€¦ · web viewin the isolated context of the individual word it is recommended that the...

.MANAGER’S REPORT TO MEMBERS ON

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED IN RESPECT OF THE_______________________________________________

MATERIAL AMENDMENTSTO THE

DRAFT CASTLEBAR AND ENVIRONS DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2008-2014

IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 12 (8) OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ACT, 2000-2007

For Mayo County Council

&Castlebar Town Council

Technical assistance from: Simon Clear & Associates,

Terenure Road West, Terenure, Dublin 6W.

1

Table of Contents

Introduction 3

Manager’s Report 4

List of Persons and bodies who made submissions or observations on the Draft Development Plan 6

Zoning Amendments 9

General / Policy / Objectives Submissions 29

2

1.0 Introduction

This report forms part of the statutory process of review of the Castlebar Town Development Plan

2004 and the preparation of a new Development Plan for Castlebar Town and its Environs for the

period 2008-2014.

Having considered the content of the Draft Development Plan, there SEA Environmental Report

and the Managers Report on submissions, the Members [of Castlebar Town Council and Mayo

County Council (hereafter called the members)], by resolution, resolved to amend the Draft

Development Plan in accordance with the provisions of Section 12(6) of the Planning and

Development Acts 2000-2006 on the 14th January 2008.

As the amendments proposed were considered to be a material alteration of the Draft

Development Plan, they were required to be placed on public display for a period of not less than

four weeks in accordance with section 12(7) of the Planning and Development Act 2000-2006.

The material amendments to the draft development plan were placed on public display for a

period of five weeks from Friday 31st January 2008 until 5 p.m. on the 6th March 2008.

This stage of the plan making process involves the preparation of a Report by the Manager on

the submissions received in respect of their material amendments to the Draft Castlebar and

Environs Development Plan 2008-2014. This report was presented to the Members on 26 th

March 2008.

3

2.0 Manager’s Report

2.1 Purpose and Contents of ReportUnder Section 12(8)(a) of the Planning and Development Act 2000, the Manager is required

to prepare a report on any submissions and observations received and submit the Report to

the Members for their consideration. This report is required to: -

(i) list the persons or bodies who made submissions or observations under this

section;

(ii) summarise the issues raised by the persons or bodies in the submissions or

observations,

(iii) give the response of the Manager to the issues raised, taking account of any

directions of the Members of the authority or the committee under section 11 (4),

the proper planning and sustainable development of the area, the statutory

obligations of any local authority in the area and any relevant policies or

objectives for the time being of the Government or of any Minister of the

Government.

This document complies with the above requirement.

Under Section 12 (9) of the Act, following receipt of this document, the members are required

to consider the Amendments to the Draft (Development Plan) and Report of the Manager.

Following the period of consideration of the Amendments to the Draft (Development Plan) and

Manager Report, which shall be completed not later than six weeks after the submission of

the Managers Report to the Members, the Members of the authorities shall, by resolution, (in

accordance with subsection 12(10)) having considered the amendments and the Managers

Report, make the plan with or without the proposed amendments, except that where they

would decided to accept the amendment they may do so or subject to any modification to the

amendment as they consider appropriate.

In making the Development Plan, under subsection 10, the Members shall be restricted to

considering the proper planning and sustainable development of the area to which the

development plan relates, the statutory obligations of any local authority in the area and any

relevant policies or objectives for the time being of the Government or any Minister of the

Government (Subsection 12(11)).

4

2.2 Nature of Submissions28 written submissions were received during this consultation period. The Council wishes to

express its appreciation to those who made submissions. The number of submissions

received indicates that the public and prescribed bodies have a significant interest in the

future development of Castelbar and its Environs.

It is possible to further breakdown the 28 written submissions as follows: -

Main Issues No. of Submissions

General – Policy – Objectives 5

Land Use Zoning 26

Total 31

The total number of submissions above (31) is greater than the actual number received (28),

as some submissions addressed more than one issue.

The following table sets out the submission numbers, which deal with the various issues: -

Main Issues Submission Numbers

General – Policy – Objectives 5, 6, 19, 23, 25

Land Use Zoning 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9,

10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19,

20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28

The Planning Authority welcomes the number of submissions and observations received

which highlights the significant level of public interest in the plan-making process.

