Refusal decisions · 24 August–30 August 2026

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. Having regard to Virginia Bypass Development Objectives VB 01 and VB 02 as set out in the Cavan County Development Plan 2022 – 2028 which require Cavan County Council to work in conjunction with Transport Infrastructure Ireland and Meath County Council to reserve and protect option corridors from development that would interfere with the delivery of the Virginia By-Pass, it is considered that the proposed development would be premature pending the determination by the Planning Authority or the Road Authority of a road layout for the area or any part thereof.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

2. It is considered that the proposed replacement of a traditional vernacular two- storey dwelling on this elevated exposed site by a new dwelling which, in the opinion of the Planning Authority, would not have sufficient regard to the design and character of the existing dwelling or to the guidance on design form and proportions included in Sections 2.1 and 2.2 of the “Design Guide for Rural One-Off Developments in Cavan Countryside”, would fail to meet the relevant criteria of Objective RDR 03 of the Cavan County Development Plan 2022 – 2028 one of which is that the design of replacement dwellings in rural areas shall have regard to the design, finish and character of the existing building and comply with the ‘Cavan Rural Design Guide’, or any such replacement document. The proposed development, and the precedent which it would form, would therefore be considered contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

3. Having regard to insufficient information submitted in relation to stormwater drainage design and attenuation capacity for the proposed development, and to adequately ensure that any future drainage infrastructure associated with the Bypass Scheme can safely accommodate the additional flow arising from the proposed development, it has not been adequately demonstrated to the Planning Authority that the proposed development would not give rise to surcharge or increased flood risk downgradient from the proposed development. It is considered, therefore, that the proposed development would be contrary to Objective WQG 07 of the Cavan County Development Plan 2022 – 2028 which is to ensure that development would not have an unacceptable impact on water quality and quantity including surface water, ground water, designated source protection areas and river corridors; and would be contrary to Objective FRM 01 which is that development that would cause flooding or exacerbate such a risk at the proposed development site or at another location shall not normally be permitted

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: 6d42990cbb34a4078e4e916817510b52dee655b3e157032fb56572dfed612cfd

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. Having regard to the nature of the retained development, which includes the demolition of what appeared to be an older vernacular dwelling and where the reuse of original known features is not evident, it is considered that the retained development contravenes Objectives VA 1, VA 2 and RDR 01 of the Cavan County Development Plan 2022-2028, has resulted in a loss of a traditional building which contributed to the unique character, heritage and identity of the local area and is contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: 11a2eb36e0df9006065ce250af22ac64bc99e32a3344f803d709a3cb931c22c6

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. The proposed development, in particular the coffee shop drive-through facility, is located adjacent to a key radial and bus route to and from Cork City, which is heavily trafficked. This route also serves pedestrians and cyclists. It is considered that the proposed development which is a car orientated development, contravenes Strategic Objective 3 of the Cork City Development Plan 2022-2028 and undermines the strategic vision for the city in terms of integrating people orientated developments along sustainable and active travel corridors in the city. Notwithstanding the measures outlined in the application, to address traffic generated by the proposed development, these are not sufficient and could contribute a further increase in traffic movements to the site. The proposed development will result in a traffic hazard and endanger public safety. The proposed development would not be in accordance with the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

2. The subject site is situated on land zoned for sustainable residential neighbourhoods in the Cork City Development Plan 2022-2028. Such zoning allows for uses that contribute to sustainable residential neighbourhoods are also acceptable in principle in this zone provided they do not detract from the primary objective of protecting residential amenity and do not conflict with other objectives of this Development Plan, and such uses include small-scale local services including local convenience shops. As per paragraph ZO 1.2 of the Cork City Development Plan 2022-2028, development that does not support the primary objective of this zone will be resisted. Having regard to the scale and form of the proposed development, which includes the provision of a drive-through restaurant which is and would continue to be the principal use of the site, it is considered that the proposed drive-through use and would provide for a restaurants/cafés which would extend substantially beyond the local service and local population. Furthermore, as per paragraph 11.186 of the Cork City Development Plan 2022-2028 for Hot-Food Takeaways/Fast-food Restaurants ‘fast food outlets/takeaways with proposed drive-through facilities will generally only be acceptable within designated Level 2 District/Large Urban Town Centres (Ballincollig) and will be assessed on a case-by-case basis’. The proposed development being coffee shop operation and drive-through facility as set out in the application is deemed to come within the scope of a hot-food takeaway/fast-food restaurant. The subject site is not a Level 2 District/Large Town Urban Centre. The proposed development would, therefore, materially contravene the land use zoning objective of the site, contravene other provisions of the Cork City Development Plan and would not be in accordance with the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2, 3

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: ce27f7b819d5a49b3cfd0637dc69d19567a8b34f0005a08d301f95024761074c

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

Source note: Grounds 1 and 2 of the council’s 3 grounds are reproduced in full. Ground 3 is withheld because it contains private ownership and residence information. Original numbering is retained.

