2641/21
The development will consist of works to include: • Construction of a 2-storey apartment building with dormer accommodation in the roof space; • The apartment building will provide 8 no. apartments, consisting of 4 no. 1-bed units, 1 no. 2-bed unit and 3 no. 3-bed units; • Vehicular access from Church Park Way, 7 no. car parking spaces and 23 no. bicycle parking spaces; • Landscaping, boundary treatment, bin stores and all associated site works and services.
Core Refusal Reason
The Inspector recommends granting permission, reversing the Planning Authority's refusal, concluding that the infill residential development is compatible with the Z15 zoning objective, respects the setting of the adjacent Protected Structure, and provides appropriate density on an under-utilised site.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The mandatory requirement for a masterplan under Section 14.8.14 is not applicable in this instance as the proposal involves a small infill development on part of a landholding where the main institutional uses are being retained.
- The contemporary design, materiality, and setbacks of the proposed building ensure it appears subservient to the Protected Structure (Mount Argus Church) and does not negatively impact the architectural character or burial grounds.
- Revised plans submitted with the appeal adequately address previous concerns regarding pedestrian safety, car parking layout, and bicycle storage, ensuring the development integrates safely into the existing streetscape.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Decision Document Summary
This Inspector's Report concerns an appeal against Dublin City Council's decision to refuse permission for an 8-apartment building on a 0.0841ha site at Church Park Way, Kimmage. The site occupies a corner of the grounds of Mount Argus Church, a designated Protected Structure. The Planning Authority's refusal was based on the lack of a masterplan for the Z15 zoned lands, perceived injury to the architectural character of the church, and substandard parking/pedestrian access. The Inspector argues...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