Refusal decisions · 19–25 Oct 2026

Notwithstanding the subject site’s constraints, the Planning Authority considers that the provision of a c. 39dph scheme would represent underdevelopment of an accessible site with direct access to frequent public transport services via the adjacent Core Bus Corridor. It is considered that the proposal does not adhere with the requirements of, inter alia, Policy Objective PHP18 of the County Development Plan 2022-2028, as varied, and Table 3.1 of the Compact Settlement Guidelines with regard to the density ranges applied to locations in Dublin classified as ‘Urban Neighbourhoods' of 50-250dph. Therefore, the proposed development, would set an undesirable precedent for other similar developments and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

The Planning Authority notes that the subject permission relates to an amendment of the parent permission granted under Register Reference D15A/0695, the duration of which was previously extended under Register Reference D15A/0695/E. The conditions of the subject 'amendment' permission were linked back to those of the 'parent' permission by way of Condition 1 of D21A/0465. As such, the planning permission on this site, both under D15A/0695/E and D21A/0465 has expired. Therefore, the 'appropriate period' within which an extension of duration application could be made has passed. Under the requirements of Section 42(1)(d) of the Act, the Planning Authority is precluded by law from extending the appropriate period. Note: Having regard to Section 42(4) of the Act, which provides that the aggregate period of extensions granted shall not exceed five years, and noting that a five-year extension has already been granted under Register Reference D15A/0695/E, the Planning Authority is precluded from granting any further extension of the 'parent' permission.

REASONS It is recommended that permission be refused for the following reason: 1. Having regard to the scale bulk and massing of the proposed rear dormer, it is considered that the proposed dormer would be excessive, visually incongruous in the roofscape and would result in significant negative visual impact on the character of the streetscape. Therefore, the proposed attic conversion with rear dormer fails to comply with Section 12.3.7.1 Extensions to Dwelling (iv) Alterations at Roof/Attic level of the Dún Laoghaire Rathdown County Development Plan 2022-2028 and would set an undesirable precent for similar development within the area. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

The proposed development, which seeks an increase in the total number of residential units from 67 no. to 69 no. units, would result in a residential density of 83.23 units per hectare. This exceeds the anticipated density range of 40-80 units per hectare applicable to a Suburban-Urban Extension area as set out in Section 4.3.1.1 Policy Objective PHP18: Residential Density. Having regard to the location of the site and its level of accessibility, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that a density in excess of the prescribed range has been justified. The proposed development would therefore constitute overdevelopment of the site and would be contrary to Section 4.3.1.1 Policy Objective PHP18: Residential Density, and the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

RECOMMENDATION Pursuant to the Planning and Development Acts 2000, (as amended), it is hereby recommended, for the reason set out in the First Schedule hereto, to REFUSE PERMISSION for the following reason: 1. While the principle of a residential development on this site is acceptable, it is considered that the provision of a development with a density of 18.7 uph (rising to 25 uph net) would represent underdevelopment of an existing, well-located and serviced site with access to high-quality, high-frequency public transport services in the area. It is considered that the proposal does not comply with the requirements of Policy Objectives PHP18 and PHP19 of the County Development Plan 2022-2028 as varied, and Table 3.1 of the Compact Settlement Guidelines with regard to the density ranges applied to locations in Dublin classified as ‘City - Urban Neighbourhood’, which together seek to provide for higher densities, and more efficient use of scarce urban land. The proposal is considered to represent piecemeal development where plots are brought forward for development individually, that if accepted as a principle would result in an unsustainable pattern of development. The proposed development would, therefore, be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

The proposed increase in ridge height to accommodate the attic conversion and proposed rear dormer extension would be visually dominant in the streetscape as it would break the established ridge line height of the dwelling and terrace, and be contrary to Section 4.0 and 5.0 of Appendix 18 of the Dublin City Development Plan 2022-2028. The proposed development would therefore, in itself and by the precedent it would set for the construction of similar dormer extensions, be seriously injurious to residential and visual amenity and be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

