Bord Pleanala says no to Johnstown project

Plans to demolish a landmark building in Johnstown village, Navan, and construct a mixed use development in its place have been refused by Bord Pleanala. Laurence McLoughlin Ltd had appealed a decision by Meath County Council refusing its application to knock down the existing buildings and build a development of two-, three- and four-storeys at Johnstown. The appeals board agreed with the planning authority's decision to refuse the planning. Observers included local named individuals, and the Johnstown Residents' Committee. The site of 0.63 hectares is located on a pivotal site within the original village of Johnstown, Bord Pleanala planning inspector, Lorraine Dockery, said. Johnstown is characterised by small-scale, low rise development, with the maximum heights of new build generally being three storeys. The subject site was considered to be an important landmark site within the village core, located at the junction of three roads, has prominent street frontage and currently contains four structures, one of which is an attractive two-storey vernacular stone building. It also contains three newer single storey, detached dwellings, none of which would appear to be occupied, the inspector added. The proposed new accommodation comprised 805 square metres ground floor retail in seven units, with 939 square metres self-contained office units on ground, first and second floors facing the existing road. Residential accommodation proposed comprised 34 apartments, comprising 32 two-bed units and two three-bed units, each with own private open space and opening onto landscaped shred open spaces. The proposal also provides for 137 car parking spaces at basement level with an additional surface car park for 25 cars adjacent to the new road entrance. Meath County Council had refused planning approval for three reasons: the overshadowing of existing properties in the vicinity, excessive density, and the fact that the scale, design and height would constitute gross overdevelopment and over-intensification of use of the site, would be highly obtrusive, would seriously injure the visual and residential amenity of the area and depreciate the value of residential property in the vicinity. The proposed development would therefore constitute an inappropriate design response to the existing context of the site, making a radical change in the form of the area, at odds with the established character of Johnstown, it said. In its appeal, McLoughlin Ltd contended that the proposal would not cause a significant degree of overshadowing of adjoining sites, did not constitute excessive residential density, would not be visually obtrusive, be an overdevelopment or over-intensification of use of the site, cause injury to the visual and residential amenities or a reduction in the value of properties in the area. The developer also contended that the necessary lands were within its ownership or control in order to provide the required sightlines for exiting the site. Ms Dockery stated she had no objection in principle to the proposal for a mixed-use development on this site and, in principle, considered it to be in accordance with the zoning objective for the area. There is much discussion within the appeal and application as to whether this area of Johnstown should be classified as a village or as an extension of Navan town, she said. "Having visited the site and its environs and having examined the file, I would concur with the planning authority that the village designation is appropriate in this instance. While I concur that, slowly, over time, much of the lands between the subject area and the core of Navan will presumably be developed and that this area may become subsumed into Navan town, it must be acknowledged that, at the present time, this area of old Johnstown village retains its rural character and village feel. "This is reflected in the zoning for the area which is stated to protect, provide for and improve local shopping and service facilities in Johnstown village. I therefore consider that any development on this site should reflect the village status in terms of density, design and layout and should reflect the ability of the village to absorb any such development." She concurred with the opinion of some of the observers who stated that the existing two-storey, stone-fronted shop adds to the character of the village and is an example of vernacular architecture within the village. The inspector went on: "Normally, I would be of the opinion that this structure should be retained, where possible, within any redevelopment of the site. However, in this instance, I do acknowledge that sightlines are poor at the junction, due primarily to the location of this structure and, in this instance, accept that its removal would improve the situation greatly. With regards to the demolition of the remainder of the structures, I do not have undue concerns as they add little or nothing to the character of the village in their current state." She had serious reservations in relation to the design of the proposed development and considered that the scale, massing, repetitive elevations and palette of materials of the proposed development, together with the highly contemporary design was such that it could be located in any large urban area, but does not relate to this small village. The proposed rounded element at the western end of the site would be highly visible as one travels from Navan and does not relate to anything within the village. The proposed development does not create a sense of place and in my opinion, is too 'urban' at this location, Ms Dockery concluded.