Appeals board rejects Bartra €30m apartment scheme for Old Navan Rd
It is now the second failed attempt by Bartra to secure planning permission to redevelop the site.
Bartra Property (Castleknock) Ltd was planning to construct a five storey 56 apartment scheme on the site at Brady's Public House, Old Navan Rd, Dublin 15.
The refusal upholds a decision by Fingal Co Council to refuse planning permission after 75 objections were lodged against the proposal.
One of those to object was Castleknock resident, Barry O'Lone who in 2023 turned down a €100,000 offer from Bartra to withdraw a High Court challenge against a 210 bedspace co-living scheme for the same site opposite his family home.
The co-living scheme did not proceed and in May of last year, Bartra Property (Castleknock) Ltd lodged plans for the apartment scheme for the site.
As part of his objection, Mr O'Lone repeated the allegation that he was previously offered €100,000 by Bartra in April 2023 to withdraw the High Court judicial review against the co-living scheme.
In its refusal to the 56 unit scheme, the appeals board concluded that having regard to its height, massing, bulk and design and its lack of a direct relationship with the public open space located immediately to the north-east of the subject site, the proposed development fails to integrate with the established character of the area.
The appeals board stated that as a result the scheme would be contrary to the Fingal County Development Plan 2023-2029, which requires that new development adds quality by integrating high quality design and ensuring good quality accessible public realms, by ensuring development contributes to a positive sense of place, local distinctiveness and character.
The appeals board also refused planning permission as the absence of adequate on-site car parking provision would result in substandard residential amenity for future occupants of the development, would be likely to lead to overspill parking in the vicinity of the subject site and would be likely to result in congestion and obstruction of road users, which would endanger public safety by reason of traffic hazard.
In the Bartra appeal lodged, Thornton O'Connor Town Planning stated that there are not many better sites in the city that have the capacity for increased height and density.
The planning consultants stated that the height, scale and massing of the proposal was very similar to the building already permitted on the site.
Director of the planning consultancy, Patricia Thornton stated that the scheme cannot be considered to be overbearing, over-scaled or to cause material overlooking.
Ms Thornton also argued that the scheme has been carefully crafted to the highest architectural standards and that the issue of the provision of on-street parking can be overcome by on-street parking controls.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
17 hours ago
- Irish Times
Court steps in after man gives €350,000 to poor to get to heaven
The High Court has stepped in to protect the interests of a farmer who has already given €350,000 cash to homeless and poor people on the basis God has promised him a seat in heaven. Mr Justice Michael Twomey on Friday appointed a guardian to represent the best interests of the farmer, aged in his forties, who, the court heard, only last week gave €1,000 cash to a homeless woman he met. Solicitor Katherine Kelleher, speaking on behalf of the Health Service Executive (HSE), told Judge Twomey the man had recently sold his farm for around €600,000 and by May last had been left with just €288,000 in two bank accounts. A medical report was handed into court. READ MORE 'The situation is that in a short number of weeks he has again given away added sums in the region of €38,000,' Ms Kelleher said. 'His bank accounts are literally haemorrhaging cash. I have received a phone call just this morning revealing that in one of the accounts there is now an overdraft of €65,000.' She told Judge Twomey the man claimed he had been told by God to give away all of his money and if he did so he would get to heaven. Ms Kellleher said she was applying to the court on behalf of the HSE for the appointment of a guardian ad litem to look after the best interests of the man. His total funds now stand at €250,000. Judge Twomey said he would appoint a guardian ad litem in light of the evidence that had been presented to the court. He said he would also make an order in the extended terms sought by the HSE directing the two banks concerned be directed to permit all inquiries be made regarding the man's accounts and allowing the guardian ad litem take all steps considered necessary. The proceedings were returned into early September. The man concerned cannot be identified by order of the court.
