Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2560481 - F.I. Received Doc. - Application - Cover Letter (2) ARCHITECTS | CONSULTING ENGINEERS | BUILDING SURVEYORS Tel: 042-9746492 info@cspringle.com www.cspringle.com MNK Engineering T/A CS Pringle Incorporated in Ireland: Reg No 640491 Registered Office: Monaghan Road, Castleblayney, Co. Monaghan. Page 1 of 25 Our Ref: 6524RFI Date 29.07.2026 Planning Department, Monaghan County Council, 1 Dublin Street, Monaghan Co. Monaghan. Re: Significant Further Information Response in relation to the planning application ref. 25/60481; at Dernaglug, Doohamlet, Co. Monaghan. Revised description of development, The provision of 28 no. dwellings comprising:  2 No. 2 bed detached bungalow dwellings,  4 no. 2 bed semi-detached bungalow dwellings,  6 No. 2 bed semi-detached two-storey dwellings,  11 No. 3 bed detached two-storey dwellings,  5 No. 4 bed semi-detached two-storey dwellings, Together with revised site layout plans, boundary treatments, hard and soft landscaping, public lighting, drainage and utility services, revised house type drawings and all other ancillary site development works necessary to facilitate the proposed development. Dear Sir/Madam, Further to your request for further information and our subsequent conversations in relation to the proposed development, 25/60481, please find below our response as follows: Point 01 It is noted the development seeks to rely on provisions under section 15.8.10 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025-2031 which pertains to social housing only. Consequently, the proposed development can only be justified at a location outside the settlement envelope if it is clearly demonstrated that there is demand for social housing. On the basis of the information provided, and noting a separate current application for residential development within the village boundary, the Planning Authority are not satisfied that (a) there is a need for the level of social housing proposed, and (b) the proposal contributes to sequential development. The applicant is advised to provide robust justification for the proposed development in accordance with Section 15.8.10 of the Development Plan. Section 15.8.10 of the Development Plan sets out the criteria applicable to residential development within Tier 4 settlements and provides that proposals for social housing outside the defined settlement boundary may be favourably considered where a clear and demonstrable need is established, the lands are contiguous to the settlement boundary and can be adequately serviced. RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 2 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors The following document demonstrates that the proposed development satisfies the requirements of Section 15.8.10 by:  establishing a clear and demonstrable need for the proposed social housing development in Doohamlet;  demonstrating that the proposed site represents a logical and sequential extension of the existing village. Figure 1 – Site location outlined in RED Site Location and Context Social Housing Demand All stakeholders recognise that Ireland continues to face a significant housing shortage arising from a combination of sustained economic growth, demographic expansion, changing household formation patterns, and a prolonged period of underinvestment in housing delivery. The availability of an adequate supply of social housing is a critical component of addressing this issue, ensuring that households who cannot secure suitable accommodation through their own financial resources can access good-quality, secure and affordable housing. Following the economic recovery of the 2010s, Ireland experienced significant population growth, particularly in areas where employment opportunities and essential services are concentrated. However, the growth in population and household demand has substantially exceeded the delivery of new housing, resulting in increased pressure on the housing market, escalating property prices and rising rental costs. These pressures have disproportionately affected lower-income households, younger generations and those reliant on social housing supports. The consequences of this housing shortage extend beyond supply and affordability issues, contributing to increased homelessness, overcrowding, housing insecurity and adverse social outcomes. Furthermore, the shortage of available housing has wider economic implications by restricting labour mobility, limiting population growth in certain areas and creating barriers to continued investment and economic development. In response to these challenges, the Government has identified the accelerated delivery of housing, including social and affordable housing, as a national priority. The provision of social housing is recognised as an essential mechanism to support households who are unable to meet their housing needs through the private market and to ensure that communities can develop in a balanced and sustainable manner. The scale of Ireland’s housing shortage has been comprehensively recognised Doohamlet O'Neills GAA Club Road to Castleblayney Road to Ballybay Cois Carraig & Cois Cill Doohamlet National School Cois Locha All Saints Church Doohamlet Community Centre Bus Stop Site RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 3 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors by the Housing Commission in its 2024 report, which estimates a national housing deficit of between 212,500 and 256,000 homes based on Census 2022 data. The Housing Commission identifies the requirement for an urgent and substantial increase in housing delivery, particularly in relation to social, affordable and cost-rental housing provision. The report states: “After a decade of pent-up demand caused by chronic undersupply, a step-change in building output is essential to address the housing deficit and to meet ongoing requirements…” The Commission further recommends: “There should be a targeted increase in the proportion of social and cost-rental housing to 20% of the national stock, ensuring an appropriate tenure mix. This is necessary to address the dearth of such housing.” This highlights the significant imbalance that currently exists between housing demand and supply and reinforces the requirement for increased delivery of social housing units as part of a sustainable long-term response. The legacy deficit arising from reduced housing construction following the economic downturn is illustrated in Figure 2, which demonstrates the significant reduction in housing output during this period and the subsequent challenge in meeting accumulated demand. Figure 2 - Housing Units built by the Public Sector The Government’s housing strategy, Housing for All – A New Housing Plan for Ireland, establishes the overarching objective that: “Everybody should have access to sustainable, good quality housing to purchase or rent at an affordable price, built to a high standard, and located close to essential services, offering a high quality of life.” The Plan recognises that increasing housing supply is fundamental to addressing affordability pressures and meeting the needs of Ireland’s growing population. A key objective of the strategy is the delivery of a significant increase in social housing, including a target of over 10,000 social homes annually, with an average of 9,500 new-build social homes to be delivered by 2026. Importantly, Housing for All places emphasis on increasing direct construction of social housing by Local Authorities, stating: RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 4 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors “Increased provision of social housing must involve more emphasis on new-builds by Local Authorities and an ending of long-term leasing of private accommodation by Local Authorities through phasing out new entrants and focusing on new-build to provide social homes.” This policy direction reinforces the importance of delivering additional social housing through appropriately located residential developments. In addition to the national housing deficit, it is important to consider the local housing delivery context within County Monaghan. To establish the level of housing delivery achieved during the lifespan of the previous Monaghan County Development Plan 2019–2025, an assessment has been undertaken of completed scheme housing and apartment developments over the six-year period since adoption of the Plan. The 2019 Development Plan identified a Core Strategy housing target of 1977 residential units across the County. Figure 3 - Table 2.4 of the Monaghan CDP 2019-2025 However, analysis of CSO housing completion data indicates that only 1769 new dwellings were completed across County Monaghan between Q2 2019 and Q4 2025. Figure 4 - New Dwelling Completion in Local Authority by Quarter (source data.cso.ie) The shortfall in delivery is particularly significant as scheme housing output is directly linked to the provision of social and affordable housing through mechanisms such as Part V obligations and dedicated Local Authority housing schemes. Accordingly, the failure to meet previous housing delivery targets has contributed to a significant level of unmet demand across the County. This existing deficit must also be considered alongside continued population growth, which has increased pressure on available housing resources. Notwithstanding these historic delivery challenges, we acknowledged that Monaghan County Council has been very proactive in addressing housing need in recent years through the delivery of new Local Authority housing schemes and the RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 5 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors advancement of residential developments across the County. This includes the successful delivery of schemes of a comparable scale, such as Coill An Rí, Carrickmacross and Sli Lorcain / Slí na Coille, Monaghan, which demonstrate the Council’s commitment to increasing housing supply and supporting sustainable residential growth. The proposed development should therefore be considered