3876/24
PROTECTED STRUCTURE (RPS. 2413) : the development consist of columned awning structure with a louvre screen roof, retractable windbreaker protection screen on the sides and integrated drainage system into the columns. The structure is aluminium with a coated sandblasted feature and an anthracite colour finish.
Refused
Core Refusal Reason
The Inspector recommended granting permission for retention, concluding that the awning is a reversible intervention that does not adversely affect the fabric or character of the Protected Structure and is essential for the commercial viability of a neighbourhood retail unit.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The awning structure is an easily reversible addition that has little to no direct impact on the original fabric of the Protected Structure.
- The design, scale, and materiality of the awning are considered compatible with the shopfront and are not excessively bulky or obtrusive within the streetscape due to its recessed position.
- Retention of the structure supports the commercial viability of a long-standing retail unit, which aligns with the Z3 zoning objective to maintain and strengthen neighbourhood centres.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Policy BHA2 (b), (d), and (e)Section 14.7.3 (Neighbourhood Centres)Zoning Objective Z3Section 15.17.5 (Shopfront and Façade Design)Dublin City Council Shopfront Design Guide 2001
Decision Document Summary
This report pertains to a first-party appeal against Dublin City Council's refusal of retention permission for an aluminium-framed awning at 37 Dunville Avenue, a Protected Structure. The Planning Authority initially refused permission on the grounds that the structure obscured the shopfront and detracted from the architectural character of the historic terrace. The Inspector's assessment highlighted that the building's interior was largely stripped out in 1997, leaving the front façade as the p...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