THE LONG ANTICIPATED €400m redevelopment of the O’Devaney Gardens site in Dublin is facing a fresh delay.
This follows developers of the scheme, Richard Barrett’s Bartra ODG Ltd instituting High Court judicial review proceedings today against a condition attached to the An Bord Pleanála decision giving the 14-storey project the green light.
The scheme is made up of 1,047 residential units across 10 apartment blocks made up of 1,024 apartments and 23 houses with the site located in the north west inner city, adjoining the residential area of Stoneybatter.
As part of a deal struck between Bartra and Dublin City Council, half of the scheme is to be made up of social and affordable homes.
The breakdown of the housing will be 30% social housing, 20% affordable and 50% private housing.
The scheme was the first Strategic Housing Development (SHD) scheme where the appeals board included a condition locking out investment funds from purchasing residential units and restricting the sale to individual purchasers.
In imposing similar conditions on other recent SHD schemes, the board has limited the restriction to houses and duplex units only.
However, in the case of the O’Devaney Gardens permission, the condition also locks out investment funds purchasing apartments.
Now, Bartra is seeking to have that condition quashed as it relates to apartments.
The scheme is ‘shovel ready’ and if the matter can be resolved quickly, Bartra can commence work on site in early 2022.
However, the issue over the condition also has the potential to delay the scheme.
In a grounding affidavit, Planning Director with Bartra, Hazel Jones has stated that the inclusion of such a condition “may have the effect of compromising the viability or future management of the development”.
Ms Jones claims that An Bord Pleanála has acted ultra vires, or ‘beyond its powers’, in imposing the condition as it relates to apartments.
Solicitors for Bartra, McCann Fitzgerald wrote to An Bord Pleanála on 15 September and 3 November outlining the view that they felt that the condition had been included in error and seeking clarification on the matter.
The grounds of the judicial review proceedings state that no substantive response to either letter was received despite McCann FitzGerald advising the Bord that Bartra would have no alternative but to seek relief by way of judicial review in relation to the condition unless the error outlined was corrected.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
have your say