within this wider context of continued investment in housing delivery across the county. This identified local need is further supported by correspondence between CS Pringle and Monaghan County Council’s Housing Section, which confirms an identified requirement for 31 additional social housing units within the Doohamlet area. This correspondence provides clear evidence of an existing and unmet demand for social housing within the settlement and demonstrates that the proposed development responds directly to an established housing need rather than creating speculative residential growth. Figure 5 APPENDIX A– Correspondence with Monaghan County Council’s Housing Section The Planning Authority will be aware that Planning Application Ref. 25/60489, comprising a proposed residential development of 44 dwellings within the settlement boundary of Doohamlet, was lodged on behalf of the Connolly partnership shortly after our application. Both applications have progressed concurrently through the development management process, with Further Information requests issued. However, there are currently no extant planning permissions for multi-unit residential development within the defined development boundary of Doohamlet capable of contributing to the existing housing supply or addressing the identified social housing need. While Application Ref. 25/60489 remains under consideration, it is an undetermined planning application and cannot be regarded as an extant permission or as a deliverable housing scheme. There is no certainty that planning permission will be granted or that the development will be implemented. The existence of another live planning application within the settlement boundary neither diminishes the demonstrated need for additional social housing within Doohamlet nor prejudices the assessment of the current proposal under Section 15.8.10 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025–2031. Each planning application must be determined independently on its own merits, having regard to the relevant planning policy, the evidence submitted and the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. The current proposal has demonstrated a clear and identifiable social housing need, represents a logical and sequential extension of the existing settlement and complies with the criteria set out in Section 15.8.10 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025–2031. Accordingly, the existence of another live planning application provides no basis for refusing or delaying the determination of this application It is also noteworthy that the recently enacted Planning and Development Act 2024 reflects an evolution in the national planning framework, placing increased emphasis on the identification and delivery of housing required to meet existing and future need. In preparing housing strategies, planning authorities are required to have regard to existing and projected housing demand across all tenures, including social, affordable and cost-rental housing, together with Government housing policy and national planning objectives. This legislative framework reinforces a plan-led but evidence-based approach to housing delivery, recognising that planning decisions should facilitate the provision of housing where a clear and demonstrable need RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 6 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors has been established. In this regard, the confirmed requirement for 31 social housing units within Doohamlet, as identified by Monaghan County Council's Housing Section, is a material planning consideration of significant weight and supports the proposed development as an appropriate response to identified local housing need. Sequential Development Although the application site lies outside the defined settlement boundary, it represents the logical and sequential extension of the existing residential development at Doohamlet and accords with the principles of compact and sustainable settlement growth. The proposal directly adjoins the existing residential estate and extends the established road network from its natural termination point, thereby consolidating the existing built form rather than creating a detached or isolated residential enclave. It does not constitute leapfrog or contribute to a sporadic form of development but represents the next logical phase in the evolution of the settlement. Unlike larger settlements, Doohamlet functions as a linear rural village, with its principal community facilities distributed along the R183 corridor. These include Doohamlet National School, Doohamlet Community Centre, Connolly's Guesthouse and Public House, and All Saints Church, which together form the functional core of the village. The proposed development is located approximately 300 metres walking distance from these facilities and is therefore well integrated with the existing settlement and its community infrastructure. The settlement is also constrained by a watercourse that bisects the village, with identified flood-prone lands located primarily to the north and north-east, including lands adjoining the existing GAA grounds. These environmental constraints limit the potential for future expansion in that direction. By contrast, the application site occupies elevated lands to the south of the village, outside identified flood-sensitive areas, making it a more appropriate location for residential development. The proposal therefore represents the most logical direction for future growth, making efficient use of existing infrastructure while respecting the physical constraints affecting the settlement. RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 7 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors Figure 6 – Doohamlet development boundary - Monaghan CDP 2025-2031 The Planning Authority has referred to a separate planning application within the settlement boundary. While acknowledged, that application should not influence the assessment of the current proposal. It remains undetermined and therefore cannot be relied upon to meet an existing housing need. Furthermore, the grant of planning permission does not guarantee commencement or completion of development. The proposal before the Planning Authority should therefore be assessed on the basis of the demonstrated housing need that exists today, particularly having regard to the Housing Section's confirmation of a requirement for 31 social housing units within Doohamlet. Accordingly, the proposed development should be regarded as a sustainable and sequential extension of Doohamlet that consolidates the existing settlement pattern, responds directly to an identified local housing need, and fully accords with the objectives of Section 15.8.10 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025–2031. Bus Stop Site Doohamlet National School All Saints Church Doohamlet Community Centre Connolly’s Guesthouse 150m 300m Road R183 Community Spine Stream RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 8 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors Figure 7 – Flood map for Doohamlet (source floodinfo.ie) Conclusion There is a clear and demonstrable need for additional social housing in the Doohamlet area, supported by national housing policy, the Housing Commission’s findings, the legacy shortfall in housing delivery in County Monaghan, and direct evidence of local demand from Monaghan County Council’s Housing Section (31 applicants on the waiting list for the Doohamlet area). Furthermore, the site constitutes a logical and sequential extension of the established settlement pattern of Doohamlet. The lands directly adjoin the existing residential development area, are contiguous with the built-up footprint of the village, are not affected by flood risk constraints, and are located within a convenient walking distance of the key community facilities located along the R183. The proposed development therefore represents a sustainable consolidation of the existing settlement rather than isolated rural expansion and is consistent with the principles of appropriate growth and development for a Tier 4. The proposed development can also be easily serviced. Contact has been made with Uisce Éireann, confirming that a wastewater connection to the proposed development is feasible. A pre-connection enquiry with the Doohamlet Group Water Scheme has also confirmed that they can supply the development with water. In conclusion the proposed development will deliver much needed social housing in an appropriate location while supporting sustainable growth within Doohamlet. Having regard to the above response, the relevant national policy objectives and the provisions of the Local Development Plan, all of which seek to facilitate the delivery of much-needed social housing, we trust that this application will receive favourable consideration from the Planning Authority. Site RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 9 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors Point 02 The application has failed to include adequate details of public lighting proposals for the development. Consequently, the applicant is required to provide a street lighting layout and additional information in terms of public lighting to include: • Submit a Lighting Design Report for the development showing the new junction and road connecting it to the existing public road taking into account; the conflict area lighting requirements at the entrance with the public road, the footpath lighting requirements, the existing street lighting in place, ensure uniformity of lighting, minimise light spill into neighbouring private properties. A Lighting Design Report has been prepared and is submitted as part of this response. The report demonstrates that the proposed lighting scheme has been designed to provide appropriate conflict area lighting at the site entrance, ensure adequate illumination of the footpaths, integrate with the existing public lighting network, maintain uniformity of lighting, and minimise light spill onto adjoining residential properties • A new junction onto a public