Core Refusal Reason
The application for an extension of duration was refused because the development had not commenced and no substantial works had been carried out on-site prior to the expiration of the original permission, failing to meet the statutory requirements of Section 42 of the Planning and Development Act 2000.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The development permitted under planning reference 18/121 has not commenced on-site, and the subject site remains a greenfield site.
- No substantial works were carried out during the appropriate period of the original permission, which is a mandatory requirement for an extension under Section 42(1) of the Planning and Development Act 2000.
- The applicant acknowledged that works did not begin due to economic conditions and building costs, which does not satisfy the legislative criteria for granting an extension of duration in this instance.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Decision Document Summary
This application sought a five-year extension of duration for a previously granted permission (Ref: 18/121) for the construction of a dwelling house, garage, and associated services at Dunnaman, Croom, Co. Limerick. Following a site inspection and review of the application, the planning authority determined that the development had not commenced and no substantial works had been completed. Consequently, the proposal failed to meet the statutory requirements of Section 42 of the Planning and Deve...SOURCE PDFOpen Original
Note: If code appears below, the council site is blocking the preview. Please open the original file.