2460048

permission to retain indefinitely a partially complete steel portal frame structure and associated works and Planning Permission to complete the construction of the community facilities building consisting of meeting rooms, indoor racquetball courts with ancillary facilities, on site car parking, connection to public services, entrance and all associated site works as previously granted under PL. Ref: 17121. This planning application is for a 10-year permission to complete the works

Granted

Core Planning Reasoning

The development was refused primarily because the scale and metal cladding finishes of the two-storey dwelling were deemed discordant with the landscape, and the applicant failed to demonstrate that required 90-metre sightlines could be achieved without utilizing third-party lands, creating a traffic hazard.

Decision Maker's Conclusion

  • The proposed house design, characterized by an 'American farm style' with extensive black metal cladding, is not traditional or representative of the rural area and fails to integrate with the landscape.
  • The applicant did not provide sufficient technical dimensions or legal evidence to prove that the 90-metre sightlines are achievable within their ownership, particularly regarding obstructions like an existing shed and boundary hedgerows.
  • While the applicant was found to comply with the rural housing need criteria (Policy 5-11), the visual impact and traffic safety concerns outweigh the principle of development at this specific elevated site.

Cited Policies (CDP)

Policy 5-9Policy 5-11Policy 5-12Rural Housing Design Guide – Appendix 4Table 5.2Table 6.2Chapter 15Volume 3, Appendix 6Section 4.1Section 4.3.1Section 6.1Appendix 3

Decision Document Summary

This report concerns an appeal against Tipperary County Council's decision to grant permission for a two-storey house and garage at Creeragh, Ballingarry. The site is a 0.767ha greenfield area located in 'Open Countryside'. A third-party appellant argued that the applicant did not meet local needs and that the development posed a traffic hazard. The Inspector found that the applicant did meet the criteria for Policy 5-11 as their other property was in a settlement and over 5km away. However, the...
SOURCE PDFOpen Original
Note: If code appears below, the council site is blocking the preview. Please open the original file.