24169

Permission for a new residential development of 5 no. dwelling houses comprising 4 no. new semi-detached 3 bedroom dwelling houses, 1 no. detached 4 bedroomed dwelling house and all ancillary and associated site development works. This application includes a Natura Impact Statement

Refused

Core Refusal Reason

The application was refused due to inadequate environmental and flood risk information, insufficient residential density for the site's location, lack of utility capacity confirmation, and negative impacts on the residential amenity of neighboring property.

Decision Maker's Conclusion

  • The applicant failed to provide a Construction and Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) or a robust Flood Risk Assessment, meaning the Planning Authority could not be satisfied that the development would not adversely affect the integrity of Dundalk Bay SAC/SPA or increase flood risk elsewhere.
  • The proposed density of 10.8 units per hectare is significantly below the minimum requirement of 35 units per hectare for an 'edge of settlement' site, representing an inefficient use of zoned land and a contravention of Policy Objective HOU 15.
  • The development would seriously injure the residential amenity of the adjoining cottage ('Don Bosco') by reason of overlooking from upper floor windows and failed to demonstrate sufficient legal interest for required road realignment works and utility connections.

Cited Policies (CDP)

Policy Objective HOU 15Table 3.2Section 13.21.5Policy Objective IU 19Policy Objective IU 20Policy Objective IU 27Policy Objective NGB 6Table 13.4Section 13.8.9.1Article 22 (2)(g)(i) of the Planning and Development Regulations 2001 (as amended)

Decision Document Summary

The proposal sought permission for a residential development of 5 dwellings (one detached and four semi-detached) on a 0.46-hectare site at South End, Blackrock, Co. Louth, including the realignment of Wavecrest Drive. While the site is zoned 'A1 - Existing Residential', Louth County Council refused permission on six grounds. The primary issues included the lack of a CEMP to protect nearby European sites, a density that was considered unacceptably low for the location, and a flawed Flood Risk As...
SOURCE PDFOpen Original
Note: If code appears below, the council site is blocking the preview. Please open the original file.