Minutes 2024

Minutes of Special Meeting of Sligo County Council to Consider The Draft Sligo County Development Plan 2024-2030 and The Second Chief Executive’s Report on Submissions and Observations relating to The Draft CDP 2024-2030 held at 9.30 am on Monday 15th April 2024 in The Council Chamber, County Hall, Riverside, Sligo.

COUNCILLORS PRESENT:

Councillor Baker
Councillor Casserly
Councillor Clarke
Councillor Connolly
Councillor Fox
Councillor Gibbons
Councillor Gilroy
Councillor Healy
Councillor MacSharry
Councillor Maguire
Councillor Mullaney
Councillor Mulvey
Councillor O’Boyle
Councillor O’Grady
Councillor Queenan
Councillor Taylor
Councillor Walsh

OFFICIALS IN ATTENDANCE:

Mr. Martin Lydon, Chief Executive
Ms. Dorothy Clarke, Director of Services
Mr. Frank Moylan, Senior Planner
Ms. Mihaela Davidescu, Senior Executive Planner
Ms. Leonora McConville, Executive Planner
Mr. Barry Ward, Executive Planner
Ms. Sinéad Branley, Meetings Administrator
Ms. Pauline Lavelle, Staff Officer
Ms. Jo-Anne McGonigle, A/Staff Officer
Mr. Francis Conboy, IS Technical Support Officer

CATHAOIRLEACH:

Cathaoirleach, Councillor Gerard Mullaney, presided.

APOLOGIES:

Apologies were received from Councillor Bree.

ARRANGEMENTS FOR MEETING:

The Cathaoirleach welcomed all present to the meeting, adding that today is an extremely important day for this Council and that decisions made today will have far reaching implications for the future of this county. The Cathaoirleach advised Members that lunch will be provided in the canteen at 12.30pm.

INTORDUCTION TO SECOND CHIEF EXECUTIVE'S REPORT ON SUBMISSIONS AND OBSERVATIONS RELATING TO THE DRAFT COUNTY DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2017-2023:

Senior Planner, Mr. Moylan advised that, following a request from Members, a hard copy of the Draft County Development Plan 2024-2030 and the Second Chief Executive’s Report is available in the Chamber for the Members to use during the day. The format of the document was explained to Members at the Workshop held on Friday 12th April last in terms of Volume 1, Volume 2 and the two appendices which contain all the proposed amendments that flow out of the submissions received.

The Second Chief Executive’s Report summarised the submissions by breaking them into issues. The Chief Executive offered an opinion and a recommendation on each issue of each submission. The recommendation was either to keep the Draft Plan unchanged or to make a change to the Draft Plan. Where a change was recommended, the additional text or the text to be deleted was included in the recommendation.

On the following pages of these Minutes:

where the Members agreed with the Chief Executive’s recommendation to keep the Draft Plan unchanged, this is marked as “No change”.
where the Members agreed with the Chief Executive’s recommendation to change the Draft Plan, this is marked as “Agreed”.
where the Members rejected the Chief Executive’s recommendation for either change or no change, a vote was taken on the respective issue. This is marked as “Proposed by ... Seconded by ...” and followed by the outcome, i.e. “AGREED” + the text or modification that was agreed.
where any of the Members put forward a motion for a change to the Draft Plan, a vote was taken on the respective issue. This is marked as “Proposed by Councillor ... & Seconded by Councillor ...” and followed by the outcome, either “AGREED” + the text or modification that was agreed, or “Lost”.

SECOND CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S REPORT ON SUBMISSIONS AND OBSERVATIONS RELATING TO THE DRAFT COUNTY DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2024-2030:

VOLUME 1 – RESPONSES TO SUBMISSIONS ON VOLUME ONE OF THE DRAFT COUNTY DEVELOPMENT PLAN:

Mr. Moylan informed the meeting that submissions in Volume 1 of the document would be taken first and then handed over to Ms. Davidescu to take the Members through it.