The proposal, by reason of layout specifically including for a bathroom/sanitary facilities in a permitted garden studio structure, would fail to accord with the provisions of the 2022-2028 CDP, specifically BFP6 of the 2025 SDCC House Extension Design Guide relating to Detached Garden Rooms and Sheds. Furthermore, the proposal, if permitted, would set an undesirable precedent for similar non-compliant developments, which would in themselves and cumulatively, be harmful to the residential amenities of the area, and would contravene the ‘RES’ land use zoning objective of the site which seeks “To protect and/or improve Residential Amenity”, and would thus be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

I recommend REFUSAL OF PERMISSION for the; • alteration to existing stair hall at first floor level to provide for new flight of stairs from half-landing to attic, • removal of portion of stair hall ceiling, • installation of new flight of timber stairs to match adjoining flight at half-landing, and, • the installation of new ridge vents pursuant to the Planning & Development Act 2000, as amended, for the following reason: 1. Having regard to the status of the subject dwelling as a Protected Structure, it is considered that the proposed alteration to the existing stair hall at first floor level, the removal of a portion of the stair hall ceiling and the installation of a new flight of timber stairs would result in the unnecessary loss of the original fabric and alter the original floor plan. Furthermore, the installation of new ridge vents at the roofline would result in an unacceptable visual impact on the roofscape. The proposed works, if permitted, would adversely affect the special architectural interest and character of the Protected Structure and its setting, and would establish an undesirable precedent for similar alterations to Protected Structures within the Architectural Conservation Area. The proposed development would, therefore, be contrary to Policy Objectives HER8 Section 12.11.2.1 of the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Development Plan 2022-2028 (as varied September 2026) and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

1. The site is zoned Z8 with the objective ‘To protect the existing architectural and civic design character, and to allow only for limited expansion consistent with the conservation objective’. The configuration of the internal layout across lower ground floor level and ground floor level to facilitate the provision of 3 no. residential units would result in an unacceptable poor level of amenity afforded to future occupiers by way of internal layout and design. The proposal would therefore be contrary to the provisions of the Dublin City Development Plan 2022 – 2028, including Section 15.8 Residential Development and Section 15.9 Apartment Standards and would contravene the zoning objective through over intensification and overdevelopment of the site. The proposal would set an undesirable precedent for similar type development and be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
2. 2. The proposed works, which includes poorly configurated and considered residential floor plans, would further erode the special architectural character, legibility and hierarchy of spaces within the Protected Structures. The proposed development would therefore contravene Policies BHA 2 (b), (d), (f) and (g) of the Dublin City Development Plan 2022-2028, would represent a poor architectural response to the historic site and would set an undesirable precedent for similar type development. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

