Core Refusal Reason
The development was commenced prematurely prior to planning determination, necessitating an application for retention permission rather than standard permission.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The works were commenced prematurely, creating a substantial risk that the development would not be completed in accordance with standard planning conditions.
- A grant of permission is not the appropriate legal mechanism for development already underway, and the applicant must instead seek permission for retention.
- The unauthorized commencement sets an undesirable precedent that would be harmful to the residential and visual amenities of the area and contrary to proper planning.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Decision Document Summary
The proposal sought permission for the widening of an existing vehicular entrance at 60 Coolamber Drive, Rathcoole. The planning authority refused the application because the development had already commenced on-site before a decision was reached. The authority determined that granting standard permission for works already in progress was inappropriate and that the applicant should have applied for retention permission. Additionally, the premature commencement was cited as setting a negative pre...SOURCE PDFOpen Original
Note: If code appears below, the council site is blocking the preview. Please open the original file.