Donegal County Council denied planning permission for a proposed glamping development in Portnoo. The council’s decision was based on concerns that such developments could set a negative precedent for rural tourism, especially in areas with “sensitive landscapes.”
The development, which sought to build nine glamping pods along with associated parking and wastewater facilities, would have been located in Lackagh, overlooking the scenic Gweebarra Bay.
The council also noted that while the glamping pods were intended to offer a unique tourism experience, their presence in the rural area could undermine the preservation of the region’s natural beauty.
According to an article published by Donegal Live, in their refusal, they stated that such developments in sensitive landscapes “have the potential cumulatively to be severely detrimental to preservation of such sensitive landscapes.”
Louise and Noel Adair, the developers behind the project, had proposed the nine glamping pods along with parking facilities and a new wastewater treatment system.
Despite these amenities, the development was met with objections from local residents. One local, Ed Perrin, criticized the design of the pods, saying the “timber-framed and clad in corrugated iron” structures did not fit with the traditional rural character of the area.
Perrin argued that the introduction of the pods would diminish the region’s visual appeal, potentially disturbing both residents and visitors who appreciate the tranquility of the landscape.
“It would also seriously injure the visual amenities of the area, fail to be adequately absorbed and integrated into the landscape, and would militate against the preservation of the rural environment,” the council explained.
Further concerns raised by local residents included the potential for increased noise and light pollution in the area.
In its decision, Donegal County Council emphasized the “elevated and sensitive nature” of the area, which is designated as a high scenic amenity zone. They also noted that the absence of communal facilities and the backland location of the proposed site made it an incompatible addition to the rural surroundings.
The council further explained that approving such a project would set a problematic precedent for future tourism developments in rural areas.