5

3.0 List of Persons and Bodies who made Submissions or observations on the Draft Development Plan.

SUBMISSION NUMBER

DATE RECEIVED RECEIVED FROM (Location of Land)

1 6th March 2008 Margaret MartinRinshinna and Moneen,

Castlebar, Co. Mayo.

2 6th March 2008 Tom Phillips & Associates on behalf of

Sean McGuinnessSnugborough, Castlebar, Co. Mayo.


Sean McGuinnessCloonagh & Aghadrinagh


4 6th March 2008 Dudley FilanDoogary, Breaffy Road,


5 6th March 2008 Michael Kilcoyne

6 6th March 2008 Lorcan CribbinMoneenbradagh and Aghalusky,

Castlebar.

7 6th March 2008 McHale Road’s Residents

1 of 4 identical submissions – same as 8, 9 and 10)







11 6th March 2008 Mr Cyril Flynn, Newtown Street Castlebar

12 6th March 2008 Society of St. Vincent de PaulBreaffy Road, Castlebar.

6

13 6th March 2008 Taylor Architects on behalf of

Gerry GillardSpringfield/Moneenbradagh


Anthony O’MalleyDoogary, Breaffy, Castlebar.


Pat LoftusBarrack Bridge, Springfield, Castlebar.

16 6th March 2008 David Walsh, Principal, Spatial Policy on behalf of

Minister John Gormley T.D.

17 5th March 2008 Ger DerreLands at Carrowbrinogue & hinterland

18 5th March 2008 Sean WalshTully Rehins, Castlebar, Co. Mayo.

19 5th March 2008 DTZ on behalf of

Tesco Ireland Limited

20 4th March 2008 Vincent Walshe

Rocklands, Castlebar, Co. Mayo.

21 29th February 2008 Sean Lucy & Associates Ltd on behalf of

Michael McDermott, Albert Dravins & Eamon ScanlonDoogary, Castlebar.

22 27th February 2008 Eamon & Kathleen CourellLands at Ballynaboll North/Ballymacragh.

23 27th February 2008 National Roads AuthorityCastlebar Ring Road

24 26th February 2008 Taylor Architects on behalf of

John Joe BurkeLands at Kilkenny, Castlebar.


Harold & Peter ConwayLeenane Road, Westport, Co. Mayo.

7

26 5th March 2008 Fintan StauntonCarrowbrinogue

27 5th March 2008 Michael Murray

Carrowbrinogue

28 5th March 2008 Matt Shaw

Carrowbrinogue

8

4.0 ZONING AMENDMENTS

The following section of the Manager Report sets out details of the proposed Material

Amendments to Draft Development Plan and the comments relating to the Environmental

Report, as they appeared in the Material Amendments Report published on 31st January 2008. Beneath each individual amendment, details of whether or not to submissions were received on this amendment will be set out. If submissions have been received, details of the issues raised in the submission shall be included as well as the managers response and recommendation to the issues.

SUBMISSION NO.1 – AMENDMENT NO ___

Location Rinshinna and Moneen

Name Margaret (Molly) Martin

Draft Plan Zoning Low Density Housing

Amended Zoning Part of lands are now included in the 75m buffer strip for the Proposed N5 Southern Bypass route

The remaining lands are zoned Low Density Housing/ Enterprise and Employment/ Residential-Commercial

Summary of Main Issues

Their material amendments to the draft development plan will have an impact on her 32 acre of land holding a sterilising the lands and hindering the development of its real potential.

She requests that her objection be addressed fairly to the mutual satisfaction of all parties (Ms Martin and the Council)

The submission objects to the increased offer for the ring road as it is twice as wide along land is relative to the rest of the ring road.

The draft development plan affected only 15% of her land, while the amended plan affects 75% of her land.

Managers Response

Refer to the NRA submission No.23 which indicates a wider reservation requirement.

Recommendation No change

9

SUBMISSION NO.2 – AMENDMENT NO 3

LocationAghalusky

NameSean Mc Guinness

Draft Plan ZoningLow Density Housing

Amended ZoningResidential-Commercial

Summary of Issue1The submission has raised two separate issues. Each issue shall be addressed separately below1.The first issue relates to zoning Amendment number three and whether or not it represents an appropriate and sustainable land use.The submission is introduced by referring to the unsustainability of zoning amendment number 3.

