Core Refusal Reason
The Inspector recommended granting permission, overturning the Planning Authority's refusal, on the basis that the works constitute a significant renovation and extension of a typical 1960s/70s dwelling rather than a total replacement dwelling, and would not adversely affect residential amenities or the character of the area.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The proposed development constitutes a significant renovation and deep retrofit common for dwellings of this era, and does not represent a replacement dwelling that would require evidence of structural failure under Section 8.2.3.4(xiv).
- The scale, massing, and design of the extension are in keeping with the character of the established suburban area and the existing streetscape.
- The proposal will not result in any undue loss of light, overshadowing, or overbearing impacts on neighboring properties, particularly Nos. 8 and 12 Ardagh Park.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Section 8.2.3.4(xiv) Demolition and Replacement DwellingsSection 8.2.3.4(i) Extensions to DwellingsZoning Objective A
Decision Document Summary
The application relates to 10 Ardagh Park, Blackrock, a semi-detached dormer bungalow on a 0.048ha site. The proposal involves demolishing a garage and chimney to facilitate a two-story side and rear extension, porch, and new dormer windows. The Planning Authority initially refused permission, arguing that the scale of demolition effectively constituted a replacement dwelling without justification of structural defects. However, the Inspector found that the applicant's revised appeal plans—which...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