Core Reason for the Refused Part
The proposed dormer extensions were refused due to non-compliance with design standards regarding scale and subordination to the roofline, as well as procedural issues involving undeclared roof alterations.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The proposed rear dormer relies on significant roof alterations, including raising the ridge by approximately 0.5m, which were not explicitly described in the statutory notices or application description.
- The dormers fail to meet development plan standards requiring extensions to be set down from the ridge and remain subordinate in design, scale, and massing to the original dwelling.
- Discrepancies within the submitted drawings regarding the scale of the dormers relative to the ridge line prevent a clear assessment and would negatively impact the residential amenity of the area.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Section 12.3.7.1(iv)
Decision Document Summary
This application sought permission for a new front porch and zinc-clad dormer extensions to the front, side, and rear of a dwelling at 38 Granville Park, Blackrock. While the Planning Authority granted permission for the porch and minor facade changes, the dormer elements were refused. The refusal was based on the failure to declare necessary roof height increases in the public notices and the excessive scale of the dormers, which did not remain subordinate to the existing roofscape as required ...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.