1. Having regard to the existing pattern of development in the area, it is considered that the proposed dwelling, when taken in conjunction with existing and permitted development in the vicinity, would contribute to an undesirable pattern of linear development along this stretch of roadway and would further consolidate a form of ribbon development in the Rural Hinterland. The proposal would contribute to the incremental urbanisation of the countryside and would undermine the objective of maintaining the distinction between built-up areas and the open countryside. The Planning Authority considers that the proposed development would result in an inappropriate intensification of residential development within the Rural Hinterland, contrary to Objective ZO 20 City Hinterland, Objective 3.13 Rural Generated Housing, and the wider strategic objectives of the Cork City Development Plan 2022-2028 (as amended). The proposed development would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

2. The site is located within the Cork City Hinterland, where the objective is to protect rural amenity, landscape character and the open countryside from inappropriate development. Having regard to the extent of existing one-off housing in the locality, it is considered that the proposed development would contribute to an over-concentration of residential development in a rural area that is not served by public footpaths, public lighting or public foul sewerage infrastructure. The proposal would therefore reinforce an unsustainable pattern of development and would be contrary to Objective ZO 20 City Hinterland and the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: 85666b2f43477f0c4ee4d54e6b74088790e6ab127b6ec846bbf2e9d02bd859bc

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. The development/proposed development is located within Flood Zone A as set out in the Cork County Development Plan, 2022. Cork County Development Plan Policy Objective WM 11-16 seeks to avoid development in areas where there is a high probability of flooding (Flood Zone A). The retention and extension of this unit for use as residential development would be contrary to The Planning System and Flood Risk Management Guidelines for Planning Authorities 2009, and would materially contravene Policy Objective WM 11-16 of the Cork County Development Plan, 2022 and would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

2. The proposed development, due to its location and layout to the rear of Townshend Street would constitute overdevelopment on a restricted site to the rear of an existing dwelling unit. The proposed development would create an undesirable precedent for similar development in the vicinity and would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: 3b6c60bbd413cfb7f508a6d720d1a73024fe7811133a65717b4db81517d28a98

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. The site is located in a rural area identified as ‘Rural Area Under Strong Urban Influence’ as designated in the Cork County Development Plan, 2022. Within this area, applicants must demonstrate that their proposal constitutes a genuine rural generated housing need based on their social/ economic links to a particular local rural area and must demonstrate compliance with one of the categories of housing need set out in Objective RP 5-4. On the basis of the information submitted, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the applicant has demonstrated a rural generated need for a house at this location and has failed to demonstrate compliance with any one of the categories of housing need set out in Objective RP 5-4. The proposed development would thus conflict with the settlement policy and Objective RP 5-4 of the Cork County Development Plan, 2022 and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: 899cff27755566858eeacf29eb4b4bb0238276e0a4913e0f76586d4c632a25ea

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

Source note: Open the official case file for 26/61277, then its documents and select “Notification of Decision” dated 27 August 2026. The quoted refusal grounds are on PDF pages 2–3.

1. It is a policy of the Council (policy LK-DM-P-1, Letterkenny Plan and Local Transport Plan 2023-2029) ‘to support the principle of development proposals that are: (a) Generally consistent with the zoning objectives as set out in Table 7.1 and the corresponding zones identified on Map 7.1 entitled ‘Land Use Zoning Map’; and (b) Supported in the zoning matrix contained in Table 7.2’. The subject site is located on land zoned as ‘Local Environment’ and as per Table 7.1, the land zoning objective of the local environment zoning is ‘to provide for limited development only ensuring no significant negative impact on the landscape setting or the biodiversity quality of the area’. Table 7.2 further confirms that the proposed retail use cannot be considered within this zoning. Accordingly, to permit the proposed development would materially contravene the aforementioned policy provisions of the County Development Plan 2024-2030 (as varied) and would thereby be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official case file · decision PDF page 2

