2460312

Permission for (a) the provision of a total of 18no. apartment units in a 3 storey building of which there are 10no. 1bed apartments, 6no. 2bed apartments and 1no. 3bed apartments along with associated residential communal spaces at ground level. (b) The provision of bin and bicycle storage at ground level, boundary treatments, external landscaping, connection to existing site services and all ancillary development works. (c) The provision of 4no. ancillary car parking spaces and associated works to the footpath

Refused

Core Refusal Reason

The proposed development is considered over-dominant and out of character with the surrounding residential area due to its scale and materials, while also failing to meet minimum standards for storage, residential amenity, and archaeological assessment.

Decision Maker's Conclusion

  • The design and external appearance, specifically the excessive use of render and the over-dominant three-storey rear elevation, are not in keeping with the established red-brick character of the surrounding residential area.
  • The proposed layout fails to provide adequate and conveniently accessible facilities for refuse, bicycle, and bulky item storage, and the communal amenity space lacks sufficient privacy and functional separation from the public road.
  • The application lacks a necessary Archaeological Impact Assessment despite the site's location within an Area of Archaeological Potential and its immediate proximity to a Scheduled Monument (Children's Burial Ground).

Cited Policies (CDP)

HOU 11HOU 15HOU 17HOU 18HOU 19HOU 20HOU 21HOU 22HOU 23HOU 24HOU 30NGB 6IU 19IU 13BHC 6BHC 713.19.1413.16.17

Decision Document Summary

STFA Limited sought permission for a three-storey building comprising 18 apartments on a triangular brownfield site at the junction of The Laurels Road and Patrick Street, Dundalk. While the residential use is acceptable in principle under the 'A1 Existing Residential' zoning, the Planning Authority identified significant concerns regarding the building's visual dominance and the use of inappropriate materials. Furthermore, the proposal was found to be deficient in its provision of accessible st...
SOURCE PDFOpen Original
Note: If code appears below, the council site is blocking the preview. Please open the original file.