Core Reason for the Refused Part
The retention of the covered decking area was refused due to its negative impact on residential amenity, the creation of flood risks by obstructing stream maintenance, and insufficient evidence regarding ecological impacts on the Booterstown Marsh SPA.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The covered decking area is visually obtrusive and detracts from the residential amenities of neighboring properties due to its height, scale, and close proximity.
- The structure impedes the maintenance of a stream, leading to an unacceptable risk of flooding for adjoining properties and potential prejudice to public health.
- The Planning Authority is not satisfied that the development would not have a significant effect on the Booterstown Marsh Special Protection Area or other European sites.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Decision Document Summary
The application sought retention permission for a widened vehicular entrance and a covered decking area at 27 Trimleston Gardens, Booterstown. While the vehicular entrance was granted permission as it was found to be consistent with the Objective A zoning and local development policies, the decking area was refused. The refusal was based on the structure's adverse visual impact on neighbors, the risk of flooding caused by its interference with stream maintenance, and the lack of sufficient infor...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.