
Appeals board rejects Bartra €30m apartment scheme for Old Navan Rd
An Bord Pleanála has rejected plans by builders, Bartra for its plans for a €30m apartment scheme for Dublin's Old Navan Road.
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


RTÉ News
11 hours ago
- RTÉ News
High Court dismisses challenge against Clare wind farm
The High Court has dismissed objectors' judicial review challenge against the green light for a 579 ft high eight turbine wind farm for lands in south east Clare. Over 300 people from the area lodged objections against the Fahy Beg wind farm proposal and Clare County Council refused planning permission to RWE Renewables Ireland Ltd for the 38.4 MW wind-farm on lands 1.5km from Bridgetown, and 3.5km from O'Briensbridge in south-east Clare in May 2023. As part of the proposal, the wind-farm developers are to establish a Community Benefit Fund which will distribute up to €3.12m over the first 15 years of the wind farm. Documents lodged with the application state that the provision of the Community Benefit Fund "will have a significant long-term, positive effect on the socio-economic profile of the study area and wider area". The council refused across five grounds including that the planned wind farm would depreciate the price of property as it would be visually over-bearing on those properties. However, RWE Renewables Ireland appealed and An Bord Pléanála overturned the council refusal to grant planning permission in March 2024. In response, the Fahybeg Windfarm Opposition Group and Sean Conway launched High Court judicial review proceedings seeking to have the appeals board decision quashed for the wind farm which is to be located on a site 14km north of Limerick city. However, Mr Justice Richard Humphreys - who presides over the Planning and Environment Division of the High Court - has dismissed all grounds of the judicial review challenge. The applicants claimed that the decision should be quashed as the planned wind farm would materially contravene the Development Plan due to the loss of part of Ballymoloney Woods. Mr Justice Humphreys stated that on the basis of the applicants' analysis, the felling of any tree necessarily constitutes a material contravention of the Development Plan. Mr Justice Humphreys stated that this approach represented an "excessively literalist and absolutist interpretation" of development plan objectives. Mr Justice Humphreys stated that the application failed to engage with the specifics of the individual trees which are actually being felled, pointing 0.4 of a hectare or 0.2% of the total amount of long established woodland is being removed. He said: "There is no absolute prohibition on the removal of trees, contrary to the applicants' complaints, and a reasonably informed reader would not read such a preclusion into the Development Plan when same is read objectively and holistically." Mr Justice Humphreys also dismissed the objectors' claim that planning permission should be quashed due to the impact that the wind farm would have on property prices in the area. He said that there is no substantive evidence presented that would conclusively indicate a depreciation in property values directly attributable to the wind farm's presence at this particular location. Mr Justice Humphreys made no order in relation to costs.

The Journal
13 hours ago
- The Journal
High Court dismisses judicial review challenge against 579ft-high wind farm in Clare
THE HIGH COURT has dismissed objectors' judicial review challenge against the green light for a 579ft-high eight-turbine wind farm for lands in south-east Clare. More than 300 people from the area lodged objections against the Fahy Beg wind farm proposal and Clare County Council refused planning permission to RWE Renewables Ireland Ltd for the 38.4 MW wind-farm on lands 1.5km from Bridgetown, and 3.5km from O'Briensbridge in south-east Clare in May 2023. As part of the proposal, the wind-farm developers are to establish a Community Benefit Fund which will distribute up to €3.12m over the first 15 years of the wind farm. Documents lodged with the application state that the provision of the Community Benefit Fund 'will have a significant long-term, positive effect on the socio-economic profile of the study area and wider area'. The Council refused across five grounds including that the planned wind farm would depreciate the price of property as it would be visually over-bearing on those properties. However, RWE Renewables Ireland appealed and An Bord Pleanala overturned the Council refusal to grant planning permission in March 2024. In response, the Fahybeg Windfarm Opposition Group and Sean Conway launched High Court judicial review proceedings seeking to have the appeals board decision quashed for the wind farm which is to be located on a site 14km north of Limerick city. Advertisement However, Justice Richard Humphreys – who presides over the Planning and Environment Division of the High Court – has dismissed all grounds of the judicial review challenge. The applicants claimed that the decision should be quashed as the planned wind farm would materially contravene the Development Plan due to the loss of part of Ballymoloney Woods. Justice Humphreys stated that on the basis of the applicants' analysis, the felling of any tree necessarily constitutes a material contravention of the Development Plan. Justice Humphreys stated that this approach represented an 'excessively literalist and absolutist interpretation' of development plan objectives. Justice Humphreys stated that the application failed to engage with the specifics of the individual trees which are actually being felled, pointing 0.4 of a hectare or, or 0.2% of the total amount of long established woodland is being removed. He said: 'There is no absolute prohibition on the removal of trees, contrary to the applicants' complaints, and a reasonably informed reader would not read such a preclusion into the Development Plan when same is read objectively and holistically.' Justice Humphreys also dismissed the objectors' claim that planning permission should be quashed due to the impact that the wind farm would have on property prices in the area. He said that there is no substantive evidence presented that would conclusively indicate a depreciation in property values directly attributable to the wind farm's presence at this particular location. Justice Humphreys made no order in relation to costs.


Irish Independent
a day ago
- Irish Independent
The Indo Daily: Rugby stars, Leaving Cert grinds, lewd jokes and a High Court case
The private grinds industry in Ireland is booming, and is estimated to be worth between €50-€60m. Investors, including well-known names like Brian O'Driscoll and Caelan Doris, have been keen to get in on the action, as the pair did when they helped fund hybrid learning platform Grinds 360 last year. But the competition in the grinds world can be just as intense as it is on the rugby pitch, and sometimes notably bitter. Take the case of respected maths teacher Rob Browne, whose high-profile transfer from the Dublin Academy of Education to Grinds 360 led to a contentious dispute that landed in the High Court where, among other things, a lewd joke made on TikTok was under scrutiny. On this episode of The Indo Daily, host Kevin Doyle is joined by Sunday Independent journalist Mark Tighe, to discuss this unusual legal battle.