An Bord Pleanála refuse Louisburgh development

An Bord Pleanála refuses Louisburgh development


Anton McNulty

AN Bord Pleanala over-ruled one of their own inspectors when they recommended that a 45 residential unit development in Louisburgh be refused planning permission despite their inspector giving it the go-ahead.
The proposed development located at Clooncarrabaun, Chapel Street, Louisburgh consisting of 45 residential units, retail/office space and associated site development works was given planning permission by Mayo County Council on March 12, 2008, but was appealed to An Bord Pleanala (ABP) by the Western Regional Fisheries Board.
The southern site boundary is formed by the Bunowen River and the WRFB - who were the only appellant - claimed that the development would lead to an increased risk of flooding which could have adverse impact on the existing fishery and habitat, as well as the angling amenity of the river. The ABP inspector disagreed with the appeal but he was over-ruled by the Board who were not satisfied that the site would not be at risk of flooding or that the development would have an adverse impact on flooding outside the site.
The proposed development by the applicant Patrick Corrigan comprised of six blocks of mixed use but predominantly residential development with 35 bed spaces. A flood risk assessment was submitted with the planning application and concluded that the proposed development would have an insignificant impact on the Bunowen River.
Local councillor, Austin Francis O’Malley told The Mayo News that the decision to refuse planning permission was ‘outrageous’ and felt decisions like this would deter any potential investment in the area.
“This development is right beside the town of Louisburgh and in times like this, these decisions stifle growth and the creation of jobs in the area. My initial reaction was that this is an outrageous decision when we need every job that can be created. Mayo County Council gave it its blessing, the board inspector also gave the ok but some other guy in his wisdom decides to overturn it. This development would have knitted in nicely with the town and the spin-offs would have been enormous. It would have been a massive boost to the area and these types of decisions are bound to put people off investing in towns like Louisburgh,” he said.
In a response to the WRFB objection, the applicant’s agent, AP McCarthy Consultants Ltd said there would be no impact on flood levels downstream of the appeal site and minimal effects on flood water levels upstream of the site.In his report, ABP Inspector Andrew Hubbard said he did not consider the proposed development would give rise to any adverse impact in relation to flooding or to the ecology and habitat of the Bunowen River. He also added that the infrastructure of Louisburgh has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed development and recommended that the decision to grant permission to be upheld subject to 24 conditions.
However, ABP decided not to accept their own inspector’s recommendations and refused the application. They said the development would be located on a flood plain and prone to flooding and were not satisfied the proposed development would not result in an unacceptable risk of flooding.