Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2560489 - Appeal NotificationOur Case Number: PL -502064 -MN -26 Planning Authority Reference Number: 2560489 Planning Department Monaghan County Council Council Offices No.1 Dublin Street Monaghan Co. Monaghan Date: Re: 09 September 2026 MON. CO. CO. PLANNING SECItO+ j 10 SEP 2026 Construction of 44 houses and all associated site works. Doohamlat, Castleblayney, Co. Monaghan. Dear Sir/Madam, An Coimisiun Pleanala Enclosed is a copy of an appeal under the Planning and Development Act, 2000, (as amended). 1. The planning authority is required to forward specified documents to the Commission under the provisions of section 128 and section 37(1)(b) of the Planning and Development Act, 2000, (as amended). You are requested to submit these pilot digital planning application documents to An Coimisiun Pleanala electronically. The documents are to be uploaded on our digital portal as agreed with the training from the LGMA. Please upload, within a period of 2 weeks beginning on the date of this letter, the following documents:- (i) a copy of the planning application made to the planning authority and a copy of any drawings, maps (including ordnance survey number) particulars, evidence, a copy of any environmental impact statement, other written study or further information received or obtained by your authority in accordance with regulations under the Acts. If practicable, the original of any drawing with coloured markings should be provided or a coloured copy, (ii) a copy of any technical or other reports prepared by or for the planning authority in relation to the application, (iii) a certified copy of the relevant Manager's Order giving the decision of the planning authority, (iv) a copy of the notification of decision given to the applicant, (v) particulars of the applicant's interest in the land or structure, as supplied to the planning authority, Teil Tel (01) 858 8100 Glao Aitiuil LoCall 1890 275 175 Facs Fax (01) 872 2684 64 Sraid Maoilbhride 64 Marlborough Street Laithrean Greasain Website www.pleanala.ie Baile Atha Cliath 1 Dublin 1 Riomhphost Email communications@pleanala.ie 001 V902 D01 V902 (vi) a copy of the published notice and a copy of the text of the site notice erected on the land or structure. (vii) a copy of requests (if any) to the applicant for further information relating to the application under appeal together with copies of reply and documents (if any) submitted in response to such requests, (viii) a copy of any written submissions or observations concerning the proposed development made to the planning authority, (ix) a copy of any notices to prescribed bodies/other authorities and any responses to same, (x) a copy of any exemption application/certificate within Part V of the 2000 Act, (as amended), applies, (xi) a copy of the minutes of any pre -planning meetings, (xii) One electronic copy of any Environmental Impact Assessment Report received by the Planning Authority as per Article 97(1) of the Planning and Development Regulations, 2001, (as amended). 2. To ensure that the Commission has a full and complete set of the material specified above and that it may proceed with full consideration of the appeal, please certify that the planning authority holds no further material relevant to the case coming within the above list of items by signing the certification on page 3 of this letter and returning the letter to the Commission. 3. In addition to the documents mentioned above, please supply the following:- Particulars and relevant documents relating to previous decisions affecting the same site or relating to applications for similar development in near proximity. "History" documents should include; a) Certified Manager's Order, b) the site location, site layout maps, all plans and c) particulars and all internal reports. Copies of I -plan sheets are not adequate. Where your records show that a decision was appealed to the Commission, it would be helpful if you would indicate the Commission's reference. Submissions or observations by the planning authority. 4. As a party to the appeal you may, under section 129 of the 2000 Act, (as amended), make submissions or observations in writing to the Commission in relation to the appeal within a period of 4 weeks beginning on the date of this letter. Please note any submission/observation you wish to make to the Commission CANNOT be uploaded to Sharefile. These submissions can be made in writing to the Commission or can be emailed to appeals@pleanala.ie within the required timeframe. Any submissions or observations received by the Commission outside of that period shall not be considered, and where none have been validly received, the Commission may determine the appeal without further notice to you. Contingency Submission 5. If the decision of your authority was to refuse permission, you should consider whether the authority wishes to make a contingency submission to the Commission as regards appropriate conditions which, in its view, should be attached to a grant of permission should the Commission decide to make such a grant. In particular, your authority may wish to comment on appropriate conditions which might be attached to a permission in accordance with section 48 and/or 49 of the 2000 Planning Act, (as amended), (Development / Supplementary Development Contributions) including any special condition which might be appropriate under section 48(2)(c) of the Act. Any such contingency submission, in circumstances which your authority decided to refuse