3095/21
The development will consist of the following: widening of the existing openings in the front stone boundary wall to provide new vehicular access with inward opening double gates, 2.6 meters wide to each garden the subject of this application. The gates shall match in design and height the existing gates on site. One paved parking space, 2.6 meters wide shall be provided in each garden to facilitate electric vehicle charging points. The dividing railings between the gardens shall be retained and conserved.
Core Refusal Reason
The proposed development would result in the loss of on-street car parking spaces in a high-demand residential area, which is contrary to Development Plan policies (MT14 and Section 16.38) that seek to retain on-street parking as a shared resource.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- While the proposed design and tree protection measures were considered acceptable in the context of the Residential Conservation Area, the loss of public on-street parking was deemed unjustifiable.
- Winton Avenue is identified as a high-demand parking area at full permit capacity; the loss of 2 to 3 on-street spaces would negatively impact the supply available to local residents.
- The inspector concluded that the necessity for off-street electric vehicle charging does not override the specific Dublin City Development Plan restrictions against removing on-street parking to facilitate single-dwelling vehicular entrances.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Decision Document Summary
This report details a first-party appeal for the widening of boundary wall openings to provide vehicular access for two mid-terrace dwellings at 10 and 12 Winton Avenue, Rathgar. The applicants argued that the work was necessary to facilitate electric vehicle charging and was a repeat of a previously granted (but partially unimplemented) permission. The site is located in a Z2 Residential Conservation Area. The Planning Authority refused permission primarily due to the loss of on-street parking....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