Galway Bay fm newsroom - An engineer from Maree has brought a High Court challenge against the planning authority's refusal to allow him build a house 850 meters from his parents home.
24 year old Conor Tarpey claims An Bord Pleanala made fundamental errors of law when it decided to refuse his application to build a house in an area he has lived in for most of his life.
Conor Tarpey, a recently qualified engineer, wants to build a dwelling house with a garage and ancillary works at Ballynamangh East near the village of Maree, on lands owned by his family.
He applied and secured planning permission for the house from Galway Co Council.
However that decision was appealed to An Bord Pleanala by a neighbouring landowner.
In 2019 the board refused permission, which Mr Tarpey challenged in the High Court.
Those proceedings were resolved and the application was sent back for a fresh consideration.
Early this year the board again refused to grant Mr Tarpey permission.
It said it was satisfied that when having regard to certain Ministerial guidelines and policy regarding rural stand alone housing, Mr Tarpey lacked a demonstrable economic or social need to live in this area or came within the criteria to allow him build a house at this location.
The board added that it did not consider the proposed development complied with policies for the control of rural housing.
At the High Court this week Niall Handy BL for Mr Tarpey said his client "ticked all the boxes" in regards to having a longstanding relationship with the locality in which he wants to continue to make his home.
Counsel said the board had made fundamental errors of law in its decision, and its conclusions were not justified.
Arising out of the refusal Mr Tarpey has launched fresh High Court judicial review proceedings where he seeks orders including one quashing the Board's refusal, made on January 20th last.
He also seeks orders that the board be directed to grant him planning permission and that his application be remitted back to the board.
He further seeks a declaration from the court that the board erred in law, took irrelevant considerations into account, and acted unreasonably rendering its decision void and of no legal effect.
Permission to challenge the board's decision was granted, on an ex-parte basis, by Mr Justice Simons.
The judge made the matter returnable to a date in May.
