5071/23
The development is to consist of the demolition of all existing single storey structures on site and the construction of a four/five-storey apartment block comprising a total of 10 apartments (9 no. two-bedroom and 1 no. three bedroom) with associated areas of balcony and roof terrace and 3 no. three-storey townhouses (2 no. three bedroom and 1 no. two-bedroom) together with associated off-street car parking, landscaping and new boundary treatments.
Core Refusal Reason
The proposed development fails to meet mandatory minimum standards for apartment and townhouse design (specifically floor areas, storage, and private open space) and represents an inappropriate transition in height and scale that would negatively impact the residential amenities of the surrounding low-profile area through overbearing impact and overlooking.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The internal layouts of the apartments and townhouses fail to comply with mandatory technical requirements set out in the Sustainable Urban Housing Guidelines (2023) and the Compact Settlement Guidelines, particularly regarding 3-person unit ratios, storage quantum, and balcony depths.
- The proposed development represents an abrupt transition in scale that would visually dominate the streetscape and seriously injure the residential amenities of adjoining single and two-storey properties by reason of overbearing impact and overlooking.
- The application contains insufficient information regarding surface water drainage and site-specific flood risk, which prevents a definitive conclusion that the project would not have a significant effect on protected European sites in Dublin Bay.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Decision Document Summary
The proposal involves the demolition of a former builders' suppliers yard at 'The Ranch', Inchicore, to facilitate a 4/5-storey block of 10 apartments and 3 three-storey townhouses. The site is a 0.13ha brownfield infill plot zoned 'Z1'. While the Inspector acknowledges the suitability of the site for residential use, the design is found to be deficient. Key technical failings include the provision of 90% 3-person units (where only 10% is permitted), 'totally inadequate' internal storage, and to...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