The Irish Sun
a day ago
- The Irish Sun
Husband handed just £325k of wife's £60MILLION family fortune in bitter divorce battle WINS bid to get more cash
A MAN who was awarded just £325,000 of his wife's £60 million fortune has now won a bitter divorce battle. The divorcee 2 Jenny Helliwell, 42, was said to have behaved "fraudulently" Credit: Champion News Service 2 Simon Entwistle, 42, was awarded just £325,000 after a 'painful' divorce battle Credit: Champion News Service Simon Entwistle, 42, a financial trader, was awarded just £325,000 at the High Court after a His claim of needing £36,000 a year for flights, and £26,000 for "a meal plan just for himself", was called "aspirational" by the judge. The judge added: "He said to me, 'I can't even cook an omelette,' well my answer to that is 'learn', it is not difficult." "You do not have to be a master chef to learn how to eat reasonably well." Read more News Now, a judge has found Jenny guilty of "fraudulent" behaviour by failing to declare £48m of her £66m personal fortune. The pair, who were together from 2016 until 2022, enjoyed an "opulent standard of living throughout their relationship." Simon reportedly "enjoyed the trappings of being married into a family of exceptional wealth". This included living in a £4.5m villa in Dubai, and a Parisian wedding ceremony that cost £500,000 in August 2019. Most read in The Sun The villa had been a gift from Jenny's father - Dubai-based British businessman Neil Helliwell. Simon's own assets were worth around £800,000, including a flat in Teen Mom star Ryan Edwards begs judge not to force him to expose top-secret MTV contract and NDA in nasty divorce When the couple split in August 2022, Jenny hired lawyers to order Simon to leave their home with just 48 hours' notice. It sparked a legal battle that would see Simon asking for £2.5m of his wife's fortune, estimated to be worth £60m. Jenny had offered him £500,000, and then £800,000 to avoid a However, the original judge awarded just a £400,000 payout following a pre-nuptial agreement that stated the pair would keep their own assets. This came to £325,000 after he was made to pay his wife's legal fees. During an appeal, Simon claimed he was a victim of "gender prejudice", and that the agreement had been invalidated by Jenny failing to disclose around £48m in assets when he signed the document. His lawyer said: "Had the positions been reversed, it is very unlikely that he would have... so ungenerously assessed the needs of a wife after a six-year relationship." A judge has ruled that this amounted to "fraudulent" behaviour, invalidating the agreement. While Jenny did disclose around £18m in assets, she failed to disclose an additional £47m. It included around £8m of beachfront land in Dubai, and a £1.6m property in Wimbledon. This meant that Simon did not sign the agreement with full knowledge of his partner's wealth. She did not make any findings on the gender prejudice argument. The case will now be returned to the High Court, to be judged as if the agreement didn't exist. Lady Justice King said: "Since the husband in the instant case was deliberately deprived of information which it had been agreed that he should have, in my judgment, the agreement cannot stand."
Irish Times
2 days ago
- Irish Times
X wants to appeal High Court ruling dismissing Coimisiún na Meán case
Elon Musk's X wants to appeal a High Court ruling dismissing its action against Ireland's broadcasting and online media regulator, Coimisiún na Meán , over its online safety code. X International Unlimited Company, which operates X, formerly known as Twitter, had alleged that the media regulator engaged in 'regulatory overreach' in its approach to restrictions on certain video content. Coimisiún na Meán's online safety code, which was adopted last October and came into effect earlier this month, sets out legally binding rules for video-sharing platforms. It is aimed at protecting the public, and especially children, from harmful online content. The social media giant had sought a High Court order compelling the commission to quash its decision to adopt certain sections of the code. It also sought the court to overturn the commission's decision to apply the code to its platform. READ MORE In a judgment, Mr Justice Conleth Bradley this week refused reliefs sought by X . The judge dismissed several arguments made by the platform in the proceedings, including that the code was out of step with European legislation. At the High Court on Thursday, senior counsel Declan McGrath, for X, appearing with barrister Emma Synnott, said he was instructed to seek permission to appeal the court's judgment. In some High Court cases, permission must be granted by the court to appeal a judgment. Noting the judge's provisional view that the costs of the High Court action be awarded to the commission, Mr McGrath said he would not be making any submissions on the matter. Mr Justice Bradley set a date in October for the hearing of X's application for permission to appeal.