VOLUME 1 – RESPONSES TO SUBMISSIONS

SUBMISSIONS FROM PRESCRIBED BODIES:

SECTION 4: SUBMISSION 184– OFFICE OF THE PLANNING REGULATOR (OPR):

Submission 184, from the Office of the Planning Regulator (OPR) is legally required to be addressed first in the report. The issues raised in the submission contains five recommendations and seven observations. The Planning Section went through each of the items in detail.

Issue 1 – no change
Issue 2 – agreed
Issue 3 – no change
Issue 4 – no change
Issue 5 – no change
Issue 6 – no change
Issue 7 – agreed
Issue 8 – no change
Issue 9 – no change
Issue 10 – no change
Issue 11 – agreed
Issue 12 – no change
Issue 13 – agreed
Issue 14 – agreed
Issue 15 – agreed
Issue 16 - no change
Issue 17 – agreed
Issue 18 – agreed
Issue 19 – agreed
Issue 20 – agreed.

SECTION 5: SUBMISSION 103– NORTHERN & WESTERN REGIONAL ASSEMBLY (NWRA):

Issue 1 – no change
Issue 2 – agreed
Issue 3 – agreed
Issue 4 – no change
Issue 5 – no change
Issue 6 – agreed
Issue 7 – no change
Issue 8 – agreed
Issue 9 – no change
Issue 10 – no change
Issue 11 – agreed
Issue 12 – no change
Issue 13 – no change
Issue 14 – no change
Issue 15 – no change
Issue 16 - no change
Issue 17 – no change
Issue 18 – no change
Issue 19 – agreed
Issue 20 – no change.

SECTION 6: SUBMISSION 124– DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING, LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND HERITAGE (DHLGH) - DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS UNIT (DAU)

Issue 1 – agreed
Issue 2 – agreed
Issue 3 – agreed
Issue 4 – agreed
Issue 5 – agreed
Issue 6 – agreed
Issue 7 – agreed
Issue 8 – no change
Issue 9 – no change
Issue 10 – no change
Issue 11 – no change
Issue 12 – agreed
Issue 13 – no change
Issue 14 – no change
Issue 15 – no change

VOLUME 1 – RESPONSES TO SUBMISSIONS

SECTION 7: SUBMISSIONS FROM OTHE PRESCRIBED BODIES

SUBMISSION 1 – HEALTH & SAFETY AUTHORITY:

No change.

SUBMISSION 9 – DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT

Agreed.

SUBMISSION 19 – EPA, SEA SECTION, OFFICE OF RADIATION PROTECTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING

Issue 1 – no change
Issue 2 – no change
Issue 3 – no change
Issue 4 – no change
Issue 5 – no change

SUBMISSION 47 – TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE IRELAND (TII)

Issue 1 – agreed
Issue 2 – agreed
Issue 3 – no change
Issue 4 – agreed
Issue 5 – no change
Issue 6 – agreed
Issue 7 – no change
Issue 8 – no change
Issue 9 – agreed
Issue 10 – agreed
Issue 11 – agreed
Issue 12 – no change
Issue 13 – agreed
Issue 14 – agreed
Issue 15 – no change
Issue 16 - no change
Issue 17 – no change
Issue 18 – no change
Issue 19 – no change
Issue 20 – no change.

SUBMISSION 73 – OFFICE OF PUBLIC WORKS (OPW)

Issue 1 – no change
Issue 2 – agreed
Issue 3 – no change
Issue 4 – no change
Issue 5 – no change
Issue 6 – no change
Issue 7 – agreed
Issue 8 – no change
Issue 9 – no change
Issue 10 – agreed
Issue 11 – agreed
Issue 12 – agreed
Issue 13 – agreed
Issue 14 – agreed
Issue 15 – no change
Issue 16 - no change
Issue 17 – agreed
Issue 18 – agreed
Issue 19 – no change
Issue 20 – agreed
Issue 21 – no change

At this point in the meeting, Cathaoirleach, Councillor Mullaney, advised that all comments will be taken when the submissions from the prescribed bodies, and motions thereon, have been heard, and Volume 1 completed.

