Planning permission for strategic housing development quashed where reasons for EIA screening determination were inadequate

Planning and development – judicial review – local residents challenging the decision granting planning permission for a strategic housing development on a site – protected structure – existing site – planning permission – impugned decision – pleadings and issues – scope of the trial - State and Irish Water not Participating - derogation Licence -scope of this Judgment – Grounds at Issue – opposition papers – information before the board - role of the court & law of judicial review - presumption of validity - general principles - irrationality and reasons - inadequacies of EIA and AA – adequacy of reasons – alleged failure to indicate whether the Board agrees with the analysis in its Inspector’s Report and whether that report is part of the Board’s reasoning – reasons offered were sufficient - protected structure – extent of curtilage - EIA screening - “significance of effects” – protected structure – screening report - Inspector’s Report – Impugned Permission – EIA Screening – reasons - the Board adopted a report which did not describe those effects adequately and could not of itself, in law, provide an adequate basis for or reasons for an EIA screening determination that EIA was not required - Board failed to give adequate reasons for its EIA Screening decision as to insignificance of effect on Cultural/Architectural Heritage – remittal - birds & green sites network - impact on wider network of green sites - theoretical and unsubstantiated argument - scientific expertise of the board - building height - material contravention & application of SPPRS – analysis of caselaw - Board erroneously relied on SPPR1 of the Height Guidelines and that the Impugned Permission must be quashed on that account - Board’s reliance on SPPR3 - Density Gradient Issue - “precautionary approach” & prejudgment bias - failure to comply with the proper planning limitation - AA Screening – Ringsend WWTP Overload - Irish Water correspondence, HHQRA & AA Screening Report - Inspector’s Report, the Board’s Decision on AA Screening - the Inspector and the Board were alive to their obligation to screen for in-combination effects and explicitly concluded that there would be none of significance - Dublin Cycling – evidence - meaning of in-combination effects - bathing waters – judicial review granted –