2. It is a policy of the County Donegal Development Plan 2024-2030 (as varied) that ‘any proposal for economic development use, in addition to other policy provisions of this Plan, will be required to meet all the following criteria: (a) It is compatible with surrounding land uses existing or approved, (b) It would not be detrimental to the character of any area designated as being of Especially High Scenic Amenity (EHSA), (c) It does not harm the amenities of nearby residents, (d) There is existing or programmed capacity in the water infrastructure (supply and/or effluent disposal) or suitable developer-led improvements can be identified and delivered, (e) The existing road network can safely handle any extra vehicular traffic generated by the proposed development or suitable developer-led improvements are identified and delivered to overcome any road problems, (f) Adequate access arrangements, parking, manoeuvring and servicing areas are provided in line with the development and technical standards set out in this plan or as otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, (g) It does not create a noise nuisance, (h) It is capable of dealing satisfactorily with any emission(s), (i) It does not adversely affect important features of the built heritage or natural heritage including natura 2000 sites, (j) It is not located in an area at flood risk and/or will not cause or exacerbate flooding, (k) The site layout, building design, associated infrastructure and landscaping arrangements are of high quality and assist the promotion of sustainability and biodiversity, (l) Appropriate boundary treatment and means of enclosure are provided and any areas of outside storage proposed are adequately screened from public view, (m) In the case of proposals in the countryside, there are satisfactory measures to assist integration into the landscape, (n) It does not compromise water quality nor conflict with the programme of measures contained within the current northwestern river basin management plan.’ On the basis of the information submitted, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the proposed development will not harm the amenities of nearby residents as it has not been demonstrated that storm/surface waters can be appropriately collected, managed and disposed of to an appropriate discharge point given the falling topography of the land across the site in a north-easterly direction. Accordingly, to permit the proposed development would be prejudicial to public health and the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. Furthermore, having regard to the failure of the particulars submitted with the application to demonstrate visibility splays where the private lane meets the local road in accordance with the requirements of Figure 16.2 and Table 16.5 of Chapter 16 of the CDDP 2024-2030 (as varied), the Planning Authority is not satisfied on the basis of the information submitted that safe visibility splays can be provided in each direction to the required standards. Accordingly to permit the proposed development could result in dangerous traffic cross-over movements into and out of the site, could endanger public safety by reason of a traffic hazard and would thereby be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area

   Official case file · decision PDF page 2, 3

3. The subject site is not registered to the applicant and a letter of consent from the relevant landowner has not been submitted. 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.

   Official case file · decision PDF page 3

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: 7f259a3b688fc1df8a14be16685fff46686ccb1de6957b4af836903d9cc808b1

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

Source note: Open the official case file for 26/61309, then its documents and select “Notification of Decision” dated 27 August 2026. The quoted refusal ground is on PDF page 2.

1. Policy TOU-P-8 requires that all tourism-based development complies with inter alia, the following criteria – ‘The development will not cause a traffic hazard, and the existing road network can safely handle any extra vehicular traffic generated by the proposed development.’ Having regard to the intensification of use of the existing entrance and restricted internal space to enable additional traffic manoeuvres that will result if the development is permitted in proximity to the existing N56 roundabout, and the frequency of such movements, the Planning Authority considers that the proposed development constitutes a traffic hazard. Therefore, to permit the development would be contrary to the provisions of Policy TOU-P-8 and contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official case file · decision PDF page 2

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: e8765818aa3a9561424d0c68c3276fffc4c8398bf498a01d59cdc12b1f912b98

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. Having regard to the nature of the proposed development, which comprises of the substantial and almost complete demolition and reconstruction of a residential dwelling, it would not be in accordance with Policy Objective CA6: Retrofit and Reuse of Buildings and Policy Objective PHP19: Existing Housing Stock - Adaptation, nor would it accord with the provisions of Section 12.3.9 Demolition and Replacement Dwellings of the Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Development Plan 2022-2028, in that a strong justification for the substantial and almost complete demolition of the existing dwelling on site has not been provided. Furthermore, it is considered that the substantial and almost complete demolition of the existing dwelling and its subsequent replacement, if permitted, would set an undesirable precedent which would be contrary to the provisions of theDún Laoghaire Rathdown County Development Plan 2022-2028and the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: 52acfc6d9a27bf2d52faeaff0dc065bb781477fe45e7d5c009ceaf1e3be6face

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. The Planning Authority considers that the proposed development, comprising the retention of a single-storey storage shed used for the storage of outdoor pergolas and coverings associated with an online commercial business, constitutes 'Warehouse', comprising commercial storage use on lands subject to Zoning Objective 'B', the objective of which is to 'Protect and improve rural amenity and to provide for the development of agriculture'. Having regard to the nature of the use, the Planning Authority considers that the development is not compatible with the rural function of lands zoned Objective 'B' and is neither Permitted in Principle nor Open for Consideration under Table 13.1.4 of the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Development Plan 2022-2028. The proposed development would therefore materially contravene Zoning Objective 'B' and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: 388eca4ea8747e9f1a19dd0227886f06b0d39baa68370a38eb5929d0b0e34b55

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. The proposed development by virtue of its design, scale, massing, and detailing would dominate the front elevation of the house and be visually injurious to the visual amenities of the area. It would be contrary to the policies of Section 12.3.7.1 of the Dun Laoghaire- Rathdown County Development Plan which seeks to ensure that extensions have a harmonious relationship with the main building.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: e79997c12bd9fb7cb2f2b2916c6f671cecd377fb9730ceb6744fdbf59160b289

