Architect Hugh Wallace secures permission for unauthorised works on his Dublin home

Dublin City Council has approved an application by The Great House Revival and Home of the Year presenter and his husband, Martin Corbett, for planning permission to be granted retrospectively for work done on their end-of-terrace house in Portobello
Architect Hugh Wallace secures permission for unauthorised works on his Dublin home

Seán McCárthaigh

Architect and RTÉ broadcaster Hugh Wallace has secured retention permission for changes made during the renovation of his home in Dublin’s south inner city, despite some significant alterations from the original authorised design.

Dublin City Council has approved an application by The Great House Revival and Home of the Year presenter and his husband, Martin Corbett, for planning permission to be granted retrospectively for work done on their end-of-terrace house in Portobello.

However, the well-known TV celebrity was not granted planning permission for raising the overall height of the ridge of the roof by 300mm to 8.2 metres to provide additional headroom for storage areas in the attic.

The council explained that the refusal was due to the detail not being contained in a statutory notice, despite being referenced in drawings and a cover letter.

Dublin City Council said Mr Wallace would need to submit a separate planning application for retention permission for the altered roof height.

It noted that the architect had already raised the height of the roof to 7.9 metres from 7.1 metres from plans approved in 2021.

The property was bought in 2020 for €300,000 after it was damaged by fire.

Planning files show building work on the site first started in April 2021 and Mr Wallace now wanted to regularise all “deviations” from the original plans.

They also revealed that an enforcement notice was issued last year in relation to works “not as per plans” granted planning permission four years ago.

Stephen Shally, an architect with Mr Wallace’s architectural firm, Douglas Wallace Consultants, claimed it was only possible to carry out investigations on the condition and nature of the building’s foundations, external walls and party wall when internal finishes and the existing floors had been removed.

Mr Shally pointed out that they showed an existing gable wall and another external wall were in very poor condition and “not structurally adequate for new build loading.”

He explained that the gable wall as well as the chimney of an adjoining property, with the owner’s permission, were removed and a new gable wall built.

Mr Shally said the first-floor structure of other walls was condemned and replaced as works continued and the roof was removed.

Files show Mr Wallace and his husband altered the positions of the living rooms, toilets and bedrooms in the property which also affected the location of windows in the building.

“The changes instigated have a minimal overall impact but generally a positive one,” said Mr Shally.

He claimed the additional windows added uniformity to the façade which had been lacking in the previous scheme, while the gossip wall would provide additional privacy between neighbours.

Council planners accepted that most of the changes at ground floor level were “minor in nature.”

However, they noted one room had been changed from a sitting room to a bedroom.

On the first floor, an ensuite bathroom was removed to provide additional bedroom space.

The council said it had some concerns about the additional bedroom at ground floor level as the house already had very limited private amenity space with just a small 20m² courtyard.

It noted that official guidelines set out the minimum private open space standard for two-bedroom houses at 30m² and 40m² for a three-bedroom house.

However, council planners accepted that “on balance” the reduced amenity space was acceptable in this instance at that location “given the high-quality living environment provided within the renovated house and the central urban location with access to areas of public open space as an amenity.”

No objections were made to Mr Wallace’s application for retention permission.

However, the architect and his husband are required to pay a development contribution of almost €2,015 to the local authority towards public infrastructure and facilities as a condition of the grant of retention permission.

More in this section

Western People ePaper