3449/24
PROTECTED STRUCTURE: RETENTION: (a) Change of use from retail office to Hotel with 17 No. of Hotel bedrooms (at First, Second, Third and Fourth levels); (b) General alterations including the following: provision of bathrooms and relocation of internal partitions, upgrading of fire resistance of doors and floors, and repair of sliding sash windows, with internal modifications and associated site works.
Core Refusal Reason
The applicant failed to demonstrate that the retrospective works respected the historic fabric and plan form of the Protected Structures (Policy BHA2) and did not provide adequate justification regarding the overconcentration of hotels or the prioritisation of residential use on upper floors (Policies CEE28, SC3, and QHSN7).
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- Insufficient evidence was submitted to prove that the interventions for services, fire safety, and layout changes did not compromise the architectural integrity and historic plan form of the Protected Structures.
- The applicant failed to provide a mandatory justification report regarding hotel overconcentration within a 1km catchment, undermining Development Plan objectives for a balanced mix of city centre uses.
- The proposal does not align with core policies (SC3 and QHSN7) which actively encourage the conversion of vacant upper floors in the city centre to residential use rather than visitor accommodation.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Decision Document Summary
The application seeks retention permission for the change of use of the upper floors of Nos. 18/19 Duke Street and No. 8 Duke Lane Upper from retail/office use to a 17-bedroom hotel. The site is located in the Grafton Street and Environs ACA, and Nos. 18 and 19 are designated Protected Structures. The Inspector's primary concerns relate to conservation and land-use balance. While hotel use is 'permissible' under the Z5 zoning, the Inspector found that the works already carried out (including new...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