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. The proposed density of approximately 23 dwellings per hectare would be significantly below the generally applicable density range of 40 to 80 dwellings per hectare for City Suburban/Urban Extension locations in Dublin. The proposal does not optimise the residential development potential of the site and would constitute underdevelopment and an inefficient use of suitably zoned and serviced land. The applicant has not demonstrated that the physical or contextual characteristics of the site justify the proposed density or the application of the exception under Section 3.3.6 of the Sustainable Residential Development and Compact Settlements Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2024). The proposal would therefore not accord with Section 4.3.1.1, Policy Objective PHP18: Residential Density, or Section 12.3.3.2: Residential Density, of the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Development Plan 2022-2028, or the density objectives of Chapter 3 of the Guidelines, and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: bde6027999d6cec9f84c48962c2626f2f32340ce85d3e87b35b75634750820ec

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. Having regard to the design, scale, height, massing and constrained siting of the proposed two-storey dwelling, together with its largely blank side elevations, proximity to the adjoining properties and relationship with the site topography, it is considered that the proposed development would constitute a visually dominant, incongruous and discordant form of infill development that would fail to respect the established spacing, form and character of development along Killiney Road. The proposed development would be out of keeping with the character of the area and would set an undesirable precedent for similarly constrained infill development along the streetscape. The proposal would result in an overbearing impact and an undue sense of enclosure at Nos. 41 and 43 Killiney Road given its proximity and massing, and the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the development would avoid undue overshadowing or loss of daylight to adjoining residential accommodation. The proposed development would therefore seriously injure the residential amenities of adjoining properties and would be contrary to Policy Objective PHP18: Residential Density, Policy Objective PHP19: Existing Housing Stock: Densification, and Section 12.3.7.7: Infill, of the Dún Laoghaire- Rathdown County Development Plan 2022-2028. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: 15093503727171dbadd58a158a5070c2dab09cee79e40293985af95e02e387df

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

Source note: The assessment mentions both the North-West Irish Sea SPA and Rogerstown Estuary SAC/SPA. The adopted first ground expressly names the North-West Irish Sea SPA (004236). This source wording is retained without resolving the geographical descriptions.

1. Based on the dearth of information submitted, the location of the development proposed on site and its proximity to an existing watercourse which flows downstream into the North-West Irish Sea SPA (004236) via the Bracken river, it is concluded that in the absence of a Screening for Appropriate Assessment as part of the application there is a gap in the information available to the Planning Authority and it is not possible to conclude with certainty whether or not the proposed development either individually or in combination with other plans or projects, in view of best scientific knowledge and in view of the sites’ conservation objectives, would be likely to have a significant effect on any designated European Sites (in particular the North-West Irish Sea SPA (004236)). The development as proposed, is therefore contrary to Objective DMSO1 of the Fingal Development Plan, and contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 12

2. Having regard to the lack of adequate proposals submitted with respect to the wastewater treatment system, surface water drainage and the absence of a flood risk assessment as required under the Planning System and Flood Risk Management Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2009), the proposed development would be prejudicial to the outer groundwater drinking water protection zone for Bog of the Ring, public health and the amenity of the surrounding area as the applicant has not demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority that the proposed wastewater treatment and surface water drainage arrangements are adequate or that the development would not be at risk of flooding. The development, as proposed, is therefore contrary to Policy GINHP19 and Objectives DMSO160, DMSO203, DMSO212, DMSO215, IUO16 of the Fingal Development Plan, and contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 12

3. The proposed development for retention and permission is located within 10m of a watercourse and thus, does not provide for an adequate buffer from the Bracken River as required by Objectives DMSO154, DMSO156, DMSO210 & IUO26 of the Fingal Development Plan 2023-2029. The proposed development would contravene the above-named Objectives of the current Development Plan and, therefore, would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 13

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: 4676e218e115c6e92e800a2a259ac7cba3681376fa6cb4c12b2c1fa2e25f059a

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. The proposed development, which seeks to omit the childcare facility previously required under parent permission Reg. Ref. F15A/0015, would fail to provide and would prejudice the future delivery of essential childcare infrastructure necessary to serve the existing residential area and would therefore be contrary to the Childcare Facilities Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2001); Policy CIOSP10, Objectives CIOSO27 and CIOSO28 of the Fingal Development Plan 2023-2029; and, would therefore be contrary to the principles of proper planning and the sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 10

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: 6cf53795b58e372d4efc396045995e15de02f50fc0f6889e1122a72b6f218bc4

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

Source note: The notice cover identifies the earlier permission as 2460043, while the adopted ground gives 24/60042. The ground is quoted as issued.

