SD21B/0448

Increase in height of part of the existing low level boundary wall to 1.75 metre high screen walls abutting the public footpath along the south west boundary line, together with additional 1.75 metre high screen walls within the site to provide screening for the proposed additional private open space to the south west corner of the overall site with access from the dwelling via the proposed new French doors in lieu of 1 kitchen window on the southwest elevation together with the relocation of existing pedestrian entrance with access to onto Dangan Park

Granted

Core Planning Reasoning

The Inspector recommended upholding the planning authority's condition to limit the boundary wall height to 1.2 metres to ensure the preservation of the area's character and maintain passive surveillance of the street from a prominent corner site.

Decision Maker's Conclusion

  • The proposed 1.75-metre high boundary wall would result in the loss of passive surveillance of the public domain and negatively impact the established visual amenity of the corner site.
  • The existing dwelling already possesses private open space (approx. 270sqm) that far exceeds minimum standards, rendering the visual interference of a high wall for additional screening unnecessary.
  • Cited precedents for higher walls in the area are distinguished as being part of original street layouts rather than retrofitted additions that alter the established character of the junction.

Cited Policies (CDP)

Section 11.3.2Section 2.3.5Housing Policy H15Policy H17 Objective 5Section 11.3.1 (iv)Table 11.20

Decision Document Summary

The applicant sought permission for various alterations at 59 Dangan Park, a corner site in Kimmage, most notably increasing a boundary wall's height to 1.75 metres to screen a new private open space. While South Dublin County Council granted permission, they attached Condition No. 2, restricting the wall height to 1.2 metres to protect street surveillance and visual character. The First Party appeal argued that the wall was necessary for privacy and cited local precedents. However, the Inspecto...
SOURCE PDFOpen Original
Note: If code appears below, the council site is blocking the preview. Please open the original file.