Core Reason for the Refused Part
The Inspector recommended a split decision, granting permission for the roof-light but refusing the vehicular entrance due to the loss of a valuable on-street parking space in a high-demand area and the inadequate depth of the proposed in-curtilage parking, which would necessitate hazardous parking maneuvers.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The proposed roof-light is considered consistent with the 'Z1' residential zoning objective and would not be harmful to the visual amenities or character of the area.
- The vehicular entrance would result in the loss of on-street parking in a location where there is high demand and reliance on such spaces, thereby contravening Policy MT14 and Section 16.38.9 of the Development Plan.
- The restricted depth of the front garden (c. 4.5m) is insufficient to accommodate a standard vehicle safely, leading to oblique parking that would impede driver visibility and create a risk for pedestrian-vehicular conflict.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Policy MT14Section 16.38Section 16.38.9Appendix 5Section 5.1Zoning Objective Z1
Decision Document Summary
This report concerns a first-party appeal against a split decision by Dublin City Council for a residential development at 15 Fairfield Road, Glasnevin. The applicant sought permission for a vehicular entrance and a front roof-light. The Inspector found that while the roof-light was acceptable and followed local precedents, the vehicular entrance posed significant issues. The site context involves a street with high on-street parking demand and a shared side passage with No. 17. The primary plan...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