Managers Response

Refer to the DOEHLG response No. 16, which recommends rejection of amendment No. 3.

RecommendationIt is recommended that this is not to be accepted.

Summary of Issue 2 2. The second issue, of which the majority of this submission refers, does not relate to an amendment to the plan and therefore cannot be considered by the Members.Notwithstanding this issue and in the interest of fairness the details of the issues raised set out below.

Managers Response

All of the above issues have been taken into consideration as part of the assessment of the submission. However, the purpose of submissions to the amendments is to address amendments to the plan only and not to raise additional issues. Therefore, the members are precluded from considering the amendment as suggested by landowners planning consultant, to zone additional lands.

The very reason that the submission considers that the zoning amendment number three is unsustainable, on the basis of sequential development, applies to the development of the subject lands also as they would be located at a distance greater from the town centre than other lands zoned for low-density housing. Therefore it is considered that the the rationale raised against zoning amendment number 3 also applies to the subject lands. Contrary to the statements contained in submission, sufficient lands have been zoned for medium density development over the lifetime of the plan.

The Development Plan is for a six-year period only and the headroom provided for is in excess of that required. Therefore no additional lands are required to be zoned Medium Density during the life of the Development Plan.

RecommendationIt is recommended that the proposal to zone 2 plots of land at Snugborough from their Draft Plan zonings of Low Density Housing and Rural Character to New Residential (medium density) be not accepted. The members are adviced that this proposal does not refer to an amendment to the Draft Development Plan.

10


Location Cloonagh

Name Sean Mc Guinness

Draft Plan Zoning Part Residential/Commercial - Part Rural Character

Amended Zoning Part New Residential - Part Rural Character

Summary of Issue1 The submission seeks the extension of the area that is to proposed New Residential to the north towards Lough Saleen. This will facilitate the implementation of a number of objectives of the draft Development Plan.

The basis for the submission is that it would open up lands in the area for amenity purposes and could facilitate sustainable movement patterns in the area.

An unfeasibly large area of open space/amenity has been provided, and the proposal to zone additional lands for a new residential represents a balanced approach, which will facilitate the development of high quality open space and amenities and maximise the potential of the lake.

The zoning of additional lands will facilitate the implementation of several objectives of plan while enhancing the accessibility and deliver ability of such amenities.

Managers Response

This proposal would appear to have some merit in that the area dedicated to open space amenity is large and will not become useable and quality open space if sufficient residential development is not permitted. However, the lands have sensitivities in relation to flooding, wetland, natural and cultural heritage.

RecommendationIt is recommended that the additional area of land as proposed in the submission be accepted and that the lands be zoned New residential

11


Location Doogary

Name Dudley Finan

Draft Plan Zoning Low Density Residential

Amended Zoning Unzoned

Summary of Issue1 The submission seeks the revision of the draft plan to include his lands within the Environs boundary as it was in the Draft Development Plan. The lands were removed in accordance with Zoning Amendment No 4.

The lands are located within 100m of the Castlebar Sewerage Scheme.Al lands removed from the plan area between Breaffy Roiad (N60) and Curheens Road (R373) should be considered again for Low Density Residential Zoning.

Good access is available to the lands while other lands are dependent on the ring road to gain access.

Managers Response The lands are part of a large area of lands removed from the Draft Plan

as part of amendment no 4 on foot of the recommendation of the DOEHLG which indicated that the quantity of lands zoned in the Draft Development Plan was not in accordance with the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

In submission 16 the DOEHLG has recommended that Amendment No 4 be accepted by the members and that there is still an excessive area of zoned land, particularly low density residential. The Department has recommended that rather than increasing the area of zoned land, that the council significantly reduce the area. The Department and the NRA (Submission 23) has indicated that the zoning of lands outside of the routes of the proposed ring road is unsustainable.

RecommendationIt is recommended that lands the subject of submission No 4 are not included in the area of the Development Plan and Environs boundary and are not zoned for low density residential development.

12

SUBMISSION NO.6 – AMENDMENT NO 9 (and 3 / 11)

Location Springfield, Moneenbradagh, Aghalusky

Name Lorcan Cribbin

Draft Plan Zoning Medium Density Residential

Amended Zoning Open Space/Amenity

Summary of Issues It is not clear whether or not the submission is supporting the amendments or supporting the original proposed zonings on the Draft Development Plan.1 Driving Range (Amendment 2)2 Amendment 3 or 11.

