24107

of the revised location of the dwelling on site; the extension to the dwelling, the altered fenestration to the dwelling, which was granted permission under ref P11/616 and for RETENTION permission for the shed on site for horticultural use and for PERMISSION to revising the site boundaries granted under ref P11/616 & all other associated site and ancillary works

Refused

Core Refusal Reason

The proposed retention of the shed was refused because its domestic design and lack of evidence for horticultural use were deemed injurious to the visual amenity of the area.

Decision Maker's Conclusion

  • The shed's scale, design, and domestic appearance are inconsistent with a building intended for horticultural use.
  • Site inspections revealed no evidence of ongoing horticultural activity to justify the retention of the structure for its stated purpose.
  • The retention of the building as constructed would be injurious to the visual amenity of the area and contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the region.

Cited Policies (CDP)

CDP 14.2 Settled LandscapeClare County Development Plan 2023-2029

Decision Document Summary

The applicant, John Clancy, sought retention for several modifications to a dwelling and a shed intended for horticultural use at Toornahooan, Lisdoonvarna. While the Planning Authority found the dwelling-related elements acceptable, it issued a split decision refusing the shed. The refusal was based on the shed's domestic appearance and the absence of any actual horticultural activity on-site, which the authority determined would be injurious to the visual amenity of the 'Settled Landscape' des...
SOURCE PDFOpen Original
Note: If code appears below, the council site is blocking the preview. Please open the original file.