221107

the construction of 40 No. residential dwellings comprising 4 No. 4-bed detached single storey dwellings (Type A3/A4), 4 No. 4-bed semi-detached single storey dwellings (Type A1/A2), 15 No. 3-bed semi-detached/terrace 2 storey dormer dwellings (Type B1/B2/B3), 8 No. 3-bed semi-detached single storey dwellings (Type D1/D2), 6 No. 2-bed semi-detached single storey dwellings (Type C1/C2), 2 No. 1-bed semi-detached single storey dwellings (Type E1), 1 No. 1-bed detached single storey dwellings (Type E2), together with a new vehicular entrance off the existing R417 road including provision of a new pedestrian path, all ancillary internal access roads, infrastructure, landscaping and boundary treatments, and all associated site and development works and services

Refused

Core Refusal Reason

The proposal was refused due to poor urban design and layout, inadequate drainage and SuDS strategies (including a lack of necessary third-party consents), and the absence of a required Road Safety Audit.

Decision Maker's Conclusion

  • The design and layout are considered deficient in terms of urban design, providing a poor public realm and failing to meet density standards for an edge-of-centre site.
  • The applicant failed to demonstrate a satisfactory surface water and foul drainage strategy, lacking necessary technical calculations, site testing, and third-party consents for outfalls.
  • The absence of a Stage 2 Road Safety Audit and a construction-phase surface water management plan represents a failure to address potential risks to road users and the environment.

Cited Policies (CDP)

Chapter 15 'Urban Design'Policy SW9Policy RS2Section 2.5.9RD 1RD 2Policy HSO8

Decision Document Summary

Harristown Developments Limited proposed the construction of 40 residential dwellings on a 2.4ha greenfield site at Kilbeg, Kildangan, Co. Kildare. The development was refused by Kildare County Council due to a combination of poor layout and design that failed to create a high-quality public realm, and significant technical omissions. Key issues included the lack of a comprehensive SuDS strategy, the absence of third-party consents for drainage outfalls, and the failure to provide a Stage 2 Road...
SOURCE PDFOpen Original
Note: If code appears below, the council site is blocking the preview. Please open the original file.