Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1990

• Permanent Page URL

THIRD SCHEDULE

Reasons for the Refusal of Permission Which Exclude Compensation

Section 12 .

1. Development of the kind proposed on the land would be premature by reference to any one or combination of the following constraints and the period within which the constraints involved may reasonably be expected to cease—

(a) any existing deficiency in the provision of water supplies or sewerage facilities,

(b) the capacity of existing or prospective water supplies or sewerage facilities being required for prospective development as regards which a grant of a permission under Part IV of the Principal Act, an undertaking under Part VI of that Act or a notice under section 13 exists,

(c) the capacity of existing or prospective water supplies or sewerage facilities being required for the prospective development of another part of the functional area of the planning authority, as indicated in the development plan,

(d) the capacity of existing or prospective water supplies or sewerage facilities being required for any other prospective development or for any development objective, as indicated in the development plan,

(e) any existing deficiency in the road network serving the area of the proposed development, including considerations of capacity, width, alignment, or the surface or structural condition of the pavement, which would render that network, or any part of it, unsuitable to carry the increased road traffic likely to result from the development,

(f) any prospective deficiency (including the considerations specified in subparagraph (e) in the road network serving the area of the proposed development which—

(i) would arise because of the increased road traffic likely to result from that development and from prospective development as regards which a grant of permission under Part IV of the Principal Act, an undertaking under Part VI of that Act or a notice under section 13 exists, or

(ii) would arise because of the increased road traffic likely to result from that development and from any other prospective development or from any development objective, as indicated in the development plan, and

(iii) would render that road network, or any part of it, unsuitable to carry the increased road traffic likely to result from the proposed development.

2. Development of the kind proposed would be premature pending the determination by the planning authority or the road authority of a road layout for the area or any part thereof.

3. Development of the kind proposed would be premature by reference to the order of priority, if any, for development indicated in the development plan.

4. The proposed development would endanger public safety by reason of traffic hazard or obstruction of road users or otherwise.

5. The proposed development, by itself or by the precedent which the grant of permission for it would set for other relevant development, would adversely affect the use of a national road or other major road by traffic.

6. The proposed development would interfere with a view or prospect of special amenity value or special interest which it is necessary to preserve.

7. The proposed development would cause serious air pollution, water pollution, noise pollution or vibration or pollution connected with the disposal of waste.

8. In the case of development including any structure or any addition to or extension of a structure, the structure, addition or extension would—

(i) infringe an existing building line or, where none exists, a building line determined by the planning authority or by the Board,

(ii) be under a public road,

(iii) seriously injure the amenities, or depreciate the value, of property in the vicinity,

(iv) tend to create any serious traffic congestion,

(v) endanger or interfere with the safety of aircraft or the safe and efficient navigation thereof,

(vi) endanger the health or safety of persons occupying or employed in the structure or any adjoining structure, or

(vii) be prejudicial to public health.

9. The development would contravene materially a condition attached to an existing permission for development.

10. The proposed development would injure or interfere with a historic monument which stands registered in the Register of Historic Monuments under section 5 of the National Monuments (Amendment) Act, 1987 , or which is situated in an archaeological area so registered.

11. The development would contravene materially a development objective indicated in the development plan for the use solely or primarily (as may be indicated in the development plan) of particular areas for particular purposes (whether residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural or otherwise).

12. Paragraph 11 shall, subject to paragraph 13, not apply in a case where a development objective for the use specified in paragraph 11 applied to the land at any time within the five years immediately prior to the date on which the relevant application was made for permission under Part IV of the Principal Act to develop the land, and the development would not have contravened materially that development objective.

13. Paragraph 12 shall not apply in a case where a person acquired his interest in the land—

(a) after the development objective referred to in paragraph 11 has come into operation, or

(b) after notice has been published,

(i) in accordance with section 21 of the Principal Act, of a proposed new development plan or of proposed variations of a development plan, or

(ii) in accordance with section 21A of the Principal Act, of a material alteration of the draft concerned,

indicating in draft the development objective referred to in paragraph 11.

14. For the purposes of paragraph 13, the onus shall be on a person to prove all relevant facts relating to his interest in the land to the satisfaction of the planning authority.

15. In this Schedule, each of the terms “road authority” and “national road” has the meaning assigned to it in the Local Government (Roads and Motorways) Act, 1974 .