Park and Ride facility requested.

Managers Response In the context of the original submission on these lands it would appear

that the submission is supporting the amendments as the original submission to the draft Development Plan sought the amendment of the zoning from Medium Density Residential to Open Space amenity.

Recommendation It is recommended that Amendment No. 9 be accepted.

It is recommended that amendment no 3 be rejected.

Park & Ride designation cannot be incorporated at this time.

13

SUBMISSIONS NO’s. 7, 8, 9 and 10 – AMENDMENT NO 25 Zoning

Location Mc Hale Road

Name No 7 - Petition signed by the residents of Mc Hale Road (59 signatures)

No 8 - Petition signed by the residents of Mc Hale Road (66 signatures)



Draft Plan Zoning Open Space/Amenity

Amended Zoning Part Residential/Commercial - Part Medium Density Residential

Summary of Issues The submission raised 4 issues (the same in each submission) Development of the kind proposed would lead to an increase in traffic and a danger to road safetyWould not be proper planning and development of the areaOvercrowding of the areaDestroys one of the last of the green areas near the town centre

Managers Response The submissions object to the amendment to rezone land at the back of

McHale Road from OS/A to residential / commercial.

There is no DOEGLG objection to this zoning.

Recommendation It is recommended that Amendment No. 25 be accepted.

14

SUBMISSIONS NO’s.11 – NO AMENDMENT

Location Newtown House

Name Mr Cyril Flynn

Draft Plan Zoning Existing Residential/Infill

Amended Zoning Submission not related to an amendment to the Draft Plan

Summary of Issues The submission seeks the amendment of zoning from Existing Residential/Infill to Town Centre.

Managers Response

This submission does not relate to any of the amendments made to the Draft Development Plan and therefore cannot be taken into consideration by the council

Recommendation It is recommended that Submission No 11 be acknowledged

15

SUBMISSIONS NO’s.12 – AMENDMENT NO. 24

Location Breaffy Road

Name St Vincent De Paul

Draft Plan Zoning Community/Institutional

Amended Zoning Medium Density Residential

Summary of Issues This would be an isolated piece of residential sandwiched between existing Community/Institutional and Enterprise/Employment.

Reason for revising zoning is not considered sufficient to justify amendment.

Serious concerns about the security of the refuge if a development of 12 apartments is carried out immediately adjoining and sharing the same entrance.

Managers Response The role of the Development Plan review process is not to determine

planning applications.

There is no DOEHLG objection to this zoning.

A very small area is involved, which is relatively central and suitable for residential development.

Recommendation It is recommended that Amendment No. 24 be accepted

16


Location Springfield/ Moneenbradagh

Name Gerry Gillard

Draft Plan Zoning Medium Density Residential

Amended Zoning Open Space Amenity

Summary of Issues Land down zoned from residential to OS/A.

This will unbalance architecture value at entrance to town at the 1st

roundabout which represents a landmark opportunity.

Managers Response The land adjoins existing developed residential land but will not function

as OS for same.

The rezoning may be reconsidered although DOEHLG recommends Amendment No. 9 be accepted.

Recommendation It is recommended that Amendment No. 9 be accepted / amended.

17


Location Doogary, Breaffy Road

Name Anthony O’Malley



Summary of Issues The current boundary of the Draft Development Plan extends up to the edge of his lands and he requests that the low-density zoning be extended to include his lands.


as part of amendment no. 4 on foot of the recommendation of the DOEHLG which indicated that the quantity of lands zoned in the Draft Development Plan was not in accordance with the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.



18

SUBMISSIONS NO’s.15 – NO AMENDMENT

Location Springfield

Name Pat Loftus

Draft Plan Zoning Existing Residential/Infill

Amended Zoning Submission not related to an amendment to the Draft Plan

Summary of Issues The submission seeks the amendment of zoning from Existing Residential/Infill to Residential/Commercial, due to nearby public parking, landmark site and the pending development of adjoining lands.

Managers Response

This submission does not relate to any of the amendments made to the Draft Development Plan and therefore cannot be taken into consideration by the council.

