24332

chun foirgneamh talmhaíochta, bealach isteach agus clós feirme chomh maith le gach obair eile a bhaineann le tagairt WL/EN24/078 a choinneáil

Refused

Core Refusal Reason

The development was refused due to its adverse visual impact on a highly sensitive coastal landscape and the failure to provide adequate environmental assessments (AA Screening and Nutrient Management Plan) to rule out significant impacts on nearby European sites.

Decision Maker's Conclusion

  • The development lacks agricultural justification and constitutes a haphazard, standalone intervention that fails to integrate into the Class 3 Special landscape, resulting in a significant adverse impact on the visual amenity and character of the rural setting.
  • Due to the absence of a Nutrient Management Plan and an Appropriate Assessment Screening Report, the Planning Authority cannot be satisfied that the development will not adversely affect the integrity of the Connemara Bog Complex SAC and SPA.
  • The proposal materially contravenes multiple policy objectives and development management standards of the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028, specifically regarding landscape sensitivity (LCM 3, DM 46), agricultural practices (AD 1, DM 13), and environmental assessments (NHB 1, NHB 2, DM 50).

Cited Policies (CDP)

Policy Objective AD 1Policy Objective EQ 1Policy Objective NBH 1Policy Objective NHB 2Policy Objective NHB 3Policy Objective WR 1Policy Objective WS 5Policy Objective WS 7Policy Objective WW 11Policy Objective WM 2Policy Objective FL 2Policy Objective LCM 3DM Standard 8DM Standard 13DM Standard 14DM Standard 28DM Standard 46DM Standard 47DM Standard 50DM Standard 61DM Standard 63

Decision Document Summary

This application sought retention permission for an agricultural building, entrance, and farm yard at Leitheanach Theas, An Caiseal, Co. Galway, within a sensitive coastal landscape area. Galway County Council refused the application on two primary grounds: visual amenity and environmental protection. The planner determined that the standalone structure was visually intrusive and lacked sufficient agricultural justification for its location in a 'Special' sensitivity landscape. Additionally, the...
SOURCE PDFOpen Original
Note: If code appears below, the council site is blocking the preview. Please open the original file.