An appeal has been submitted to An Coimisiún Pleanála challenging Donegal County Council’s decision to grant planning permission for a small glamping development outside Downings.
The permission, issued in November, allows Pacific Construction Ltd to develop five glamping pods on a site along The Atlantic Drive, including an ancillary communal facilities building, a proprietary wastewater treatment system, landscaping, access, parking, and other associated works.
The national planning authority is expected to make a decision on the appeal by April 2026.
The appellant argues that the development would constitute “inappropriate speculative commercial development in a rural area remote from services and without safe pedestrian linkages.”
The appeal raises concerns related to scenic amenity designations, residential amenity, public health, Natura considerations, and potential traffic hazards for pedestrians. These objections reflect common issues encountered in rural tourism development applications, particularly in areas where infrastructure or connectivity is limited.
In the project’s planning application, principal planner John Scally said, “The applicant proposes purpose-built tourism accommodation on the outskirts of Downings, directly off the Atlantic Drive and the Wild Atlantic Way, an area recognised for its natural assets, outdoor recreation, and growing tourism appeal, including prestigious golf courses and hospitality offerings.”
He added that both the Donegal County Development Plan and the Wild Atlantic Way Regional Tourism Strategy identify a need for expanded tourism infrastructure to support visitor growth and address seasonal fluctuations while protecting the natural and built environments.
Scally also noted that the site is located in what is designated as a Structurally Weak Rural Area, where planning policy limits new holiday housing unless there is a demonstrable social and economic need.
According to DonegalLive, he wrote, “The site lies within a Structurally Weak Rural Area facing housing pressures from holiday homes, where planning policy restricts new holiday housing unless a clear social and economic need is demonstrated.”
The appellant, however, maintains that the development does not meet these criteria and would conflict with sustainable planning principles.
The appeal states, “The subject proposal represents a speculative commercial tourism accommodation land use in a scenic rural area, remote from appropriate facilities and services and without any pedestrian connection to the urban settlement, which would result in an inappropriate form of commercial development with associated detrimental environmental (wastewater) and traffic impacts contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.”
It further argues that “the proposal would also seriously injure the residential amenities of existing neighbouring properties and depreciate their value by reason of excessive noise and general disturbance,” concluding that the permission could be refused for “different legitimate reasons.”
For outdoor hospitality and glamping operators, the case highlights ongoing sensitivities around rural tourism development, including infrastructure expectations, environmental safeguards, and community impact.
It also underscores the importance of aligning proposals with regional tourism strategies and demonstrating clear economic or social benefits when seeking approval in policy-restricted rural zones.