road should be designed to BS5489, Lighting Design Standards, the position of all new and existing lighting columns should be considered regarding the sightlines on the junction onto the public road. The submitted Lighting Design Report confirms that the proposed junction onto the public road has been designed in accordance with the requirements of BS 5489. The design has taken account of the location of both existing and proposed lighting columns to ensure that the required sightlines at the junction are maintained. • Any concerns in the RSA regarding lighting should be incorporated into the lighting design. The recommendations of the Road Safety Audit relating to lighting have been reviewed and incorporated into the Lighting Design Report and the proposed lighting scheme, where applicable. • Include individual grid lighting reports for; the whole project, the development only, the road connecting it to the development and the junction with the existing road, and new footpath to be constructed on the public road. The Lighting Design Report shall be carried out by a competent, qualified Lighting Designer. The applicant must liaise with Monaghan County Council’s Public Lighting Officer regarding the specification of the existing street lighting in place. The submitted Lighting Design Report includes individual lighting grid reports for the overall development, the proposed residential development, the connecting road, the junction with the existing public road, and the proposed footpath along the public road. The report has been prepared by a suitably qualified and competent Lighting Designer. • All lighting columns shall be placed on the inside/rear of footpaths to minimise physical obstruction to pedestrians and reduce risk of impact from vehicles and shall be placed in line with property boundaries or building lines. No lights, to be considered for future adoption by Monaghan County Council, shall be mounted on walls of any buildings. The proposed lighting layout has been designed so that all lighting columns are located to the rear of the footpaths, aligned with property boundaries or building lines where practicable, thereby minimising obstruction to pedestrians and reducing the risk of vehicle impact. No lighting proposed for future taking in charge by Monaghan County Council is mounted on the walls of any buildings. • All lanterns shall be accessible for maintenance purposes from hoist parked on the public road. In situations where this is not possible, then collapsible columns, capable of safe operation by one operator, shall be used. RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 10 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors The proposed lighting scheme has been designed to ensure that all lanterns are accessible for routine maintenance from a hoist positioned on the public road. Where this cannot be achieved, collapsible lighting columns capable of safe operation by a single operator have been specified. • Submit a planting layout drawing clearly indicating exclusion zones where no planting of trees or shrubs will take place, i.e. there shall not be any mature tree within 6m horizontal distance of a 6m lighting column or within 8m horizontal distance of an 8m lighting column, etc A revised planting layout drawing has been prepared and is submitted as part of this response. The drawing clearly identifies the exclusion zones around all proposed lighting columns, ensuring that no trees or shrubs are planted within the required horizontal distances, thereby maintaining access for maintenance and preventing interference with the lighting system. Point 03 Policy MURP1 and Section 15.8 of the Development Plan list a number of components which should be considered when designing the layout for new developments, including: the creation of active frontages (with corner sites providing dual frontage); compatibility of the proposed development with adjoining buildings; permeability of layout; avoiding roads dominance; and connectivity with surrounding urban area. The Planning Authority consider the proposed development is lacking in this regard with concerns including, but not limited to: • Proposed house No’s 1 and 2 are considered to have an awkward layout relative to the remaining proposed development, and adverse relationship to an abutting existing dwelling to the east. These should be omitted. Houses Nos. 1 and 2 have been omitted from the proposed development and replaced with a single-storey bungalow. This revision provides a more appropriate and visually attractive entrance to the development while creating a stronger termination to the terrace along Dernaglug Cul-de-sac. The inclusion of a dwelling in this location is an important design element of the revised layout. Without it, the substantial side and rear boundary wall of the existing adjoining dwelling would be directly exposed to the proposed public open space and estate road, resulting in a poor visual edge and an inactive frontage. The revised layout is consistent with the principles of the Monaghan County Development Plan, which promotes the creation of high-quality public open spaces that are safe, attractive and naturally overlooked. It also accords with the principles of the Design Manual for Quality Housing, which advocates that public open spaces should be defined by active frontages providing passive surveillance, rather than by rear garden boundaries or exposed boundary walls. The proposed bungalow provides this active frontage, improves the visual quality of the public realm, enhances passive surveillance of the open space and estate entrance, and contributes positively to the overall character of the development. • Roads dominated layout of suburban character. The layout has been carefully designed to respond to the site's physical characteristics, constraints and natural topography, rather than adopting a rigid suburban estate pattern. The internal road network follows a low-speed, curvilinear alignment, which has been developed to accommodate the site's changing ground levels while minimising unnecessary earthworks, particularly adjacent to site boundaries. The street layout incorporates raised tables, generous verge planting and a central green space, creating a pedestrian-friendly environment and reinforcing the village character. The development is structured around a hierarchy of high-quality public open spaces rather than road infrastructure. The principal area of public open space occupies a central and highly visible location, forming the focal point of the development and providing an attractive amenity for residents. The accompanying landscape plan introduces a strong green structure through extensive verge, boundary and buffer planting, ensuring that soft landscaping is a defining feature of the scheme. Dwellings have been positioned to overlook the public open spaces, providing strong passive surveillance and creating a safe, attractive and functional residential environment. RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 11 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors The overall layout reflects the established character and morphology of rural village residential development within Doohamlet. The proportion of carriageway relative to soft landscaping and public open space is consistent with developments within the counties village settlement and avoids the appearance of a conventional suburban housing estate. The proposed development therefore integrates appropriately with its rural village setting and accords with the principles of the Design Manual for Quality Housing and the objectives of the Monaghan County Development Plan. • Poor permeability. The proposed development is located within a small, edge-of-village cul-de-sac where expectations for permeability are naturally limited by the surrounding context. The site is served by a single vehicular access, with an internal network of footpaths providing pedestrian connectivity around the central open space and throughout the estate, ensuring convenient access to all dwellings and amenity areas. The layout has been designed to provide clear internal legibility, with a simple and logical street hierarchy, strong visual connections to the central open space, and a comprehensive network of footpaths that facilitates convenient and intuitive pedestrian movement throughout the development. Furthermore, the internal road layout has been designed to ensure that, should adjoining lands become available for future development, the proposed estate road network can provide the logical and appropriate point of access, thereby facilitating the orderly expansion of the settlement in accordance with proper planning and sustainable development. • House No. 25 with a blank frontage adjacent an area of open space. House No. 24 (previously identified as House No. 25) has been revised to address the Planning Authority's concern regarding the extent of the blank elevation facing the adjacent public open space. An additional window has been introduced to the kitchen/dining area, reducing the visual impact of the previously blank façade while improving natural daylight and outlook for future occupants. The revised design also enhances passive surveillance of the adjoining public open space, contributing to improved natural supervision, increased activity and a stronger sense of place, consistent with the principles of good urban design and residential amenity. • The private amenity area boundary walls to houses 2, 4, 16, and 20 are visually prominent. House No. 2 has been omitted from the proposed development, as outlined previously. The rear garden boundary walls serving Houses No. 3, 14 and 19 (previously Houses No. 4, 15 and 20) are necessary to provide appropriate levels of privacy, security and residential amenity for future occupants. The walls will be constructed in smooth rendered blockwork, providing a durable and high-quality finish that is consistent with the architectural character of the development. While sections of these walls will be visible from the public realm, their visual impact has been carefully mitigated