SUBMISSION 76 – DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Issue 1 – agreed
Issue 2 – no change
Issue 3 – no change
Issue 4 – no change
Issue 5 – no change
Issue 6 – no change

SUBMISSION 102 – NATIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY (NTA)

Issue 1 – agreed
Issue 2 – no change
Issue 3 – no change
Issue 4 – agreed
Issue 5 – no change
Issue 6 – no change
Issue 7 – no change
Issue 8 – agreed
Issue 9 – no change
Issue 10 – no change

SUBMISSION 109 – ELECTRICITY SUPPLY BOARD (ESB)

Issue 1 – no change
Issue 2 – agreed
Issue 3 – no change
Issue 4 – agreed
Issue 5 – agreed
Issue 6 – agreed
Issue 7 – agreed
Issue 8 – agreed
Issue 9 – agreed
Issue 10 – no change
Issue 11 – agreed
Issue 12 – no change

SUBMISSION 113 – ARTS COUNCIL

Issue 1 – agreed
Issue 2 – agreed
Issue 3 – no change
Issue 4 – agreed
Issue 5 – no change
Issue 6 – no change to Chapter 33 of the Draft Plan
Issue 7 – no change
Issue 8 – agreed
Issue 9 –no change

SUBMISSION 119 – UISCE ÉIREANN

Issue 1 – no change
Issue 2 – no change
Issue 3 – no change
Issue 4 – no change
Issue 5 – no change
Issue 6 – no change
Issue 7 – no change
Issue 8 – no change
Issue 9 – no change
Issue 10 – no change
Issue 11 – no change
Issue 12 - agreed
Issue 13 – agreed
Issue 14 – no change
Issue 15 – agreed
Issue 16 - no change
Issue 17 – agreed
Issue 18 – agreed
Issue 19 – no change
Issue 20 – agreed
Issue 21 – no change
Issue 22 – agreed
Issue 23 – agreed
Issue 24 – agreed
Issue 25 – no such issue in CE report (Page 144)
Issue 26 – agreed
Issue 27 – agreed
Issue 28 – no change
Issue 29 – agreed
Issue 30 – agreed
Issue 31 – agreed
Issue 32 – agreed
Issue 33 – agreed
Issue 34 – agreed
Issue 35 – agreed
Issue 36 - agreed
Issue 37 – agreed
Issue 38 – no change

SUBMISSION 150 – PLANNING ADVISORY DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, CLIMATE & COMMMUNICATIONS

Issue 1 – no change
Issue 2 – agreed
Issue 3 – agreed
Issue 4 – no change
Issue 5 – no change
Issue 6 – no change
Issue 7 – no change
Issue 8 – no change
Issue 9 – no change
Issue 10 – no change
Issue 11 – no change
Issue 12 – no change

SUBMISSION 194 – FÁILTE IRELAND

Issue 1 – no change
Issue 2 – agreed
Issue 3 – no change
Issue 4 – no change
Issue 5 – agreed
Issue 6 – no change
Issue 7 – agreed
Issue 8 – no change
Issue 9 – no change
Issue 10 – agreed
Issue 11 – agreed
Issue 12 – no change
Issue 13 – agreed
Issue 14 – agreed

SUBMISSION 209 – HSE / NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICE

No change.

This concluded the submissions to the Draft Plan from prescribed bodies.

MOTIONS:

Senior Planner, Mr. Moylan, advised that, with the agreement of the Cathaoirleach, he would now deal with the motions submitted, in order of receipt. Any motions relating to Volume 2 of the Chief Executive’s Report, and to zoning of specific lands, will be dealt with when taking the individual submissions in Volume 2.

Meetings Administrator, Ms. Branley proceeded to read through the motions received, in order of receipt:

Received at 9.49am:

Proposed by Councillor M. Clarke
Seconded by Councillor R. O’Grady

“To amend the Draft County Sligo Development Plan and draft zoning map 2024-2030 relating to lands outlined in red on the map below at Rathedmond House, Rathedmond, Strandhill Road, Sligo so that this land is included in the “nRes New Residential” land-use zoning as indicated below and in the attached report.”

