WEB1524/25

The development consists of alterations to the ground floor rear elevation and for minor internal alterations to the existing ground floor plan and for the construction of a first floor extension to the existing house and for all associated site works.

Granted

Core Planning Reasoning

The Inspector recommended granting permission as the development is consistent with the 'Z1' residential zoning objective, the Dublin City Development Plan 2022-2028 policies on urban consolidation, and Appendix 18 guidelines, providing a reasonable level of residential accommodation without resulting in significant adverse impacts on the amenities of adjoining properties.

Decision Maker's Conclusion

  • The proposed development represents an innovative adaptation of the existing suburban housing stock, aligning with the policy framework for urban consolidation and densification of the suburbs.
  • The redesign of the proposal, which includes a hipped roof profile, reduced ridge height, and the use of clerestory windows, successfully mitigates potential overshadowing, overbearing, and overlooking impacts on neighboring properties.
  • The proposal provides an acceptable standard of residential accommodation and is consistent with the established character and two-storey pattern of development in the Clontarf area.

Cited Policies (CDP)

Dublin City Development Plan 2022-2028Zoning Objective Z1Policy QHSN6 (Urban Consolidation)Policy Objective QHSNO4 (Densification of the Suburbs)Chapter 15, Section 15.11 (Development Standards)Appendix 18 (Ancillary Residential Accommodation)Appendix 18, Section 1.1 (General Design Principles)Appendix 18, Section 1.2 (Rear Extensions)Appendix 18, Section 1.4 (Privacy)Appendix 18, Section 1.6 (Daylight)

Decision Document Summary

The proposal involves the reconstruction and expansion of 'Naomh Treasa', a fire-damaged single-storey detached house at Stiles Court, Clontarf. The project seeks to add a first-floor extension and modernize the ground floor layout on a restricted 0.014-hectare infill site. A third-party appeal was lodged by a neighboring resident at No. 1 Silverfield, who raised concerns regarding the visual dominance of the new two-storey structure, potential loss of light, and safety risks during the construc...
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