D24B/0537/WEB

Demolition of the existing chimney and open fireplace, and construction of a new

Granted

Core Planning Reasoning

The Inspector recommended granting permission because the development is a minor residential extension that complies with the 'R' zoning objective, respects the setting of the adjacent Protected Structure (Cambridge House) through a modern design approach, and does not unduly impact the residential amenities of neighboring properties in terms of overlooking or overshadowing.

Decision Maker's Conclusion

  • The zinc-clad extension represents a sensitive 'modern' addition that contrasts appropriately with the historic palette of the adjacent Protected Structure without being overly dominant or overbearing.
  • The absence of a formal design statement or architectural impact assessment does not warrant refusal as the proposed works are minor and the information provided is sufficient for a robust planning assessment.
  • Potential residential amenity impacts, specifically overlooking towards Cambridge Mews, are mitigated by the existing boundary vegetation and a condition requiring opaque glazing in the studio window.

Cited Policies (CDP)

Zoning Objective 'R'Policy HER8Section 12.11.2Policy Objective HER8Section 12.11.2.3SPPR 1Section 6.4.15 (Architectural Heritage Protection Guidelines)

Decision Document Summary

This report assesses a proposed 17sq.m. second-floor flat-roof extension at 2 Cambridge Close, Sandycove. The site is situated in close proximity (375mm-345mm) to 'Cambridge House', a Protected Structure. The primary issues raised in the third-party appeal involve the impact on architectural heritage, overbearance, and potential loss of light/privacy. The Inspector concludes that the use of contemporary zinc cladding is an acceptable design idiom under Architectural Heritage Protection Guideline...
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