Hazelwood garden extension meets strong opposition

A PLANNING application to alter the boundary of a house in Hazelwood, Clonroadmore, Ennis, to increase a back garden and build a two-metre high wall, would mean the loss of a communal green space in the estate if granted, according to Ennis town Councillor Johnny Flynn, who has objected to the proposal.

He is concerned that if permission is granted to Rhona and Thierry Gomes of 52, Hazelwood, allowing them to alter the boundary of their property for the purposes of an increased rear garden size and to include the construction of a two-metre high wall around the perimeter of land adjacent to their property, that it will lead to “an open season for builders to sell off strips of green space within existing housing estates”.
Councillor Flynn is one of 20 people, who have made submissions to the planning application, lodged with Ennis Town Council in early November.
In his objection to the proposal, the councillor explained that the effect of granting planning permission in this case would be “the loss of existing communal green space at the entrance to the Hazelwood Estate, into private ownership”. In his submission, he said, “The area involved has been maintained and planted with trees/flowers by the residents’ association at their own cost for over 16 years. The set-back green area defines the entrance to the estate and in the centre is located the large rock engraved with the estate name.”
“In common law, I understand that public rights of way on lands over which communal usage exists for over 12 years uinterrupted are legally established. This would appear to be the case here as I am unaware of correspondences informing residents to stop using the communal green space.”
Councillor Flynn also contends that the granting of this planning application would block off and enclose the existing green area, which he believes would be contrary to planning permission originally granted for the development of Hazelwood Estate itself.
Councillor Flynn’s objection also states, “I understand this estate has been taken in charge by Ennis Town Council and that all common areas, including this green space, may well be vested in law to the town council under the relevant roads act utilised to take in charge. The granting of permission to remove this communal green space, located at the entrance to Hazelwood Park and housing the large stone engraved estate sign would be contrary to objectives four, seven, nine and 15 of the Ennis and Environs Development Plan 2008 in general and to objectives 10 and 19 in particular. The two latter objectives aspire to make provision for the creation of high-quality public spaces and ensure that both new and existing residential areas are able to forge individual neighbourhood identities.”
He further comments that the granting of this planning application would “fly in the face” of the provisions of national sustainable residential development in urban areas guidelines, as “it would not strike a right balance between functions of the street including sense of place nor ensure support of sense of place and identifiable public realm”. “Just like buildings, the form and character of the public realm ought to be considered and designed as an entity rather than be regarded as the space that is left over between buildings. The communal green space area may be seen as incidental to the applicant and the original developer but it has been used by residents and kids living along this road and cared for, for over 16 years,” he added.
Councillor Flynn’s objection also comments, “In light of the planning application being considered and the number of objections from the established ocmmunity, granting such a proposal to return communal green spaces to private ownership would result in social division, possible enrichment of a few to the detriment of many and the common, declare open season for selling off or building on existing green spaces in private estates throughout Ennis, damage constitutional property rights of residents based on legitimate expectation that green spaces at the time of purchase of homes would remain so to protect the value and amenity of their homes. I would ask that this planning application be not granted for reasons outlined above and in particular to put down a marker that such communal green spaces will be protected from threat of being walled off, sold off or built on.”
The councillor also confirmed that out of 54 houses in the Hazelwood Estate, 30 have signed a group objection to the planning application, whilst 18 households also sent in individual objections.
Kathleen Allen, treasurer of the Hazelwood Residents’ Assocation, who have also made a submission on the planning application, said that the effect of granting the application would be removal of residents’ distinctive entrance, rock, green space, trees, planting area, all of which were maintained by them for approximately 16 years. “The communal green space would be blocked off into private ownership.
“When we bought our houses, based on original planning permission granted, all maps, brochures and so on showed the site associated with above planning as green area. We have used the area and maintained it for 16 years,” she said.
A decision is due on the planning application in the near future.