Recommendation It is recommended that Submission No 15 be acknowledged.

19

SUBMISSIONS NO’s.16 – VARIOUS AMENDMENTS

Location General

Name David Walsh / Minister John Gormley, T.D. DOEHLG

Draft Plan Zoning Various (see below)

Amended Zoning Various (see below)

Summary of Issues It is important that the planning authority take consideration of the issues raised in light of any further decisions they will be taking.

The submission states that the planning authority must:1) accept amendments 1, 4, 5 and 9 in removing medium/low

density residential zonings from these areas.2) Reject amendments 2, 6, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 as they would add to

the existing excess level of low density residential zoning3) Reject amendments 7 and 8 as these areas are unsuited to

employment related purposes4) Reject amendments 3 and 11, given that they would result in

development that would be contrary to the proper town centre-based commercial development

Zoning is still excessive which would have an adverse impact on proper planning and sustainable development and objectives of NSS.

If above recommendations change commercial back to outlying residential, further deletions should be considered; particularly relating to land outside N5.

Managers Response DOEHLG submission has been carefully considered and is endorsed.

Recommendation It is recommended that the recommendations of the DOEHLG, be accepted by the council.

20


Location Carrowbrinogue

Name Ger Deere


Amended Zoning Enterprise and Employment

Summary of Issues The submission objects to the zoning as it would create demand on the local (road) network in the absence of proper infrastructure and would be out of character with the rural setting of Carrowbrinogue and hinterland.

Managers Response

The issue raised in this submission is reflective of the submission of the DOEHLG

Recommendation It is recommended that the recommendations of the DOEHLG and the content of this submission be accepted, by the council and that Amendment No 8 be rejected.

21

SUBMISSIONS NO’s.18 – AMENDMENT NO. ___

Location Tully Rehins

Name Sean Walsh

Draft Plan Zoning Part Low Density Residential / Part green area

Amended Zoning

Summary of Issues His land will only be capable of accommodating one house and he wishes to have 2 houses on the land.

Managers Response

This does not refer to an amendment and cannot be considered.

RecommendationIt is recommended that Submission No 18 be acknowledged.

22


Location Milebush

Name Vincent Walshe


Amended Zoning Majority Low Density Residential / Small area Rural Character

Summary of Issues A small section of his lands have been amended to Rural Character from Low Density Residential as part of Amendment No 5. He requests that all his lands be zoned Low Density Residential

Managers Response The DOEHLG recommends that the council accept the amendment from

Low Density Residential to Rural Character.

There are currently 504ha of land zoned for Low Density Residential. This is considerable and in excess of the area of land required to serve the projected population growth over the period of the plan.

Recommendation It is recommended that there be no amendment to the Draft Development Plan on foot of this submission.

23


Location Milebush

Name Michael Mc Dermott, Albert Dravins and Eamon Scanlon



Summary of Issues The current boundary of the Draft Development Plan extends up to the edge of his lands and he requests that the low-density zoning be extended to include his lands. (2.7ha).

Requests adjustment to environs boundary.

Previous low density planning history: premature.

Should be included for low density residential as the lands are accessible and developable.

Amend amendment No. 4 and include lands.


as part of amendment no. 4 on foot of the recommendation of the DOEHLG which indicated that the quantity of lands zoned in the Draft Development Plan was not in accordance with the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.



24


Location Kilkenny

Name John Joe Bourke


Amended Zoning Part Low Density Residential/ Part Rural Character

Summary of Issues c. 4 ha. Located at pumping station, presumption re zoning for residential but zoned OS/A.

Serviceable.

Low density residential requested as with other surrounding lands.

Managers Response This land is not suitable for residential development zoning due to its

isolation.

Recommendation No change.

25

SUBMISSIONS NO’s.26 – AMENDMENTS NO. 8


Name Fintan Staunton



Summary of Issues The submission objects to the zoning as it would create a long-term negative impact on the Carrowbrinogue and Snugborough areas, creating demands on the local road network in the absence of proper infrastructure.

Managers Response



26



Name Michael Murray



Summary of Issues The submission objects to the zoning as it would create a negative long-term impact on the Snugborough and surrounding areas, creating demands on the local road network in the absence of proper infrastructure.

