An Bord Pleanála reject massive tower in major win for village!

Existing Tower

Proposed Tower

 

It was a major win today for the small village of Castleconnell and its residents as An Bord Pleanála reject the Vodafone application for a proposed telecommunications tower within the centre of the village.

“This planning application was originally submitted to the council in March this year and naturally there were concerns in the village. But, we got the locals together and submitted objections on a number of issues including the increased height of the structure and its proximity to residential property and heritage structures in the village. Thankfully, the council refused the application, but our hearts sank when, a few weeks later, it was appealed to An Bord Pleanala.
A few months on, we are over the moon that An Bord Pleanala have reached the same conclusion and listened to the concerns of a small, rural community like ours.
And, of course, it’s fantastic that a small village like Castleconnell could unite to take on a big telecommunications company like Vodafone, and win. The story of David and Goliath comes to mind!” Nicky McNamara, LOVE Castleconnell

The application proposed that the existing telecommunications mast in the centre of Castleconnell village would be replaced with a much larger tower. It involved the removal of the existing 15m tower and for it to be replaced with a new 20m lattice tower together with antennae dishes bringing the overall height to 21.5m, which would be over 5m higher than the existing tower.

Today it was revealed that the application was rejected with the reasons and considerations as follows;

“the proposed height and bulk of the replacement mast in such a prominent location within the village of Castleconnell in proximity to an area designed as the Castleconnell Architectural Conservation Area in the current Development Plan for the area, protected structures and residential property, it is considered that the proposed development would be visually obtrusive and would seriously injure and depreciate the value of properties in the area.  The proposed development would, therefore, be contrary to proper planning and sustainable development of the area.”