WEB2376/25

Demolition of the existing garage structure (38 m2 ) and replacement with a ground plus mezzanine level studio/live/work structure, ancillary to the main house, extending to a total of 79m2. . The accommodation will include ground level open plan studio/live/work space, ground level kitchen and toilet, mezzanine level open plan studio/live/work space, mezzanine level bathroom and storage. The structure will have a gate access onto Seafield Close, rooflights, photovoltaic panels, heat pump and will include all associated site works, as well as hard and soft landscaping.

Granted

Core Planning Reasoning

The appeal was a first-party challenge to Condition No. 3 of a grant of permission. The Inspector found the original condition prohibiting human habitation was overly restrictive and recommended amending it to permit use as ancillary living space while preventing independent sale or rental.

Decision Maker's Conclusion

  • Condition No. 3 as originally worded was overly restrictive and contradictory to the intended and acceptable use of the structure as ancillary accommodation.
  • The proposed studio/live/work structure is in compliance with Development Plan policy regarding detached habitable rooms within the curtilage of an existing dwelling.
  • The condition should be amended to restrict the use of the extension to purposes ancillary to the main dwelling and prohibit its sale or letting as an independent unit.

Cited Policies (CDP)

Dublin City Development Plan 2022-2028Appendix 18: Ancillary Residential AccommodationSection 2.0 Detached Habitable Rooms

Decision Document Summary

The proposal involves the demolition of an existing 38sqm garage and the construction of a 79sqm ground-plus-mezzanine level structure intended for use as a studio, gym, and guest accommodation at 285 Clontarf Road, Dublin. While Dublin City Council granted permission, they imposed a condition (No. 3) that strictly prohibited human habitation. The applicants appealed this condition, arguing it was unnecessary and contradictory to the project's purpose. The Inspector's assessment concluded that t...
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