None of 14 objections to a proposed Special Amenity Area Order for Howth peninsula, under which more than half its total land would be protected, is sustainable, an inquiry into the proposed order heard yesterday.
Mr Brendan McGrath, a chartered town planner, who co-ordinated the Howth project for Fingal County Council, told the inquiry three of the objections in fact supported the proposed order.
The order, which was presented to the council in February, covers an area of 547 hectares. It takes in Ireland's Eye and the southern and eastern parts of the Howth peninsula and is mainly natural and semi-natural habitat with some low-density housing.
Mr McGrath outlined the objectives under three headings - to enhance the area; to preserve its character or special features and to prevent and limit development. Its scope is far wider than that originally envisaged by Mr Brendan Howlin, then minister for the environment in 1996, , who directed the council to make an order for the area.
It includes a "buffer zone" incorporating Howth Castle demesne and the imposition of levies on all new developments in Howth, ranging from £100 to £1,000.
Among those who would be most affected is Mr Christopher Gaisford-St Lawrence, of Howth Castle, who owns 319 hectares in the area. He submitted an objection to regulations in the order which say some types of development, which previously did not require permission, now would.
Mr McGrath said the order would not affect Mr St Lawrence's proposed development. Though details of his planned development were not given, they were referred to by Mr McGrath as "rural development". "Howth is not a rural area," he said, "and otherwise exempted categories of rural development require planning permission." The order was therefore partially incorrect, he said, "as rural categories of exempted development should not have been listed as `development which was previously exempt from permission' ". Also objecting were Allenspark Ltd, Parshall Ltd, and Lowestoft Ltd. Their objection related to the East Mountain and adjoining lands. In response to their arguments that the order did not provide sufficient land for residential development and the imposition of a levy on the whole peninsula was unreasonable, Mr McGrath said the special amenity area should not be viewed in isolation.
"The designated area accounts for only just over half of the Howth peninsula, which itself is only a small part of the north-eastern part of the city. Policy issues relating to land for residential use . . . should be addressed at this spatial scale," he said. The imposition of planning levies was considered "reasonable . . . to part fund capital amenity works" such as way-marked trails, beach facilities and carparking facilities.
Further objections related to the management of public pathways and worries about the development of private gardens.
The inquiry continues today in the offices of Fingal County Council in O'Connell Street.
