Locals discuss seeking judicial review of planning grant for Galway housing estate

Residents in Rosshill are to to consider a High Court judicial review after An Bord Pleanála granted permission for the development of 102 homes on the former Par 3 golf course there.

Planners gave the green light to Alber Developments to proceed with phase one of what was previously a 342-unit development that was turned down by the Board after it was branded a ‘substandard’ form of development on the site.

With 33 planning conditions attached, the Strategic Housing Development (SHD) application submitted for Rosshill Manor in July was successful despite Galway City Council’s opposition.

SHD legislation is used to fast-track proposals for more than 100 residential units by submitting applications directly to An Bord Pleanála after consultations with local authority planners.

Phase one of the development includes for 11 one-bed apartments; 24 two-bed apartments; 11 four-bed houses; and 56 three bed-houses.

Also included is a childcare facility and car parking (14 spaces), along with retail and commercial space.

Each housing unit is to be provided with two car parking spaces, amounting to 130 in total, with a further 134 bicycle parking spaces.

For each apartment, there would be one car parking space, with one visitor car space for every four apartments, giving a total of 43 spaces. One bicycle space per apartment bedroom, with a visitor space for every two apartments amounts to 77 in total.

The planning application commits to access and junction improvements at Rosshill Road and Rosshill Stud Farm Road, with the provision of a footpath connectivity link along both routes.

In a submission to An Bord Pleanála, Chief Executive of Galway City Council Brendan McGrath recommended a refusal of permission, stating that it would “constitute overdevelopment” of the site and “would be significantly out of character with the established pattern of development in the area”.

Mr McGrath said the development would be “premature” due to the “existing deficiency of pedestrian, cycling and public transport infrastructure on the road network serving the area” and would result in “traffic congestion in the area”.

Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII) also objected to the proposal and said a grant of permission would set a precedent that “would adversely affect the operation and safety of the national road network”.

Conditions attached to the grant of permission include a stipulation that the developer must, prior to commencing works, enter an agreement with Galway City Council over requirements for social and affordable housing as part of the scheme – with up to 20% required under the amended Planning and Development Act.

There is also a stipulation that ‘cuckoo funds’ – corporate investors that buy up property for letting – will be restricted and all houses must be occupied by individual purchasers.

The conditions demand that the development should be carried out on a phased basis and that “no dwelling shall be occupied” until the Rosshill Road junction is realigned and a footpath link completed.

No more than 50% of dwellings can be occupied prior to the completion of the childcare facility “unless the developer can demonstrate to the written satisfaction” of the City Council that a childcare facility is not needed.

The board has instructed that roof garden that was included in the application must be moved to an area mooted for carparking spaces, resulting in the loss of 14 spaces – and that 10% of all communal car parking spaces must be provided with electric vehicle charging points.

No additional development is permitted to take place above roof parapet level, including lift motors, air conditioning systems, storage tanks or telecommunication equipment.

A spokesperson for the Rosshill Residents’ Association confirmed to the Galway City Tribune that locals were considering their options.

“We are going to have a meeting on Sunday evening to look at it. Our only option now is judicial review, which is an expensive option, but we are going to discuss it,” said the spokesperson.

The belief locally was that this development was simply a way of getting the previously rejected proposal for 342 units “in through the back door”.