Core Planning Reasoning
The Inspector recommended the retention of conditions 3(a) and 3(b) on the basis that the proposed fourth-storey attic level and its specific roof profile would be visually obtrusive and fail to contribute positively to the character and setting of the Residential Conservation Area.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The proposed extension, by virtue of its height and design (including blind dormers), would be visually obtrusive and detrimental to the character and setting of the Victorian terraced house and the wider Conservation Area.
- The development as proposed would negatively impact the residential and visual amenities of adjoining properties, specifically No. 23 Haddington Road.
- Condition 3(a) and 3(b), which require the omission of the attic level and a reduction in the height/pitch of the rear return to match the neighbor, are necessary to ensure orderly development.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Dublin City Development Plan 2022-2028Z2 Residential Neighbourhoods (Conservation Areas)Section 14.7.2Section 11.5.3Policy BHA 9Section 11.5.4Section 1.0 (Residential extensions)Section 4.0 (Alterations at Roof Level)
Decision Document Summary
This report concerns a First Party appeal against conditions attached to a grant of permission for a multi-storey rear extension at 25 Haddington Road, Dublin 4, a Victorian terraced dwelling located within a Z2 Residential Conservation Area. The Planning Authority (PA) granted permission but required the omission of the attic floor level and associated dormers (Condition 3) to protect visual amenity. The applicant argued that the terrace already exhibits a varied pattern of rear extensions and ...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