Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Couple Ordered to Demolish House - any update?

1616264666771

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 37,416 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    I'd also add that the department in Meath County Council which deals with people dumping rubbish isn't the same department that deals with planning applications. Two different departments. Therefore, no relevance to this discussion.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,397 ✭✭✭✭bucketybuck




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,284 ✭✭✭bcklschaps


    Because they thought they were above the laws that pertain to plebs like the rest of us and that they would get away with it. Arrogant feckers.

    Glad the house is being demolished. If it was allowed stay standing it would set a dangerous precedent and effectively make planning laws in Ireland irrelevant.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 45,532 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    If that is the case, it just highlights how poor planning control in general is.

    Would you be happy with someone from the council spending their entire working day driving around looking for stuff that never got planning permission or what?
    The only thing highlighted by this case is that someone who has been turned down can circle back and go through the steps again and that avenue should be locked down so that the bulldozers would have appeared after a few years rather than a few decades.

    Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/ .



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,202 ✭✭✭✭anewme


    Yes they come across as dreadfully entitled brazen people and certainly are not doing themselves any favours in any of the interviews. And trying to twist the system meant they eventually ran out of road.

    I find the images of the demolition fairly harsh though - must be a visual thing - can read about it, but I would not gloat over the images - even though I know it was the only result.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 671 ✭✭✭Meeoow


    Kippure, main st ardee, nera Investments. Very easy to Google, you lefties expect everything done for ye.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,757 ✭✭✭dubrov


    No one will listen to what you are saying if you keep throwing abuse



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,956 ✭✭✭adaminho


    There is a demolition order in place for this but it's currently being appealed in the courts. I don't see how it's any different to the Murrays case.



  • Subscribers, Paid Member Posts: 44,924 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    You're incorrect in the nera investments one. That was closed down by enforcement action from laois county council

    Kippure had already found to be unauthorized by an bord pleanala a couple of months back.

    It should also be noted that the portion on the kippure estate subject to the unauthorized action is not contracted as IPAS center, so incorrect here again.

    Ardee is bandit country generally



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 14,649 ✭✭✭✭JupiterKid


    Absolutely untrue, local authorities have been demolishing illegally built houses and other buildings since the early 1970s. They rarely garner media attention.

    Including this case in the link below in 1973 where a developer built two new houses in Templeogue without planning permission:



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,804 ✭✭✭JVince


    Ipas have exempted development status (the gript won't give you that information)

    kippure has had action taken against it for building houses (you might have missed that element) - and the action is a lot quicker than the Navan planning here

    If you take your information from the gript, you'll find its mostly wrong

    In the case of the Navan house - it was built in flagrant breach of planning and done so purposely. It will send a message to everyone else who builds in flagrant breach of planning.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 45,532 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    ...the gript…

    It is actually just pronounced as "grift"!

    Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/ .



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,051 ✭✭✭Kaisr Sose


    Its well known that staff shortages are the issue with the lack of enforcement. So the councils leave it to the public to make a complaint or report something. Hardly robust or fit for purpose enforcement. Kinda like our to roads policing .. lots of laws, but minimal policing.

    Planning enforcement is much more robust in the UK. They even turn up on site and inspect works are being built according to the permission granted. Here we rely on self certification, which has caused a very big problem re compliance with Building Regs (eg all the apartments with fire defect issues that the tax payer will have to fork out on is directly down to a lack of enforcement)

    So, yes, I do believe council staff tasked with planning enforcement could easily be more proactive.

    I agree that this situation should have been resolved within 2 years. Again , that's about all it would take in the UK.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 45,532 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Ok so to follow up on your point...

    If I recall correctly, the council acted on foot of a complaint they received. It was not their own processes that picked this up.

    ...how exactly would the processes within Meath Co Co with a full team of planners have been any different in how they approached this case?

    This house is* down a lane, already off the beaten track so generally not noticeable.

    * soon to be "was" 😎

    Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/ .



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,357 ✭✭✭Montage of Feck


    Android auto correct is shilling for apple now?