through the site layout. Rather than forming long, continuous boundaries, the walls are broken into shorter lengths by the arrangement of dwellings, access points and landscaped areas. In addition, proposed tree and shrub planting will soften their appearance over time, reducing their visual prominence and ensuring they integrate successfully into the overall landscape strategy. It is therefore considered that the revised design strikes an appropriate balance between safeguarding residential privacy and maintaining a high-quality public realm. • The opposing first floor windows on side elevations of a number of dwellings could compromise privacy. Windows at first floor on side elevations have been removed. RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 12 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors • The useability and appropriateness of the public open space to the immediate south of house 29. In response to the Planning Authority's comment regarding the usability and appropriateness of the public open space to the immediate south of House No. 29, it is confirmed that this area was not intended to serve as public open space. Accordingly, it has been omitted from the current development proposals. Point 04 Submitted dwelling plans are lacking in detail and full proposed elevations plans have not been provided for all dwelling types. Revised plans shall be submitted in his regard. See the accompanying updated House Type’s - Floor Plans, Section & Elevations addressing the points above. Mirrored house types are denoted using the letter ‘r’. Point 05 The applicant shall engage with Uisce Eireann by submitting a pre-connection Enquiry (PCE) to assess feasibility of connection to the public water / wastewater infrastructure. The outcome of the Uisce Eireann PCE shall be submitted to the Planning Authority as part of a response to this Further Information Request. See the accompanying pre-connection enquiry response from Uisce Éireann, confirming that wastewater connection to the proposed development is feasible. Also attached pre-connection enquiry from Doohamlet Group Water Scheme stating they can supply the development. Point 06 The applicant is requested to provide a separate plan(s) clarifying the extent of ‘cut and fill’ on the application site. This plan should include details on existing & proposed site levels, and in so far as possible existing ground levels on abutting land. See the accompanying Volumetric Analysis Plan Drawing Ref 6524 – 90 – 01 illustrating the proposed cut and fill strategy. The extent of excavation has been determined primarily by the internal road network, which has been carefully designed to accommodate the site's significant level changes. The road geometry achieves appropriate gradients in accordance with current design standards while minimising earthworks along the site boundaries where possible and protecting existing hedgerows. Consequently, the majority of the cut is located within the centre of the site, an open agricultural field with no distinctive landscape features. This approach preserves the site's perimeter, reduces visual impacts on neighbouring properties, limits unnecessary disturbance to existing ground levels and boundary vegetation, and represents the most appropriate engineering and environmental solution for the development. Point 07 The following environment related information shall be provided: a) Submit a Construction and Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). The CEMP must consider impacts and propose mitigation for air, noise, dust and surface water risks. o The CEMP shall take account of best practice and the guidance produced by Inland Fisheries Ireland titled “Guidelines on Protection of Fisheries during Construction Works in and Adjacent to Waters 2016”. The CEMP shall include the location details of the monitoring points where daily visual checks and weekly surface water monitoring (physical& chemical parameters) shall be carried out. See the accompanying CEMP report by McCloy Consulting Ltd. RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 13 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors o The CEMP must also take into consideration Construction and Demolition proposals and By-Products management using “Best Practice Guidelines for the preparation of resource & waste management plans for construction & demolition projects’. It is not clear in the application if imported infilling material will be required for the development and details in particular regard to the source and quantities of this material should be specified in the CEMP. If infilling material is required to be imported onsite the applicant or economic operator shall: i. Utilise EPA By-Product Regulation 27 in moving soil infill material from one site to another. Official correspondence demonstrating Article 27 Registration with the EPA shall be submitted to the Planning Authority prior to commencement of Development, or ii. If using waste material as infill and prior to acceptance of material a valid permit must be issued by Monaghan County Council in accordance with the Waste Management (Facility Permit and Registration) Regulations 2007 as amended, or iii. buy topsoil material as a product for final landscaping purposes only. Documentation demonstrating purchase shall be submitted to Planning Authority. See the accompanying CEMP report by McCloy Consulting Ltd. b) submit revised proposals for the storm water drainage system to take account of the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage guidance document on Nature-based solutions for the management of rainwater and surface water run-off in urban areas. Revised surface water drainage proposals have been prepared and are submitted as part of this response. The drainage strategy has been reviewed and updated to take account of the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage's guidance document, Nature-based Solutions for the Management of Rainwater and Surface Water Run-off in Urban Areas. The proposed surface water management measures incorporate nature-based solutions where appropriate and are designed to manage runoff in a sustainable manner, having regard to the characteristics and constraints of the site. c) Submit a surface water drainage plan detailing how the surface water drainage system will be maintained post development stage, and details of the responsible persons. A Surface Water Drainage Maintenance Plan has been prepared and incorporated within the Engineering Services Report submitted as part of this Further Information response. The Maintenance Plan sets out the inspection, operation and maintenance requirements for the surface water drainage system following completion of the development and clearly identifies the party responsible for its long-term management, operation and maintenance, thereby ensuring the continued effective performance of the drainage infrastructure throughout the lifetime of the development Point 08 The Planning Authority has received a third-party submission in respect of the proposed development. The applicant is invited to review the content of same and provide a detailed response to the issues raised. 9.1 Ground 1, 9.2 Ground 2, 9.3 Ground 3 & 9.4 Ground 4: Please refer to Additional Information Request No. 1 and the corresponding response within this document, which demonstrates the proposal's compliance with the Monaghan County Development Plan RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 14 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors 2025–2031 and the grounds 1-4 above. The response clearly establishes that the development constitutes a logical and sequential extension of Doohamlet and satisfies an evidenced need for social housing at both county-wide and local levels. 9.5 Ground 5: The application falls to be determined in accordance with the statutory Development Plan in force at the date of the Planning Authority's decision. The fact that pre-planning engagement commenced prior to the adoption of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025–2031 does not prejudice the assessment of the proposal under the current policy framework. Doohamlet is identified as a Tier 4 Village within the settlement hierarchy, reflecting the Planning Authority's recognition of its existing community infrastructure, service base and capacity to accommodate sustainable residential growth. The proposed development is specifically intended to address an identified and evidenced social housing need at both local and county level, as set out in response to Further Information Request No. 1. Furthermore, the grant of permission for this development would not prejudice the future consideration of other suitable lands within Doohamlet, as each planning application must be assessed on its own individual merits having regard to the statutory Development Plan and all other material planning considerations prevailing at the time of determination. It is also noteworthy that the Planning and Development Act 2024 reflects an evolving legislative approach to housing delivery, placing increased emphasis on evidence-based housing strategies and the timely provision of housing required to meet identified need. While not all provisions of the Act have yet been commenced, it nevertheless represents the clear direction of national planning policy and is capable of being afforded material weight in the assessment of proposals that respond to established housing need. In the present case, the confirmed requirement for 31 social housing units within Doohamlet provides compelling evidence that the proposed development is consistent with this evolving legislative and policy framework. 