Motion deferred.

Received at 9.50am:

Proposed by Councillor T. Walsh
Seconded by Councillor D. Gilroy

“To request that the planning department review this error and amend Core Strategy, Table 3.2 in Section 3.3 of the CE report accordingly to account for the additional units required and the additional 17 hectares of zoned land required. As such column 3 row 10 should read ‘4,492 units’ and column 5 row 10 should read ‘149.5 hectares’. It is likely an upgrade is also required to the associated Table 5.2, page 28 of CE Report to account for the NWRA figure.”

Motion deferred.

Received at 9.57am:

Proposed by Councillor P. Taylor
Seconded by Councillor J. Queenan

“The wording of strategic policies SP-S-9 and SP-9-11; we propose the following amendments to refer to a ‘first home in this area’ or ‘permanent home in lieu of ‘first home’.

Response: the reference to a ‘first home’ in the Strategic Policies SP-S-9 and 11 relates to a first home built in that area (SP-S-9) or landholding.

(SP-S-11), as opposed to the first home anywhere.

Issue; we are aware of cases where the council has insisted on the first home irrespective of where that first home was, the wording should change as recommended.”

Urban Housing Policies, page 45 of Draft County Development Plan, copy attached, recommends a minimum of 10% 1 bedroom homes, and 20% 2 bedroom homes in all developments.

SP-S-9 Strategic Settlement Policy for Rural Areas under Urban Influence -page 44 of CDP Core Strategy.

Wording to be amended to read

A) Landowners and farmers, including their sons and daughters, who wish to build a first home, in this area, for their permanent occupation on the landholding associated with their principal family residence.

Motion deferred, to be taken under Section 8 of Volume 1.

Received at 10.00am:

Proposed by Councillor T. Walsh
Seconded by Councillor D. Gilroy

“To request provision of an additional 500 student units and 14 hectares of zoned land in Sligo Town to account for the ATU possible future expansion plans and associated impact on the private rented market in line with town first policies, proper planning and sustainable development. As such, column 3, row 10 should read 4,992 units and column 5, row 10 read 163.5 hectares.”

Motion deferred to be dealt with later in the proceedings.

Received at 10.03am:

Proposed by Councillor D. Gilroy
Seconded by Councillor M. Casserly

“That the lands referred to in submission 95 ( 3.64 ha in total) in Finid Carney which is proposed to be zoned 0.88 ha Green belt with the remainder 2.76 ha all be zoned as rural and the entire holding zoned rural to facilitate the building of a family home for a member of the landowner’s family.”

Motion deferred, to be taken with specific submission in Volume 2.

Received at 10.05am:

Proposed by Councillor T. Walsh
Seconded by Councillor J. Queenan

“Refers to appendix A infrastructural assessment and Ballymote Draft zoning map”

Motion deferred to be dealt with under Volume 2.

Received at 10.06am:

Proposed by Councillor D. Gilroy
Seconded by Councillor T. Fox

Relates to an area of land referred to in submission 81.

Motion deferred to be dealt with under Volume 2.

Received at 10.08am:

Proposed by Councillor T. Walsh
Seconded by Councillor M. Clarke

“To amend the HST target to account for the Ukrainian population of 2,507 persons, the quarter of which will likely remain here long term and add an additional 7ha. As such column 3, row 10 should read 5,233 units and column 5, row 10 should read 170.5 ha.”

Motion deferred, to be dealt with at a later point in proceedings.

Received at 10.23am:

Proposed by Councillor P. Taylor
Seconded by Councillor J. Queenan

Wording is the same as item received at 9.57am. The only change relates to the area crossed out below.

“The wording of strategic policies SP-S-9 and SP-S-11. We propose the following amendments to refer to ‘a first home in this area or ‘permanent home’ in lieu of ‘first home’.

