Developer Michael O'Flynn's rejected €75m housing plan has got a second chance

THE HIGH COURT has overturned Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown Council Council’s refusal to grant planning permission to property developer Michael O’Flynn for a €75 million residential project.

O’Flynn Capital Partners, whose founder is O’Flynn, had sought a judicial review of the council’s refusal for 164 residential units at Beech Park, Cabinteely/Loughlinstown in south county Dublin.

The council, which had opposed the application, had refused permission on a number of grounds including that it contravened the area’s planning scheme.

In a lengthy and detailed judgment today, Justice Robert Haughton quashed the council’s decision “in its entirety”.

The judge remitted the matter back to the council for a fresh determination after finding that reasons given by the local authority for refusing permission were invalid and that irrelevant matters had been taken into consideration.

The council’s refusal was tainted and in the circumstances the whole decision should be quashed, he said.

In his action, O’Flynn had claimed the council was “biased and had predetermined or prejudged the planning application” because of a dispute over a road leading into the proposed development.

The developer and his company have said they would be prepared to negotiate access with other land owners in respect of the road.

The plan involves the demolition of 11 existing dwellings and the construction of a 158m section of the Druid’s Glen Road linking the proposed development to the N11.

€75 million plan

O’Flynn had claimed the potential sales value of the developed land should exceed €75 million. The proposal will also create around 100 full-time construction jobs. The land was acquired for more than €12 million.

Council planners had refused permission on grounds including that the development failed to provide a “high-quality site-specific design response for the site” in relation to layout, ecology and landscape design.

It would seriously injure the amenities or depreciate the value of property in the vicinity, was contrary to proper planning and is not consistent with the Cherrywood planning scheme in regard to its design and sequencing, the council said.

O’Flynn had argued the refusal of permission for the section of the Druid’s Glen Road which traverses his company’s land “will likely pose significant difficulties” for the delivery of any development in the area.

He said that until the dispute has been resolved it seemed likely none of the development proposed for a 36-acre area within the Cherrywood scheme could be built, including at one residentially-zoned area which could provide up to 543 new homes.

He also argued the planning authority is obliged by law to grant permission where it is satisfied the proposed development is consistent with the local planning scheme.

The High Court action was brought because the proposal is located within a strategic development zone and a local area planning scheme. As a result the council’s refusal could not have been appealed to An Bord Pleanála.

‘Ransom strip’

In his judgment, the judge said one of the reasons the council had refused permission in respect of the Druid Glen Road was to avoid creating a ransom strip. This was to effectively oblige the development company to make a joint or coordinated application with adjoining landowners in respect of that entire road.

This was an improper motive and involved the taking into account of irrelevant considerations, the judge said.

Judge Haughton said he was sending the application back to the council so it could make its decision based on submissions already before it and the conclusions in the court’s judgment.

In addition the order was to allow council to either request further information about the proposal from the developer and ask the company if it wishes to submit any revised plans or modifications concerning its planning application.