D24A/0205

1) Proposed 6 no. Glamping Pods 2) Access via right of way. 3) Provision of car

Refused

Core Refusal Reason

The Planning Authority refused the application on the basis that the development would materially contravene Zoning Objective 'G' (to protect and improve high amenity areas) and Specific Local Objective (SLO) 151, which restricts holiday caravan/camping facilities to within a 1km radius of Glencullen crossroads.

Decision Maker's Conclusion

  • Specific Local Objective 151 is considered unrealistic and overly restrictive, as it conflicts with core development plan policies (E17 and E19) aimed at promoting sustainable tourism and rural enterprise diversification.
  • The proposed development of 6 glamping pods is modest in scale, effectively screened by mature trees, and integrates well into the existing farmstead without resulting in adverse visual impacts or loss of residential amenity.
  • Technical concerns raised by the Planning Authority regarding wastewater treatment, tree protection, and traffic can be adequately addressed through the imposition of robust planning conditions.

Cited Policies (CDP)

Section 13.1.5 (Zoning Objective 'G')Specific Local Objective (SLO) 151Policy Objective E17: Tourism and RecreationPolicy Objective E19: Rural DevelopmentSection 12.3.13.1 (Holiday Caravan and Camping Sites)Section 10.2.2.5

Decision Document Summary

This report assesses a first-party appeal against the refusal of 6 glamping pods at Stroller's Place, Dublin 18. The site is an elevated 0.336ha plot within a sheep farm, characterized by a grove of mature trees with panoramic views of Dublin Bay. The Planning Authority refused permission primarily because the site is located 760m outside the 1km 'Glencullen circle' defined by SLO 151. However, the Inspector argues that this specific objective is arbitrary and creates a 'misinterpreted' restrict...
SOURCE PDFOpen Original
Note: If code appears below, the council site is blocking the preview. Please open the original file.

PDF Document Missing

The original decision document for this case could not be linked. This often happens for older cases or those with restricted documentation.

Search for case on ABP