Response: the ref to the 1st home in the Strategic Policies SP-S-9 and 11 relate to a 1st home built in that area SP-S-9 or landholding. SP-S-11 as opposed to the first home anywhere. Issue. We are aware of cases where the council has assisted on the first home irrespective of where that first home was. The wording should change as recommended.

Urban Housing Policies, page 45 of Draft County Development Plan, copy attached, recommends a minimum of 10% 1 bedroom homes, and 20% 2 bedroom homes in all developments

SP-S-9 Strategic Settlement Policy for rural areas under urban influenc – page 44 of CDP Core Strategy, wording to be amended to read ‘(a) Landowners and farmers, including their sons and daughters, who wish to build a first home in this area for their permanent occupation on the landholding associated with their principal family residence.”

Motion deferred, to be taken under Section 8 of Volume 1.

Received at 10.23am:

Proposed by CouncillorT. MacSharry
Seconded by Councillor R. O’Grady

Wording not read out. (Zoning change request from GB (Greenbelt) to NRA (New Residential Area) – Carew site)( nRES)

Motion deferred, to be taken with specific submission in Volume 2.

Received at 10.24am:

Proposed by Councillor T. Walsh
Seconded by Councillor M. Clarke

“In relation to 2.29 hectares of land at Carrickhenry and resolved, that lands in Folio SL-18061F retain their current zoning as WILT or equivalent as per submission SLGC2955.”

Motion deferred to be dealt with under Volume 2.

Received at 10.38am:

Proposed by Councillor T. Fox
Seconded by Councillor D. Mulvey

“To propose that this land referred to in submission 95 be removed from the Green Belt.”

Motion deferred to be dealt with under Volume 2.

Received at 10.42am:

Proposed by Councillor M. Clarke
Seconded by Councillor D. Gilroy

“That Sligo County Council, having considered and having taken into account the increased zoning of lands resulting from the submissions by Members today, hereby resolve that the Core Strategy is amended accordingly to reflect and facilitate this increase.”

Motion relates to Volume 1 but was deferred to end of proceedings as it refers to zoning decisions and amendments to the Core Strategy.

At this point in the meeting, Mr. Moylan advised that, having reviewed the remaining motions submitted, they all relate to Volume 2 of the Chief Executive’s Report. Mr. Moylan added that Ms. Davidescu will now proceed to go through Section 8 of the Chief Executive’s Report, Councillors submissions, followed by Section 9, Supplementary Recommendations by the Chief Executive.

VOLUME 1 – RESPONSES TO SUBMISSIONS

SECTION 8 – SUBMISSIONS FROM ELECTED MEMBERS OF SLIGO COUNTY COUNCIL:

Ms. Davidescu outlined details contained in Section 8 of the Chief Executive’s Report.

SUBMISSION 100 – SLIGO COUNTY COUNCILLORS PLANNING GROUP:

Motion received at 10.23am

It was proposed by Councillor P. Taylor
Seconded by Councillor J. Queenan

AGREED

Issue 1 – no change
Issue 2 – no change
Issue 3 – no change
Issue 4 – no change
Issue 5 – no change
Issue 6 – no change
Issue 7 – no change
Issue 8 – no change
Issue 9 – agreed
Issue 10 – no change
Issue 11 – no change
Issue 12 - no change
Issue 13 – no change
Issue 14 – no change
Issue 15 – no change
Issue 16 - no change
Issue 17 – agreed
Issue 18 – agreed
Issue 19 – no change
Issue 20 – no change
Issue 21 – no change
Issue 22 – no change

SUBMISSION 156 – COUNCILLOR JOE QUEENAN

No change.