1. The only access to the proposed development is via a currently substandard and poorly configured access road ('Oakfield Road') and the proposed transition between the proposed development and the existing road appears to have been haphazardly arranged without alignment of landscaping and pedestrian and cyclist facilities. In the absence of the necessary infrastructure upgrades or an alternative access arrangement to facilitate the intensification and change of use on this site as proposed, the proposed development would be served by a substandard access arrangement which would be prejudicial to road safety, would provide a poor design standard and environment for a high-density residential development and active travel link in a town centre and would, therefore, be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
2. The proposed development is of a type specified in 10(b) of Part 2 of Schedule 5 of the Planning and Development Regulations 2001 (as amended) and exceeds the relevant threshold, and an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is therefore required. The application site is within Clondalkin Town Centre and is within a business district (as per the definition contained in the same regulations). Notwithstanding the same, an EIA Report has not been provided and the Planning Authority is unable to undertake EIA of the proposed development. The Planning Authority is precluded from granting permission in such circumstances.
3. Having regard to: • The submitted traffic analysis which is based on surveys over one year old and does not appear to show actual traffic figures and queue lengths on the Ninth Lock Road; • The proximity of the combined vehicular entrance to a busy junction; • Inadequacy of details submitted, including absence of swept path analysis and sightlines, for vehicular entrances for the undercroft car park and future connections to the northeast of the site; • The car parking ratio for the site of 0.49 which is considered to be too low to adequately serve the development; • The predominance of car parking on the central link street which is to be a future active travel link; and • The potential for “ransom strips” for future connections by the proposed layout not providing connection up to the site boundary; it is considered that the proposed development would be premature due to the deficiency in the road network serving the area; would endanger public safety by reason of traffic hazard; would not be adequately serviced by car parking which would likely result in displaced and haphazard parking behaviour in the surrounding area; and would contravene UD2 Objective 2 of the Clondalkin Local Planning Framework 2026 as it relates to north-south connections in this area. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
4. Having regard to details submitted which demonstrate that the proposed development: • Fails to demonstrate that key areas of public open space will receive adequate levels of sunlight; • Fails to provide adequate levels of sunlight to a significant number of residential units (24%) with some units receiving 0.0 hours of sunlight on 21st March; and • Has failed to adequately assess the potential impact of the proposed development on reasonably anticipated future development on adjoining lands to the north and south; the proposed development would provide open spaces of poor amenity value, would result in an unacceptable standard of residential amenity for future occupants of dwellings which do not receive the minimum recommended level of sunlight, and would potentially prejudice the future development of adjoining sites. The proposed development would therefore undermine the ‘TC’ zoning objective and the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
5. Having regard to: • Extensive areas of blank and inactive ground level frontages, particularly to the central amenity space; • The haphazard location and arrangement of Blocks 5 and 6 which do not integrate successfully within the overall urban design strategy of the scheme, are not provided with adequate private amenity space as houses, and which by their proximity undermine the long-term management and protection of the eastern boundary hedgerow which is a key green infrastructure feature; • That Block 5 and 6, by their siting, prevent the improvement of the local GI network as sought for this area in policies GI2 Objective 1 and GI3 Objective 2 of the Clondalkin Local Planning Framework; and • The concern for overlooking and privacy in respect of the creche outdoor play space and the rear of Block 2C; it is considered that the proposal would result in a poor standard of public real; would fail to create an attractive and legible urban structure consistent with the zoning objectives for the site; would undermine policies GI2 Objective 1 and GI3 Objective 2 of the Clondalkin Local Planning Framework in relation to the improvement of green infrastructure assets in the area; would undermine policy CBH4 of the LPF relating to the integration of new development in the village centre. All of this combined with the the performance of the proposed development in terms of sunlight, the proposed density of 238.6 dph, the relative provision of public open space compared to the CDP standard of 2.4ha per 1,000 population, and the ratio and layout of car parking represents overdevelopment of the subject site. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
6. Childcare. The proposed development includes 154 no. family-sized units (two bedrooms or more) but fails to provide adequate childcare facilities to serve the development. Having regard to the limited existing childcare capacity in the area and the absence of sufficient justification for the proposed reduction in childcare provision, the Planning Authority considers that a creche facility with a capacity of approximately 41 children should be provided. The proposal would therefore result in inadequate supporting social infrastructure and would contravene policy CHE12 Objective 1 of the Clondalking Local Planning Framework in relation to provision of childcare in teh area, and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
7. Flooding. The SDCC Natural Water Department has recommended refusal on the basis of flood risk, that adequate detail has not been provided in relation to measures which would counter the risk of flooding in this area, which is designated as ‘Flood Zone B’ on county maps. Notwithstanding the submitted FRA (and the Justification Test in Section 5.1) and the justification of development at the subject location in relation to the first criteria of the justification test for development management that the subject lands have been zoned and designated for the particular use proposed in the County Development Plan and Clondalkin LPF, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that flood risk has been sufficiently mitigated and managed through the location, lay-out and design of the development to reduce such risks to an acceptable level. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

The Planning Authority considers that the applicant has failed to satisfactorily demonstrate the justification for the closure of ‘Entrance B’ and the operation of ‘Entrance A’ as a ‘semi-controlled’ access point. The proposed development would reduce permeability and accessibility for pedestrians, cyclists and vulnerable road users and would be contrary to the requirements of Objective CIOSO51, Objective CMO19 and Objective CMO30 of the Fingal Development Plan 2023 - 2029 which aims to ensure permeability and the removal of barriers to active movement. To permit this development would set an undesirable precedent for similar development and would therefore be contrary to proper planning and sustainable development.

