4374/24

PROTECTED STRUCTURE : PERMISSION & RETENTION:The development shall consist of (i) permission for new vehicular access, to facilitate disabled driver, including alterations to existing wrought iron railings and (ii) permission/ retention permission for works to front garden area to facilitate vehicular space for disabled driver and installation of access ramp to lower ground floor apartment.

Split decision

Core Reason for the Refused Part

The Planning Authority initially refused the vehicular access based on the loss of on-street parking contrary to policy SMT25, potential injury to the architectural character of the Protected Structure and historic streetscape, and negative impacts on an adjacent street tree's root zone.

Decision Maker's Conclusion

  • The proven medical necessity for a disabled parking space constitutes an exceptional circumstance that outweighs the general presumption against the removal of on-street parking spaces.
  • The proposed works are sensitively designed by conservation professionals and will not significantly harm the character, setting, or historic fabric of the Protected Structure or the wider terrace.
  • Technical arboricultural and engineering assessments demonstrate that the adjacent street tree can be adequately protected through specialized construction methods, such as the use of a reinforced thin mesh slab.

Cited Policies (CDP)

Policy SMT25Section 8.5.7Section 11.5.1Policy BHA2Policy BHA9Section 15.6.9Section 15.15.2.5Appendix 5, Section 4.1Appendix 5, Section 4.3.1Appendix 5, Section 4.3.2Appendix 5, Section 4.3.7

Decision Document Summary

This report concerns a first-party appeal against a split decision by Dublin City Council regarding 36 Leinster Road, a Protected Structure. The applicant sought permission for a new vehicular access and retention of front garden works to facilitate a parking space for a disabled driver and a lower-ground floor access ramp. The Planning Authority had refused the vehicular access element, citing policy restrictions on removing on-street parking and heritage concerns. The Inspector recommended ove...
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