4540/23

The development consists of 1) Demolish the existing single storey garage at side of the main building. 2) Change of use existing barber shop (GF - 19.8 sq.m at 18 Fitzgibbon Street to take away restaurant. 3) Erect new 3-storey building at 19 Fitzgibbon Street, including a take-away on ground floor and a 2 bed 3 person accommodations on upper levels (an individual entrance will be erected on GF at 19 Fitzgibbon Street), including 29.6 sqm Kitchen/Dining area, 3.8sqm WC & 0.8 sqm wardrobe on 1st floor and a double bedroom (12.9 sqm) & single bedroom (9.1 sqm) with 3.8sqm WC, 4.4 sqm storage & 0.8 sqm wardrobe on 2nd floor (attic). 4. Erect an attic with one roof light to rear of the existing building at 18 Fitzgibbon Street integrated with 19 Fitzgibbon Street 2nd Floor/Attic. 5) Erect 2 roof light at front of the existing roof for 18 Fitzgibbon Street.

Refused

Core Refusal Reason

Material contravention of Z2 zoning objectives and poor architectural design within a sensitive Residential Conservation Area.

Decision Maker's Conclusion

  • The proposed takeaway use is neither a 'permissible use' nor 'open for consideration' under the Z2 Residential Conservation Area zoning objective, representing a material contravention of the Development Plan.
  • The architectural quality of the proposed building is inadequate and fails to respond appropriately to the rhythm and historic context of the surrounding streetscape.
  • The development would be visually obtrusive, would seriously injure the urban character and amenities of the conservation area, and would set an undesirable precedent.

Cited Policies (CDP)

Z2 Residential Conservation AreaDublin City Development Plan 2022-2028

Decision Document Summary

The proposal involved the change of use of a barber shop to a takeaway restaurant at 18-19 Fitzgibbon Street, Mountjoy, located within a Z2 Residential Conservation Area. Dublin City Council refused permission primarily because the takeaway use is not permitted under the site's specific zoning objective in the 2022-2028 Development Plan. Furthermore, the planning authority found the design to be of insufficient architectural quality, noting that it failed to respect the historic urban form and w...
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.