This article is from page 18 of the 2007-12-18 edition of The Clare People. OCR mistakes are to be expected so download the original SWF or the rendered page 18 JPG
AN BORD Pleanala has been told that there is not much point in zon- ing land and then refusing to allow permission for its development on the basis that it is a rural area.
Last month, Clare County Council refused planning permission to Tho- mas Sexton for eight holiday homes at Quilty.
An appeal lodged on behalf of ar- chitect, Michael Leahy, states: “The facility as proposed will provide year
round employment in terms of care- taking, maintenance and repairs. In addition to the summer period, facil- TLS MLU(C OAR Nalshom-VRoM Ro) IICoLOMBODKOlerca bank holidays and for Christmas “Mr Thomas Sexton 1s a local man from the parish. He is anxious to es- tablish a small business in his parish which will provide employment and will also be make a contribution to the economic and social life of the area, it is difficult to understand why his application should be refused. “The proposal is compatible with
the development plan, with the built form of the area and with the zoning objectives for the land on which it is located.
‘The council appear to want to treat the site as an unzoned piece of land in a rural area, which contradicts their own plan. There are no amenity or infrastructure reasons for refusing permission for this development.
“The proposal is located on zoned land and to suggest that the proposal would ‘significantly exceed the den- sity appropriate to the zoning of the
site’ 1s not justified.
“The density proposed of slightly more than four to the acre could not be regarded as excessive.
“We cannot see that it could be ar- cued that the development would de- tract from the rural character of the area or would in any way injure the amenities of the area. The proposal has been designed to be compatible with other developments close by in Caherrush including the much larger holiday homes development to the west of the site. We cannot see the
council’s justification for saying that the proposal would detract from the rural character of the area
“We consider the development ap- propriate to the rural tourism infra- structure of the area. The proposal is located in an area zoned for ‘other settlement land’ and is compatible with that zoning. .. The proposal sat- isfies a need for tourism accommo- dation in the area and will facilitate economic growth in the area.”
A decision is due on the application Tama ert