‘Unauthorised’ extension at Sutton beachfront property faces likely demolition order, judge rules
The owner of a period home in north Co Dublin is facing a court order to demolish a large “unauthorised” extension to his beachfront property after a judge ruled against him in a years-long planning row.The proceedings against Philip Farrelly, a businessman based in Sutton, came to a head in the Circuit Court on Monday when Judge John O’Connor handed down a ruling in favour of Fingal County Council.The property at the centre of the row is on Burrow Road, a premium residential strip near Howth where the late rock star Phil Lynott had a home. Burrow Beach, famed for its golden sand and scenic views of Ireland’s Eye, is to the rear of the home.Fingal issued an enforcement notice to Mr Farrelly in March 2020, in the early days of the Covid pandemic, that required him to remove the unauthorised structure within four months. That did not happen. But the local authority waited until November 2024 to initiate court action against him. READ MORE‘Things went horribly wrong’: How life changed for former TD Colm Keaveney Storm Chandra live: People evacuated from homes after intense flooding; major M50 disruption If Trump goes after Ireland, he will also destroy a lot of US wealthWhite House backtracks initial claims about Alex Pretti after intense backlashThe judge has now made a declaration saying the structure was an “unauthorised development”, citing legislation and rulings of the superior courts. “This court then must make an order to effect that declaration, which will involve appropriate demolition works and restoration works,” the ruling said. At issue in the case was a new two-storey extension measuring about 129m at the rear of the dwelling, a separate single-storey extension, a lean-to roof, another single-storey extension and a wooden fence. The council sought an order for demolition within four months and an order to “restore and land with topsoil and grass seed” within six months.Noting Mr Farrelly has asked to be allowed make a proposal to Fingal, the judge deferred making the order for demolition until another hearing on March 2nd. The preliminary view set out in the ruling was that “costs follow the event”, which suggests Mr Farrelly also faces having to pay the costs of the long-running case. However, the judge gave the parties three weeks to make a written submission if they disagree. The fact that the authorised structure was left standing for years led Mr Farrelly’s next-door neighbour Simon Revill to repeatedly demand action from Fingal to enforce its 2020 order.Fingal argued the extension did not have planning permission and was not an exempted development under planning regulations. The local authority also cited a decision of the former An Bord Pleanála, now known as An Coimisiún Pleanála, which found the development was not exempt. Mr Farrelly opposed the council’s case, arguing the dwelling and extension works of the past decade had been developed “within planning limitations” and amounted to exempted development. He noted the council waited until late 2024 before taking the case against him, arguing it was not an application that had shown any urgency. He also argued the council “has prosecuted the proceedings at a leisurely pace since then, waiting seven months to file a replying affidavit, for example”.He asked the judge to refuse the council’s application, saying the case should be adjourned pending his request to the council for retention permission.
