The owner of McCloskey’s pub on Morehampton Road in Donnybrook, Dublin 4 has been refused permission to retain a 136sq m retractable barrel-roofed awning over its existing beer garden.
An Coimisiún Pleanála (ACP) refused planning retention to Tagatoni Limited for the installation of the awning at the rear of the pub.
In a ruling that upheld an earlier refusal by Dublin City Council, ACP concluded that the retention application would give rise to an unacceptable level of noise disturbance for residential properties in the vicinity.
The decision was made having regard to the scale, design and method of construction of the development, the proximity of the development to residential properties, the intended hours of use of the subject premises and recorded noise levels in the vicinity of the premises/structure.
READ MORE
ACP also found that the applicant had not adequately demonstrated that the development would not be detrimental to the residential amenity, environmental quality or established character of the area.
[ Donnybrook pub appeals rejection of awning over beer gardenOpens in new window ]
It found the proposal would likely devalue property in the vicinity and would create an undesirable precedent for similar type development.
The ACP inspector in the case recommended refusal, acknowledging that there was an obvious tension between safeguarding the amenities of local residents and ensuring that premises such as McCloskey’s continue to thrive.
The inspector found the applicants’ noise assessment to be entirely unsatisfactory.
Three observations to ACP were submitted by local residents. Eamonn and Catherine Curley, Sheila and Paul Fahey and Frances Kavanagh – all of Marlborough Road – argued that the submitted noise assessment was not representative of the lived experience of residents where noise disturbance was frequent and disruptive.
[ Hundreds object to plans for Ireland’s largest new townOpens in new window ]
They also claimed that the pub had been playing loud music in the beer garden at night, which had materially altered the character and use of the back garden.
In the first-party appeal drawn up by Cathal O’Neill + Company architects against the refusal, it contended that whatever noise may currently emanate from the premises was part of an established use and that the structure would attenuate sound and improve the receiving conditions.
O’Neill argued that “the proposal improves an existing situation”.
The ACP and council refusals follows the council last year refusing an application by Tagatoni Ltd for the erection of a part-retractable awning/covered area over the rear garden area to create a new seating area at the same pub.
