WEB1510/21

The development will consist of construction of a new infill single storey detached dwelling with a flat sedum roof accessed off Ailesbury Gardens. Proposed dwelling is in front of existing dwelling on an infill site separated by Ailesbury Gardens with all associated landscaping works.

Refused

Core Refusal Reason

The proposed development was refused as it would negatively impact visual amenity through the loss of mature landscaping, interfere with the safety and maintenance of the adjacent railway infrastructure due to insufficient setbacks, and create a traffic safety hazard for pedestrians and road users.

Decision Maker's Conclusion

  • The development would be out of character with the existing leafy streetscape and would result in an incongruous form of overdevelopment that harms the visual amenity of the area.
  • The proposed 1-metre separation distance is insufficient to ensure the structural integrity and allow for the maintenance of the Sydney Parade Railway Station retaining wall, posing a risk to rail infrastructure safety.
  • The provision of an isolated footpath and pedestrian entrance on a narrow road with limited visibility and existing parking constraints would create a traffic safety hazard.

Cited Policies (CDP)

Z1 Zoning ObjectiveSection 4.5.3.1 - Policy SC13Section 4.5.9 - Policy SC26Section 5.5.2 - Policy QH5Section 5.5.2 - Policy QH7Section 5.5.2 - Policy QH8Section 5.5.2 - Policy QH13Section 16.2.2.2 - Infill DevelopmentSection 16.10.10Section 16.10.2 - Residential Quality StandardsSection 16.38 - Car Parking StandardsSection 16.39 - Cycle Parking StandardsAppendix 5 - Roads Standards

Decision Document Summary

This report evaluates a proposal for a 48sqm (revised from 60sqm) single-storey, 1-bed contemporary detached dwelling on a restricted 138sqm site fronting Ailesbury Gardens, Dublin 4. The site is a landscaped area containing two mature trees and directly abuts a 3.3m high stone retaining wall for the Sydney Parade Railway Station. While the applicant proposed a car-free development with a new footpath section to address earlier concerns, the Inspector argued that the site is fundamentally unsuit...
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.

View the appeal at An Bord Pleanála