Managers Response



27



Name Matt Shaw



Summary of Issues The submission objects to the zoning as it would create a negative long-term impact on the Snugborough and surrounding areas, creating demands on the local road network in the absence of proper infrastructure.

Managers Response



28

4.1 GENERAL / POLICY / OBJECTIVES SUBMISSIONSThe following submissions relate to the text, policies and objectives contained in the Draft Development Plan. The Recommendations from this section will result in recommended amendments to the text of the Draft Development Plan.

SUBMISSION NO.5

Amendment Text Amendment No. 23

Location Non Specific

Name Michael Kilcoyne

Issue 1 Add the word only after the word may on the 4th line.

Managers Response

The addition of the word may will remove any possibility of granting permission for management companies and will confirm the first half of the sentence which states that no management companies shall be allowed to operate in private housing developments

By including this paragraph, it is possible that disputes will occur between the developers and occupants of private housing developments, over who is responsible for maintenance of the development, between the time that the development is first occupied and the time that the estate/development is taken in charge by the local authority.

Recommendation In the isolated context of the individual word it is recommended that the proposed amendment not be accepted.

However, it is also recommended that the members consider the overall implications of the inclusion of this paragraph as it may have unintended consequences for future occupants of larger private developments.

Issue 2 The submission that requests that the following paragraphs are added to Amendment No. 23.

All developers will be required to the granting of planning permission is to Lodge with the council cash bonds equal to 10% of the value of the development and this bond shall only be refunded when the planning permission has been complied with in food and the estate has been taken in charge by the Council.

The application of taking charge of the estate shall be made not later than eight years after the initial grant of planning permission and shall comply with the standards set by the Council not later than six years after the granting of the planning permission. When a developer has failed to comply with this and the developer or his associate companies applied for planning permission for future developments, the fact that he has failed to comply with the requirements in relation to the takeover offers previous developments by the Council, the local authority shall take this into account in considering the granting of planning permission and where the developer has failed to take reasonable steps in this planning permission shall be refused.

Managers This issue can be addressed by way of conditions imposed upon

29

Responseplanning permissions, in accordance with regulations.

Recommendation The amendment No. 23 should not be accepted.

SUBMISSION NO.6

Amendment Text Amendments No’s 3, 9 and 11

Location Moneenbradagh and Aghalusky

Name Lorcan Cribbin.

Issue 1 Enterprise and Employment

Managers Response

Recommendation

Managers Response

No formal provision to be made for P & R facility.

Recommendation No change.

SUBMISSION NO.19

Location

Name


No. 27 clarity re TIA; No. 29 and 30 concur with ref. to RPG 2005; No. 31 want stations outside 50 KMH limit; No. 33 suburban bulky goods shopping supported, 3rd centre for northern catchment (amendment 20 dezoned NC. Matrix change to allow supermarket as OC in E & E zones.

Managers Response

No change recommended.

Recommendation No amendment to Draft Development Plan.

SUBMISSION NO.22

Location Ballynaboll North/ Ballymacragh

30

Name Eamon and Kathleen Courell


They disagree with a statement in the text of the commentary on the Environmental impact of the zoning that lands are unserviced – sewer is in place along frontage.

Managers Response

The Minister recommends these lands be un-zoned and that the amendment be rejected

Recommendation Acknowledge submission

SUBMISSION NO.23

Location Non Specific

Name NRA

Summary of Issues The NRA have requested that a 125m buffer is identified on each side of the road improvement line and have expressed issues in relation to land acquisition costs as a result of zoning. .

Managers Response

The Council is aware of the concerns of the NRA relating to corridor reservation issues. However, the planning authority will ensure that any planning issues within this area will not impact or impinge in any way on the design and land requirements of the road scheme.

RecommendationThe planning authority will ensure that any development within the additional 50 m zone on either side will not adversely impact in any way on the design and route selection of the N5 and N60 routes.

SUBMISSION NO.25

LocationLisnabirka and Milebush

NameHarold and Peter Conway


Small error in draft plan and want is changed in final plan, include footnote re saleen.

Managers Response

The footnote should be included.

RecommendationRecommend that the final plan includes the footnote as per the submission and as per the Draft Development Plan

31

€¦ · web viewin the isolated context of the individual word it is recommended that the...

Documents