WEB1844/23

PERMISSION & RETENTION: a) Retention Permission & b) Planning Permission for development at 27A Camac Park, Dublin 12 constructed under previously approved Reg Ref Web1110/16 & Web1110/16/X2. a) Retention of modifications to Existing Structure include reduced number of Windows & 2 No. extra External Doors & 4 No. Rooflights. b) Planning Permission includes Change of Use from the approved 4 Bed Detached Dwelling to 3 Storey Student Accommodation providing 2 No. 1 Bed Units at Ground Floor & 2 No. 1 Bed Duplexes at First Floor & Attic Level, totalling 7-8 No. Bed Spaces with Site Works to include subsuming (but maintaining) the applicant owned existing Right of Way into the overall site curtilage, creating a Front Vehicular Access Gateway for 2 No. Cars plus 4 No. Storage Sheds & 7 No. Bicycle Stands at Rear.

Refused

Core Refusal Reason

The proposal fails to meet locational criteria for student accommodation, lacks adequate management and amenity details, and represents an inappropriate conversion of a family dwelling that would negatively impact the character of the residential area.

Decision Maker's Conclusion

  • The site is unsuitable for student accommodation as it is not located on or near a third-level campus or within the inner city, contravening Policy QHSN45.
  • The application failed to provide sufficient evidence regarding professional management, resident eligibility, amenity standards, and community integration as required by Section 15.13.1.
  • The conversion of a single dwelling into multiple student units is out of character with the established residential area and sets an undesirable precedent for the loss of family housing.

Cited Policies (CDP)

Policy QHSN45Section 15.13.1

Decision Document Summary

This application sought retention and planning permission for the conversion of a single dwelling at 27A Camac Park, Bluebell, into four self-contained student units accommodating up to eight bed spaces. Dublin City Council refused the application primarily because the location is remote from university campuses and lacks necessary infrastructure, violating Policy QHSN45. Furthermore, the applicant failed to demonstrate compliance with management and amenity standards, and the intensification of...
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.