Castlebar car-parking levy ‘a disincentive’ – developers

€116k charge dubbed a backward step in town centre’s future development

Anton McNulty

The developers proposing to develop a derelict site on Castlebar’s Main Street have described the car-parking levy imposed on them by the county council as ‘punitive’ and a ‘disincentive’ to further town centre development.
Castlebar-based Jackita Ltd was granted planning permission by Mayo County Council to demolish an existing derelict building on Main Street and construct a new commercial and retail unit, part two-storey and part three-storey. The site compromises of 0.17 hectares and borders onto Castle Street Car Park.
Permission was granted subject to 17 conditions, one of which related to development levies, including €116,718 as a contribution for car parking.
Unhappy with the levy, Jackita Ltd – the company directors of which are Vicki Staunton, David Staunton, Anne Staunton, Jack Staunton and Megan Staunton – lodged an appeal with An Bord PleanΡla.
In the appeal lodged by Niall Taylor of Taylor Architects on behalf of Jackita, it was stated that Jackita hoped the development would be a ‘template for future development of a new streetscape onto the Castle Street Car Park’.
Mr Taylor said they hoped to develop the site in two phases, and that they believed the levy would make both phases of the development unviable.
“We submit that the financial contribution of €116,700 is punitive and should be removed,” Mr Taylor wrote in the appeal. “The car parking levy imposed makes not only the scheme under phase one unviable financially given the construction costs, achievable rents etc, but also makes phase two and any future developments of the backlands unviable. Such a levy therefore is, in our opinion, a retrograde or backward step in the future development of Castlebar town centre.”
The current derelict building had previously housed two retail units. These were destroyed by a fire in the mid-2000s. The nature of the new development is to be part retail and part commercial spread over three floors and a basement, with a ground floor of 520,665 square metres.
Mayo County Council had initially expressed concerns over the scale of the development but, after amendments were made to the plan, granted planning permission in February.
In granting planning permission, the council’s planners report stated that the development will ‘contribute to the much needed rejuvenation of the Main Street and will also represent a significant move towards the redevelopment of vacant land to the rear of Main Street and allowing for the development of a new streetscape along Castle Street car park’.
The planners also stated that there was a shortfall of 49 proposed car parking spaces for the proposed scheme. Mr Taylor disputed this claiming there was adequate existing car parking in the town to serve the retail operations in the town.
The appeal also pointed out that the Development Plan for the town stated that ‘rigid adherence to [car-parking requirements] will not be required. It will often be more appropriate to utilise public parking or multi-storey car parks’.
Mr Taylor said that the car-parking requirements were not appropriate for a town-centre project designed to rejuvenate Main Street, and that as a result the levy was unjustified.
An Bord PleanΡla are due to give their decision in July.