9.6 Ground 6: The objector's reference to a Social Infrastructure Audit appears to conflate good practice assessments sometimes prepared for large urban developments with a statutory planning requirement. No policy within the Monaghan County Development Plan requires such an audit for a residential development of this nature, nor is there any specified threshold above which such an assessment becomes mandatory. Accordingly, it is considered that sufficient information has been submitted to enable the Planning Authority to assess the proposal. The development is appropriately located, can be adequately serviced, is well integrated with the existing village, and will contribute positively to the sustainable growth of Doohamlet. The request for a separate Community and Social Infrastructure Capacity Audit is therefore unnecessary and unsupported by planning policy. 9.7 Ground 7: As mentioned above see the accompanying pre-connection enquiry response from Uisce Éireann, confirming that wastewater connection to the proposed development is feasible. Also attached pre- connection enquiry from Doohamlet Group Water Scheme stating they can supply the development. 9.8 Ground 8: Please refer to Additional Information Request No. 1 and the corresponding response within this document, which demonstrates the proposal's compliance 15.8.10 & Objective RDSP 1 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025–2031. To further assist the Planning Authority in its assessment of the current proposal, attention is drawn to the recent grant of planning permission under Planning Ref. 25/60326 for a 21-unit social housing development at Rockcorry. While it is acknowledged that every planning application must be determined on its own merits and having regard to its particular site characteristics, the decision provides a relevant RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 15 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors and recent example of the application of the policies of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025– 2031 to a proposal within a Tier 4 village. Of particular relevance is the Planning Authority's assessment in that case, which concluded: "In principle and subject to (a) all housing being social (which can be conditioned) and (b) evidence of housing demand, the Planning Authority is of the opinion that development at this location is acceptable in principle and will help to secure Objective S04 and Policy RDSP1 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025–2031." The same fundamental planning considerations arise in the present application. The proposed development comprises 100% social housing, and Monaghan County Council's Housing Section has confirmed an identified requirement for 31 social housing units within Doohamlet. The proposal also represents the logical and sequential extension of the existing settlement and is capable of being served by existing infrastructure. The planning circumstances are therefore directly comparable in that both proposals seek to deliver identified social housing need within Tier 4 villages on lands that represent appropriate and sustainable locations for residential expansion. The Rockcorry decision demonstrates that the Planning Authority has previously recognised that proposals of this nature can constitute proper planning and sustainable development where there is a clearly evidenced housing need and the development is appropriately located. While not binding, consistency in planning decision-making is an important principle of the planning system and is reflected in the Development Management Guidelines for Planning Authorities. Section 6.7 of the Development Management Guidelines advises that planning authorities should have regard to the planning history of sites and their wider environs to help ensure a consistent approach to planning proposals over time. Furthermore, Section 7.15 confirms that the objectives of a development plan should not be interpreted as imposing a blanket prohibition on particular forms of development and do not relieve the Planning Authority of its obligation to assess each application on its individual merits. Accordingly, it is submitted that the assessment undertaken in Planning Ref. 25/60326 demonstrates the correct application of the policies of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025–2031 and supports a consistent approach in the determination of the current application. As in the Rockcorry case, the proposal before the Planning Authority responds to an evidenced social housing need, represents the logical sequential expansion of an existing Tier 4 village and constitutes proper planning and sustainable development 9.9 Ground 9: The objector contends that the proposed residential density is excessive having regard to the site's location outside the defined village boundary. This assertion is not supported by either the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025–2031 or current national planning policy. As outlined elsewhere in this Planning Statement, the proposed development has been specifically assessed under Section 15.8.10 of the Monaghan County Development Plan, which expressly provides for social housing developments on lands adjoining Tier 4 villages where a demonstrable housing need exists and where the development represents a logical and sustainable extension of the existing settlement. The policy does not prescribe a reduced density simply because a site lies immediately outside the settlement boundary. Rather, the assessment is based on whether the development constitutes proper planning and sustainable development having regard to its context, design quality, infrastructure capacity and identified housing need. The proposed development adjoins the existing built-up area of Doohamlet and represents the sequential expansion of the village. It is served by existing public infrastructure and is within walking distance of community facilities, thereby supporting the principles of compact growth promoted by national planning policy. RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 16 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors The Sustainable Residential Development and Compact Settlements Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2024) recognise that residential density should not be considered as a numerical exercise but should instead respond to the character, scale and function of the settlement. The Guidelines emphasise that the appropriate density for villages is one that makes efficient use of serviced land, supports existing services and facilities, creates walkable neighbourhoods and delivers high-quality residential environments. They discourage the inefficient consumption of land through unnecessarily low-density development, particularly where sites are well connected to existing settlements. The proposed layout has been carefully designed to respond to the village context. The density reflects the efficient use of serviced land while providing generous public open space, private amenity areas, appropriate separation distances, substantial landscaping, adequate parking and a clear hierarchy of streets and pedestrian routes. The development therefore achieves an appropriate balance between efficient land use and high-quality residential amenity. Furthermore, the proposed density is entirely consistent with the objective of delivering compact growth in existing settlements, reducing unnecessary land take and maximising the use of existing infrastructure, all of which are key objectives of the National Planning Framework, the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025–2031 and the Compact Settlements Guidelines. 9.10 Ground 10: The objector's assertion that the proposed development would result in piecemeal development is not supported by the characteristics of Doohamlet or the planning policy framework governing the assessment of the application. The objection appears to assume that future growth of Doohamlet should occur around a traditional village core. However, this does not reflect the established settlement pattern. Doohamlet has evolved as a linear rural village, with residential development and community facilities extending along the R183 Regional Road rather than being concentrated around a single nucleated centre. The existing church, school, community facilities and residential development are distributed along this linear corridor, and the village has historically developed in this manner. The proposed development represents the logical continuation of this established settlement pattern. The site immediately adjoins the existing residential area, is connected to existing public infrastructure and can be integrated into the village without creating isolated or fragmented development. It therefore constitutes a planned and sequential extension of the existing settlement rather than piecemeal development. Furthermore, the objector suggests that future residential expansion should instead be directed to lands north of the R183. This overlooks significant physical constraints affecting those lands. Areas to the north of the Regional Road, including lands adjoining the existing football grounds, are known to be affected by flood risk, limiting their suitability for residential development. By contrast, the application site occupies elevated ground outside identified flood-sensitive areas and is therefore a significantly more appropriate and sustainable location for residential development. Importantly, the proposed development does not prejudice the future comprehensive development of Doohamlet. As previously outlined, the grant of planning permission for this scheme would not preclude the consideration of other suitable lands in the future, each of which would continue to be assessed on its own merits against the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025–2031 and all relevant material planning considerations 9.11 Ground 11: The matters raised under this ground substantially repeat issues already addressed elsewhere in this Further Information response, including the principle of development outside the settlement boundary, housing need, residential density, layout, connectivity, access arrangements, infrastructure and residential amenity. Accordingly, these matters are not repeated here. