Core Refusal Reason
The applicant failed to demonstrate a genuine housing need or long-standing social link to the area, resulting in a contravention of Rural Housing Objective RHO-4 for sensitive coastal landscapes.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The applicant failed to provide documentary evidence to support claims of residency or establish a housing need as required by Objective RHO-4 for coastal areas.
- The proposed development would constitute haphazard development in a scenic and coastal rural area, militating against the preservation of the rural environment.
- The development would interfere with the character of the coastal landscape, which the Planning Authority deems necessary to preserve in the interest of proper planning and sustainable development.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Objective RHO-4Mayo County Development Plan 2022-2028DM Standard 7.6Mayo Rural Housing Design Guidelines 2008
Decision Document Summary
The proposal sought permission for a 178.10m2 single-storey dwellinghouse, vehicular access, and a sewage treatment system on a 0.380-hectare site at Doohoma, Ballina, Co. Mayo. Although technical aspects such as house design, water supply, and access were considered acceptable, the site is located within a sensitive coastal area. The application was refused because the applicant did not establish a functional or social need to reside in this specific location, and the development was judged to ...SOURCE PDFOpen Original
Note: If code appears below, the council site is blocking the preview. Please open the original file.