Core Refusal Reason
The Inspector recommends a grant of permission, concluding that while the initial proposal was overbearing, reducing the depth of the first-floor rear extension to 6 metres ensures it will not seriously injure the residential amenities of neighbouring properties.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The principle of extending the dwelling is acceptable under the site's 'Objective A' zoning and aligns with National Planning Framework objectives for densification.
- The original proposed rear extension depth of 7.6m would negatively impact the adjoining property (No. 93) by way of overbearing and overshadowing, requiring a reduction to 6m.
- The proposed side extension is considered compatible with the character and visual amenities of the established streetscape and does not overwhelm the original dwelling.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Section 12.3.7.1 (Extensions to Dwellings)Zoning Objective APolicy Objective PHP19 (Existing Housing Stock - Adaptation)Section 10 (Exemptions and Reduction of the Development Contribution Scheme)
Decision Document Summary
The appeal concerns a two-storey rear and side extension to a semi-detached dwelling at 94 Ballinteer Park, Dublin 16. Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council originally refused permission, citing that the scale and bulk would be overbearing and cause overshadowing to the neighbouring property. Upon inspection, the Inspector agreed with the Council's concerns regarding the 7.6m depth of the rear extension but determined that this issue could be mitigated through a planning condition reducing the d...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