Under the Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Development Plan 2022-2028, the site is subject to zoning objective A1, which seeks “to provide for new residential communities and Sustainable Neighbourhood Infrastructure in accordance with approved local area plans or approved Framework Plans.” The site is located within the Rathmichael / Ferndale Local Area Plan boundary, for which a Framework Plan will be prepared. Section 2.6.1.3 Local Area Plan Plan-Making Programme of the Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Development Plan 2022-2028 notes that within the A1 zoned lands at Rathmichael there are a number of existing properties and 'minor modifications and extensions to these properties can be considered in advance of the relevant Local Area Plans.' The proposed development which comprises the construction of a 62no. units, having regard to its nature and scale, would not constitute 'minor modification and extensions to existing property'. Accordingly, the proposed development would be contrary to the provisions of Section 2.6.1.3 of the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Development Plan 2022-2028, would set an undesirable precedent for other similar developments and would be materially contrary to the A1 zoning objective of the area, which seeks “to provide for new residential communities and Sustainable Neighbourhood Infrastructure in accordance with approved local area plans or approved Framework Plans.” It is considered that the proposed development undermines the intended plan-led and co-ordinated approach to residential development in the Rathmichael area as provided for in the Dun Loaghaire Rathdown County Development Plan 2022-2028. Therefore, the proposed development would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

1. Having regard to the location of the site within the Rathmichael Framework Plan area, the active progression of the Rathmichael Framework Plan intended towards a Draft Plan publication in 2027, the requirement under the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Development Plan 2022-2028 (as varied) for the coordinated and plan-led development of the Rathmichael area, and the need to determine the appropriate scale, phasing and supporting infrastructure necessary to facilitate future growth, it is considered that the proposed development would be premature and would prejudice the comprehensive and coordinated development of the wider Rathmichael area. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to Sections 2.4.6: Phasing and 2.6.1.3: Local Area Plan Making Programme of the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Development Plan 2022-2028 (as varied) and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
2. Having regard to the site location and the poor quality of pedestrian connections as a result of deficient footpath and active travel infrastructure linking to the site, it is considered that the development would fail to provide safe and accessible means of pedestrian access to and from the development suitable to serve the proposed nursing home and assisted living accommodation. The proposed development would therefore be prejudicial to pedestrian safety and contrary to Section 12.3.8.2: Nursing Homes/Assisted Living Accommodation of the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Development Plan 2022-2028 (as varied), which requires nursing homes and assisted living accommodation to be served by the provision of good footpath links, and contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

1. Having regard to the residential nature and scale of development permitted under SD22A/0455 / ABP-315996-23, the nature of the subject proposal which provides for a significant intensification of residential use through the increased capacity of each dwelling unit, the absence of facilities for cyclist/pedestrian/vulnerable road users and traffic generated by the development, and the absence of demonstration of safe movements within and to/from the subject site along adjoining laneways, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the subject laneways adjoining the site are equipped to safely accommodate the proposed intensification of residential use and generation of additional movements. The proposed development would therefore endanger public safety by reason of a traffic hazard.
2. The subject proposal, by reason of the insufficient bedroom size, aggregate living and bedroom floor area of the 3 no. dwellings as constructed, would fail to provide an acceptable standard of internal accommodation in accordance with the requirements of Section 5.3.2 and Table 5.1 of the 2007 Quality Housing for Sustainable Communities, Best Practice Guidelines or Section 12.6.7 Residential Standards of the 2022-2028 CDP, and would constitute substandard residential amenity which would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area and the ‘RES’ zoning objective of the subject site. Furthermore, the proposal, if permitted, would set an undesirable precedent for other substandard development, which would in themselves and cumulatively, be harmful to proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

Having regard to the residential nature of the development proposed, the absence of facilities for cyclists, pedestrians, vulnerable road users and traffic generated by the development, and the absence of demonstration of safe movements within and to/from the subject site along adjoining laneways, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that laneways adjoining the site are equipped to safely accommodate the proposed introduction of residential use and generation of additional movements. The proposed development would therefore endanger public safety by reason of traffic hazard by itself and by the precedent it would set for similar backland development. In addition, the proposal fails to provide sufficient justification for car-free development at this location in accordance with Section 12.7.4 Car Parking Standards of the 2022-2028 CDP or national guidance regarding residential consolidation. The development as proposed would, if permitted, thus set an undesirable precedent for similar substandard residential development on the laneway, which would in themselves and cumulatively, be harmful to proper planning and sustainable development of the area, and be contrary to the ‘RES’ zoning objective of the site.

