Re: Re: Dartmouth Square Disgrace

Home Forums Ireland Dartmouth Square Disgrace Re: Re: Dartmouth Square Disgrace


I switched off his rhetoric a long time ago and strongly believe that he has taken this line only to pad out the time he spends in court. The only route unproven against his stance is unique bizarre constitutional route that no one else has ever invested legal costs in.

In relation to the Leopardstown case I can see the legal point. You have a lot of very similar land in the vicinity none of which is developed with some zoned resi and some zoned amenity. The zoning in such a case has some slight doubt as the decision to zone plot a resi and plot b amenity due to their similar characteristics is an arbitrary decision. It is a fair question to ask why there is a very different zoning despite the simularities. As a result the owners of the financially disadvantaged plot successfully argued this point.

However I do not feel that this principle can be transferred to Dartmouth Square for the following reasons. Firstly the site history for over a century displays that the estate zoning on the site was amenity. The plan has always been that this plot would be subservient to the adjoining residential uses. Secondly when the zoning was conferred in the first statutory development plan the plan for the area was reliant on this plot providing the amenity space for this locality and no other sites were considered so that decision cannot be conidered to be arbitrary. Thirdly the CPO of the lands at Leopardstown sought to change the day to day use of the subject plot; in this case the use is not proposed to change and as such the local authority cannot be said to be gaining any financial gain in the transaction.

I would ask one simple question what was the user clause in all previous leases and how long has the superior interest holder insisted on such a user clause formed the centre of all deals done? The zoning is valid on the basis of his predessors grants of lease.

Latest News