Assistance in lodging objection against 32 apartments opposite Protected Structure

I’d rather object to the dormer bungalow 🙂

why would a view of a church be a reason to object??

If the proximity of the proposed development is to be so close to the church as to interfere with the overall character of its setting then consequently damage will be caused to the church. The setting of the church would have one or more perspectives each of which contribute towards assembling the integrity of the whole existing setting. The quality and standard of setting and its relationship to the church must not be compromised if the heritage fabric of the church is to be respected and maintained to a high standard.

The plans/elevations proposed should reveal the full extent of damage to the setting of the protected structure.

well if it’s this you should ask more of your local reps

http://www.sdublincoco.ie/320980.pdf

That’s what constitutes an objection from a Councillor? 😮

That’s an insult to the planning system, Councillor. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Frivolous? Yes.
Vexatious? Yes.
Based solely on planning considerations? You must be joking.

lol – brilliant! 😀

Al least for once they can’t be arsed to get involved with a planning matter.

Although his wholly uninformed opinion will probably still carry more weight than many of the submissions made by the locals. That’s presumably why he isn’t even pretending to try any more.

For the record, that submission is not eligible for consideration and should be thrown out.

How about the still dire need for housing in this statelet ? Where are people supposed to live ?
Maybe if you were not (presumably) living in a dormer bungalow with views of a church you would be glad of an apartment in Dublin

@tamhlacht wrote:

Particular areas of concern are traffic, streetscape, overshadowing and views of a church.

these aren’t “areas of concern”. they’re issues which would be addressed at planning and add info stages by competent architects and consultants. if you can demonstrate (and by that i mean illustrate and/or statistically suggest) that traffic and shadows will be a problem you might have a case, but probably not.

“streetscape” is not a concern, it is a noun. bungalows and churches do not a decent streetscape make, so i would imagine raising that noun would only harm your case.

regarding views of a church, at the risk of being trite, why would you want to deny the occupants of these new apartments this lovely view?

Interesting but not entirely surprising comments to a request for assistance ….

No – I don’t live in the dormer bungalow and no I am not Cllr Mick Murphy.

But I do think that two of the short original streets of Tallaght village should be protected from anymore urban and bland concrete blocks. It is not too much to ask seeing as though over 2 squared miles of industrial land in Cookstown and Belgard has been rezoned (2006) to allow for more residential development, so there is no shortage of space appropriate for modern high rise development.

As for providing places for peoplen to live – there are at least 2,000 unsold and unoccupied apartments already in Tallaght new urban centre available for sale for the crowds needing housing. Do that number tell you anything about supply and demand and housing needs in this area ??
There are a further @ 500 planned for The Square extension, so there is actually no shortage of available units.

The market is awash with bland apartments in Tallaght – so how about we hold off eroding the last corner of the small village area before throwing up another 32 apartments.

This small development is hardly going to “solve” a housing “crisis” in this emerging city, but it will bury The Priory from the East of the village area behind more concrete and protruding balconies.

The Priory will be invisible to pedestrians if this latest block is allowed to be developed at 4 stories – not to mention simply add a further 32 apartments to the already 500+ across the road in The Laurels, Priors Gate and Molloys apartment complexes.

Thanks for the comments re: needing housing etc…. does anyone have any assistance to offer in protecting the skyline in this corner of Tallaght village ?

Unfortunately i do not think the council can / will consider the market (demand) as a reason for refusal of this application…. you simply will have to stay within planning issues…. and i completely agree with you that bland apartment blocks have become a blight on the skyline of our cities…..

i think you (or an appointed consultant) should focus your objections from the design standpoint….and compliance with development plans, local area plans and governmental guidelines …. these are the planners bibles, so if you can show a non-compliance with these then you have a strong argument….. however a major problem is that guidelines in these are disingenuous and inane….

is this on that site of an old esso station??

Details of Application: SD07A/0569
Date Received:16/07/2007
Applicant:John O’ Connor , Molesworth Place
Location:Site of former Esso Service Station at junction of Greenhills Road and Main Road, Tallaght, Dublin 24
Proposed Development:Construction of mixed retail / residential developments of 32 no. apartments and 654 sq.m retail on 4 floors over basement car park as follows: 13 no. 3 bedroom apartments, 10 no. 2 bedroom apartments, and 9 no 1 bedroom apartments, on ground, first, second, and third floors with projecting balconies at first and second floor, and 3 no. ground floor retail units; (245 sq.m); (205 sq.m); and (204 sq.m) as modification/extension to and incorporating parts of site of approved development under construction Reg. Ref. no. SD04A/0731 with vehicular parking access through approved development under construction.
Decision Due:09/09/2007

Here is the site location Plan http://www.sdublincoco.ie/339321.pdf

Deadline for Submissions is Sun 19th August 2007

is the church and dormer dwelling north immediately south of th esubject site??

cannot see overshadowing as being much of an issue….. the majority of shadowing will be onto the applicants own lands….

Thanks Henno, good to get this guidance… it is this site indeed… the designs have been revised slightly since last refusal to incorporate a stone cladding.. but will still be beside a terrece of single storey cottages.

This application is seeking to include a small site which An Bord Pleanala recent granted permission for 2, 2 storey townouses, into the new site for 4 storey apartments which seems disengenuious as there is obviously a very big difference in putting 2, 2 storey townhouses beside a single storey terreced cottage and 4 storey box shaped apartments.

2 storey ownhouses would be more inkeeping with the “country character” of this short street which faces onto a 18th century wall around The Priory. This road has The Priory protected lands to the east and have the protected St Marys 1930 school house on the same side of this short street as the proposed development.

It is just an example of parachuting in ultra modern design and shapes with no meaningful attempt to enhance or compliment the existing character and design in this small village quarter.

Any other advice / precedence would be gratefully accepted.

Thanks.

Attached is an image ( @ 4 months old) of the view from the junction of new Greenhills Road and Main Road to East, the garage canopy is now ermoved and opens up the view of St Marys and The Priory lands including protected Cypress trees and the Friars walkway to the Prios gate apartments and all those who travel towards the village from the east of Tallaght.

Also you can see the laneway from the end with the protected St Marys school house and the adjacent cottages..

shot from east to west of the proposed site