SUBMISSION 180 – COUNCILLOR DONAL GILROY

Issue 1 – no change
Issue 2 – no change
Issue 3 – agreed
Issue 4 – no change
Issue 5 – no change
Issue 6 – no change
Issue 7 – no change
Issue 8 – no change
Issue 9 – no change
Issue 10 – no change
Issue 11 – no change
Issue 12 – no change
Issue 13 – no change
Issue 14 – no change
Issue 15 – no change

VOLUME 1 – RESPONSES TO SUBMISSIONS

SECTION 9 – CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S SUPPLEMENTARY RECOMMENDATIONS:

The Planning section went through the Chief Executive’s various supplementary amendment recommendations as detailed in Section 9 under the following headings:

9.1 Supplementary recommendations on Transport

9.2 Supplementary recommendations on Water Quality

9.3 Supplementary recommendations arising from the Sustainable Residential Development and Compact Settlements Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2024)

9.4 Recommendations on miscellaneous issues

All CE recommendations were agreed.

Mr. Moylan then advised that a motion, listed previously, would be taken at this point in the meeting, as follows:

Received at 9.57am:

It was proposed by Councillor P. Taylor
Seconded by Councillor J. Queenan

“The wording of strategic policies SP-S-9 and SP-9-11. W we propose the following amendments to refer to ‘a first home in this area or ‘permanent home’ in lieu of ‘first home’.

Urban Housing Policies, page 45 of Draft County Development Plan, copy attached, recommends a minimum of 10% 1 bedroom homes, and 20% 2 bedroom homes in all developments

SP-S-9 Strategic Settlement Policy for rural areas under urban influenc - page 44 of CDP Core Strategy, wording to be amended to read ‘(a) Landowners and farmers, including their sons and daughters, who wish to build a first home in this area for their permanent occupation on the landholding associated with their principal family residence.”

Councillor Taylor stated that two separate motions had been submitted following submission of his motion above, one of which relates to the rural housing policy and the other to the urban housing policies. Councillor Taylor requested the the motion on rural housing policies be dealt with next. This was agreed.

Ms. Branley then read out the following motion, as requested by Councillor Taylor:

Proposed by Councillor P. Taylor
Seconded by Councillor J. Queenan

AND AGREED

“The wording of Strategic Policies SPS9 and SPS11. We propose the following amendments to refer to ‘a first home in this area’ or ‘permanent home’ in lieu of ‘first home’.”

“Response: The reference to a ‘first home’ in the Strategic Settlement Policies SPS9 and 11 relate to a first home built in that area SPS9 or landholding. SPS 11 as opposed to the first home anywhere.

Issue: We are aware of cases where the Council insisted on first home irrespective of where that first home was, the wording to change as recommended.

SPS9, Strategic Settlement Policy for rural areas under urban influence, page 44 of Development Plan and Core Strategy, wording to be amended to read ‘landonwers and farmers including their sons and daughters who wish to build a first home in this area for their permanent occupation on the landholding associated with their principal family residence.”

In relation to the part of the motion referring to urban housing policies on page 44 of the draft plan i.e. The urban housing policy, page 45 of draft County Development Plan, copy attached, recommend a minumum of 10% 1 bedroom homes and 20% 2 bedroom homes in all developments - this element of the motion was withdrawn.

Mr. Moylan advised the Members that subject to amendments agreed at the meeting, Volume 1 of the Chief Executive’s Report in terms of recommendations and amendments contained within it, are hereby agreed.

Mr. Moylan then advised that Volume 2 will be taken after the break, adding that, Members with any other submissions relating to volume 2, should be putting them forward before the meeting resumes. All motions must have a proposer and seconder, and where they’re dealing with zoning of land, they should be accompanied with a map, unless the map is already referred to in a submission, or unless it has been deferred.

Following a short discussion, it was then:

It was proposed by Councillor S. Maguire
Seconded by Councillor G. Mullaney

AND AGREED

“That, if proceedings are not concluded by 5pm today, this Meeting will re-convene on Monday 22nd April 2024 at 9.30am until the necessary matters have been dealt with”.

The meeting was adjourned for a short break, to resume in 30 minutes.

Proposed by Councillor T. MacSharry
Seconded by Councillor R. O’Grady

AND AGREED

“We propose that zoning be changed from GB (Greenbelt) to NRA (New Residential Area).

