Developer Johnny Ronan has made a bid to overturn the planning refusal for his contentious plan for a 10-storey-over-basement build-to-rent apartment scheme in Dublin.
Mr Ronan's RGRE and J&R Valery's Ltd have lodged an appeal with An Bord Pleanála against Dublin City Council's refusal for the 44-unit scheme on a site at the junction of Leeson Street Upper and Appian Way in Dublin 4.
As part of a comprehensive refusal against the 29 studio and 15 one-bedroom apartment scheme, the council refused permission after finding the scheme’s excessive height, scale and density on a small, visually prominent site constituted overdevelopment.
It concluded RGRE and J&R Valery’s Ltd’s scheme would have an unreasonable overbearing, visually dominant effect on adjoining sites.
However, planning consultants for the applicants, John Spain & Associates, have contended the proposal would provide “a quality build-to-rent residential development in an existing urban area adjoining high-quality public transport”.
Mr Spain said the scheme design “creates a high-quality feature building at this prominent corner site and key gateway to Dublin city centre”.
‘Urban form’
The submission further contended the height “contributes to the wider streetscape and urban form of the area” and also “provides much-needed accommodation in a highly accessible area well served by public transport”.
Mr Spain acknowledged the height of the scheme, at 34.4m, is higher than the city development plan standard. However, he said given the location of the site adjoining the Leeson Street/N11 Quality Bus Corridor, the height of the building is appropriate in relation to supporting increased densities in well-served urban areas, in accordance with national planning policy.
However, Armstrong Planning, on behalf the Upper Leeson Street Area Residents’ Association, told the city council it objected “in the strongest possible terms on the grounds that the height, form and scale of the scheme . . . is completely out of character with the local built form and as such would militate against the principles of proper planning and development of the area”.
In one of 12 objections lodged against the scheme, Armstrong Planning said the 34.4m height “is simply too high for the site in such close proximity to nearby residences”. A decision is due on the appeal in April.
