4218/23

PROTECTED STRUCTURE: the development will consist of 1. demolition of an existing ground and first floor extension to the rear and to the side of existing protected residential dwelling, 2. demolition of an existing outhouse located within the side passage of existing dwelling, 3. internal alterations to existing ground and first floor levels of protected residential dwelling including a larger window to first floor of northern gable end, 4. construction of new single-storey extension to north of dwelling and a two-storey extension to the rear of the original protected dwelling including replacement of existing windows to existing dwelling along with associated landscaping, including all other ancillary site works and services.

Refused

Core Refusal Reason

The proposed development involves excessive demolition and an insensitive rear extension that would negatively impact the architectural character and historic floor plan of a Protected Structure.

Decision Maker's Conclusion

  • The proposed alterations and demolitions are excessive and would have an unacceptably adverse impact on the historic floor plan of the Protected Structure.
  • The height, scale, massing, and materiality of the rear extension create a visually obtrusive form that is insensitive to the architectural heritage and character of the site.
  • The cumulative impact of the proposed works would be excessively injurious to the authenticity of the building and adjacent Protected Structures, contravening multiple heritage policies of the Dublin City Development Plan 2022-2028.

Cited Policies (CDP)

Policy BHA2 (a)Policy BHA2 (b)Policy BHA2 (c)Policy BHA2 (d)Policy BHA2 (e)Policy BHA2 (f)Policy BHA9Section 11.5.1Section 11.5.3

Decision Document Summary

The proposal sought permission for the demolition of an existing structure and the development of a rear extension at 7 Saint Lawrence Road, Clontarf, a designated Protected Structure. Dublin City Council refused the application on the grounds that the scale and nature of the interventions were excessive and would cause significant injury to the historic fabric and floor plan of the building. The design of the extension was deemed visually obtrusive and insensitive, failing to respect the archit...
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.