Core Refusal Reason
While the Planning Authority refused permission citing negative visual impact on 1930s architectural character (Policy HER21), the Inspector recommended a grant of permission, concluding that the energy efficiency benefits and sustainability improvements (Policies CA5 and CA8) outweigh the visual disruption to the existing flat-roof streetscape.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The proposed pitched roof represents a significant energy conservation measure aligned with climate action goals (Policy CA5) and provides a sustainable improvement to habitable accommodation standards.
- While the proposal disrupts the local flat-roof parapet continuity, the visual impact is acceptable when balanced against the dominant pitched-roof character of the wider residential area and the improved aesthetic of the side elevation.
- The development will not result in significant negative impacts on the residential amenities of adjoining properties, such as overshadowing or overbearing effects, and is consistent with the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Policy Objective HER21Section 12.3.7.1 (iv) Alterations at Roof / Attic levelPolicy Objective CA5 (Energy Performance in Buildings)Policy Objective CA8 (Sustainability in Adaptable Design)Chapter 13 Table 13.1.1 (Zoning Objective A)Section 11.4.3 (Heritage and Conservation)
Decision Document Summary
The proposal involves replacing an existing asphalt flat roof at No. 28 Adelaide Road, Glenageary, with a new slate-tiled pitched roof featuring a Dutch hip gable and raised chimneys. The site is a 1930s semi-detached house located on a corner plot within a small enclave of flat-roofed dwellings. The Planning Authority initially refused permission, supporting the Conservation Officer's view that the modification would radically alter the architectural expression of the 1930s group. However, the ...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