This article is from page 8 of the 2008-06-17 edition of The Clare People. OCR mistakes are to be expected so download the original SWF or the rendered page 8 JPG
ONE Clareman got planning per- mission to build a house in his native Corofin while his brother was re- fused on the grounds that he is not a local rural person, a meeting of Clare County Council was told last night.
The council members were being asked to approve a Material Contra- vention of the County Development Plan to allow a planning applicant build a home at Ballycullinan hav- ing been previously refused planning permission.
County Manager Alex Fleming,
cautioned the members that they needed to be “guided solely by the proper planning and development and sustainability of the proposal’.
Cur Tommy Brennan (Ind) told the meeting that when the applicant originally began the planning proc- ess, he was approached. The council- lor said he had originally been told there shouldn’t be a problem, but an official from the planning depart- ment subsequently contacted him and said there were difficulties.
The applicant, who had spent some time working in Dublin was subse- quently refused. Issues which had
needed resolution had been resolved “but he was refused on the grounds that he is not a local, rural person. His brother bought land from a pal and got permission to build a house across the road. Born and brought up in the same house and one 1s a local rural person and the other is told he’s not”.
Cllr Brennan said that he was pro- posing the Material Contravention on the grounds that he had supplied enough new information in the mat- ter. Cllr Richard Nagle(FF) said that the situation on the local rural people “needs a serious reality check. We
are presiding over rural depopula- tion. That is a fact. All that people are asking for is the permissions they Uomo B10 (orem kOe
Cllr Joe Arkins (FG) said dealing with the issue through a material contravention “is using a sledgeham- mer to crack a nut… and while there are genuine cases, if we start doing that then it will eventually come down to which applicants are the most popular.”
The meeting put the proposal to a vote and voted in favour of by a majority of 27 in favour to three against.