{"id":216499,"date":"2025-12-05T08:54:09","date_gmt":"2025-12-05T08:54:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/216499\/"},"modified":"2025-12-05T08:54:09","modified_gmt":"2025-12-05T08:54:09","slug":"council-seeks-removal-of-28-modular-homes-allegedly-built-without-permission-in-south-dublin-the-irish-times","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/216499\/","title":{"rendered":"Council seeks removal of 28 modular homes allegedly built without permission in south Dublin \u2013 The Irish Times"},"content":{"rendered":"

South Dublin County Council<\/a> is seeking court orders requiring the removal of an \u201cuncontrolled\u201d development of modular homes allegedly being built without planning permission on a site in Brittas, Co Dublin<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Photographs put before Dublin Circuit Civil Court indicated about 28 homes have been constructed to date, with foundations laid for at least 12 more. <\/p>\n

The council wants the development by Branach Developments Ltd on adjoining sites at Chianti Park and Hillsbrook Lawn removed and the sites restored.<\/p>\n

A local resident, John O\u2019Neill, who lives with his family about 200m from the site, also sought orders restraining the development. He claims works began about mid-August and have resulted in blocked drains on his property, sewage overflow and loss of amenity. His concerns were echoed in sworn statements from other local residents. <\/p>\n

Judge John O\u2019Connor refused last October to grant interim orders pending the full hearing of the matter on Thursday when he heard arguments from Stephen Dodd SC, for the council, and barrister Conor Sheehan, instructed by BKC Solicitors.<\/p>\n

The matter was adjourned to Tuesday next to hear a reply from Michael O\u2019Donnell SC, for the respondents \u2013 Branach Developments Ltd, Mullnassa Limited and Threshford Limited. <\/p>\n

Mr O\u2019Donnell told the judge he would be opposing the applications on grounds this was an exempt development. An exempt development is not an unauthorised development and the issue before the court is a legal one, he said.<\/p>\n

He did not dispute works have been carried out involving construction, alteration, excavation, repair and renewal, counsel said. Works for improvement or alteration of a structure are exempt, he said. <\/p>\n

In his submissions, Mr Dodd said the development is being carried out in an \u201cuncontrolled\u201d and \u201cunregulated manner\u201d, the council\u2019s concerns about it had been \u201centirely ignored\u201d and the development was in fact \u201caccelerated\u201d after the council got involved last August. <\/p>\n

It was argued the development is delivering housing but that is \u201cno excuse\u201d for unauthorised development, he said. \u201cNormal developers look for planning permission.\u201d<\/p>\n

This development was being carried out to obtain \u201csubstantial profits\u201d, he said.<\/p>\n

Works, including tree felling, installation of services and block construction had continued and accelerated over months despite issues raised by the council about its status and after the council took legal action, counsel said. <\/p>\n

Addressing claims the structures are not \u201cnew\u201d structures, counsel said they are entirely different structures in terms of their design and their permanent nature. They are masonry structures with an entirely new type of roof and are much larger structures than the mobile homes and chalets, some very dilapidated, that were on the site previously, he said. <\/p>\n

Contrary to what the respondents argued, this was not \u201crenovation\u201d and \u201cimprovement\u201d of existing structures in a development that was there since 1968, counsel said.<\/p>\n

This was an entirely new development which was unauthorised and not immune from enforcement, he said. It also involved an \u201centirely new\u201d type of use.<\/p>\n

The development is in material contravention of the zoning of the area, where residential development is not allowed except in exceptional circumstances for reasons including the substandard road network cannot deal with it and to protect the character of the area, counsel said.<\/p>\n

An Coimisi\u00fan Plean\u00e1la<\/a> refused permission for some one-off housing in the area for reasons including inadequacy of the road network, he said.<\/p>\n

Other concerns include about the \u201cuncontrolled\u201d nature of the development, he said. Mature trees had been \u201crazed to the ground\u201d and there were issues about wastewater treatment and services and the impact on a protected area 900m downstream, particularly Brittas Lakes.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"South Dublin County Council is seeking court orders requiring the removal of an \u201cuncontrolled\u201d development of modular homes…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":216500,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[40],"tags":[7928,9,10,52,18,13,14,6,19,17,11,12,15,16,5,24082,7,8],"class_list":{"0":"post-216499","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-ireland","8":"tag-an-coimisiun-pleanala","9":"tag-breaking-news","10":"tag-breakingnews","11":"tag-dublin","12":"tag-eire","13":"tag-featured-news","14":"tag-featurednews","15":"tag-headlines","16":"tag-ie","17":"tag-ireland","18":"tag-latest-news","19":"tag-latestnews","20":"tag-main-news","21":"tag-mainnews","22":"tag-news","23":"tag-south-dublin-county-council","24":"tag-top-stories","25":"tag-topstories"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@ie\/115666122462146423","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/216499","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=216499"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/216499\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/216500"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=216499"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=216499"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=216499"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}