Core Refusal Reason
The development would be visually obtrusive and overbearing on the adjacent residential property at No. 22 The Grove, while the proposed hostel fails to provide mandatory staff and management facilities required by national guidelines for emergency accommodation.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The bulk, siting, and massing of the extension would result in a visually dominant and overbearing form of development that seriously injures the residential amenity of the adjacent dwelling to the south.
- The proposed communal amenity spaces are constrained in size and layout, failing to provide an acceptable standard for future occupants and likely causing noise disturbance to neighbors.
- The development fails to comply with the 2022 Guidelines for New Emergency Accommodation due to a total lack of provision for staff facilities, such as a manager's office, meeting rooms, and staff toilets.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Zoning Objective 'A'Section 11.4.3.2 Policy Objective HER20Section 11.4.3.3 Policy Objective HER21Section 12.8.3.2 (Communal Open Space)Section 12.5.2 (Aparthotels)Section 12.3.5.5 (Minimum Apartment Floor Areas)Section 12.3.5.6 (Floor to ceiling heights)Policy Objective PHP13Policy Objective PHP20Policy Objective PHP32 (Homeless Accommodation)Policy Objective PHP42 (Building Design and Height)Appendix 5 (Building Height Strategy)
Decision Document Summary
The proposal by Prinjen Limited involves the restoration and refurbishment of the derelict 19th-century Roebuck Grove House in Goatstown, Dublin 14, alongside the construction of a four-storey extension to provide a 29-bedroom hostel (amended to 24 bedrooms during the appeal) for displaced persons. The site is situated within 'The Grove' residential estate and is adjacent to a school campus. While the Inspector acknowledged that the restoration of the historic building is welcome and that the am...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