permission, would be without prejudice to your authority's main submission in support of its decision. Please quote the above appeal reference number in any further correspondence. If you have any queries in the meantime, please contact the undersigned officer of the Commission at appeals@pleanala.ie. I hereby certify that the planning authority has complied with section 128 and section 37(1)(b) of the 2000 Act, (as amended), and that all material relevant to (PL -502064 -MN -26) the request at 1 on page 1 of this letter has been forwarded. Signed: Print:( Date: Yours faithfully, Verity Taylor Administrative Assistant Digital BP07 Enclosures Make a Planning Appeal Direct URL: https://forms.gov.ie/en/68e6334b054d8f2739f8ad5b Response ID 6aa120a7564326d87b0fcbd5 Date submitted 09/09/2026 Check if you can appeal to An Coimisiun Pleanala 1. What type of appeal are you making? Third -party appeal (I am appealing the planning authority's decision regarding someone else's application) 2. Have you made a submission on this development to the relevant Yes planning authority? 3. Given you are making a third party appeal, you must include the Acknowledgement of Submission.png - Virus scan flagged the file as clean acknowledgment document that the planning authority gave to you to confirm you made a submission to it. 4. Select the statement that applies to you I am the appellant ry. 5. Throughout the appeal process, we may issue correspondence to the Yes appellant/agent as selected above by email. Please confirm that you are satisfied to receive correspondence by email °"' Appeal type **This section will determine the type of appeal you wish to make and calculate be charged.** the fee involvedyRalify fbr thg rei f�only that amou ill N �� 6. Do you wish to request an oral hearing? No 7. Please confirm the following fee details are correct: Yes Appellant/company details **This section is for details of the person/company who is making the appeal. If you are an agent submitting an appeal on behalf of a person/company, please include their details on this page. You can submit your agent details on the next page if applicable** 8. Appellant's full name/Company name Damian Murphy 9. Is the appellant/company's address in the Republic of Ireland? Yes 10. Address 19 COTS LOCHA DOD HAM LET CASTLEBLAYNEY MONAGHAN A75XH66 Ireland 11. Phone number +353830901272 Is there more than one appellant associated with this appeal? No *Please be advised that An Coimisiun Pleanala will only correspond with one appellant throughout the appeal process. If you wish to include further appellants on the appeal you may do so in your grounds to appeal document. If the appeal is a third party appeal, you must ensure that you have a planning authority submission acknowledgement letter for each appellant listed. This must be uploaded with your appeal documents.* Details about the proposed development **This section asks for details about the planning authority decision you wish to appeal** 13. Planning authority Monaghan County Council 14. Planning authority register reference number 25/60489 15. Address of proposed development CONNOLLY'S DOOHAMLET CASTLEBLAYNEY MONAGHAN A75CF58 Ireland Grounds for appeal 16. Attachment describing the grounds of your appeal (planning reasons and arguments) "You can also attach further supporting materials on the next page" Murphy Grounds of Appeal 2026.pdf - Virus scan flagged the file as clean Supporting material If you wish you can include supporting materials with your appeal. Supporting materials include photographs, plans, surveys, drawings, technical guidance documents and so on. Please note An Coimisiun Pleanala will receive a complete copy of documents/drawings/maps that were submitted at planning authority stage. When submitting supporting material, please only include new documents. (This does not apply to third party appeals where we will always require a copy of your planning authority submission acknowledgement letter,) If you have added attachments, submitting the form may take a few moments. Thanks for your patience. THIRD -PARTY APPEAL Planning Ref. 25/60489 Applicant: Connolly Partnership Location: Doohamlat, Castleblayney, Co. Monaghan Decision: Grant of permission dated 18 August 2026 Appeal by: Damian Murphy 19, Cois Locha, Doohamlet, Co. Monaghan 1. Dntroductoon I wish to appeal Monaghan County Council's decision dated 18 August 2026 to grant permission for the amended 44 -dwelling development under Planning Ref. 25/60489. I am the resident of No. 19, which directly adjoins the proposed development. My appeal is focused primarily on the effect of the amended layout on the residential and visual amenity and privacy of No. 19, particularly in relation to the northern section of the development. The concerns I raised during the planning process have not, in my view, been adequately resolved by the revised layout or by the conditions attached to the permission. I respectfully request that the Board overturn the decision and refuse permission. 2. C Canes fro th Nl o thern Section and Resident rD A menuty A significant change occurred between the original and revised proposals in the area adjoining No. 19. In the original layout, Houses 42, 43 and 44 were two -storey houses forming part of a terrace row, together with House 45, which was a single -storey bungalow. House 45 was the dwelling closest to the relevant northern boundary. Following concerns raised during the planning process regarding the relationship between the proposed development and the existing adjoining dwelling, House 45 was removed from the revised proposal as per the council's instructions. However, Houses 42, 43 and 44 remain as two -storey dwellings forming the remaining section of the terrace. The revised layout also appears to bring this remaining section further up the site and closer to the northern boundary, as shown below. 