Korean embassy objects to development near ambassador’s residence
Vienna Convention cited as part of effort to prevent development in Carrickmines
South Korean embassy officials described the proposed development in Carrickmines, south Dublin as “overbearing visually”. Photograph: Getty Images
The South Korean embassy has cited the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations as part of an effort to prevent a development next to its ambassador’s residence in Dublin.
Embassy officials filed a detailed three-page objection to proposals before Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council to build on a site beside its ambassador’s official residence, Seoul Manor, in Carrickmines, south Dublin.
As part of the planning application for the two-storey house at the Glenheather property on Brennanstown Road, a portion of the site would be given over to the council so that a curve in the road might be widened.
The site is considered problematic as it lies on a bend on a narrow country lane. Efforts by the council to alleviate traffic concerns there were blocked by councillors last year. And there are concerns among immediate neighbours the proposed works at Glenheather could spark efforts by the council to pursue compulsory purchase orders on adjacent land in order to widen the road.
Objections from the embassy of the Republic of Korea were raised on numerous grounds, including in relation to any road-widening.
“It is worth noting that any proposed road-widening scheme along this stretch of Brennanstown Road that would interfere with the property of Seoul Manor would not be possible,” the embassy said in correspondence with council officials.
“Article 22 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (which has been transposed into Irish Law) states that: ‘The premises of the mission shall be inviolable,’ and further, that the premises of the mission ‘shall be immune from search, requisition, attachment or execution’.
“For clarity, it is not legally permissible to subject any part of the Seoul Manor property to any form of compulsory purchase in order to facilitate a road-widening scheme.”
Other objections raised by the embassy included reference to a local area plan which seeks to, the embassy quotes, “limit development along the Brennanstown Road to minor domestic infills and extensions until a traffic management scheme for the area has been completed”.
“It would, in our opinion, be inappropriate to grant permission for such an obtrusive and incongruously large infill development on a very narrow and constricted site,” says the objection.
Embassy officials describe the proposed development as “overbearing visually”, and said a previous planning application on the site was rejected due to a threat to public safety.
A planning report from the council has noted the proposed development is “acceptable in principle” given its compliance with local planning objectives. However, in a request for further information it asked the applicant to confirm that an area of land fronting on to the road would be taken in charge by the local authority “to facilitate future Brennanstown Road improvement works”.
A separate objection from other neighbours noted the proposed entrance to the site could not achieve “sight lines” for traffic given it would be located on a bend.