Core Refusal Reason
The proposed development would result in a substandard form of residential amenity for future residents due to a poor configuration of units that are significantly overlooked by retained office buildings and negatively impacted by the undercroft car parking layout.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The principle of a high-density Build-to-Rent development is acceptable at this central and accessible location, aligning with national and local compact growth objectives.
- The proposed height, massing, and architectural design are appropriate for the urban context and would not detrimentally affect the character of the streetscape or the amenities of adjacent properties like Ashford House.
- The internal site layout is deficient, as the proximity to retained offices and the arrangement of undercroft parking results in poor quality private open space and insufficient privacy for future residents.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Objective A (Zoning)Policy Objective PHP18: Residential DensityPolicy Objective PHP28: Build-to-Rent and Shared AccommodationPolicy Objective PHP20: Protection of Existing Residential AmenityPolicy Objective PHP37: Public Realm DesignPolicy Objective PHP40: Shared Space LayoutsPolicy Objective PHP42: Building Design & HeightPolicy Objective PHP43: Design in Local Area PlansSection 12.3.1.1: Design CriteriaSection 12.3.3: Quantitative Standards for Residential DevelopmentSection 12.3.5: Apartment DevelopmentSection 12.3.7.7: InfillSection 12.4.5: Car Parking StandardsSection 12.4.6: Cycle ParkingSection 12.8.2 / 12.8.3 / 12.8.8: Open SpaceSection 12.8.6.2: SuDSAppendix 5: Building Height Strategy
Decision Document Summary
This report assesses a proposal by DKG Properties Ltd for a 22-unit Build-to-Rent (BTR) apartment complex ranging from 3 to 4 storeys on a 0.213ha site at Patrick Street, Dun Laoghaire. The project includes the demolition of several properties but retains existing office buildings at the rear of the site. While the Planning Authority originally refused the scheme citing 'abrupt transition in scale' and 'overdevelopment,' the Inspector disagreed with these specific points, finding the density of ...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