Core Refusal Reason
The application was refused due to inaccurate and misleading documentation, traffic safety concerns regarding a second entrance, and insufficient technical information regarding wastewater treatment and site drainage.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The submitted drawings and public notices were inaccurate and misleading, preventing the planning authority from conducting a full assessment of the development's impacts.
- The provision of a second entrance on a minor county road with restricted visibility constitutes a traffic hazard and sets an undesirable precedent for multiple entrances.
- A lack of adequate information regarding percolation tests, PE loading, and site drainage channels makes the proposal prejudicial to public health.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Decision Document Summary
This application sought permission for the retention of an existing two-storey side extension at Mucklow, Courtown. The local authority refused the proposal primarily because the application documentation was deemed misleading and inaccurate regarding site entrances. Furthermore, the development proposed a second entrance on a minor road with poor visibility, creating a traffic hazard. Finally, the applicant failed to provide sufficient technical data concerning wastewater management and drainag...SOURCE PDFOpen Original
Note: If code appears below, the council site is blocking the preview. Please open the original file.