I wish to support this motion as I believe it is only right that Carew family should be allowed to develop these three sites as they have been in the family’s ownership for generations. The road is a cul-de-sac with nine houses on it and thus developments would simply facilitate the filling gap between existing houses. The soil conditions are excellent with very low water table level, and P and T values of less than 20, thus allowing the provision of onsite wastewater treatments which will comply with EPA guidelines. These sites were given to Elizabeth and Paula as wedding presents almost forty years ago. All three girls, Orla, Paula and Elizabeth, have grown up children who need homes now, the fourth generation. Their siblings were all looked after with a site each from their parents.

Johnston and Breege Carew.”

Proposed by Councillor D. Gilroy
Seconded by Councillor P. Taylor

AND AGREED

Agreed.

SUBMISSION 23 – JOHN AND MARIE PERRY

Councillor Mulvey excused himself from the meeting at this point due to a conflict of interest.

Proposed by Councillor T. Walsh
Seconded by Councillor J. Queenan

AND AGREED

“Refers to Appendix A Infrastructural assessment and Ballymote Draft Zoning Map – To amend the Ballymote Draft Zoning Map to designate the site known as No. 6 in the map presented in section A.3.1 and Table A.3.2 of Appendix A Infrastructural Assessment of the Draft Plan with the zoning objective ‘nRES – new residential uses’ rather than ‘SLR - Strategic Land Reserve’ in the Sligo County Development Plan 2024-2030.”

SUBMISSION 24 – MICHAEL CONMY, BURY ARCHITECTS ON BEHALF OF BLACKMUD DEVELOPMENT LIMITED

Proposed by Councillor D. Gilroy
Seconded by Councillor T. Fox

“That the lands referred to in submission 24 (4.89 ha in total) in Sligo town be zoned nRES (new residential areas) to facilitate the building of much needed homes required for the reason of achieving the development goals and population targets for Sligo as a regional Growth Centre.”

Following a discussion, this motion was amended and it was:

Proposed by Councillor D. Gilroy
Seconded by Councillor T. Fox

AND AGREED

“That the lands referred to in submission 24 (2.48 ha in total) in Sligo town be zoned nRES (new residential areas) to facilitate the building of much needed homes required for the reason of achieving the development goals and population targets for Sligo as a regional Growth Centre.”

SUBMISSION 25 – MICHAEL CONMY, BURY ARCHITECTS ON BEHALF OF FERGAL CAWLEY

Proposed by Councillor J. Queenan
Seconded by Councillor M. Clarke

“That Sligo County Council do not accept the Chief Executive’s response that the lands remained zoned open space and it is resolved that the lands the subject matter of submission 25 are rezoned from open space to mixed uses (MIX).”

Proposed by Councillor M. Clarke
Seconded by Councillor J. Queenan

AND AGREED

“Re submission 33, 4.13 hectares of lands at Easkey village, having considered the Chief Executive’s response, it is not accepted that the zoning of the lands is not changed and it is hereby resolved that 3.98 hectares of the lands is changed from Green Belt (GB) to new residential (nRES) as outlined in submission No.33.”

Mr. Moylan advised that the addition of 4.13 hectares of lands at Easkey village to residentially zoned lands has the potential to yield up to 100 houses. The addition of that quantum of development to a small village such as Easkey would be considered to be inconsistent with the Core Strategy as set out in the Draft Plan.

SUBMISSION 34– JOSEPH DUNPHY

SUBMISSION 56 – JOHN TUFFY

Proposed by Councillor J. Queenan
Seconded by Councillor M. Clarke

“Having considered the Chief Executive’s response it is not accepted that the zoining of the lands is not changed and it is hereby resolved that 1.81 hectares of land on the north-eastern periphery of Enniscrone as outlined in submission no 56 be re-zoned from Green Belt to residential purposes nRES.”

This item was deferred.

The meeting was adjourned for a short break, to resume in 10 minutes.

Following a discussion, a vote was called by the Cathaoirleach in relation to the recommendation contained in the Chief Executive's report for submission 74.

