Core Refusal Reason
The application failed to demonstrate that substantial works had been carried out on the development prior to the expiration of the original planning permission, as required under Section 42 of the Planning and Development Act 2000.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The works cited by the applicant, such as partial roof removal and structural testing, are not considered 'substantial works' within the overall context of the permitted development.
- No commencement notice was submitted for the development, and several pre-commencement planning conditions, including development contributions and management plans, remained unfulfilled.
- The application fails to meet the statutory requirements of Section 42(1)(c)(ii) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) for an extension of duration.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Decision Document Summary
This application sought an extension of duration for planning permission ref. 18/1077, which involved the change of use of retail units to a seven-bedroom guest house at Ellen Street/Carr Street, Limerick. The local authority refused the request because the applicant failed to prove that substantial works had been completed on-site before the permission expired. Furthermore, the planner noted the absence of a commencement notice and non-compliance with various planning conditions, leading to the...SOURCE PDFOpen Original
Note: If code appears below, the council site is blocking the preview. Please open the original file.