Planning refusal upheld for Cork city student complex

CORK City Council’s decision to refuse planning permission for a major student development on the site of a former convent on Model Farm Road has been upheld by An Bord Pleanála (ABP).

Last December, Lyonshall Limited lodged a planning application with the council seeking permission for the development of a 450-bed purpose-built student accommodation complex at the site of the former St Joseph’s Convent and on an adjacent section of land to the rear of the Lee Garage.

The applicants said the proposed development would include the demolition of the former convent and the construction of three apartment blocks ranging in height from two to five storeys.

Earlier this year, Cork City Council refused planning permission for the plans, saying it deemed the proposed development would be “visually overbearing and out of scale and character with the pattern of development in the area”.

Lyonshall Limited subsequently lodged an appeal with An Bord Pleanála in a bid to see the decision reversed.

The first-party appeal submitted on behalf of Lyonshall said the applicants were “disappointed with the council’s decision to refuse permission for the proposed development given the context of the site, and demand for additional student accommodation in Cork city”.

The appeal contended that Lyonshall and the project design team had “engaged positively” with the planning authority throughout the LRD application process.

ABP has decided to uphold the refusal for planning permission.

In the board order, ABP said it disagreed with some reasons its inspector had recommended planning permission be refused.

However, the board order said that, having regard to the provisions of the Cork City Development Plan 2022-2028, the proposed development, “by reason of the quantity of studio units, the floor area of individual studio units, the limited communal facilities and the location of the communal facilities in Block 1 only, fails to provide a satisfactory standard of residential amenity for the student population”.

It said the development as proposed would fail to comply with elements of an objective in the development plan and would therefore, be “contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area”.