43 The removal of House 45 does not, in itself, remove the need to consider the relationship between the remaining two -storey Houses 42-44 and the existing dwelling at No. 19. The impact of the revised arrangement should, in my view, be assessed on the basis of the actual final layout, including the position, height and levels of Houses 42-44 and their proximity to the northern boundary. 3. Difference in Ground Levels and Visual Impact The impact of the development cannot be assessed by looking at horizontal distances alone. The photographs submitted below show the existing levels within my garden and the relationship between my property and the adjoining land. My garden is lower than the relevant portion of the proposed development site, with the proposed houses located on higher ground. The photographs demonstrate the change in levels within the garden, while the proposed houses are located on the higher portion of the site. This means that the effective visual height of the proposed two -storey houses from No. 19 may be greater than might be apparent from the site layout alone. This is particularly relevant because Houses 42-44 are two -storey dwellings, whereas House 45 in the original proposal was a single -storey dwelling. The Board is therefore asked to consider the relationship between: • the existing ground levels; o the proposed finished ground levels; o the finished floor levels; o the overall building heights; o the ridge levels; o the relative levels between the proposed houses and No. 19; o the resulting sightlines; and ® the effect of these factors on the residential and visual amenity and privacy of No. 19. view from back garden ground floor level 4. Condition 8 - Further separation of 42-44 Condition 8 requires: "A revised site layout plan providing for further separation of dwelling No's 42-44 to the northern site boundary." The stated reason is: "In the interests of residential and visual amenity." This condition is important because it demonstrates that the Planning Authority itself considered that the relationship between Houses 42-44 and our boundary required further attention. However, the permission does not specify how much further separation is required. There is no stated minimum distance. There is no specified revised position for Houses 42-44. There is no requirement identifying the finished floor levels or heights that must be achieved in conjunction with the relocation. As the relationship with No. 19 is one of the principal concerns, I do not consider that an unspecified future alteration adequately resolves the issue at the time permission was granted. The Board is therefore asked to consider whether the permission provides sufficient certainty that the residential amenity of No. 19 will actually be protected. 5. Potential Overlooking from Houses 31-35 In reviewing the Planning Authority's assessment of the relationship between the proposed development and No. 19, I noted the consideration given to habitable -room windows in the area of Houses 42-44. This prompted me to look more closely at the other proposed houses in the northern part of the site, particularly Houses 31 and 32, rather than assuming that the same assessment necessarily applied to the remainder of the development. On reviewing the submitted floor plans and elevations for Houses 31 and 32, I became concerned that the first -floor accommodation appears to include bedrooms at the rear of these houses. Their orientation and position are materially different from Houses 42-44. This raised a specific concern for me regarding the potential views from these habitable -room windows towards No. 19. The concern is particularly relevant because the row containing Houses 31 and 32 is positioned approximately perpendicular to my boundary, while my boundary is angled. The relevant part of the development site is also at a higher level than my garden. As demonstrated by the photographs submitted below, from the area corresponding to the proposed location of Houses 31 and 32 there is already a substantial view along the length of my garden. I am not asking the Board to assume that overlooking occurs simply because the houses contain habitable -room windows. I am asking that the actual sightlines from the proposed windows are assessed, taking account of the proposed positions of the houses, their orientation, the angled boundary, the difference in ground levels and the resulting views towards the private garden of No. 19. I also ask that the assessment is not confined to Houses 31 and 32 individually, but considers the relationship of the wider row of Houses 31-35 with No. 19. 6. Actual Sightlines Demonstrated by the Photographs The photographs above were taken from the existing boundary in the area corresponding to the proposed location of the row containing Houses 31 and 32. The first photograph shows the view from this side of the boundary. The second photograph is taken from the same location looking back along the garden. Together, they demonstrate that from this higher part of the site there is currently a clear view along a substantial length of the private garden of No. 19. I recognise that the existing view does not, by itself, establish what the view would be from the completed development. However, it demonstrates the importance of assessing the proposed sightlines having regard to the actual levels, orientation and position of the proposed houses. I therefore respectfully ask the Board to assess the likely views from the proposed habitable -room windows of Houses 31 and 32 using the submitted drawings, proposed levels and actual relationship with the boundary of No. 19. 