Snowtopia Appeal Fails at Planning Board

Tuesday, December 8, 2009

An Bord Pleanála has upheld Fingal County Council’s rejection of the proposed Snowtopia development at Tyrrelstown. The reasons given were that it would conflict with local land zoning objectives (ST1 - Science and Technology), would draw custom from the nearby Blanchardstown cinema, and was poorly served by public transport.

The €100m indoor ski resort would have created 1,000 permanent jobs. Twinlite and Cobalt  Developments , who planned the 32,000sqm development, claim it was a fully funded project and had hoped to begin work next year. They have already spent €300,000 on planning and had the backing of an English venture capital company.


It was intended that Snowtopia would feature two ski slopes, a rock and ice climbing area and a high-level adventure playground. The company expected up to 1.5 million visitors a year to attractions including a paintball centre, digital theatres, a gym, restaurants and retail outlets.


The site also adjoins a major pharmaceutical industrial plant, Bristol Myers Squibb. The planning board said that because of the proposed scale of Snowtopia, with significant numbers of the public visiting the site, its presence "would be prejudicial to the future operation and possible expansion" of the pharmaceutical plant and would therefore militate against achieving the science and technology zoning objective.

The decision is a big dissapointment to the local community and snow lovers all over Ireland. Twinlite may now seek an alternative site in the locality for their project. Meanwhile others are considering similar developments elsewhere.


PLANNING INSPECTORS RECOMMENDATION:
Having regard to all of the above, I recommend to the Board that permission be REFUSED in accordance with the following schedules –

REASONS AND CONSIDERATIONS


1. The site of the proposed development is located in an area which is
designated, in the Fingal County Development Plan 2005-2011, with
the overall land use zoning objective “ST1”: “To facilitate
opportunities for science and technology based employment and
associated and complementary uses in a high quality environment in
accordance with an approved local area plan”. It is considered that
development in accordance with this land use zoning objective must be
accorded priority in determining the proper planning and sustainable
development of the area. The site of the proposed development
immediately adjoins a major pharmaceutical industrial establishment,
which is also a “SEVESO” site and which provides valuable science
and technology based employment to a significant number of people
and, thereby, accords fully with the “ST1” zoning objective. It is
considered that the proposed ‘Snowtopia’ leisure / recreation based
development, by reason of its location, nature, size and scale, with a
significant presence of public visitor patronage to the site, would be

prejudicial to the future operation and possible expansion of the said
industrial establishment and militate against achievement of the overall
“ST1” zoning objective for the area. The proposed development
would, therefore, materially conflict with the land use zoning policy of
the Co. Dev. Plan 2005, depreciate the value of property in the vicinity
and be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of
the area.

2. The proposed recreational / leisure development would comprise retail
and cinema use on a site located in Tyrrelstown, a Level 4 retail centre
in the Fingal County Retail Strategy, remote from the existing and
established Level 2 retail centre of Blanchardstown Town Centre. This
would be contrary to the policy of the Planning Authority, as set out in
the County Development Plan and the Blanchardstown Urban
Structure Plan, to promote and encourage major enhancement of retail
and leisure provision in Blanchardstown Town Centre and to enhance
the vitality, viability and character of the Town Centre. Furthermore, it
is considered that the proposed development would have an adverse
material impact on the existing cinema use that currently operates from
the Blanchardstown Shopping Centre. This use is an integral
component of the permitted shopping centre and its loss would result
in the removal of an evening/night time use at this town centre
location. It is considered that such a loss would be contrary to the
policies of the current Development Plan and of the Blanchardstown
Urban Structure Plan, which seek to increase the town centre’s vitality
and vibrancy. The proposed development would, therefore, be contrary
to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

3. Having regard to the location of the proposed ‘Snowtopia’
development and to the nature and scale of the uses proposed, in an
area poorly served by public transport provision, and where no
timeframe for the provision of new / upgraded facilities and services to
the site exists, and to the stated reliance on the application sites

proximity to the proposed N2/N3 Link Road, to demonstrate
accessibility and adequacy of road network capacity, and where there
is currently no time frame for the delivery of this piece of strategic
public road infrastructure to serve the development, it is considered
that the proposed development would lead to the creation of an
unsustainable car dependent development. The proposed development
would, therefore, contravene the policies of the Regional Planning
Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area 2004-2016 and Policy EP5 of
the current County Development Plan, which seeks to focus activities
attracting large numbers of trips in areas very close to major public
transport facilities. The proposed development would, therefore, be
contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the
area.



Some extracts from planner's report

PLANNING ASSESSMENT :
I believe that the relevant issues in review of the merits of this appeal
relate to:
(a) The ‘Principle’ and ‘Location’ of proposed ‘Snowtopia’;
(b) Refusal Reason No. 2 - Proposed Retail and Cinema Use; and
(c) Refusal Reason No. 3 - “Unsustainable Car Dependent
Development”.