1. 1 This proposal is seeking a ‘Change of house design’, to Pl. Ref. No. 24/60042, which is a permission ‘Consequent to an Outline permission’, where the original outlined permission is Pl. Ref. No. 23/60086. This proposal includes an increase in the size of this site, as such, this proposal would contravene materially the parent outline permission, Pl. Ref. No. 23/60086.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: 50127aa78199b07d3cb9fefe7f0ca3f2b7c09574119049305684ff6f223e3ed7

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

Source note: The notice’s order-date field is blank. The official case register records the refusal decision on 25 August 2026, and the notice is signed that day.

1. Having regard to the nature of the proposed residential development in conjunction with its location on lands zoned for Open Space/Recreation & Amenity purposes in the in the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the proposal is compatible with Open Space/Recreational Amenity uses, and would contravene materially the land use zoning matrix contained in the current County Development Plan which seeks to facilitate the development of appropriate, compatible uses within the Open Space/Recreational Amenity zoned areas. Accordingly, to grant the proposed development would contravene material provisions of the current Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028 and therefore, would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

2. Having regard to the subject site location within a Flood Zone C, adjacent to the flood plain of the Owenriff River, and the absence of a Site-Specific Flood Risk Assessment for the proposed development at this sensitive location, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the subject site is not at risk of flooding in the future. Therefore, if permitted as proposed, the development would materially contravene Policy Objectives FL 1, FL 2 and FL 18 of the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028 in relation to flood risk and would also be contrary to Ministerial Guidelines issued under Section 28 of the Planning & Development Act, 2000 (as amended) (The Planning System and Flood Risk Management Guidelines 2009) and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

3. The proposed removal of the existing stone wall and mature hedgerow and lack of regard for biodiversity with the landscape design proposal at this sensitive site is not in accordance with DM Standard 47: Field Patterns, Stone Walls, Trees and Hedgerows and therefore contravenes policy objectives in the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028 and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: ae66a000d68967de8a54e50729dee183a42c909aaae7ea64a15dc2e340bd14f2

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. The planning authority is not satisfied based on the information received and the lack of justification accompanying the application content that the proposed development would be in accordance with the provisions of Policy Objective AD1 Sustainable Agricultural Practices of the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028. The development would therefore if permitted, materially contravene Policy Objective AD 1 and DM Standard 13 of the County Development Plan 2022-2028, would create a precedent for similar future developments in the area, and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

2. The development on site as hereby proposed to be retained and further intensified is considered to have potential to constitute a hazardous arrangement to road users owing to the poor horizontal alignment of the heavily trafficked local primary carriageway (L 2212-83) in the vicinity of the site frontage where sightlines are severely restricted in both directions and the cumbersome vehicular movements associated with a development of this nature would compromise road safety and therefore be contrary to DM Standard 28 of the Galway County Development Plan 2022 – 2028 and to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

Local extraction verified against a checked notice format. Document SHA-256: 1d8c2d377e78da51439938670c11ea629783239048b7c872f832813be0507f88

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. Having regard to the planning history of the site, the Planning Authority notes that Planning Reference 992288 for which the development was granted, included provision for a specific site access arrangement. The existing vehicular entrance serving the site has been developed at alternative location which does not have the benefit of planning permission. The proposed development would rely upon and increase the use of this unauthorised access arrangement, thereby resulting in the intensification of unauthorised development. In the absence of any regularisation of this existing entrance on site as part of this application, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the proposed development would not constitute a traffic hazard and therefore if permitted would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

Local extraction verified against a checked notice format. Document SHA-256: 032f88b7ec1f27c1e125cd9dc13700f42aaab37cfcc808e501ba66ea59404ee2

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. The Planning Authority have serious concerns owing to the proposed restricted development access point in conjunction with onsite and external parking constraints and uncertainty regarding overflow of parking. Furthermore, the creation of a vehicular access point as proposed via an undefined junction with restricted visibility, whilst traversing Bride Street footpath would not be conducive in the creation of desired quality and safety of vulnerable road users’ permeability movements whereby there is a high degree of pedestrian demand in conjunction with safer routes to school movements. Therefore, it is considered proposed vehicular entrance is a haphazard arrangement that has the potential to create vehicular and pedestrian conflicts which would endanger public safety by reason of traffic hazard or obstruction of road users or otherwise and contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

Local extraction verified against a checked notice format. Document SHA-256: bdd258fea2736f5d95a523f75f26f88de92cb98c3fd325dd8d7eabcae8f498f3

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. Having regard to the following: - the proposed development being sited within an undeveloped greenfield setting, - the lack of any evidence of an established farm enterprise accompanying the application content, the Planning Authority consider the proposed development in the absence of a comprehensive agricultural justification for the works to be contrary to the provisions of Policy Objective AD 1 Sustainable Agriculture Practices of the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028 and therefore to permit same in light of this significant lacunae would create an undesirable precedent for similar future developments in the area and be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

