WEB1623/23

Planning permission is sought by Winemount Ltd for the change-of-use of the existing two storey Guud Day Café (202m2 in total) at the address of Hampton by Hilton, 25 Chancery Street, Smithfield, Dublin from Café use into Hotel use. The proposed ground floor will consist of two meeting rooms (105m2) and the proposed first floor will consist of four hotel bedrooms with ensuites (86m2). Planning permission is also sought for connections to all other necessary site services and all ancillary works necessary to facilitate the change-of-use of the premises.

Granted

Core Planning Reasoning

The proposed change of use would result in the loss of an active, publicly accessible street-level use, which is contrary to the Z5 zoning objective to ensure vibrancy, vitality, and footfall within the city center and the SDRA 13 regeneration area.

Decision Maker's Conclusion

  • The loss of an active street-level frontage would detract from the vibrancy and amenities of the area, conflicting with the primary purpose of the Z5 use zone.
  • The applicant failed to demonstrate through a comprehensive marketing exercise that a viable alternative public-facing use could not be secured for the premises.
  • The proposal would undermine the planning principles established in the original hotel permission (PL29N. 248961), which specifically required an active use at this corner to activate the streetscape.

Cited Policies (CDP)

Zoning Objective Z5Policy CCUV30 (Cafés / Restaurants)Policy CCUVO11 (Victorian Fruit and Vegetable Market)SDRA 13 (Markets Area and Environs)Section 15.4.1 (Hotel Concentration)Appendix 2 (Retail Strategy)

Decision Document Summary

The proposal involves the change of use of a 105 sq.m. café at the Hampton by Hilton, Smithfield, to two ground-floor meeting rooms and four first-floor ensuite bedrooms. Located near the Four Courts and the Victorian Fruit and Vegetable Market, the site is in a strategically important regeneration area (SDRA 13) zoned Z5. The applicant argued the café was unviable, citing a lack of footfall and significant financial losses. However, the Inspector noted that the original permission for the hotel...
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