Core Planning Reasoning
The Inspector recommended omitting Condition 2(a) to allow the dormer to match the ridge height of the adjoining property for visual consistency, while maintaining Condition 2(b) to restrict the width to 3.5m in accordance with design guidance.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- Condition 2(a) should be omitted because the adjoining house (No. 107) has an existing extension of the same design and scale, making a height set-down unnecessary for visual harmony.
- Condition 2(b) regarding the 3.5m maximum width should be retained to reduce the bulk of the dormer and ensure better alignment with current development plan design guidance.
- The proposed development is acceptable as it would be barely visible from the public road, lacks significant overlooking, and would not be seriously injurious to the residential amenity of the area.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Paragraph 14.10.2.5 of Volume 1 of the Fingal Development Plan 2023-2029Fingal Development Plan 2017-2023
Decision Document Summary
The applicant sought permission for a roof conversion at 108 Hazelbury Green, Clonee, involving a change from a hipped roof to a gable-ended roof with a rear dormer window. Fingal County Council granted permission but imposed Condition 2, requiring the dormer to be set down 300mm from the ridge (2a) and limited to 3.5m in width (2b). The first-party appeal specifically contested these restrictions. The Inspector observed that the neighboring house has an identical extension, arguing that a heigh...SOURCE PDFOpen Original
Note: If code appears below, the council site is blocking the preview. Please open the original file.