appropriate consideration of slightly lower densities, with an average yield of c.30 dwelling per hectare on suburban ‘New Residential’ lands. As outlined above this advocated flexibility, will facilitate the delivery of housing units in accordance with the Core Strategy allocation for Roscommon town.       

CE Recommendation No. 7

AGREED

 

To include the following new section after Section 5.5 (Residential Opportunity Sites) on page 30 of the Draft LAP:

Section 5.6: Residential Density, Mix and Design

In recognition of its status as a ‘Key Town’ Roscommon County Council will aim to promote the achievement of higher densities in residential opportunity areas, subject to site specific considerations, good design and adherence to urban regeneration and development management standards as set out in Volume 1 of the Roscommon County Development Plan 2022-2028 and generally reflecting the principles set out in Section 4.0 (Quality Urban Design and Placemaking) and Section 5.0 (Development Standards for Housing) of the Sustainable Residential Development and Compact Settlements - Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2024).  

Subject to site assessment, consideration will be given to increasing prevailing heights, as this represents a key element in addressing the delivery of more compact growth in the central urban environs of Roscommon town. It is essential that developers appreciate the necessity to demonstrate optimal use of the capacity of sites in the ‘Town Core’ and ‘Outer Core’ where access to public transport, employment and community services exists.

The Council recognises that tenure is a fundamental consideration in the delivery of housing and acknowledges Section 6.6 of the National Planning Framework, which underpins the need to estimate the demand for different tenure types. Accordingly, it is appropriate and necessary to reflect national policy and demographic trends towards smaller housing sizes and both a continually diversifying and an ageing population. Residential delivery will need to provide a greater range of choice and options to meet the needs of all sectors within the community.

In order to continue to enhance the core urban areas of the town and create attractive places to live, the overall design and layout of new residential schemes should be of high quality and comply with the relevant policy objectives set out in both this Local Area Plan and the governing County Development Plan and appropriately reflects the principles and concepts set out in the Sustainable Residential Development and Compact Settlements - Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2024). 

CE Recommendation No. 8

AGREED

 

To add the following additional policy objective after RN 18 in Section 5.5 (Residential Opportunity Areas) on page 31 of the Draft LAP and re-number all subsequent policy objectives:

RN (TBC): Encourage and assist stakeholders in the preparation of coordinated, urban design frameworks/masterplans for the Opportunity Sites identified in the ‘Town Core’ and ‘Outer Core’ in order to ensure that the principles set out in the Sustainable Residential Development and Compact Settlements, Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2024) are appropriately reflected. 

CE Recommendation No. 17

AGREED

 

To add the following policy objective before RN 27 in Section 7.4 (Roscommon Town Approaches and Movement Study (RTAMS)) on page 46 of the Draft LAP and re-number all subsequent policy objectives accordingly: 

 

RN (TBC):  Ensure development proposals which may affect national roads within or adjacent to the Plan boundary have regard to the requirements of the Spatial Planning and National Roads Guidelines (DTTS, 2012) and the Traffic and Transport Assessment Guidelines (TII, 2014).

 

In response to Members queries on the next steps in the plan making process, Mary Grier, Senior Planner confirmed that amendments will be made to the Draft Roscommon Town Local Area Plan as proposed and outlined the remainder of the process that will take place.  The Material Alterations will be placed on public display within three weeks from today and will be referred to the Prescribed Bodies.  During the public consultation period of 4 weeks, submissions or observations may be made on the Material Alterations only.  A further Chief Executive’s Report will be prepared in early July on foot of any submissions received.  Following this, Members will then meet for final consideration and making of the Plan.  The new Plan becomes effective six weeks from the date of the final meeting.