2. The Planning Authority, by virtue of the lacunae associated with the proposed development in respect to the management of potential animal waste generated on site and having regard to the precautionary principle, is not satisfied based on the information received that significant negative effect on the natural environment and the integrity of the Natura network can be ruled out. Therefore the development if permitted has potential to have significant negative adverse impact on the rural landscape and the localised ecology and habitats thereof, would contravene materially objectives AD 4 & NHB 1 and development management standards 14 & 50 contained in the current Galway County Development Plan, and therefore would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: c78129b4f972bcebc46b2596fdf762a76715b762d55298350e3c41b00ccc8dc7

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. The Planning Authority are not satisfied that the applicant has demonstrated compliance with Policy Objective RH2 of the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028 to develop their first home in a rural area in an area which is under strong urban pressure within the Galway County Transport & Planning Study (GCTPS). Therefore, the proposed development is considered contrary to the rural housing provisions of the said county development plan. Accordingly, to grant the proposed development would contravene materially Policy Objective RH2 contained in the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028, would be contrary to the provisions of Ministerial Guidelines issued to the planning authorities under Section 28 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) and to “Sustainable Rural Housing Guidelines for Planning Authorities” issued by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (updated in December 2020), would set an undesirable precedent for similar future development in the area, and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

2. The subject site is located within an identified flood risk area and having regard to the nature of the proposed development, the Planning Authority is not satisfied in the absence of a site specific flood risk assessment that the subject site is not at risk of flooding in the future. Therefore, if permitted as proposed, the development would materially contravene Policy Objective FL8 of the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028 and would be contrary to Ministerial Guidelines issued under Section 28 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended).

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

3. In the absence of any details submitted on file in relation to the water supply to serve the proposed development, it is considered that the development if permitted as proposed, would be contrary to DM Standard 37 of the Galway County Development Plan, 2022-2028, and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

4. The Planning Authority is not satisfied that the applicant has satisfactorily demonstrated that they can provide and maintain the required sightlines from the entrance to the site along the public road. Therefore, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the required sightlines can be achieved at this location and to grant the development as proposed would be contrary to DM Standard 28 and would endanger public safety by reason of traffic hazard or obstruction of road users or otherwise and thus would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: 672c6a998688a22e36ce5e682fea127840b1ebcd95de2d6e8450f8e0bddc4698

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. The Planning Authority consider that the proposed development, if permitted, would generate increased traffic on to the National Road N63. Therefore, to permit the proposed development would materially contravene Policy Objective NR4 and DM Standards 28 of the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028, would lead to traffic conflicts and overlapping splays with junction LP-3204 and vulnerable road user safety and would not be in accordance with the TII guidelines and policies for development along national roads.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

Local extraction verified against a checked notice format. Document SHA-256: a507a6ecb75a7000e0072f0a4ed6cec358fa1ee2be34030f38f23f4eda25b7bd

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. The proposed development would be served by an entrance onto the R347 Regional Road at a location characterised by horizontal curvature, restricted visibility and existing traffic management measures including continuous centre line road markings and chevron signage. Based on the information submitted, and in the absence of satisfactory evidence demonstrating that adequate sightlines can be achieved and maintained in accordance with DM Standard 28 of the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that a safe means of vehicular access has been demonstrated. Furthermore, the submitted site layout plan indicates visibility of approximately 93m to the west from the proposed entrance and includes a diagonal 120m sightline extending in a south- westerly direction across lands opposite the application site and beyond the application site boundary. It has not been demonstrated that all lands required to facilitate and maintain the proposed visibility arrangements are within the control of the applicant or subject to a formal agreement with the relevant landowner(s). Accordingly, the proposed development would interfere with the safe and free flow of traffic and would endanger public safety by reason of traffic hazard. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to Policy Objective NNR2 and DM Standard 28 of the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028 and contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

2. The Planning Authority is not satisfied, based on the information submitted, that the proposed wastewater treatment system complies with the requirements of the EPA Code of Practice for Domestic Wastewater Treatment Systems (Population Equivalent ≤10), 2021. The submitted Site Characterisation Form records bedrock at a depth of 1.0m below ground level and the Planning Authority is unable to reconcile the minimum depth of unsaturated soil/subsoil required beneath the point of infiltration with the levels indicated on the submitted site-specific section. Accordingly, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the safe disposal of domestic effluent can be achieved on site without risk to groundwater. To grant permission in these circumstances would be prejudicial to public health, contrary to the EPA Code of Practice for Domestic Wastewater Treatment Systems (Population Equivalent ≤10), 2021, contrary to Policy Objective WW6 and DM Standard 38 of the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028 and contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

Local extraction verified against a checked notice format. Document SHA-256: 0e37da44533953853f9ed3c93549242dbcf97006e8eee237919e6166cd757e6e

