24-metre mast decision at Esker House upheld by ABP
AN BORD Pleanála has upheld South Dublin County Council’s decision to refuse planning permission for the erection of a 24-metre telecommunications mast at Esker House in Lucan.
Vantage Towers Ltd sought permission for the erection of a 24-metre-high lattice telecommunications support structure.
Also included was antennae, dishes and associated telecommunications equipment, all enclosed in security fencing.
It was noted in their planning application that the proposed development was located within the curtilage of a Protected Structure.
On May 29 last, South Dublin County Council decided to refuse permission for the telecommunications mast.
The council said the mast would be “a visually dominant feature that would have a significant adverse impact on the character, setting, special interest of the Protected Structure [Esker House].”
A proposed revised siting of the structure was also ruled out by the council, as the new site would result in a “reduction in the separation distance to the Riparian Corridor and associated watercourse to the north of the subject site [and] would fail to protect the integrity of the riparian corridor.”
Vantage Towers Ltd appealed this decision to An Bord Pleanála the following June where they stated the structure would “be well hidden” from most viewpoints associated with Esker House.
The company also outlined how the structure was needed in Esker “to ensure coverage in a weak area of Dublin” and it would “significantly improve Vodafone’s coverage” in the area.
In terms of the riparian corridor, Vantage Towers stated that protection measures could be put in place to protect it during development works.
On March 15, An Bord Pleanála decided to uphold South Dublin County Council’s decision to refuse permission.
The appeals board said the development of the structure “would fail to protect the integrity of the riparian corridor.”
ABP also said it “cannot be satisfied that the proposed telecommunications infrastructure by reason of its height, design and siting would not result in a visually dominant feature that would have a significant adverse impact on the character, setting, special interest of the Protected Structure Esker House and its curtilage.”
