Community groups in the south Tipperary town of Clogheen have voiced grave concern after a controversial proposal for a communications mast got through the local planning process - without their objections being considered.
An appeal has been lodged with An Bord Pleanala this week against permission granted for the 30-metre Esat Digifone mast in the centre of Clogheen.
Community spokesmen warned that there is something to be learned from the manner in which they became lulled into a false sense of security, believing that the planning application was on hold.
Certainly there is a stark lesson for other communities around the country in this case: that constant vigilance and frequent checks with their local planning offices are vital if they are to avoid being caught out in similar circumstances.
The Clogheen objectors barely made the deadline for an appeal to An Bord Pleanala after they learned by chance that planning permission had been granted by Tipperary South Riding County Council on July 28th.
The episode has shown up an apparent anomaly in the planning process of which all local communities should take note, according to the people of Clogheen, which has a population of 400.
The sequence of events began on April 30th, when a planning application site notice appeared in the window of the three-storey Clogheen Garda station.
It gave notice of application for the erection of a 36 metre (almost 120 foot) triangular mast with additional antennae and cabin for use by Esat Digifone and the Garda for communications purposes.
This had been anticipated and deeply feared by Mr Klaas Huizenga and his wife, Bernie, who live immediately next door with their 2 1/2-year-old daughter, Aimee.
They were keenly aware of the many applications for such masts on Garda stations around the country, and they had been watching for just such a notice.
Mr Huizenga wrote a letter of objection to the council on May 15th, and followed it up with another on May 18th. Both were sent by registered post.
He says he was contacted by planning office officials, who told him that they had received no actual planning application from Esat. At their request, he visited the planning office and pointed out the location of the site notice on maps.
"I was basically told not to worry - that if anything actually happened a new notice would have to go up and the whole process would start again," he says. "We didn't hear anything for weeks, during which we kept looking at the notice next door to see if another one was going up."
Meanwhile, other people in Clogheen had also sent in objections, and a public meeting was held to express opposition to the proposed mast.
Last week the objectors were shocked when they were told that planning permission had been granted on July 28th. An inspection of the file in the planning office revealed that an actual planning application had been submitted to the council on June 12th - almost six weeks after the notice appeared on site. The file contains a Planning Section memo, dated July 21st, which recommended granting of permission for a mast 30 metres high (almost 100 feet). This memo also states: "No objection was received to the proposed development."
When an irate Mr Huizenga called to the planning office, he says, he was told that "because the (site) notice was in a different time period, all the letters from Clogheen are in a different file, and a new file was started on June 12th".
In other words, the Clogheen objections were not even considered in relation to the Esat application.
A council planning officer has told The Irish Times that this situation was not in breach of the planning regulations.
"When an objection is permitted, it is in relation to a particular planning application. We did not have a planning application at the time those letters (of objection) were submitted or received. The application came to us on June 12th from Esat."
He added that the council would not have been aware that the public notice was on the site as far back as April - "We can only deal with the application when it arises, and if objections arise after that date then they will be dealt with."
The only requirement of developers was that, when submitting their planning application, they should submit a copy of the public notice which was on site, "and that they retain or maintain the notice on site for at least a month after submitting a valid application".
Asked how potential objectors were to know when a planning application was actually submitted, the official suggested that they could contact the planning office "from time to time" to see if this had happened.
The Clogheen community organisations rowed in immediately behind Mr Huizenga's decision to lodge an appeal with An Bord Pleanala, while anger has intensified over their earlier objections not being considered.
The Clogheen Community Council readily volunteered the £120 fee needed for the appeal. Its chairman, Mr Ger Flynn, strongly questioned the procedures adop ted by the planning authority.
"The people feel that they were not given a chance to object," he asserted. "Maybe this also happens in other places, but it sounds very strange. We were all watching for a new notice to appear on the station."
Mr John Tuohy, of the GalteeVee Valley agri-tourism group, commented: "This really is monstrous. Nobody wants this mast in Clogheen."
Both these groups, as well as the Clogheen Tidy Towns Group, the Clogheen Development Association and many concerned individuals have supported Mr Huizenga's appeal.
In it, he lists as reasons for the appeal, "irregularities in the planning process; environmental impact; possible health effects; not in accordance with proper planning and development of the area, and depreciation of property values".
He asks An Bord Pleanala to conclude that "the people of Clogheen have not been given a fair chance to have their objections considered by the planning department, and that this proposal is an unwelcome and damaging development for the town".
The Huizenga family live and sleep only a few feet away from the proposed mast location. They point out that up to 20 young children live within a radius of about 50 metres of the proposed mast.
This week Mr Huizenga spoke of having "that feeling of having been lulled into a false sense of security, and then being sold out".
The family said they would definitely have to move away if the mast went ahead, although they have built up a business in the town over six years. They would not take the risk of radiation affecting their child's health. "This would be an imposed risk, not a risk you chose yourself."
The visual obtrusiveness of the proposed mast is also a major cause of concern to the town's development groups, who say that tourism is Clogheen's main potential asset for the future.
The historic town has no significant industry.