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. Policy RE O105 of the Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 seeks to promote and facilitate the development of rural tourism, subject to such development not having a detrimental impact on the residential amenities of rural residents. The proposed development by its nature will increase human activity and vehicular movement, thereby resulting in increased light spill, noise and visual intrusion, all within an existing rural area and in immediate proximity to existing dwelling houses. The proposal, if granted, would seriously injure the amenities, or depreciate the value, of property in the vicinity and would have a significant impact on the rural character and visual amenity of the area. The development as proposed would be contrary to the policies and objectives in the Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029, would set an undesirable precedent for similar development of this scale and nature and would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 3

2. The provision of safe and achievable lines of sight has not been demonstrated in a southern direction on the L-2007 local road. The proposed development and the associated intensification of the use of the vehicular entrance, from that of a private dwelling and historic entrance, to a 22-bed commercial tourism development, which would, by its nature result in increased vehicular movement where sight lines are not achievable, represents a potential traffic hazard and endangerment of public safety. The proposed development would therefore endanger public safety by reason of traffic hazard or obstruction of road users or otherwise and would contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 3

3. Having regard to the extent of the proposal for a significantly sized holiday commercial activity at this rural location (provision for 22 persons) and the unzoned nature of the subject lands, located in a rural area: (a) Where under Section 9.3 of the Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029, it is stated that ‘if land is not within an identified settlement and is not otherwise zoned, the use of such land shall be deemed to be primarily agriculture’ and (b) Where the site is located within the River Liffey Valley and Plains Landscape Character Area with a ‘Medium to High Sensitivity’ and a ‘Medium to Low Capacity’ in the Landscape Character Assessment of the Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029. (c) Where the site is situated off a Local Road where no footpath or cycling provisions are provided and located at a significant distance from any settlement, facilities and amenities, thereby requiring increased vehicular movement at this rural location and attracting a significant increase in additional car-borne journeys and an increased reliance on private vehicle travel, the proposed development would represent a negative intervention into a rural setting where the receiving environment does not have the capacity to absorb its extent, would promote unsustainable travel patterns, would be contrary to national policy on active travel (the National Sustainable Mobility Policy 2026), and would be contrary to Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 policy regarding the protection of the rural environment and sensitive landscapes and, if granted would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 3, 4

4. The proposed development, located in a rural area, where substantial trees and hedgerows have been removed and where the proposed development would require additional significant removal of hedgerows to facilitate sight visibility would be contrary to Section 12.9 Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows and Objectives, BI O1, BI O26, BI O27, and BI O29 of the Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029, which seek to incorporate existing trees and hedgerows within developments and to prevent, in the first instance, the removal of hedgerows to facilitate development. To permit the proposal would be contrary to the policies and objectives of the Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 and would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 4

Local extraction verified against a checked notice format. Document SHA-256: 2c2b743b22f9e8530ca1a0a0964e5e02dfbc8f0e544ed84525c3e95c69849713

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. The primary application is for retention as a house, then change of use for short term let until again required as a house. Having regard to the size and scale of the structure to be retained as a dwelling on site, with a stated area of 26.7sq.m, it is considered that the retention and use of this structure as a dwelling would represent a substandard form of development which, when compared to even the minimum size for an apartment as set out in the Kilkenny City and County Development Plan 2021- 2027, would be inadequately sized. It is considered that retention of the development would set an undesirable precedent for further such development and will be contrary to the residential amenities and proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 3

2. (a) The combined areas of the existing outbuilding and proposed garage are deemed excessive to serve the needs of only a proposed short term let accommodation on this subject site (b) The scale, design and location of the proposed garage, are out of character with the residential nature of the site, and contrary to the visual amenities of the area The proposed garage on site is therefore considered contrary to the residential amenities, rural character, visual amenities and proper planning and development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 3

3. The applicant has (i) stated that the vehicular entrance adjacent to the agricultural building which is proposed for use as a domestic garage will not be used to facilitate the short-term let building, (ii) has not demonstrated vehicular parking for visitors on site or internal vehicular access leading to the proposed domestic garage, and (iii) has not demonstrated in relation to either vehicular entrance serving the site, that adequate sightlines exist or can be achieved and maintained for vehicles entering and egressing the site; the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the development would not give rise to traffic hazard at this location and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 3

4. The applicant has failed to demonstrate provision of an adequate water supply to serve the development and has not submitted a Confirmation of Feasibility from Uisce Eireann to serve the building to be used for short-term let; the applicant has failed to the demonstrate that the development would not be prejudicial to public health.

   Official final decision · PDF page 3

5. The applicant has failed to demonstrate that the wastewater treatment system is adequate to cater for the existing and proposed development or adequate provision for the disposal of surface water on site, and the development as proposed would be prejudicial to public health and the environment.

