Refusal decisions · 10–16 Aug 2026

1. The proposal is contrary to Policy RH-P-1 of the County Development Plan 2024-2030 (as varied) in that evidence of a genuine need and vital link to the area in the vicinity of the application site for a period of at least 7 years has not been demonstrated. Furthermore, on the basis of the information submitted, it is considered that the applicant does not have a genuine rural housing need, by virtue of the fact that their rural need has already been met through a previously approved permission, and as such, no justification has been submitted to evidentially demonstrate that the applicant has sold their current occupied rural dwelling. Accordingly, to permit the development would materially contravene the aforementioned Policy of the Plan and would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
2. Having regard to the location of the site just outside of the settlement framework, the extent of existing and permitted dwellings in the immediate vicinity of the application site, and the infill opportunities that exist within close proximity of the site within the settlement framework, it is considered that the proposal would contribute to an excessive density of development of a suburban scale in an unserviced rural area, which is designated as a rural area under Strong Urban Influence. To permit the proposed development would result in further expansion of a suburban pattern of development, and would set an undesirable precedent for further development along this road frontage which would further erode the rural character of the area, and materially contravene Policies RH-P-9 of the County Development Plan 2024-2030 (as varied) and the objectives of National Planning Policy and would thereby be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
3. Having regard to the fact that the subject site is currently served by a private access road, the Planning Authority is not satisfied on the basis of the information submitted that the applicant has sufficient legal interest to access the site. Accordingly, to permit the proposed development would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

1. The subject site is located within the townland of Stroangibbagh, Drumkeen, in a rural area identified as a ‘Structurally Weak Rural Area’. It is an Objective of the County Donegal Development Plan, 2024-2030 (as varied), as set out in RH-O-1 ‘to consider proposals for new one-off housing within a ‘Structurally Weak Rural Area’ from any prospective applicants with a genuine rural need for a dwelling house’. Having regard to the fact that the applicant already owns and occupies a rural dwelling on site within a ‘Structurally Weak Rural Area’ and in the absence of sufficient detail in support of this application which demonstrates the current dwelling cannot be adapted or extended to meet such needs, it is considered that the applicant does not have a genuine rural housing need, by virtue of the fact that their rural need has already been met. Current planning policy does not provide for the granting of second rural homes. Accordingly, to permit a second rural dwelling would materially contravene the aforementioned policy provisions of the County Donegal Development Plan 2024-2030 (as varied) and would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area and would establish a very undesirable precedent for similar patterns of development.
2. The proposal is contrary to Policy RH-P-9 of the County Development Plan, 2024-2030 (as varied) in that the design of the proposed dwelling is inappropriate for the site and its locality and, if granted, would result in the imposition of a non-traditional form of development which would be out of character with the established adjacent development and would impact the visual and scenic amenities of the surrounding area, particularly having regard to the proposed external finishes i.e. corrugated walls to upper elevations and roofing. Accordingly, to permit the development as proposed would materially contravene the aforementioned Policies of the Plan and would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
3. It is a Policy of the Planning Authority (Policy RH-P-9, County Development Plan 2024-2030 (as varied)) that, inter alia, ‘Proposals for individual dwellings shall provide for the safe and efficient disposal of effluent in a manner that does not pose a risk to public health and accords with Environmental Protection Agency codes of practice’. Having regard to the inadequacy of information submitted in respect of the application in relation to adjoining wastewater treatment facilities serving the existing dwelling on site the Planning Authority is not satisfied on the basis of the information submitted that the subject site can cater for the safe and effective treatment and disposal of effluent in accordance with the necessary standards. Accordingly, to permit the proposed development may be prejudicial to the delivery of safe and effective arrangements for the treatment and disposal of effluent generated by the adjoining dwelling house and would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
4. Having regard to the failure of the subject application to demonstrate that storm/surface waters can be appropriately collected, managed and disposed of to an appropriate final discharge point and any details regarding the proposed private well nor any adjoining private wells, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the proposed development would accord with Environmental Protection Agency codes of practice and accordingly, to permit the proposed development would be prejudicial to public health and the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
5. The subject site is located on low-lying lands in close proximity to the Deele River and it is a policy of the Council ‘To only permit development where flood or surface water management issues can be successfully addressed and/or where there is no unacceptable residual flood risk for the development, its occupants and/or private property or public infrastructure elsewhere within the catchment.’ (Policy F-P-1 of the County Donegal Development Plan (2024-2030 (as varied)). The Flood Risk Maps have identified the site within Flood Zone A (See Appendix A) which indicates that the subject site may be at high risk of fluvial flooding. The Planning Authority is not satisfied that the proposed development would not be at risk of flooding or meet the criteria for appropriate development as required through a Justification Test/Flood Risk Assessment. Accordingly, to permit the development on the basis of the information submitted in support of the application would be contrary to the aforementioned policies of the County Donegal Development Plan (as varied) and be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

It is a policy of the County Donegal Area Plan 2024-2030 (as varied) (Policy L-P-2 refers), ‘To protect areas identified as ‘High Scenic Amenity’ on Map 11.1 ‘Scenic Amenity’. Within these areas, only development of a nature, location and scale that integrates with, and reflects the character and amenity of the landscape may be considered, subject to compliance with other relevant policies of the Plan.’ It is a further policy (Policy L-P-3) ‘To safeguard the scenic context, cultural landscape significance, recreational/tourism amenities, and environmental amenities of the County’s coastline from inappropriate development’. On the basis of the information submitted, in particular having regard to the limited size of landholding, the failure of the application to evidentially demonstrate supporting documentary evidence of a bona fide agricultural activity or need for an agricultural shed at this sensitive and scenic location and to the isolation of the subject site from any associated agricultural farmyard complex, the Planning Authority considers that the proposed development would constitute a disorderly and unjustified form of development in this designated High Scenic Amenity rural area. Accordingly, the proposed development would, if permitted, set an undesirable precedent for similar types of disorderly development which would, thereby, be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.