Core Refusal Reason
The proposed second-floor extension and terrace, by virtue of their scale, height, and elevated location, would protrude above the established skyline and fail to remain subservient to the original roof profile, significantly detracting from the character and setting of the Howth Architectural Conservation Area (ACA).
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The addition of a second floor would fundamentally alter the appearance of the dwelling to a three-storey building, which is not in keeping with the scale of existing contemporary dwellings in the immediate row.
- The development's position on an elevated site makes it visually dominant and intrusive on the skyline when viewed from prominent public areas, including Howth Harbour and the historic tourist village.
- The proposal fails to positively enhance or respect the character of the Howth Architectural Conservation Area (ACA) and contravenes development plan policies requiring extensions to be subservient to existing rooflines.
Cited Policies (CDP)
RS Zoning ObjectiveObjective DMS44Objective PM44Objective DMS157Policy HCAP14Policy HCAP15Table 14.24Objective DMS0187Section 14.10.2Policy SPQHP41Objective SPQHO45Section 14.19.3.3Objective DMSO187
Decision Document Summary
This report assesses a first-party appeal against the refusal of permission for a second-floor bedroom extension and a 42.29 sqm roof terrace at 1 Thulla, Howth. The site comprises a contemporary detached dwelling situated on an elevated, visually prominent position overlooking Howth Harbour within an Architectural Conservation Area (ACA). While the applicant submitted an alternative reduced design during the appeal, the Inspector maintained that any additional floor at this location would creat...SOURCE PDFOpen Original
Note: If code appears below, the council site is blocking the preview. Please open the original file.