Core Refusal Reason
The proposed vehicular entrance would require the removal of one mature Birch tree and potentially damage another, which is contrary to the Dublin City Tree Strategy 2016-2020 and the Dublin City Development Plan policies for tree protection. Additionally, the Inspector found no justifiable necessity for a second entrance following the refusal of a separate development on the site.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The loss of a mature Birch street tree and the potential negative impact on the root zone of a second tree is contrary to Section 16.3.3 and Policy GI28 of the Dublin City Development Plan.
- Following the Board's previous refusal of a dwelling to the rear of the site, there is no longer a justifiable necessity for a second vehicular entrance at this location.
- Permitting a second entrance would lead to a proliferation of access points that would conflict with traffic and pedestrian movements, potentially endangering public safety and setting an undesirable precedent.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Policy GI28Section 16.3.3Zone Z2Section 14.8.2Appendix 5, Section 5.1Section 3.3.3 of the Dublin City Tree Strategy 2016-2020
Decision Document Summary
The applicant sought permission for a new vehicular access at Ashleigh, 2 Vergemount, Clonskeagh, a period property in a Z2 Residential Conservation Area. The application was originally justified by the need to replace an existing entrance that would have been lost to a new dwelling at the rear; however, that dwelling was refused permission on appeal (ABP-310539-21). Dublin City Council refused the current application because it required the removal of a mature Birch street tree. The Inspector c...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