CONTROVERSY around the issue of so-called ‘in-fill sites’ has led to an application by a young couple for a house in Kilkishen being rejected, twice over.
The application to build a one-off house at Teeronea was turned down by county planners last year. Following an inspection of the site, and consideration of national and local guidelines, An Bord Pleanála has now copperfastened that decision.
Both the Council and the appeals board found that the creation of an in-fill, or what the local authority described as “gap sites”, would be contrary to the County Development Plan 2017-2023.
An Bord Pleanála also stated that the couple had failed to satisfy the requirement to prove a local housing need. That was despite the fact that one of the applicants attended national school in Kilkishen.
Commenting on the general principle of in-fill sites, Councillor PJ Kelly, who highlighted the issue earlier this year, described the situation as “crazy and vexatious”.
“An in-fill site is created when there is a space made between two existing houses,” he explained.
“That becomes an issue in areas where there is high pressure, where the population has increased between one Census and the next. When an in-fill is created, someone from an urban area can come into a rural one and build. For that reason, planners took corrective action to stop the creation of in-fills altogether.
“However, that has now led to local people being refused planning permission if their proposed house is going to create one or more in-fill sites. It’s crazy and it doesn’t make sense.”
The West Clare councillor has called for the concept of in-fill sites to be removed from the forthcoming County Development Plan for 2023-2029. Councillor Kelly said the issue is creating widespread problems in areas like his native Lissycasey and other locations defined as being under urban pressure. He also noted that many councillors are unaware of the problems that can arise and the impact of the in-fill site ban in certain parts of the county.
“Some members were not aware of this until I raised it,” he said. “Even if an area’s population increases by one person from one Census to the next, the area can be labelled a pressure zone and then the in-fill ban creates a problem.”
The application in question was made in July of last year for single storey/part two-storey home on a site located in a rural area at the northern edge of Kilkishen village, just over 7km north of Sixmilebridge. The site is accessed from the R462 regional road within a 60kph zone. There were no objections to the development and a representation was made by Councillor Joe Cooney.
In December of last year, the Council refused permission to the applicants, both of whom are currently living and working overseas, on the basis that the house would “give rise to undesireable ribbon development along the public road, outside the settlement boundary of Kilkishen”.
In their appeal to An Bord Pleanála, the applicants said that they did not know what the landowner’s future intentions were for the remainder of the landholding.
They also contended that the appeal site is beside the settlement boundary of Kilkishen village and that the site was previously zoned where positive discussions took place with Clare County Council with respect to the provision of a number of housing units on the land.
The applicants also asked that the Appeals Board consider imposing a Section 47 condition. That would require the sterilising of the remainder of the landholding, with the landowner’s permission.
The appeal also stated that the applicants chose to apply for permission on this sustainable serviced site instead of applying for permission on family-owned lands around three kilometres away. It contended too that the design of the house would assist in knitting it into the fabric of the village.
During an assessment of the appeal, Planning Inspector, Liam Bowe, of An Bord Pleanála referred to the National Planning Framework (NPF), the Sustainable Rural Housing Guidelines (SRHG) and the County Development Plan.
Both the NPF and the SRHG require that planning authorities differentiate between rural housing demand arising from rural housing need and housing demand that arises from proximity to cities and towns.
It was noted that the site is in an Area of Special Control, and, because of its location, is under strong urban pressure. In respect of the County Development plan, the inspector noted that policy only permits further rural housing in such locations when the applicant is a “local rural person”, works full-time or part-time in a rural area; or can demonstrate exceptional health and/or family circumstances.
Despite the fact that one of the applicants provided evidence of attendance at Kilkishen National School for eight years, the inspector found they “had not demonstrated any economic or social need to live in this rural area that meets the requirements of the rural housing policy”.
He said he was “not satisfied that information provided forms a clear basis for compliance with rural housing policy set out in the development plan or forms a basis for a need to live at this rural location”.
Mr Bowe also said that: “The siting of new dwellings in the countryside so as to deliberately create a gap site of this nature will not be permitted.”