Core Refusal Reason
The proposed extension, by reason of its scale, bulk, and proximity to site boundaries, would result in visual obtrusion and seriously injure the residential amenities of adjoining properties.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The scale, bulk, and massing of the proposed first-floor extension would constitute an oppressive and dominant feature in close proximity to the residents to the east.
- The featureless and monolithic nature of the proposed east elevation would amplify the overbearing impact on the existing visual and residential amenities.
- While issues of overshadowing and overlooking were found not to be critical, the physical presence of the structure would significantly depreciate the amenity currently enjoyed by neighboring residents.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Fingal Development Plan 2023-2029Zoning Objective RSSection 3.5.13.1 (Residential Extensions)Policy SPQHP41 (Residential Extensions)Objective SPQHO45 (Domestic Extensions)Section 14.10.2.4 (First Floor Extensions)
Decision Document Summary
The applicant sought permission for an 18m² first-floor extension to the side of a semi-detached dwelling at 144 Carlton Court, Swords, intended to accommodate a fifth bedroom. Fingal County Council refused permission due to potential overshadowing and undesirable precedent. On appeal, the Inspector noted that while the extension's height (6.4m ridge) did not exceed the existing house and windows were positioned to avoid overlooking, the primary planning conflict was the physical massing. The ex...SOURCE PDFOpen Original
Note: If code appears below, the council site is blocking the preview. Please open the original file.