Core Refusal Reason
The proposal was refused due to inappropriate scale and design that would negatively impact residential amenity and character, and for failing to meet the specific planning criteria for a family flat unit.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The extension's height, design, and proximity to boundaries are out of scale with the existing dwelling and would negatively impact the privacy and outlook of neighboring properties.
- The layout and configuration of the extension suggest it is intended as a separate family unit, yet it fails to meet the specific requirements for such developments.
- The proposal lacks a demonstrated need for a family unit, lacks an integral entrance, exceeds size limits, and would materially contravene the County Development Plan.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Objective PM46Objective DMS23Objective DMS43
Decision Document Summary
The application sought permission for a 9.46 sq. m front and side extension at Per Ardua, Channel Road, Rush. The Planning Authority refused the application because the design was deemed incongruous with the streetscape and harmful to the privacy of adjacent residents. Additionally, the authority determined that the extension functioned as a family flat but failed to comply with the necessary standards regarding size, access, and demonstrated need as set out in the County Development Plan 2017-2...SOURCE PDFOpen Original
Note: If code appears below, the council site is blocking the preview. Please open the original file.