Core Planning Reasoning
The Inspector recommended the removal of Condition No. 3, determining that the proposed first-floor study window is an unobtrusive addition that harmonizes with the dwelling's fenestration and the wider streetscape, making the requirement to match existing dimensions unnecessary.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The proposed two-storey side extension is a distinctly new addition with a different material palette (rendered vs. brick), which justifies a departure from existing window dimensions while maintaining aesthetic balance.
- The window design responds appropriately to the existing structure and the rhythm of the streetscape, where numerous examples of broken uniformity already exist.
- In accordance with Section 139 of the Planning and Development Act 2000, the Planning Authority should be directed to omit Condition No. 3 as it is not required to protect visual amenity.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Land Use Zoning Objective 'A'Section 8.2.3.4: Additional Accommodation in Existing Built-up Areas: (i) Extensions to DwellingsSection 8.2.3.5: Residential Development – General Requirements
Decision Document Summary
This report evaluates a first-party appeal against a specific condition (Condition No. 3) attached to a grant of permission for extensions and modifications to a detached dwelling at 6 Laurleen, Stillorgan. The development includes a two-storey side extension, a rear extension, and a new bay window. The Planning Authority required the new first-floor study window to match the dimensions of existing windows to preserve visual harmony. The Inspector found that the new extension, which sits forward...SOURCE PDFOpen Original
Note: If code appears below, the council site is blocking the preview. Please open the original file.