Menu
Ireland's political and cultural magazine
10 July 2022
T
HE DEPUTY chairman of An Bord
Pleanála (ABP), Paul Hyde, signed a
controversial permission for a
development in, Ratoath, County
Meath, which was originally based on
an invalid planning application.
Mr Hyde, who has stepped down from his role
while inquiries continue into other decisions he
made as a board member of ABP, signed o on
a decision in March 2020 to amend a road junc-
tion at Moulden Bridge, Ratoath. The road
junction is part of the Ratoath Outer Relief Road
and was designed to provide access to a 128-
house estate built by Sherwood Homes
(Ratoath) Ltd., owned by local builder, Luc
Hemeryck.
The decision to grant permission overruled
the view of ABP inspector, Karen Kenny, who rec-
ommended against giving planning permission
for a road junction that had been granted by
Meath County Council in 2016. Ms Kenny carried
out an inspection of the application following an
Hyde-bound
By Frank Connolly
A planning permission for a road junction
in Ratoath signed by Paul Hyde did not
follow inspector’s recommendation that
the application had been invalid
objection by local man, John Scott, to the road
junction.
Following her inspection in November 2019,
Kenny contended that the “lack of clarity in
respect of the extent of the works and..in respect
of existing road layout in the area raises a pro-
cedural issue under Article 23 of the Planning
and Development regulations”.
The regulations require that land adjoining
the site and which is “under the control of the
applicant or the person who owns the land
which is the subject of the application shall be
outlined in blue and any wayleaves shall be
shown in yellow” in the maps accompanying the
planning application.
According to Kenny and the objector, John
Scott, this condition was not met in the original
planning application to MCC which, she said had
“deemed the submitted plans and particulars to
constitute a valid planning application in accord-
ance with the provisions of the Planning and
Development Regulations”.
However, she recommended a decision that
would have said that “on the basis of the sub-
missions made in connection with the planning
application and appeal, it appears to the Board
that the planning application made to the Coun-
cil was invalid on the grounds that the
requirements of Article 23 1(a) of the Planning
and Development Regulations 2001, as
amended, are not met”.
In her recommendation to the Board, Kenny
said that procedural issues that arose under the
Regulations were “in respect of 1). The site
boundary; and 2) the detail provided in relation
to the existing road layout in the vicinity of the
land to which the application relates”.
“Works that form an integral part of the pro-
posed road junction to include a pedestrian and
cycle crossing, turning lanes and signals are
outside of the red line boundary and do not
therefore form part of the subject application.
On inspection, it was also apparent that the site
layout plan does not detail the existing road
layout in the vicinity of the site”.
She also noted that the submitted plans did
The Inspector wrote:
‘Works that form an
integral part of the
proposed road junction do
form part of the subject
application and the site
layout plan does not detail
the existing road layout in
the vicinity of the site”
Rchel Kenny
NEWS
July 2022 11
not include details of an approved junction
upgrade close to the site and therefore did not
provide sucient detail to allow her to carry out
a full assessment in respect of existing and pro-
posed road layouts for the area.
Ten months before her inspection, in January
2019, Mr Hemeryck, his colleagues in Sherwood
Homes Ltd. and his professional advisors met
with the ABP Director of Planning, Rachel Kenny
and with the MCC senior planners, Wendy Bag-
nell and Billy Joe Padden, in relation to his
proposed housing development.
The minutes of the meeting do not include
specific mention of the road junction and the
apparently invalid planning application for it.
In a decision to grant permission in early
2020, for an amended proposal for the provision
of a “signalised junction and associated works”
at Moulden Bridge, Paul Hyde signed a decision
saying that the original application made to the
planning authority “was valid on the grounds
that the requirements of Article 23 (1) (a) of the
Planning and Development Regulations 2001,
as amended, are met”.
Hyde wrote: “The Board considers that the
requirements of Article 23 of those Regulations
are met and that there is sucient clarity and
detail in relation to the works proposed under
the subject application”.
Following a further meeting of the board on
30 March, 2020, Hyde signed the decision later
that day. He said the decision to grant permis-
sion was justified following the submission of
the amended plans submitted to ABP in January,
2020. This was implicit acceptance that the orig-
inal plans to which an objection might have
been made would have been deficient in allow-
ing a potential objection to assess whether an
onjection would be justified. Without an objec-
tion an appeal is not possible. Hyde had also
signed o on the original decision by ABP in
November 2016 to grant permission for the stra-
tegic housing development and road
construction by Sherwood Homes which gener-
ated the need for the junction.
The decision of May 2020 also appears to
ignore the argument made by Mr Scott in his
appeal of the original permission, as accepted
by Karen Kenny in her recommendation, that the
original planning application was not available
for public viewing after it was first submitted in
2015. However, Kenny said this was a matter for
the planning authority, MCC, and “cannot be
addressed by the Board in this appeal”. Again
it is possible potential objectors (and therefore
appellants) were deterred by not being able to
see the original planning application.
It has further emerged that ownership of
some of the lands which were transferred by
Sherwood Homes to MCC in relation to the road
and housing development are disputed. In a
letter from Staines Law, in May 2020, to MCC on
behalf of Yvonne and James Everard of Ratoath,
the solicitors stated that their clients are the
owners of unregistered property which has
been included in the development. In general
lands not in the ownership of an applicant for
planning permission may be included in an
application provided it does not result in a frivo-
lous application having to be considered.
Their clients, the solicitors said, have insisted
that a portion of the lands acquired by the Coun-
cil from Sherwood for the Ratoath Outer Relief
Road was never owned by the company and that
James Everard “is registered in the Registry of
Deeds” as the owner. The 0.157 hectares of land
at Jamestown, Ratoath was subsequently trans-
ferred in April 2020 by the Council to Howardwell
Ltd, a company connected to Sherwood, for a
consideration of €1 under Section 183 of the
Local Government Act, 2001.
Independent councillor in Ratoath, Gillian
Toole, has told Village that there are “significant
issues” as a consequence of the decision by
ABP and Mr Hyde to ‘overrule’ the inspector’s
report by Karen Kenny, particularly given the
current inquiries into decisions made by the
Board over a number of years.
“I think there are serious questions over the
manner in which the Inspector’s report was not
Ownership of some of the lands
which were transferred by Sherwood
Homes to MCC in relation to the
road and housing development are
disputed by Yvonne and James
Everard, though this is not terminal
for an application
followed by the Board and Mr Hyde, particularly
in light of everything that has been alleged with
An Bord Pleanála. There are significant issues in
relation to the site, including the placement of
the boundary, which Karen Kenny raised in her
report and have not been addressed. In relation
to the claim of ownership by James Everard, I
have seen the deeds in his name. The question
is what due diligence was carried out by the
Council in relation to the ownership of the lands
before they acquired them from Sherwood”, Gil-
lian Toole said.
Councillor Toole said that she raised her con-
cerns about the Section 183 disposal in May
2020 and informed the Council of the title deeds
in possession of James Everard. The transfer to
Howardwell went ahead despite her appeal for
a thorough examination of the land ownership.
MCC has said that its solicitor has confirmed
that “no notification has been received from the
Property Registration Authority in relation to a
boundary dispute” relating to the lands it
acquired from Sherwood Homes (Ratoath) Ltd.
It also said in a letter to councillors on Ratoath
Municipal District, including Gillian Toole, in
May 2020 that the company has claimed that it
is “not aware of any boundary or land dispute in
relation to the lands they provided for the
scheme”.
Kren Kenny, former ABP inspecor
