Retention denied for portacabins
PERMISSION has been refused for retention of porta-cabins at the Carlisle grounds, home of Bray Wanderers.
Wicklow County Council refused permission last year and An Bord Pleanala has upheld that decision.
John Corcoran, care of Simon Hart Limited, Stillorgan, appealed the council’s decision last September. While he agreed with the refusal, he said that the council had failed to order the removal of the portacabins or address other structures.
Wanderers application had sought the retention of two flat-roofed single-storey portacabins with a total of 215 square metres, beside the training pitch.
The refusal by An Bord Pleanala was due to ‘ the lack of justification for such structures and the lack of information in relation to their connection to the main activity/use on site’.
The order from An Bord Pleanala said that the retention ‘would give rise to haphazard and substandard development with a lack of a co-ordinated approach to development. The development proposed for retention would set an undesirable precedent for further such development in the area and would, therefore, be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.’
The larger structure was used as offices and the smaller one is a meeting room.
The planning authority’s refusal included ‘ the substandard nature of the portacabins buildings for retention’, and ‘ the lack of information with regard to the proposed users or intended length of time they are to be in place.’
They said that the proposed development would not accord with the zoning of the site set out in the town development plan and would ‘undermine the fabric of the town’.
The inspector spoke to the general manager of the club on site and he said that the office was used by charity partners on match days and that the smaller structure was a media room.
Addressing the fact that the appellant wishes the board to add a reason for refusal that would identify unauthorised development and place a time limit on its removal, the inspector said that this was not the remit of An Bord Pleanala.
‘ There may well be other structures on site that do not have the benefit of planning permission,’ he said. ‘I would note however that the case concerns retention of two structures and that is what is being assessed, not the permitted status or otherwise of other structures on the site. Such is a matter for the Planning Authority to deal with. The Board is not an enforcement authority and has no remit or power to deal with unauthorised development or enforcement either concerning the structures subject to the appeal or other structures on site.’