Oakway responds to RFI for New Abbey development
.png)
A number of responses have been made by Oakway Homes to a request for further information on their application to build 180 homes on lands between New Abbey Road and Nicholastown, writes Brian Byrne. Because of the level of changes suggested, publication of Further Significant Information planning notices and erection of appropriate new signs has been ordered.
The developers had been given two months to reply to the RFI made last February, which inter alia addressed concerns raised in 118 third party submissions about the development. Further submissions can now be made within two weeks of the publication of the notices.
Among the RFI responses a revised site layout drawing shows potential connection points between the development with the proposed future Kilcullen Link Road, at the southeast and southwest boundaries. The required adjustments to the original plan would be 'minor', according to the response and would include changing some house types and changing some house positions.
In relation to concerns about commercial building heights at the New Abbey Road end of the development, the architects propose reductions in heights by either a complete storey or a half-storey, and reducing the proposed office space provision.
They also propose using a yellow brick instead of red throughout the scheme, though they note that a study conducted at the beginning of the design process found red brick to be 'appropriate' after documenting historical structures and the current built residential context in Kilcullen.
Following planners' objections to the removal of the stone boundary wall on the New Abbey Road, the architects have submitted an engineering report showing the wall to be structurally unsound, and that they propose to build a new blue limestone wall, potentially recycling some of the stone in the existing wall. They also noted that the existing wall is not a Protected Structure nor is it listed in the National Inventory of Architectural Heritage, and that comparisons with maps in the 19th century show that sections have been rebuilt and altered significantly from the original.
The architects have agreed to retain the stone gate piers and traditional wrought iron gate on the New Abbey Road, integrating them into one of the entrances.
A relocation plan for a pumping station ‘insofar as the lands available to the Applicant allow’ has been submitted along with details of boundary treatment.
The only actual plan shown for LAP permeability objectives is through Sunbury Close, though a ‘provision’ for one is shown to the lane in St Brigid’s Avenue which joins the road link between that estate and Conroy Park. On the concerns about providing adequate footpath width on Sunbury to meet the active mobility objectives, while maintaining the road width for residents’ vehicles, the developers say the footpath widening would be ‘marginal’ and would only impact on the width of the existing grass verges; “however, it does not affect carriageway width and so will affect the existing parking regime.” As written, in combination with a comment that there ‘is insufficient space within the lands available to amend the design’, there’s a suggestion there that the current street parking for residents of Sunbury and their visitors could be curtailed by the design previously submitted, which shows two cycle lanes taking up much of the road.
A request for a design of a footpath between the two vehicular entrances on the New Abbey Road has been kicked back to the planners with the comment that ‘the lands for this are outside the control of the Applicant’. A similar response has been made to a request for a detailed design for improvements to the traffic lights junction, in addition to a comment that the two months deadline for the return of further information ‘is not sufficient for this request to be complied with appropriately’. A clarification request for a proposed pathway on the New Abbey Road to McGarry’s Lane also gets a ‘lands outside the control of the Applicant’ note along with detail on the width.
Landscape architects have responded to the RFI on concerns about the removal of a hedgerow between two different pieces of land for the development, saying that the hedgerow will be lifted and replanted elsewhere within the site. A Weldmesh fence is proposed to protect existing hedgerow boundaries between the development and existing estates.
A number of other responses were made in relation to queries about bus stops, and pedestrian crossings. All RFI response details are now available on the KCC planning application portal, file number 2461327.
READ: More than 100 submissions on Oakway Homes planning application 
Photographs use Policy — Privacy Policy