The proposed ‘retail’, ‘restaurant / café’ and ‘office’ land use elements would not contribute towards the “ST1” zoning objective and associated vision, and would therefore be in contravention of the “ST1” zoning objective and of the Co. Dev. Plan 2005 land use policy for the area.

Equally,‘snowtopia’ would pose threat of compromise to the development potential of other “ST1” zoned lands surrounding the application site and the Cobalt landholding, much of which I noted at the time of
physical inspection to be un- and underdeveloped (see attached photographs taken at the time of physical inspection). The IDA states in their Observation that 26.3ha of these lands is in their ownership, and for which they are currently marketing for development.

The challenge facing the applicant’s proposed ‘Snowtopia’ recreational / leisure development is compounded by the application sites proximity to the Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS) Cruiserath pharmaceutical
manufacturing facility, a designated SEVESO establishment, located adjacent and to the S of the Cobalt landholding. The EU Major Accidents Directive seeks “to reduce the risk and to limit the consequences of accidents at manufacturing and storage facilities involving dangerous substances that present a major accident hazard”.

In this regard SEVESO considerations become directly relevant in the consideration of the planning merits of proposed ‘snowtopia’, motivated by the applicant as a unique leisure / recreation attraction of national, regional and local significance, and which the applicant’s intend will generate public attendance at significant scale (ie: applicant sets out approx. 4000 visitors per day).

I note the BMS’s pointed clarification that “BMS do not suggest that a buffer distance of 75m (or 136m as provided) is sufficient to the ‘snowtopia’ development comprising a single building containing a leisure type development of 32,103sq.m. gross floor area with an occupancy rate of up to 9,000 persons or an average maximum of 4,500, mainly children.

I believe that proposed ‘snowtopia’ is significantly challenged with respect to connectivity into off-site major road networks, particularly the N2 and N3, with negative consequence to accessibility.

The proposed N2/N3 Link Road is fundamental to the success of ‘snowtopia’ at this location, from an accessibility perspective. To date however, I can find no programmatic or project specific budgetary
confirmation from either of the PA (planning authority) or the NRA (National Roads Authority) that construction of the N2/N3 Link Road has commenced, and indeed on the information available, there would appear to be no commencement date programmed at present

In my view, together with the ‘N2-N3 Link Road’, ‘Metro West’ are the two bankers upon which the sustainability of ‘snowtopia’ is dependent at this location, from an accessibility perspective. Whilst improvement and upgrade of public bus services must be deemed challenged in themselves having regard to public finances at present, the delivery of Metro West within the short term and certainly within the lifetime of any planning permission granted, must again be deemed aspirational.

Certainly, without such public transport accessibility ‘snowtopia’ must reasonably be considered as “unsustainable car dependent development”, contrary to the “ST1” vision and zoning objective, and
to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

In this regard I find the proposed‘snowtopia’ development to be fatally flawed, a material contravention of the “ST1” zoning objective and contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

I do not agree with the applicant’s consequent argument that Refusal Reason No.2, “in order to protect the existing Blanchardstown cinema, is anti-competitive”. Rather, in my view, the applicant’s very argument of the proposed digital theatre, as offering “unique, targeted cinematic experiences, as opposed to standard new cinema releases”, substantiates the Co. dev. Plan 2005 expectation for its location within the Blanchardstown Town Centre. Such a central location would not only maximise accessibility, but also positively contribute towards the consolidation of the vitality and vibrancy of the Blanchardstown TC.

In compliance with the statutory Dev. Planning Frameworks, such “a tourist draw” must be properly located within, or proximate to the Blanchardstown TC.

Accordingly, I find the proposed ‘snowtopia’ development to be fatally flawed, in contravention of the provisions of the Co. Dev. Plan 2005, and of the Blanchardstown Urban Structure Plan (2007) and the Blanchardstown TC – Development Framework /MasterPlan (2009) – where clearly stated policies and development objectives exist to promote and encourage major enhancement of retail and leisure provision in the Blanchardstown TC and to enhance the vitality, viability and character of the TC, and therefore contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.


I generally share the PA’s conclusion that having regard to its location in an area poorly served by public transport provision, and to the nature, size, scale, mix and intensity of the uses proposed at this location, with a significant generation of public visitor patronage to the site, proposed ‘Snowtopia’ would lead to the creation of an unsustainable car dependent development, contrary to the abovementioned Co. Dev. Plan provisions.

I understand and share the PA’s concerns against ‘snowtopia’ as being the threat of unsustainable car dependent development at this location, consequent of – limited existing public transport and no timeframe for provision of new /upgraded facilities and services to the site; and that having regard to the applicant’s reliance on the application sites proximity to the proposed N2/N3 Link Road, to demonstrate accessibility and adequacy of road network capacity, “there are currently no time frames for the delivery of this piece of road infrastructure to serve the development” (see PA response dated 16/04/2009).

Post a Comment

Right Click

Blog Archive

Search Site

  © Blogger template The Professional Template II by Ourblogtemplates.com 2009

Back to TOP