2261062

of dwelling house and all associated ancillary site works.Gross floor space of works to be retained 123.90sqm.

Granted

Core Planning Reasoning

The Inspector recommends the removal of Condition No. 6 (development contribution), concluding that the Galway County Development Contribution Scheme 2016 was applied in error. The principle of residential development was established in 1971, and as the retention application relates only to the house design and layout without creating additional floor space, it falls within intended exemptions for existing residential use.

Decision Maker's Conclusion

  • The principle of the residential unit was accepted under a 1971 permission (Ref. 223), and the current application is essentially to regularise the design change from a semi-detached to a detached dwelling.
  • The Development Contribution Scheme exemptions for residential extensions and demolition/rebuilds imply that contributions should not be levied on existing residential floor area where no net additional floorspace is created.
  • Applying the development contribution 51 years after construction for a layout change is not warranted as the dwelling was not constructed wholly without appropriate consent and does not increase demand on public infrastructure.

Cited Policies (CDP)

Galway County Development Plan 2022 – 2028: Chapter 3 (Placemaking, Regeneration & Urban Living)Galway County Development Plan 2022 – 2028: Chapter 15 (Development Management Standards)Galway County Development Contribution Scheme 2016 (Charges for Residential Units in sub-area 1)Ballinasloe Local Area Plan 2022 – 2028Section 48 (10)(b) of the Planning and Development Act 2000Section 28 Guidelines Development Contributions

Decision Document Summary

This is a first-party appeal by Mark Kelly against Condition 6 of Galway County Council's decision to grant retention permission for a house in Cleaghmore, Ballinasloe. The house was originally permitted in 1971 as a semi-detached unit but was instead constructed as a detached bungalow. The Planning Authority sought a contribution of €3,074.50. The appellant argued that the levy was retrospective and unfair given the 51-year history of the site. The Inspector agreed, noting that the retention ap...
SOURCE PDFOpen Original
Note: If code appears below, the council site is blocking the preview. Please open the original file.