High Court challenge against ABP mast decisions
Residents protesting in Kingswood last November against the mast

High Court challenge against ABP mast decisions

Two separate High Court challenges have been brought against decisions by An Bord Pleanála in relation to two telecommunications masts in South County Dublin, reports Aodhan O’Faolain.

The actions have been brought by two bodies representing locals who are opposed to plans to develop a mast near Saggart village, and one constructed in Kingswood in South County Dublin.

Both groups, represented in their actions by Oisin Collins SC, instructed by solicitor Aoife O’Connell, have brought judicial review actions against An Bord Pleanála.

Both challenges are brought on grounds including that the board’s decisions were contrary to its own inspector’s recommendations.

In the first of the two unrelated actions the Pairc Mhuire Residents Saggart are challenging the board’s decision last May to grant permission to CK Hutchinson Networks Ireland for a new 20-meter-high structure carrying telecommunications equipment and floodlights located at St Mary’s GAA club, Pairc Mhuire in Saggart.

The proposed development will replace an existing nearby 16m high telecommunications structure.

The group’s concerns about the proposed development, which is close to a local school include noise, lack of public consultation with locals and health issues.

The group say that the board granted permission despite the fact its own inspector recommended that planning should be refused.

The group claims that the board’s decision is unreasonable and there is no evidence that it had any regard to matters it is required to do by law.

They further claim that the board’s decision was silent regarding requirements to carry out either an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) or an Appropriate Assessment (AA) of the proposed new mast.

The Pairc Mhuire Residents seek an order quashing the board’s decision to grant planning permission for the mast.

They also seek a declaration from the court that the development is contrary to the EU Directives on EIAs and AAs.

They have added the proposed developer of the mast, Hutchinson Networks as a notice party to their action.

In the second action to come before the court the Kingswood Heights Mast Objection Committee claims that in November of last year without any advance public warning or notice to locals, a mast was erected on public open lands owned by the Council.

The committee claims that following investigations, it discovered that South Dublin Couny Council had granted a licence for the mast under Section 254 of the 2000 Planning and Development Act.

The licence was granted to Cignal Infrastructure Ltd to operate the mast at Sylvan Drive, Kingswood.

The council’s decision to grant the licence was appealed to An Bord Pleanála.

In this instance an inspector appointed by the board recommended that the application for a licence for the mast be refused. However, despite the inspector’s recommendations the board dismissed the appeal.

The committee claims the decision is flawed and should be set aside on grounds including that section 254 of the 2000 Act cannot be applied to this development.

They also claim the decision is contrary to fair procedures, natural and constitutional justice.

As a result, the committee, which cites a lack of public consultations as one of its key concerns, has brought an action seeking to have the board’s decision to dismiss the appeal quashed.

They also seek declarations from the court including that the decision has no legal effect, that it is inconsistent with other decisions made by the board in similar other developments.

They have also added the developer, as a notice party to their action.

Both matters came before Mr Justice Anthony Barr, who on an ex-parte basis, granted the groups permission to bring the actions. The actions will return before the courts in December.

TAGS
Share This