The Moore Street Preservation Trust has lodged an objection to the planning application by Hammerson to retain a car park at the rear of O’Connell Street which it has been operating without planning permission since 2021.
The group says that it learnt the Moore Lane Car Park was operating without planning permission in November 2022 and is managed by Dublin Central GP Ltd who are currently in the process of re-developing large parts of Moore Street and the surrounding area.
Dublin Central GP Ltd are working on behalf of UK developer Hammerson, which owns several sites on Moore Street.
In a statement, the MSPT said Dublin Central GP Ltd “hurriedly” submitted to retain the car park in one of its planning applications for the street.
“A planning application was submitted to Dublin City Council on March 20, 2017 and sought temporary planning permission for use as a car park for four and a half years,” a spokesperson said.
“The council granted planning permission on June 22, 2017 but for a period of only four years.
“The four years for the grant of permission ended on June 21, 2021.”
The trust says Dublin Central GP Ltd “has been riding roughshod over the planning laws without a single word of criticism from Dublin City Council since June 2021, over 19 months ago.”
It also says it contacted the enforcement section of Dublin City Council “concerning the illegal use of the property as a car park and the council have contacted the owner.”
Also in its objection, the trust says: “The applicant refers to being actively engaged with Dublin City Council ‘progressing a series of planning applications for the redevelopment of a majority of the urban block between O’Connell Street Upper and Moore Lane.’”
However, the group says that much of the engagement the developer has had with the local authority has been to lodge appeals against its decisions.
“It is noteworthy that the most recent active engagement with the City Council not referred to by the applicants consists of the applicant issuing legal proceedings against Dublin City Council in a judicial review challenge against the democratic decision of the elected members to add buildings and structures directly linked to the 1916 Rising to the Record of Protected Structures.”