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed development fully complies with the objectives and design principles set out in Section 15.8 – Multi-Unit Residential Developments of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025–2031. The scheme has been designed having regard to the Sustainable Residential Development and Compact Settlements Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2024), the Design Manual for RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 17 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors Urban Roads and Streets (DMURS), the Urban Design Manual, and all other relevant national guidance documents referenced by the objector. While Section 15.8 states that multi-unit residential development will not normally be permitted outside designated settlements, the Development Plan also contains a specific policy mechanism under Section 15.8.10 which expressly provides for social housing developments adjoining Tier 4 villages where a demonstrable housing need exists and where the development represents the logical and sustainable expansion of the settlement. As demonstrated throughout this Planning Statement, the proposed development satisfies each of these criteria. The proposal represents a well-designed, plan-led extension of Doohamlet that responds to an evidenced local housing need, integrates with the existing village, utilises existing infrastructure and services, and delivers a high-quality residential environment in accordance with both the Development Plan and national planning policy. It is therefore considered that the proposed development fully accords with the objectives of Section 15.8 and constitutes proper planning and sustainable development. 9.12 Ground 12: Part V The objector has misunderstood the Part V statement contained within the Concept Statement. To avoid any ambiguity, the proposed development is intended to comprise 100% social housing, to be delivered in conjunction with Monaghan County Council in response to an identified housing need. The reference to Part V was included solely to explain the statutory obligations that would ordinarily apply to a private residential development and does not alter the intended tenure of the proposed scheme. The mechanism by which the dwellings are ultimately delivered is a matter between the developer and the Housing Authority and does not affect the planning assessment of the proposal. Location of Social Housing The suggestion that the proposed development should instead be located within Castleblayney rather than Doohamlet fundamentally misunderstands the purpose of the application. Monaghan County Council's Housing Section has confirmed an identified requirement for 31 social housing units within Doohamlet. The proposed development has been specifically designed to meet this established local need. The Planning Authority is required to assess the suitability of the application site having regard to the provisions of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025–2031 and all relevant material planning considerations. It is not required to determine whether an alternative settlement would be a preferable location. Doohamlet is identified within the Development Plan as a Tier 4 Village, reflecting the Planning Authority's recognition that it is an appropriate location for sustainable residential growth. The proposed development represents the logical and sequential expansion of the existing settlement and will support the long-term vitality and sustainability of the village. Age-Friendly Housing, Tenure Mix and Community Balance The objector also raises concerns regarding age-friendly housing, tenure mix and the concentration of social housing. These matters do not provide a basis for refusing planning permission. The proposed dwellings have been designed in accordance with the relevant requirements of the Building Regulations, including Part M, together with the principles of Universal Design, ensuring that the homes are capable of meeting the needs of a wide range of occupants over their lifetime. The allocation of dwellings to particular household types is an operational matter for Monaghan County Council in its role as Housing Authority and does not form part of the planning assessment. Similarly, while the Development Plan encourages a mix of dwelling types and tenures across residential developments generally, this cannot reasonably be interpreted as preventing a development specifically intended to meet an identified social housing requirement. Indeed, Section 15.8.10 of the Monaghan County Development Plan expressly facilitates social housing developments adjoining Tier 4 villages where a demonstrable housing need has been established. The proposal therefore accords with the specific provisions of the Development Plan. 9.13 Ground 13: RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 18 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors The objector's concerns regarding the proposed earthworks are not accepted. The site topography has been fully surveyed and accurately represented within the planning application. The accompanying Concept Statement clearly explains that localised cut and fill operations are proposed to create appropriate development platforms, accessible footpaths, compliant road gradients and functional public open spaces. Such engineering works are a normal and accepted component of residential development on sites with varying topography and do not, in themselves, indicate that a site is unsuitable for development. The proposed earthworks have been carefully designed to minimise visual impact while creating a coherent and accessible residential environment. The extent of the proposed level changes is illustrated on the submitted drawings, including the site sections and engineering information accompanying the application. Construction activities associated with earthworks, including the movement of materials, noise and dust, are temporary in nature and can be appropriately managed through standard construction management practices and compliance with any conditions attached to a grant of permission. Where surplus excavated material arises, it will be managed in accordance with the applicable waste management legislation and best construction practice. The Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) prepared by McCloy Consulting, which accompanies the application. The CEMP sets out detailed measures for the management of construction traffic, dust suppression, noise and vibration control, surface water protection, material handling, waste management and general environmental protection throughout the construction phase. Any surplus excavated material arising during construction will be managed in accordance with the approved CEMP, the Waste Management Acts and all relevant environmental legislation. 9.14 Ground 14: The objector's concerns relating to the siting and design of the proposed development largely repeat matters addressed elsewhere in this Further Information response, including the principle of development, village character, layout, density, residential amenity, public open space and the appropriateness of the site. The proposed development has been designed having regard to the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025–2031, the Sustainable Residential Development and Compact Settlements Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2024), DMURS, the Urban Design Manual, and Quality Housing for Sustainable Communities. The layout responds to the site's topography, the existing pattern of development and the surrounding residential context while delivering a high-quality residential environment with generous public open space, passive surveillance, appropriate private amenity space, landscaping and a clear hierarchy of streets and pedestrian routes. The objector's suggestion that the development exhibits a "suburban" character is a subjective opinion rather than an identified breach of planning policy. The design adopts a contemporary residential layout consistent with current national guidance and the objectives of compact growth, creating a well-connected and legible neighbourhood that integrates with the existing village. The provision of private gardens, public open space, appropriate setbacks and a simple street hierarchy are all characteristics promoted by current national residential design guidance and should not be interpreted as evidence of inappropriate suburban development. With regard to the entrance works, it is not accepted that the proposal results in an unacceptable loss of public open space. The revised layout has been carefully designed to minimise impacts on the existing estate while facilitating an appropriate vehicular and pedestrian connection to the proposed development. The remaining public open space continues to provide an attractive landscaped setting for existing residents and the proposed development significantly increases the overall quantity and quality of publicly accessible open space within the wider area. The revised proposal has also addressed concerns relating to the dwellings adjoining the entrance. Following the receipt of the Further Information Request, House No. 2 has been omitted from the scheme, increasing separation distances, reducing the scale of development at the entrance and improving the relationship with adjoining properties. The remaining dwellings fully comply with the Development Plan's standards for separation distances, overlooking, daylight, sunlight and residential amenity. There will be no unacceptable overlooking, overshadowing or overbearing impact on neighbouring properties. RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 19 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors The objector's comments regarding site levels and earthworks have been addressed separately under Ground 12. The proposed level changes are a normal engineering response to the site's natural topography and have been fully assessed within the submitted engineering drawings and supporting documentation. Temporary construction impacts are comprehensively addressed within the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) prepared by McCloy Consulting, which details the measures to manage earthworks, traffic, noise, dust, drainage, waste