The result of the vote was as follows:

FOR: Councillors. Casserly, Connolly, Fox, MacSharry, Maguire, Mullaney, Mulvey, O’Grady, Walsh (9)

AGAINST: Councillors. Baker, Clarke, Gibbons, Gilroy, Healy, O’Boyle, Queenan, Taylor (8)

ABSENT: Councillor Bree (1)

The Cathaoirleach declared the vote carried and the recommendation contained in the Chief Executive’s report was agreed.

SUBMISSION 75 – VIRTUS PLANNING CONSULTANTS ON BEHALF OF LEWIS & NIALL RHATIGAN

Following a brief discussion, Councillor Gilroy agreed to amend his motion and it was:

Proposed by Councillor D. Gilroy
Seconded by Councillor M. Casserly

AND AGREED

“That the lands referred to in submission 95 (3.64 hectares in total) in Finid, Carney, which is proposed to be zoned 0.88 hectares Green Belt, with the remainder 2.76 hectares unzoned all be zoned as unzoned and the entire holding zoned Rural to facilitate the building of a family home for a member of the landowner’s family.”

Proposed by Councillor T. Fox
Seconded by Councillor D. Mulvey

AND AGREED

“To propose that this land referred to in submission 95 be removed from the Green Belt.”

SUBMISSION 96 – DARREN CLANCY ON BEHALF OF ANDREW ALPHONSUS BREHONY

SUBMISSION 107 – EAMONN O’DOWD ON BEHALF OF FUTURE CAST

No change.

SUBMISSION 96 - DARREN CLANCY ON BEHALF OF ANDREW ALPHONSUS BREHONY

An amended motion on submission 96, as discussed earlier in the meeting was read out and it was:

Proposed by Councillor P. Taylor
Seconded by Councillor M. Clarke

AND AGREED

“To accept part of the Chief Executive recommendation to extend the development limit and change the zoning of 0.99 hectares of land to nRES zoning.”

SUBMISSION 108 – SEAMUS GILLIGAN

No change.

SUBMISSION 110 – ORLA MCCAFFERTY, PROJECT PLANNER, MKO ON BEHALF OF MICHAEL MCGOLDRICK

No change.

SUBMISSION 111 – ORLA MCCAFFERTY, PROJECT PLANNER, MKO ON BEHALF OF RHODAVILLE LTD.

No change.

SUBMISSION 112 – SIMON O’DOWD ON BEHALF OF KIERAN WALSH

Councillor Walsh excused himself from the meeting at this point due to a conflict of interest.

The motion was deferred.

SUBMISSION 114 – SINÉAD O’MALLEY, PLANNING MANAGER ON BEHALF OF FUTURENERGY IRELAND (FEI)

No change.

SUBMISSION 115 – MARTIN MCGLOIN

Agreed.

At this point in the meeting, the Cathaoirleach advised that he would take two separate motions at this time, submitted by Councillors. MacSharry and Baker, which do not form part of the submissions as part of Volume 2 of the Chief Executive’s Report.

Proposed by Councillor T. MacSharry
Seconded by Councillor M. Baker

AND AGREED

“To retain the current zoning (mixed uses) on Folio No. SL28507F. Ocean Wave Lodge, Top Road, Strandhill, Eircode: F91 V651. The total land holding of the lodge is less than 1 acre. The Council are proposing to zone part of the land as Green Belt. The premises was built as a small hotel in 1904 to keep guests and120 year on it is still operating and keeping guests. We feel that this would restrict any future development, or enhancement of the business and respectfully ask that this land is kept in its current zoning state.”

Proposed by Councillor M. Baker
Seconded by Councillor P. Taylor

AND AGREED

“While recognising the need for walkways and links between Riverstown and surrounding amenities, we propose removing plans for a walkway from the bridge spanning the Douglas River along the river between two privately owned family households.”

With the agreement of the Members, the meeting was adjourned to re-convene on Monday 22^nd April 2024 at 9.30 a.m. in the Chamber.

END OF MEETING:

The business of the Meeting concluded at 4.50 p.m.

Meeting Date 15/04/2024