WEBDSDZ2663/25
PROTECTED STRUCTURE: (i) conservation works to a section of the top of the quay wall (section measuring c. 90.83 metres in length), to the eastern side of The Malt House building, including the raking out and repointing of the existing stonework; (ii) The provision of a new gate (measuring 2.2 metres in height from ground level) on the eastern side of the Waterways House building, the purpose of which is to secure the quay wall from the northern end of Waterways House down to the railway bridge at the southern end of The Malt House; and (iii) all associated works necessary to facilitate the development. The application relates to a development proposal within the North Lotts and Grand Canal Dock SDZ Planning Scheme Area.
Core Reason for the Refused Part
The proposed 2.2-metre high steel gate would restrict public access to the Grand Canal Dock waterfront, negatively impacting the social interest of the Protected Structure and contravening specific development plan policies regarding accessibility.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The provision of a 2.2m high steel gate would impede public access to the waterfront edge, directly contravening the Dublin City Development Plan and the North Lotts & Grand Canal Dock SDZ Planning Scheme regarding accessibility.
- The restriction of access would result in a negative impact on the social interest of the Protected Structure and would be detrimental to the character and integrity of the historic quay walls.
- Granting permission for the gate would set an undesirable precedent for similar developments that restrict public permeability along the Grand Canal Dock waterfront.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Decision Document Summary
The proposal involved conservation works to a 90.83-metre section of the Grand Canal Dock Quay Wall and the installation of a 2.2-metre high steel gate to secure the quay between Waterways House and the railway bridge. While the Planning Authority granted permission for the conservation repairs and repointing, it refused the gate element. The refusal was based on the gate's restriction of public access to the waterfront, which was deemed contrary to heritage protection policies and the strategic...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.