5079/22

Planning permission for ancillary garden centre located to the south and west of the existing building and associated boundary fencing; new connecting door on south elevation of the unit connecting the garden centre to the existing, internal sales space and redesigned front entrance on the east elevation. Reconfiguration of parking area to the east of the store and the inclusion of electric vehicle charging points, cycle parking (including cargo bike spaces) and motorcycle parking. All associated works to complete the development.

Granted

Core Planning Reasoning

The Inspector recommended the modification of Condition 2 to apply a reduced financial contribution rate, determining that the external garden centre constitutes 'open storage / hard surface commercial space' under Section 12 of the relevant Development Contribution Scheme, thus qualifying for one-third of the standard commercial rate.

Decision Maker's Conclusion

  • The external garden centre is classified as commercial development capable of generating sales and footfall, and therefore qualifies for a development contribution charge.
  • The development does not qualify for an exemption under Section 11 (change of use) as the space previously served as ancillary yard/service area rather than established retail floorspace.
  • Under Section 12 of the Contribution Scheme, the development should be charged at one-third the commercial rate as it comprises open storage / hard surface commercial space development.

Cited Policies (CDP)

Dublin City Development Plan 2022 – 2028Zoning Objective Z4Dublin City Council Development Contribution Scheme 2020 - 2023Section 11 of the Development Contribution SchemeSection 12 of the Development Contribution SchemeRetail Planning Guidelines 2012

Decision Document Summary

This report assesses a first-party appeal under Section 48 regarding a financial contribution condition for an 878sq m ancillary garden centre at 'The Range', Coolock. The appellant argued that the space should not be subject to contributions as it is not 'Gross Floor Area' or, alternatively, that it should benefit from exemptions based on previous site uses. The Inspector rejected the argument that the space is not commercial GFA but agreed that the Planning Authority incorrectly applied the fu...
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