Plans for 180 apartments on SIAC site are rejected
By Maurice Garvey
A PROPOSED development of over 180 apartments at the site of the former SIAC Construction head office in Clondalkin, has been rejected by South Dublin County Council.
Council planners deemed the Monastery Road proposal by Randalswood Holdings Ltd, would among other things, contain an over-provision of one-bed units and lead to unacceptable levels of traffic congestion.
Plans for 180 apartments refused at Dolcain House on Monastery Road
The former SIAC office building Dolcain House went on the market in September 2018 for €4.8 million.
Three applications for planning permission at Dolcain House were submitted in October 2019 by Randalswood Holdings.
In total, the three applications proposed the construction of four blocks, which would house 181 apartment units (135 one-bed, 40 two-bed and six three-bed).
SIAC currently operate an asphalt plant at a neighbouring site to Dolcain House.
They raised concerns in the planning stage over potential impact on night-time working, HGV traffic, noise emissions, air quality, pedestrian/cyclist movement and error submitted by the developer regarding the boundary area.
In making their decision, the council said the “poor design and excessive height” of the proposed development would be “visually obtrusive” and would “adversely impact” the visual amenity and character of the wider area.
The council listed a number of reasons for the refusal, which also stated the proposed development would “fail to provide an adequate standard of accommodation for prospective residents by reason of poor outlook, lack of privacy, access to sunlight, air quality, noise disturbance and quantity of shared open spaces.”
Council planners also noted the “overprovision of one-bed units”, lack of landscaped areas, and the development would lead to “unacceptable levels of traffic congestion on the adjoining road network.”
The site of the proposed development is also located on lands subject to the zoning objective ‘RES’ – to protect and/or improve residential amenity.
The council said the development, as proposed, in the absence of an overall masterplan for the RES lands, represents “undesirable, haphazard, piecemeal, uncoordinated development”, and it would set an “undesirable precedent.”
TAGS news
