Developer takes court proceedings over refusal for apartment planning in Dublin

An Bord Pleanála’s refused permission to LBD for development in Churchtown

Permission was refused by the board on the grounds the application was premature and there were deficiencies in the developer’s proposals to manage surface water on the site.

Permission was refused by the board on the grounds the application was premature and there were deficiencies in the developer’s proposals to manage surface water on the site.

 

A developer has taken High Court proceedings aimed at overturning An Bord Pleanála’s refusal of permission for 32 apartments in south County Dublin.

LDB Developments Limited sought the fast-track permission for a development, ranging in height from three to six storeys, on a site at Braemor Road, Churchtown.

Last February, the board upheld a decision by Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council refusing permission.

Permission was refused by the board on the grounds the application was premature and there were deficiencies in the developer’s proposals to manage surface water on the site.

To permit the development as proposed would be prejudicial to public health and contrary to proper planning, the board held.

LDB, represented by John Kenny BL, argues the board’s refusal is flawed and should be set aside on grounds including his client’s proposal was not premature.

The board made a material error in fact in concluding the proposed development would be prejudicial to public health, LDB claims. That conclusion was not supported by evidence, it is argued.

The developer claims it had submitted adequate proposals, as part of its appeal to the board, to show surface water generated by the development would be effectively and adequately dealt with.

It is also argued the board also failed to indicate the main reasons for not accepting the recommendations of its inspector that permission should be granted.

In judicial review proceedings against the board, with the council as a notice party, LBD seeks an order quashing the board’s decision.

When the matter came before Mr Justice Charles Meenan on Monday, he adjourned it to next month.