Student cites lack of parking in challenge to shared living development on Dublin pub site

02/03/2020 - 05:13

By Ann O'Loughlin
Plans for a 198-unit, build-to-rent, shared living development in Castleknock, Dublin, have been challenged in the High Court.

File photo.

Bartra Property (Castleknock) Ltd got planning permission from Bord Pleanála last January for the development, which will contain 210 beds and two car park spaces, on the site of Brady's Castleknock Inn on the Old Navan Road.

Brady's is currently still operating as a pub but would be demolished to make way for this project, the court heard.

Barry O'Lone, a student who lives with his family across the road from Brady's, is concerned that with only two car park spaces, the development will cause "a severe strain on the area" with regard to car parking.

While the O'Lone home has a driveway, they also avail of the current on-street parking outside the house as do visitors, he says in an affidavit.

He also says the residential amenity and value of their home will be adversely affected.

Today, Mr O'Lone's lawyers were granted leave, following a one-side only represented application, to seek to quash the board's decision granting permission.

Bartra Property is a notice party. The case comes back in May.

In his challenge, Mr O'Lone claims the board appears to have based its decision on Government guidelines for new apartments. It is claimed there is no evidence to suggest the Brady's site is within an "urban area" and the only evidence is that it is within a "suburban area".

The guidelines make it clear that shared accommodation is appropriate for city centre locations and/or core urban locations. Neither of these apply to the Brady's site, it is claimed.

It is further claimed the board did not have jurisdiction to deal with it as a strategic housing development.

Mr O'Lone also says the decision was irrational, flew in the face of common sense, contravened the local development plan and took irrelevant considerations into account.

The board erred in holding that the existence of Blanchardstown Hospital justified granting permission, he says. The hospital is "remote from the site" and there is not any proper and/or safe means of accessing it by bike or foot, it is claimed.

Mr Justice Charles Meenan, in granting leave to bring judicial review proceedings, said an application to seek a stay on any works could be made with 48 hours' notice.

This website uses its own cookies as well as third party cookies to personalise content, target and report on ads, to provide social media features and to analyse our traffic. By continuing to browse the site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. For more information, see our Cookie Policy.