2460279

1. To demolish single storey rear extension and carry out internal modifications to existing detached dwellinghouse. 2. To construct ground floor extension and convert attic to habitable accommodation, including raised ridge level over new 1st floor accommodation. 3. To construct a detached single storey home office to the rear of the existing dwelling. 4. Works to include elevational modifications, new windows and rooflights and all ancillary site works and connection into existing services. Planning Ref. No. P19/625 refers.

Refused

Core Refusal Reason

The proposal was refused due to its incongruous design and scale relative to the sensitive coastal setting, and the failure to provide a Habitats Directive assessment regarding potential impacts on the Clew Bay Special Area of Conservation.

Decision Maker's Conclusion

  • The proposed house design and scale are considered out of character with the traditional rural coastal form of the area and would set an undesirable precedent for similar developments.
  • The development is deemed contrary to the Mayo County Council Rural Housing Design Guidelines and would seriously injure the visual amenities and depreciate the value of property in the vicinity.
  • In the absence of an Appropriate Assessment screening under Article 6(3) of the EU Habitats Directive, the planning authority is precluded from granting permission due to potential significant effects on the Clew Bay SAC (site code 001482).

Cited Policies (CDP)

Mayo County Development Plan 2022-2028Vol 1 Written StatementVol 2 Development Mgt StandardsMayo County Councils Rural Housing Design Guidelines

Decision Document Summary

The applicants sought permission for the demolition of a rear extension and the construction of a ground floor extension, attic conversion with a raised ridge level, and a detached home office at a coastal site in Roscahill, Kilmeena, overlooking Clew Bay. Mayo County Council refused the application, concluding that the proposed design was incongruous with the established rural coastal character and would set a negative precedent. Furthermore, the council determined that the lack of a Habitats D...
SOURCE PDFOpen Original
Note: If code appears below, the council site is blocking the preview. Please open the original file.