A DEVELOPMENT company has been fined just €1,000 for illegally demolishing a 19th-century convent that was in the process of being listed.Despite being twice ordered by Dublin City Council to re-instate the Presentation convent in Terenure after knocking it in November 2006, Kimpton Vale Ltd failed to do so and pleaded guilty to illegally razing the building yesterday.
District Court Judge David McHugh, who described the convent as a "fine" building, ordered the company to pay a fine of €1,000 and costs of €3,000.
Kimpton Vale is run by businessman Laurence Keegan, who lives in Castleknock in North Dublin.
His company has built a number of developments on the northside of Dublin, most notably at Collegewood and Collegefort in Castleknock. It recently completed the Windmill development in Porterstown, also in Dublin 15.
Revenue
The developer maintains a low profile and has never publicly commented on the demolition of the Presentation convent.
Mr Keegan was a director with Lido Construction until January 2002, nine months before it made a €7m settlement with the Revenue Commissioners for under-declaring corporation tax and VAT.
At the time, it was the biggest published settlement in the history of the State. As a result, Mr Keegan was restricted as a company director for five years from January 2004.
In 2002, he also made a personal settlement totalling almost €84,000 for under-declaration of income tax. Of that sum, €45,000 was interest and penalties.
Although the Presentation Convent was knocked in November 2006, the slow pace of the enforcement process meant the case was only heard yesterday.
Dublin City Council served two enforcement notices compelling the company to re-instate the building, which were not complied with.
Local Labour TD Mary Upton said the fine was "ludicrous", and said the city council needed to review the situation where a developer could illegally demolish a building and pay such a paltry fine.
"I think the fine is ludicrous. The knocking of a habitable dwelling warrants a much more serious sanction but it is a matter for the courts," she said.
"The sanction is so light relative to the value of the land. It seems to me that residents of the area have very few rights relative to the developer."
The 1830s convent was part of a three-acre site on Terenure Road West which was sold for for €15m in April 2006 .
The convent was described as being in good condition at the time of the sale, but homebuilders Kimpton Vale Ltd razed it on November 4, just two weeks after Dublin City Council began the process of adding it to the Record of Protected Structures (RPS).
Bulldozers moved in to demolish the convent at 7am and by the time a council official arrived at 9.30am, so much had been razed that the remainder had to be demolished on public safety grounds.
Photographs
Charges taken under the 2000 Planning and Development Act were struck out against the company's principal, Laurence Keegan, but Kimpton Vale Ltd -- with an address at Collegefort, Carpenterstown Road, Castleknock, Dublin 15 -- pleaded guilty.
The court heard that Planning Enforcement Officer Eamonn Higgins visited the site on November 9, 2007, and took photographs of the remains.
The convent has not been rebuilt, and a fresh planning application seeking permission to build 47 homes on the site -- including 32 four-bedroom houses -- has been lodged with the council.
That application -- which has a number of objectors -- was placed on hold pending the outcome of yesterday's case.
The company said it believed it was not required to seek permission to knock the building, and it was not a protected structure. Re-instatement of the convent was "not practical", the council said.
Judge McHugh ordered the company to pay a fine of €1,000 and costs of €3,009.05.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Disclaimer
No responsibility or liability shall attach itself to either myself or to the blogspot ‘Clerical Whispers’ for any or all of the articles placed here.
The placing of an article hereupon does not necessarily imply that I agree or accept the contents of the article as being necessarily factual in theology, dogma or otherwise.
Sotto Voce
(Source: II)