    🙈🙉🙊



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,679 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Buildings with no planning permission should be dealt with by being totally blocked in and inaccessible with the building of unplanned buildings all around them.

    Nice way to show these people why planning permission is important.

    That's one of the biggest takeaways from this case. The totally unfair access posh people have to the media. Same with that lad who was camped outside his family mansion claiming he was homeless and same with the Bourkes. When it comes to south Dublin planning problems places like the Irish Times seem to think it's a national issue like with a recent rugby pitch upgrade.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 75,480 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Checking sites of failed applications may actually be quite fruitful i guess.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,051 ✭✭✭Kaisr Sose


    ...how exactly would the processes within Meath Co Co with a full team of planners have been any different in how they approached this case?

    It must be pedantic time for you…?

    It's pretty obvious the process and outcome would have been the same. My point is, they /other councils are not resourced sufficiently. What if nobody complained ?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,739 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    They are kind off right. IPAS generally do not require traditional planning permission due to temporary exemptions. Under regulations, specifically S.I. 376 of 2023, the state can use certain structures for accommodating asylum seekers without typical planning procedures until December 31, 2028, to meet urgent



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 7,234 ✭✭✭secman


    Met Eireann have issued an extreme Dust warning for parts of Meath today........



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 4,910 ✭✭✭chooseusername


    Indeed,

    Murrays applied for permission for a modest bungalow in May 2006. This was refused in July 2006.

    8 months later they were applying for retention for the same site.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,798 ✭✭✭Quitelife


    Lucky these people aren’t in Gaza , Israel would have demolished their house and killed all members of the family years ago with a massive bomb from the sky



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,589 ✭✭✭standardg60


    That's still not a question of resources. Moreso it's a reflection of a mentality, mostly rurally, that reporting anyone to the authorities for illegal behavior is a no no.

    You just have to look at the support the Murrays got from the locals in the last few days. It's a legacy of occupation to my mind, and the general negative view of 'them up in Dublin' telling us what to do.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,067 ✭✭✭Caquas


    There was no mass protest in support of the Murrays. The Murrays made a big deal of "support from the locals" but they paid good money to their neighbours for land that was sanitised. Clearing out the house built there was the least those neighbours could do.😎



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 45,532 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Do despite you blaming under-resourcing in the council, you're now confirming that it had nothing to do with the council resourcing 🙄

    Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/ .



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 19,331 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    And a lot of the initial checking is made easier these days with satellite imagery and drone technology.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 2,961 ✭✭✭dixiefly


    While I would have very little sympathy with the couple themselves I would feel some sympathy with their children seeing the house that was their home all the years growing up being knocked.

    There are a few aspects that seem strange to me.

    1. The couple themselves - I am surprised that they both seemed to be on board with it. It's strange that both were on board with such a bizarre course of action, often you would think it as one or he other.
    2. Surely they had friends and relatives whom they confided in when building the bigger house - were none of those people able to persuade them otherwise?
    3. Rose Murray called the building a "mistake". I find it difficult to describe it as a mistake as the actions were carried out over probably a year in which they would have worked with architect / surveyor / groundworks / building / fitting out of the house and all of the subsequent appeals etc. I find it difficult to describe all that as a "mistake".


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 335 ✭✭davebuck


    Any chance MCC might repairs the thousands of pot holes around the local roads with the rubbles from this charade! I don't think so the Muppets on the council can't think that far ahead.

    The sad fact is we're paying for this problem with no benefit what so ever for the local tax payer.

    Who's signing off on this or are MCC using the court as an easy opt out legally?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 7,234 ✭✭✭secman


    What's upholding planning laws got to do with pot holes !



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,589 ✭✭✭standardg60


    Allegedly the son when asked if he'd somewhere to stay he replied this is my home, this is where I stay. He was completely conditioned to state this, the fruit don't fall far from the tree.

    The children are 19-24 ffs, the idea that they're innocent victims and didn't see this coming is farcical. Mammy effed off solely to play the won't someone think of the children card.

    Re your first point, there was only one spouse directing this, her.



Advertisement
Advertisement