Developers challenge planning decision for apartment complex at Herbert Park

High Court Reporters

The High Court has permitted a developer to challenge Dublin City Council’s (DCC) refusal to extend the duration of planning permission for an apartment complex, slated for a Ballsbridge site where the former home of 1916 Rising leader Michael Joseph O’Rahilly once stood.

Planning permission granted to Derryroe Ltd in September 2020 for the planned complex at Herbert Park is due to expire in October 2025 after DCC refused to extend the duration of the permission, the developer says.

Derryroe, which is owned by the operators of the Herbert Park Hotel, the McSharry and Kennedy families, demolished 40 Herbert Park – once home to “The O’Rahilly” – in controversial circumstances in September 2020. At the time the house was demolished, it was under consideration for addition to the Record of Protected Structures (RPS).

DCC took legal action against Derryroe and construction firm Pembroke Place Developments for “unauthorised demolition” of the house. The case was settled in November 2022 when Pembroke Place Developments accepted noncompliance with planning permission and was ordered to pay €3,000 to charity to avoid a court conviction.

In September 2020, Derryroe secured planning permission for a complex of 105 apartments and 10 aparthotels, in blocks of up to 12 storeys, at 36, 38, and 40 Herbert Park and 10 Pembroke Place. The permission was subject to legal challenges but was upheld.

In April 2024, the council granted planning permission for certain amendments to the development permitted in September 2020. This permission does not expire until May 2029.

On January 16th, the council refused a request from Derryroe to extend the duration of the 2020 planning permission, stating that it was not satisfied that “substantial works” had been carried out at the site.

In a statement grounding its legal challenge, Derryroe argues that the works carried out at the site, and works due to be completed before the permission’s expiration in October, “are plainly of ample or considerable amount”.

Derryroe says the council erred in its decision to refuse the extension, by virtue of its alleged failure to give consideration to the works that will be carried out at the site prior to the October expiration date.

The company also argues the decision was incorrect because the council allegedly failed to have regard for works completed in the time between local authority officials’ inspection of the site on or before December 4th, 2024, and the council’s issuing of a decision on January 16th.

On Monday, Mr Justice Richard Humphreys granted leave for the company to pursue its judicial review proceedings against DCC. The council were not represented in court during Derryroe’s application for leave.

Derryroe are seeking several orders, including the quashing of the council’s decision to refuse an extension to the planning permission.

A fresh application for an extension of time to the planning permission, submitted by the council to the council in February, remains pending.