WEB1982/22

For the refurbishment of the existing ground floor cottage, an additional new 2 story rear extension to include raising the ridge of the pitched roof to provide first floor bedroom with Velux roof lights to the front and rear, including associated site works and minor drainage works.

Refused

Core Refusal Reason

The proposed development, due to its scale, height, and lack of boundary setbacks, would result in significant overshadowing and visual incongruity, thereby injuring the residential and visual amenities of the established terrace streetscape.

Decision Maker's Conclusion

  • The proposed 0.75m ridge height increase and large front rooflight are visually overbearing and fail to respect the character and uniformity of the existing artisan cottage terrace.
  • The development would result in a substandard and non-functional private open space of only 0.8m², which is significantly below the 5-8m² per bedspace standard required by the Development Plan.
  • The proposal fails to demonstrate that it would not cause unacceptable overshadowing and loss of daylight to adjoining properties, particularly No. 22 Daniel Street.

Cited Policies (CDP)

Section 16.10.12 of the Dublin City Development Plan 2016-2022Zoning Objective Z1Section 14.7.1Chapter 5Chapter 15Section 15.4.3Section 15.11.3Volume 2 Appendix 18 (Sections 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.7, 4.0, and 5.0)

Decision Document Summary

This report evaluates a planning appeal for the refurbishment and extension of a vacant single-storey terrace workers' cottage at No. 21 Daniel Street, Dublin 8. The proposal seeks to raise the roof ridge to create a first-floor level and add a two-storey rear extension on a highly constrained site of approximately 39.78m². While the Inspector acknowledged the benefit of refurbishing the vacant unit and retaining original front features, the key arguments for refusal centered on overdevelopment....
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