Tipperary man refused permission to keep home gym in back garden
A home gym in a Carrick-on-Suir back garden has been refused planning permission after council planners said the structure was out of character with the area.
Jim Foran applied to Tipperary County Council for planning permission to retain the portacabin home gym unit in his back garden in Woodland Heights, Carrick-on-Suir.
Retention permission is sought for development which has already been carried out without planning permission.
The portacabin is already the subject of an enforcement notice, according to the council's planner's report, with the retention application submitted in an attempt to regularise its planning status.
A neighbour, Aideen Mackey, objected to the plans to keep the home gym, saying that it would increase the potential for overlooking and loss of privacy.
“I am also concerned that permitting the proposed structure in this location could establish an undesirable precedent for other similar structures within this residential development.
“The character of Woodland Heights is predominantly residential and additional structures which materially affect privacy, residential amenity, and the peaceful enjoyment of neighbouring homes should be carefully controlled,” she added.
In their report, council planners said that they were concerned that the cabin was visible from the public cemetery which is next to Mr Foran’s home.
“Given the finish and the views from an important public space, the planning authority is of the opinion that the structure will detract from the overall character of the area,” they said.
The planner said that any concerns raised by neighbours about overlooking could be managed by imposing a condition that opaque windows are to be used on the home gym, and said that the noise generated by the gym wouldn’t likely impact on neighbouring properties.
“There is a serious concern however with the impact the structure proposed would have on that aspect from the private amenity space of the neighbouring property to the north,” planners said.
“The structure to be retained projects above the shared boundary, and while not having an overbearing impact, represents an incongruous intervention that would injure the amenity currently enjoyed by neighbouring residential properties,” they added.
Planners said that because of this, planning permission for the home gym should be refused.
The development “is therefore contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. The development if permitted would also set an undesirable precedent for other similar development”, they said.