Questions raised over extent of Gaelscoil’s plans for new school

CLARE County Council has raised some issues regarding Gaelscoil Donncha Rua’s new school development and sought further information. 
In the further information request, it says that there is a question about the site area.
The local authority suggests that elements of the design are outside the developable boundary of the application.
The Council stated, “It is noted that the site area for this application as outlined in red on the details as submitted with the application, does not extend as far as the roadside edge with the Bealach Brí road and as a result aspects of the proposed development, including the new vehicular entrance from the Bealach Brí road and the proposed pedestrian access from the bus set down area, do not appear within the developable boundary of the application. 
“It is not clear therefore if the applicant has sufficient legal interest to develop these particular items, which are considered to be integral aspects of this proposal. You are therefore invited to clarify same and to clearly outline the full extent of lands within the applicant’s control”.
The request also says there are “a number of concerns” regarding the traffic safety implications of the development.
Firstly it stated that “a more detailed mobility plan is required for the proposed development, to provide for additional measures as to how congestion in the wider area is to be addressed at drop-off/pick up time, to provide counts of traffic associated with the school and to ensure that active travel measures in the wider Shannon Town are incorporated into traffic considerations for this site”.
It added “the provision of a two metre wide footpath and two metre wide cycleway along the eastern boundary of this site, adjacent to the Bóthar Buí is required. Please submit details as to how this may be facilitated.”
It also said that there are concerns regarding the design of the proposed turning circle at the southern part of the site, and the implications it could have for traffic congestion.
The Council noted additional overflow car parking provision may be required and that there were concerns about a proposed turning bay at the northern part of the site, located in an area also designated for play.
The request for further information also said, “It is noted that the footprint of the development is confined to the southern area of the subject site.
“The Planning Authority considers that the development of the northern part of the site, to address the adjoining roads may be more appropriate in terms of urban design street definition. You are invited to comment on same and outline if it is envisaged that future applications are to be made on this part of the site.”
Meanwhile the school have had an application for an extension to the duration of planning permission for the installation of a two classroom portacabin with toilet faciliies and perimeter fencing, and retention of an existing resource room portacabin, rejected.
In the planners report on the application, it states that the works which permission was being sought for an extension to carry out, have already been completed. It said this meant that the application must be considered under Section 42.
However, it found that the application does not meet its requirements.
“Section 42 of the Planning & Development Act 2000, as amended, provides that an application to extend the appropriate period of a permission can be made to enable the development to which the permission relates to be completed.
“In this instance the permission as granted under Planning Reference 16/301, restricts the appropriate period for five years, after which the condition requires the structure to be removed or a new application made to retain same.
“The current application to extend the appropriate period of Planning Reference 16/301 does not meet the relevant requirements stated in Section 42 of the Planning & Development Act 2000, as amended, and an extension is not therefore permitted in this instance.”

by Owen Ryan