management and environmental protection throughout the construction phase. Overall, it is considered that the proposal represents a high-quality residential development that is fully consistent with the design objectives of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025–2031 and current national planning guidance. Figure 8 – Active Public Open Space Calculation Existing Adjacent Site The existing development provides approximately 1,080 m² (13%) of active public open space, fully complying with the Sustainable Residential Development and Compact Settlements Guidelines for Planning Authorities, which recommend public open space provision in the order of 10–15% of the gross site area. While a small area of open space within the adjoining residential development is required to accommodate the proposed access road, this area has limited functional recreational value due to its topography, drainage characteristics and mature planting, and currently functions primarily as passive amenity space rather than usable recreational open space. The proposed development more than compensates for this limited loss through the provision of approximately 887 m² (5.5%) of new passive landscaped open space, in addition to approximately 12.3% active public open space within the development itself. Consequently, the overall quantity and quality of public open space available to both existing and future residents is maintained and enhanced. The proposed open spaces have been carefully integrated into the layout to provide usable recreational areas, informal amenity spaces, biodiversity enhancement and an attractive landscaped setting for the development. Accordingly, it is not considered that the proposal results in any unacceptable loss of public open space or residential amenity. 9.15 Ground 15: 1080m2 (13%) Active Public Open Space 8237m2 Total Site Area RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 20 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors The objector refers to conditions attached to a previous planning permission granted almost twenty years ago. The current application must, however, be assessed on the basis of the existing site conditions and the proposals now before the Planning Authority. The applicant is not relying on any historic planting as mitigation for the proposed development. A comprehensive landscaping scheme accompanies the application, providing for the planting of new native trees, hedgerows, shrubs and grassed areas throughout the development. The proposed landscaping has been designed to reinforce the site boundaries, enhance biodiversity, soften the visual appearance of the development and integrate the scheme into its surrounding landscape. Over time, the proposed planting will provide a significant enhancement to the visual amenity and ecological value of the site. The objector's suggestion that a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) is required is not accepted. The proposed development comprises a modest residential scheme adjoining the existing built-up area of Doohamlet and does not constitute a development of a scale, nature or landscape sensitivity that would normally require an LVIA. The planning application includes a comprehensive suite of drawings, site sections, existing and proposed levels, landscaping proposals and photorealistic imagery where appropriate, enabling the Planning Authority to fully assess the visual effects of the proposal. Accordingly, it is considered that sufficient information has been submitted to enable a proper assessment of the landscape and visual impacts of the proposed development. The proposed landscaping will significantly enhance the appearance of the site and ensure that the development integrates successfully with the existing village and surrounding landscape. 9.16 Ground 16: The matters raised under this ground largely repeat those addressed under Ground 15 concerning the historical removal of trees and hedgerows and the visual integration of the proposed development. The current planning application must be assessed on the basis of the existing condition of the site and the development proposed. The applicant is not relying on historic vegetation to provide landscape screening or visual mitigation. Instead, the application includes a comprehensive landscape proposal incorporating new native tree planting, hedgerows, shrub planting, grassed areas and biodiversity measures designed to enhance the visual quality of the development and reinforce the site's boundaries. The proposed landscaping has been developed having regard to Section 15.19 – Landscaping (Urban & Rural) of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025–2031 and will create an attractive, robust and sustainable landscape framework that integrates the development with the surrounding village and wider landscape. The landscape proposals will mature over time, providing enhanced visual amenity, ecological value and natural screening. The objector also suggests that the submitted drawings do not adequately illustrate the proposed earthworks. This is not accepted. The planning application includes detailed engineering drawings, existing and proposed site levels and cross- sections which clearly illustrate the proposed cut and fill required to accommodate the development. These drawings have been prepared by suitably qualified engineers and provide the Planning Authority with sufficient information to assess both the engineering and landscape implications of the proposal. Figure 9 – Updated proposed trees calculation RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 21 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors 9.17 Ground 17: The objector states that a Site-Specific Flood Risk Assessment (SSFRA) should have been submitted with the application. This is not accepted. In accordance with the Planning System and Flood Risk Management Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2009), an SSFRA is only required where a proposed development is located within, or may be affected by, areas identified as being at risk of flooding. he proposed development site is not located within an area of identified flood risk. As illustrated on Figure 6, there is no evidence of flood susceptibility affecting the site. While Doohamlet is bisected by a watercourse, the areas of known flood risk are confined primarily to lands north of the village and around the existing football grounds to the north-east. These flood-prone areas naturally constrain future development in those locations. In contrast, the application site occupies elevated ground to the south of the village and lies outside the identified flood-sensitive areas. The proposed surface water drainage strategy has been designed in accordance with current engineering standards and incorporates appropriate attenuation and Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) to ensure that post-development runoff is appropriately managed and that there is no increase in flood risk either within or beyond the site. Accordingly, having regard to the Flood Risk Management Guidelines and the absence of any identified flood risk affecting the site, it is considered that a Site-Specific Flood Risk Assessment is neither required nor warranted in this instance 9.18 Ground 18: The objector acknowledges that the proposed development will involve normal construction activities associated with a residential development but declines to consider the mitigation measures proposed by the applicant. Notwithstanding this position, the planning application is accompanied by a comprehensive Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) prepared by McCloy Consulting, which specifically addresses the management of all construction phase activities. The CEMP sets out detailed procedures and mitigation measures relating to site establishment, construction traffic management, earthworks, dust suppression, noise and vibration control, surface water protection, pollution prevention, waste management, sediment control, material storage and emergency response procedures. The document has been prepared to ensure that construction activities are undertaken in a controlled manner and that any potential impacts on neighbouring properties and the surrounding environment are appropriately avoided or mitigated. 9.19 Ground 19: The objection is based entirely on speculation regarding the possible presence of protected species and does not identify any site-specific ecological constraint. The application site comprises an improved agricultural field adjoining the existing village and does not contain designated habitats or ecological features of significance. Given the modest scale of the proposed development and the nature of the works, which comprise principally site preparation and earthworks, an Ecological Impact Assessment is neither required nor warranted. 9.20 Ground 20: The objector asserts that an Appropriate Assessment (AA) Screening Report should accompany the application. This assertion is unsupported by the characteristics and location of the proposed development. The application site is not located within or adjacent to any European Site (Natura 2000 site) and, as acknowledged by the objector, the nearest designated sites are located approximately 18 km or more from the proposed development. Having regard to the nature, scale and location of the proposal, there is no identifiable source-pathway-receptor connection that could give rise to likely significant effects on any RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 22 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors European Site, either alone or in combination with other plans or projects. The objector has presented no scientific evidence to demonstrate otherwise. The Planning Authority is the competent authority responsible for undertaking Appropriate Assessment Screening under the Planning and Development Acts. The information submitted with the application is sufficient to enable the Planning Authority to determine whether Stage 1 AA Screening is required. Accordingly, the objection raises no reasonable basis for concluding that the proposed development is likely to have significant effects on any European Site. 9.21 Ground 21: The proposed development has been designed to preserve the setting and character of the adjoining Protected Structure. No Conservation Report is required, and there is no evidence that the proposal would adversely affect the Protected Structure, its curtilage, or any archaeological resource. 