Core Refusal Reason
The development constitutes an inappropriate form of backland development and overdevelopment of a restricted site, resulting in a substandard residential unit that negatively impacts the amenities of the existing dwelling through overlooking, visual intrusion, and loss of privacy.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The retention of the outbuilding as a separate, independent residential unit represents an inappropriate intensification of use that constitutes overdevelopment of the subject site.
- The proximity of the structure to the main dwelling (approx. 6.7m) results in unacceptable residential amenity standards, specifically regarding overlooking and the potential obscuring of daylight for both units.
- The proposal does not comply with the policy framework for ancillary residential accommodation as set out in Appendix 18 of the Development Plan, as it functions as a separate dwelling rather than an ancillary space.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Section 14.7.1 (Zone Z1)Policy QHSN6 (Urban Consolidation)Policy QHSN22 (Adaptable and Flexible Housing)Policy QHSN37 (Houses and Apartments)Section 15.9 (Apartment Standards)Section 15.9.2 (Unit Size / Layout)Appendix 18 (Ancillary Residential Accommodation)Section 1.0 (Residential Extensions)Section 2.0 (Detached Habitable Rooms)Section 6.0 (Subdivision of Dwellings)Section 7.0 (Ancillary Family Accommodation)
Decision Document Summary
The Inspector's Report examines an appeal against the refusal of retention permission for the conversion of a garage/workshop into a residential unit at 18 Crescent Gardens, East Wall, Dublin 3. The site is situated within a Z1 residential zone. While the appellant submitted revised plans during the appeal to increase the gross floor area to 45.10 m² and proposed 2.2m high 'hit and miss' fencing to address privacy concerns, the Inspector found these measures insufficient. Key arguments against t...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