   Official final decision · PDF page 3

6. The subject buildings for retention form part of a larger landholding which also includes a dwelling house. The water, wastewater and vehicular access serving the dwelling house on site are proposed to serve the buildings for retention on site. The applicant has failed to demonstrate in the application documents that sub-division of the overall landholding will not occur; such sub-division of the landholding and the associated services for would give rise to traffic hazard, and would be prejudicial to public health and the environment, and the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 3

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: e1852138a6b7cf45b81af8be8d8a925862a02aa9a2fa68e102afbc535ee2f7f9

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. Overdevelopment of the Site Having regard to the restricted size and configuration of the site, the Planning Authority considers that the proposed development would constitute an overdevelopment and over-intensive use of the site. The proposal would therefore provide an inadequate standard of residential development and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 3

2. Inadequate Car Parking Provision The proposed development would provide no on-site car parking, notwithstanding the requirement for two car parking spaces per dwelling under Table 10.3 of the Laois County Development Plan 2021–2027. The applicant has not demonstrated that the required parking can be accommodated within the site or that a departure from the applicable parking standard would be justified having regard to the location and circumstances of the development. The proposal would therefore be materially contrary to Table 10.3 of the Laois County Development Plan 2021–2027 and to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 3

3. Substandard Residential Development The proposed development would result in an unsatisfactory form of residential development due to the restricted nature of the site and uncertainty regarding the availability of sufficient developable area to accommodate the dwelling as proposed. It appears to the Planning Authority that the south-eastern boundary wall extends further into the site than indicated on the submitted drawings, reducing the effective site area available for development. As a result, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the proposed dwelling can be accommodated on the site in the manner indicated. The proposed development would therefore be seriously injurious to the amenities of the area, materially contrary to Policy DM HS 9 of the Laois County Development Plan 2021-2027 and to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 3

4. Inadequate Private Open Space The Planning Authority is not satisfied that the proposed development would provide an adequate level of usable private open space in accordance with DM HS 6 of the Laois County Development Plan 2021-2027. The submitted private open space calculations include narrow and awkward areas which should not be counted as usable amenity space. Furthermore, having regard to the concerns set out under Reason No. 3, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the level of private open space indicated can be provided as proposed. In addition, insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate that adequate private amenity space would remain available to serve the existing dwelling. The proposal would therefore be seriously injurious to the amenities of the area, materially contrary to Policy DM HS 6 of the Laois County Development Plan 2021-2027 and to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 4

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: 7b26010d6fd434505ce99fe0b7b703d74d0f527b68bbf8bc5a0fda88a9291042

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. Having regard to the planning history of the site, and in particular Condition No. 1(b) of Planning Register Reference 25/60406, which required the omission of House/Site No. 1 from the permitted housing scheme and the dedication of the resultant area to public open space, it is considered that the proposed development would be contrary to the established planning strategy for the site. The Planning Authority is not satisfied that sufficient justification has been provided to demonstrate any material change in planning circumstances since the previous assessment. The proposed development would result in the loss of public open space secured under the extant permission and would undermine the approved layout of the residential scheme. Accordingly, the proposed development would therefore be seriously injurious to the amenities of the area and materially contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 3

2. The proposed development would contravene materially a condition attached to an existing permission for development.

   Official final decision · PDF page 3

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: 8fb6d6bf1f5a5d4eae851523b8956b8f69300dc1f1518108899c0cf29ff60751

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. The proposed development, consisting of a detached residential unit fails to demonstrate compliance with Objective HO O11 Subdivision of Dwelling to Accommodate Dependent Relative of the Limerick Development Plan 2022–2028 where there is a presumption against proposals for detached independent units within the curtilage of a dwelling. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to the provisions of the Limerick Development Plan 2022–2028 and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 3

2. Having regard to the scale and detached nature of the proposed residential unit, the proposal for a shared connection to the existing on-site waste water treatment system would be contrary to the Environmental Protection Agency's Code of Practice for Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems Serving Single Houses and would be prejudicial to public health and contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 3

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: 44000769b12353855f1c2405db73e22c1e7bac4b648d2b53018db5991cf9f62e

The council’s formal grounds for this decision. Planner assessment and later appeal outcomes are separate.

1. Having regard to the information submitted, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that a sufficient need has been demonstrated for the proposed agricultural entrance. The subject lands are served by an existing agricultural entrance from the laneway to the rear of Paddock 3 and the applicant has not adequately demonstrated why this existing access arrangement is insufficient to serve the agricultural needs of the landholding. The proposed development would therefore result in an unnecessary additional entrance onto the public road. Accordingly, the proposed development would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

   Official final decision · PDF page 2

PDF pages visually checked. Document SHA-256: 6d6502788a28fe28e29377f8d1e9cef5a16525f3bbf7d78ba122249ce4bb0041