Core Refusal Reason
The proposed rear extension is considered overly dominant, visually incongruous, and out of character with the streetscape due to its excessive design, scale, bulk, and height, which would injure local amenities and set an undesirable precedent.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The proposed height and scale of the rear extension are excessive and fail to comply with development plan guidance, specifically regarding the impact on the existing dwelling's low-profile character.
- The extension's bulk would be overly prominent and discordant within the streetscape, negatively impacting the visual amenity of the area and neighboring properties.
- Granting permission would set a poor precedent for similar developments that fail to respect the established architectural character of the semi-detached cottages in the vicinity.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Objective 'A' residentialChapter 12 - Development ManagementSection 12.3.7.1 - Extensions and Alterations to RoofSection 12.3.7.1 (ii), (iii) and (iv)
Decision Document Summary
The application involves a significant expansion of a semi-detached single-storey cottage at 39 New Vale Cottages, Shankill, comprising a side extension, a two-storey rear extension, and a detached garden office. The site is located in an area defined by modest, low-profile bungalows. While the appellant cited various local precedents for extensions, the Inspector determined that this specific proposal, which would rise 1.9 metres above the existing ridge line, is disproportionate. The Inspector...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