Core Planning Reasoning
The Inspector recommended the omission of Condition No. 2 (which sought to limit the canopy height to 2.8m), concluding that the as-built canopy height of 3.2m does not cause significant overshadowing, overlooking, or overbearing impacts on the adjoining property and is consistent with proper planning and sustainable development.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The canopy structure at its current height of 3.2m does not result in significant overshadowing or overlooking of the neighboring property due to its north-west orientation and single-storey nature.
- The development complies with Section 12.3.7.1 (ii) of the County Development Plan, as it maintains over 55 sqm of private amenity space and does not have an overbearing impact in its suburban context.
- The Planning Authority's requirement to reduce the canopy height by 0.4m is considered arbitrary, lacks a clear planning rationale, and would be unnecessarily burdensome in terms of cost without providing discernible planning benefits.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Chapter 12Section 12.3.7Section 12.3.7.1Section 12.3.7.1 (ii)
Decision Document Summary
This Inspector's Report relates to a first-party appeal by Elona Dervishi against a specific condition of a retention permission granted by Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council. The development at 10 Willow Glen, Dublin 18, involves several alterations to a previously approved scheme, including a side extension, a new rear extension, and a canopy over a patio. The Planning Authority granted retention but imposed Condition No. 2, requiring the canopy height be reduced from 3.2m to 2.8m to protec...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