9.22 Ground 22: The objector states that the submitted Archaeological Testing Report appears to relate to a different scheme. This is a misunderstanding. The Archaeological Testing Report was originally prepared in support of an earlier planning application for a larger development that extended beyond the boundaries of the current proposal and comprised approximately twice the number of dwellings. While the scale of the development has subsequently been reduced, the archaeological investigations encompassed the entirety of the current application site. There is no evidence of any archaeological discoveries or changes in site conditions during the intervening period that would render the report or its conclusions obsolete. The archaeological potential of the site has not changed simply because the planning proposal has changed. Indeed, the current proposal relates to a substantially smaller site than that previously investigated, meaning the archaeological assessment remains directly applicable to all lands now proposed for development. The objector also questions whether the archaeological investigations were undertaken. This assertion is wholly unfounded. The Archaeological Testing Report contains a trench location plan together with contemporaneous photographs of the excavated test trenches. Furthermore, historical Google Earth imagery dated 13 September 2007 clearly shows the excavation trenches in the locations identified within the report, providing independent verification that the archaeological investigations were carried out as recorded. Accordingly, the references within the report to the earlier, larger development are historical in nature only and do not affect the validity of the archaeological assessment or its conclusions in respect of the current application. Figure 10 – Google Earth image dated 13 September 2007 9.23 Ground 23: The objector's comments rely extensively on observations and conditions relating to a previous planning application for a substantially larger development. Those comments must be considered in the context of that earlier proposal, which differed significantly in terms of its scale, layout, access arrangements and overall design. The current application proposes a significantly smaller residential development accessed RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 23 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors via the existing residential estate, utilising established infrastructure designed to facilitate the future development of adjoining lands. The proposed access arrangements have been assessed by suitably qualified engineers, supported by a Road Safety Audit, and demonstrate that the development can operate safely and efficiently. The objector's suggestion that the development should instead provide a new direct access onto the R183 reflects a preference rather than a planning requirement. The suitability of the proposed access will be determined by the Planning Authority having regard to the technical information submitted and the recommendations of the Roads Authority. Similarly, references to road improvements and footpath works sought in connection with the previous, much larger scheme are not directly applicable to the current proposal. The present application must be assessed on its own merits, and there is no justification for requiring infrastructure that was associated with a materially different development proposal. 9.24 Ground 24: The objector suggests that the proposed development would establish an undesirable planning precedent. The applicant respectfully disagrees. If approved, the development would instead establish a positive precedent by demonstrating how much-needed social housing can be delivered in a logical, sustainable and plan-led manner on serviced lands adjoining an existing Tier 4 settlement. The proposal represents the planned expansion of Doohamlet through the efficient use of existing infrastructure and services, while avoiding more environmentally constrained lands to the north of the village. It has been specifically assessed against the provisions of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025–2031, including Section 15.8.10, which expressly recognises the need to facilitate social housing adjoining Tier 4 villages where a demonstrable housing need exists. The suggestion that approval would automatically justify future development of adjoining lands is incorrect. Any future planning application would be required to be assessed independently on its own merits, having regard to the Development Plan in force, site-specific constraints, infrastructure capacity, environmental considerations and all other relevant planning matters. The granting of permission for this proposal would not create an automatic entitlement for further development. Rather than establishing an undesirable precedent, the proposed development would demonstrate the proper application of national and local planning policy by facilitating the sustainable delivery of social housing in an appropriate location while supporting the long-term vitality and viability of Doohamlet 9.25 Ground 25: The objector contends that the proposed development will adversely affect the amenities of neighbouring properties and depreciate property values. These assertions are unsupported by any objective planning or technical evidence. The proposed development has been carefully designed to protect the residential amenities of adjoining properties through appropriate separation distances, site layout, landscaping and boundary treatments. The application demonstrates compliance with the relevant provisions of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025–2031 and established principles of good residential design. While the objector refers to case law concerning compensation provisions under the Planning Acts, each planning application must be determined on its own merits. The possibility of an effect on property values is not, of itself, a material planning consideration. The relevant consideration for the Planning Authority is whether the proposed development would result in an unacceptable impact on the amenities of adjoining properties. No evidence has been presented to demonstrate that this would be the case. Conclusion The objections raised by the objector have been carefully considered. While extensive in volume, the majority of the issues raised are either matters that have already been comprehensively addressed within the planning application and the accompanying Further Information, are based upon historical planning circumstances that are no longer applicable or rely on speculative assertions unsupported by objective planning or technical evidence. RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 24 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors The proposed development has been designed having regard to the provisions of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025–2031, national planning policy and the principles of proper planning and sustainable development. The application is supported by comprehensive architectural, engineering, environmental and technical documentation which demonstrates that the site can be developed without giving rise to unacceptable impacts on residential amenity, road safety, heritage, ecology, drainage or the wider environment. Particular regard should be had to Section 15.8.10 of the Development Plan, which expressly provides for the delivery of social housing adjoining Tier 4 settlements where a demonstrable housing need exists. The applicant has provided robust evidence of that need, together with clear justification that the proposal represents the logical and sequential expansion of Doohamlet through the efficient use of existing infrastructure and services. Many of the objections invite the Planning Authority to refuse permission on the basis of subjective opinion, hypothetical future scenarios or matters that are not material planning considerations. Planning decisions are instead be based upon objective planning policy, technical evidence and the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. Having regard to the submitted planning application, the additional information now provided and the responses contained within this document, it is respectfully submitted that the proposed development complies with the objectives of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025–2031, accords with national planning policy and represents a sustainable and appropriate response to an identified local housing need. It is therefore respectfully requested that Monaghan County Council grant planning permission for the proposed development. Schedule of reports included within the further information response: - Significant Further Information Response Cover Letter - Significant Further Information (SFI) Site Notice - Significant Further Information (SFI) Newspaper Notice - Pre-Connection Enquiry Uisce Éireann - Pre-Connection Enquiry Doohamlet Group Water Scheme - Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) - Engineering Services Report - Public Lighting Calculation Report Please refer to the enclosed drawing transmittal sheet for a list of revised drawings included with this response. It is respectfully submitted that the enclosed Further Information comprehensively addresses the matters raised by the Planning Authority, the objector and demonstrates that the proposed development accords with the principles of proper planning and sustainable development. Yours sincerely, Kieran O’Reilly MRIAI Architect |PSDP | Director RECEIVED: 30/07/2026 Page 25 of 25 Architects Consulting Engineers Building Surveyors Appendix A RECEIVED: 30/07/2026