Core Planning Reasoning
The Inspector recommended granting permission and removing Condition No. 3 (a, b, c, and d), concluding that the proposed development, as per the revised plans, would not seriously injure the residential or visual amenities of the area and that the additional restrictions were unwarranted and would unnecessarily diminish the quality of living accommodation for the occupants.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The revised design submitted via further information provides an appropriate balance between protecting the amenities of neighboring properties (No. 20 and 22) and meeting the functional needs of the applicant's family.
- Condition No. 3 would not provide a significant improvement in terms of overshadowing or visual dominance compared to the proposed revised design, but would significantly impact the internal utility of the extension.
- The proposed use of obscure glazing and controls on window opening mechanisms are sufficient and satisfactory measures to prevent undue overlooking from the new first-floor extension.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Dublin City Development Plan 2022-2028Zoning Z1 Sustainable Residential NeighbourhoodsSection 14.7.1 (Land Use Objectives)Section 15.5.3 (Alterations and Extensions)Volume 2 - Appendix 18 Section 1.2 (Extensions to the Rear)
Decision Document Summary
This appeal relates to a first-party challenge against Condition No. 3 of a planning grant for a two-storey rear extension at No. 21 Connolly Avenue, Inchicore. The Planning Authority (Dublin City Council) sought to restrict the width, depth, and window placement of the extension to protect neighboring amenities. The site is a 1920s end-of-terrace dwelling located in a 'Z1' zoned residential area. The Inspector noted that the applicant had already significantly revised the proposal during the fu...SOURCE PDFOpen Original
Note: If code appears below, the council site is blocking the preview. Please open the original file.
PDF Document Missing
The original decision document for this case could not be linked. This often happens for older cases or those with restricted documentation.
Search for case on ABP