stock image

Verdict imminent on 200 home proposal

A decision is due on August 23 on the Codd Property Holdings Ltd application for the development of 202 two-storey dwellings at Eiscir Meadows and Nobury Woods, at Arden, Tullamore.

There has been three submissions in relation to the development which consists of the demolition of existing farm buildings and the the construction of 12 two-bed terraced type houses,  eight three-bed terraced homes, 158 three-bed semi-detached houses, eight four-bed semi-detached dwellings and another five four-bed detached houses and 11 four-bed detached corner units.

The development also includes the provision of a creche totalling 284.76 M2, catering for a maximum of 58 children, with 30 associated parking spaces. It also includes the provision of a private amentiy space and two on-site car parking spaced for each dwelling.

There is a plan for a landscaped public open space, associated boundary treatments, street lighting and foul and suds drainage, as well as all associated site development works necessary to faciliate the development.

Included in the submission by Finian Dooley and Colleen Moyles of 56 Norbury Woods Green, Arden Road, Tullamore is a claim that the Eiscir Meadows and Norbury Woods development was never completed and Offaly County

Council has not yet taken the estate in charge. The other submissions come from Eiscir Meadows/Norbury Roads Residents Association and Fiona Duffy of 52 Norbury Woods Green.

'After seven years the residents are now the unadopted owners of the sewers, roads, and open spaces,' states the submission Finian Dooley and Coleen Moyles, and 'therefore any decision to grant (permission) would need need full agreement of the residents.'

The three submissions also makesreference to the visual impact of proposed plan and that thereis no parking for visitors, disabled spaces or customers or employees of the creche included in the proposed development, while the houses181-194, due to their size, depth, width, height and mass, would have an 'unacceptably adverse' impact on the amentities of the properties by reason of overlooking, loss of privacy.

Additional issues contained in the objection state the the site access proposed is not in accordance with acceptable standards and would lead to potential safety hazards, and that the internal cirrculation within the site would create conflicts between pedestirans, cyclists and vehicular movements, thereby creating another safety hazard.