Having regard to policy IE8 objective 5, section 12.2.1 (iv), and other relevant provisions, of the South Dublin County Development Plan 2022–2028, it is considered that development that would detrimentally impact the residential amenity of 'RES' zoned lands is not appropriate. In that regard, the assessment by the Environmental Health Officer with regard to noise impact is noted, and the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the proposed development would avoid unacceptable operational noise impacts on nearby residential properties. The applicant has failed to adequately assess the cumulative noise impacts of the proposed outdoor padel and tennis courts or demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures. In particular, the noise impact arising from an outdoor padel court in operation has not been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the EHO, in particular due to the lack of acoustic survey of an existing development. The Planning Authority therefore cannot be satisfied that the proposed development would avoid unacceptable noise disturbance to nearby residential receptors or would adequately protect the residential amenities of the surrounding area. A grant of permission for the development would, therefore, be prejudicial to residential amenity and contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

The development, by virtue of providing no private amenity spaces for the residential units fails to provide a satisfactory standard of residential amenity for future residents and is of an overall deficient design. As such, the development is contrary to Section 3.8 and the standards within Appendix 1 of the Planning Design Standards for Apartments Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2025) which has been issued to Planning Authorities under Section 28 of the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended. Furthermore, the development is contrary to Policies SPQHP35 & SPQHP40, Objectives DMSO19 & DMSO24 and contravenes the “LC” Local Centre zoning objective of the Fingal Development Plan 2023-2029 and will set an inappropriate precedent for other similar forms of development. The development is therefore contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area

The proposed development by reason of its siting, scale and design would result in an overbearing form of development which unduly overshadows and adversely impacts the private residential amenity space to the west. The proposed agricultural building would have a detrimental impact on the visual and residential amenities of adjoining residential occupiers than the approved scheme reg ref: F24A/0996E, and would conflict with Objectives DMSO100, DMSO71, Section 14.6.6.4 as well as the ‘HA’ Zoning Objective and Vision of the Fingal Development Plan 2023-2029. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to the proper and sustainable development of the area.

The proposed development by virtue of its scale massing and design would be unsympathetic to the design of the existing dwelling and would appear overly dominant at rear and side elevations; would be incongruous with the character of the area; and, would have a detrimental impact on the visual amenities of the area. The proposed development would directly conflict with Sections 14.10.2.3, 14.10.2.4, Policy SPQHP41 and Objective SPQHO45 of the Fingal Development Plan 2023-2029 and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. The proposed development if permitted would set an undesirable precedent for other similar developments, which would in themselves and cumulatively be harmful to the amenities of the area and be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

RECOMMENDATION Pursuant to the Planning and Development Acts 2000, (as amended), it is hereby recommended, for the reason set out in the First Schedule hereto, to REFUSE PERMISSION for the said development for the following reason: 1. The proposed development, by reason of the location, design, and appearance of the proposed glazed porch, would have a negative impact on the appearance, character and special interest of the Protected Structure, and would therefore be contrary to Policy Objective HER8, of the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Development Plan 2022-2028, as varied, which seeks to protect structures on the Record of Protected Structures from any works that would negatively affect their special character and appearance. The proposed development would also set a negative precedent for similar inappropriate development, and would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

Having regard to the proposed development’s proximity to adjoining property boundaries and the existing supermarket building in a secluded and constrained location of the site the proposal for 3no. staff accommodation residential units at this inappropriate location would result in a seriously substandard level of residential amenity for future residents of the development by reasons of poor safety and security; inadequate levels of daylight to the residential units; poor outlook from the residential units; absence of private amenity space and poor quality of communal amenity space in terms of useability, accessibility and sunlight penetration. The proposal would be contravene the provisions of the Dublin City Development 2022 - 2028, in particular Policy QHSN37 and Policy QHSN11, would set a poor precedent for similar sites across the city, and would be seriously injurious to the amenities of the area and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area