7. Overall Impact on No. 19 I ask the Board to consider the cumulative effect of the various elements of the amended development rather than considering each issue separately. In particular, the impact on No. 19 arises from the combination of: o the change in the northern section of the development; o the removal of the single -storey House 45; o the retention of two -storey Houses 42-44; o the apparent change in their position in relation to the northern boundary; o the requirement under Condition 8 for further separation; o the absence of a specified extent of that further separation; o the difference in ground levels between the development site and my house and garden; • the resulting apparent height of the proposed houses; • the position and orientation of Houses 31-35; • the potential views from habitable -room windows; • the angled relationship between the row of houses and my boundary; and • the long sightline towards the private garden of No. 19 demonstrated by the photographs. Taken together, these matters give rise to concerns regarding the residential and visual amenity and privacy of No. 19. I respectfully ask the Board to assess the development from the perspective of the existing dwelling and its actual relationship with the proposed development, rather than considering the individual components in isolation. I also remain concerned about surface -water drainage because of the levels of the site and the proximity of a watercourse. I note the drainage and environmental conditions attached to the permission. However, I ask that the final site levels and drainage arrangements ensure that surface -water runoff does not adversely affect my property or the adjoining watercourse. 9. Conclusion and Request I respectfully submit that the amended development creates a materially different relationship with No. 19 from that originally proposed. The removal of House 45 did not, in itself, resolve the residential amenity concerns arising from the northern section of the development, as Houses 42-44 remain as two -storey dwellings in this area and Condition 8 requires their further separation from the northern boundary. However, the permission does not establish the extent of that further separation or show the resulting final relationship with No. 19. This makes it difficult to assess the eventual impact of the development, particularly when the difference in ground levels and the height of the proposed two -storey dwellings are taken into account. There is also a separate concern regarding potential overlooking from Houses 31 and 32. These appear to have habitable -room windows including bedrooms, and with the higher ground, orientation of the row and angled boundary create potential sightlines towards a substantial part of the private garden of No. 19. I respectfully ask that these actual sightlines be specifically assessed rather than relying solely on a general assessment of the development. I therefore respectfully request that the Board give specific consideration to the residential and visual amenity and privacy of No. 19, having regard to the actual amended layout, proposed levels, building positions, heights, windows and sightlines. I therefore request that An Coimisit n Pleanala: 1. Overturn the decision of Monaghan County Council and refuse permission for Planning Ref. 25/60489. Alternatively, if the Board is not minded to refuse permission: 2. Require substantial amendments to the northern part of the development to satisfactorily resolve the residential and visual amenity impact on No. 19, including the position, levels, height and separation of Houses 42-44. 3. Require the potential overlooking from Houses 31 and 32 to be specifically assessed using the proposed first -floor bedroom windows, finished levels and actual sightlines to No. 19. 4. Ensure that the final approved layout provides a clear and demonstrably acceptable relationship with No. 19 rather than leaving this material aspect of the development to an unspecified future amendment. 5ubmIoxiI Ab , *� ... kialtys Aitiuil itireann ! Taaaa:f91 11 •�, �• U)CaaiGovernment Ireland IXrtnai�suu: oo *� C+bUI(2a2G Qa:L0hm THIS IS AN IMPORTANT DOCUMENT KEEP THIS DOCUMENT SAFELY, YOU WILL BE REQUIRED TO PRODUCE THIS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO AN COIMISIUN PLEANALA IF YOU WISH TO APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING AUTHORITY. IT IS THE ONLY FORM OF EVIDENCE WHICH WILL BE ACCEPTED BY AN COIMISIUN PLEANALA THAT A SUBMISSION OR OBSERVATION HAS BEEN MADE TO THE PLANNING AUTHORITY ON THE PLANNING APPLICATION. Monaghan County Council PLANNING APPLICATION REFERENCE No: 2560489 A submission/observation in writing, has been received from Damian Murphy on 06/01/2026 in relation to the above planning application. The appropriate fee of €20 has been paid. (Fee not applicable to prescribed bodies) The submission/observation is in accordance with the appropriate provisions of the Planning and Development Regulations 2001 and will be taken into account by the planning authority in its determination of the planning application. Yours faithfully, Monaghan County Council