Conor McGregor apartment plans for site of Marble Arch pub in Drimnagh rejected by planners

An Bord Pleanála has refused permission for a 113-unit apartment block in Dublin 12

Conor McGregor’s Emrajare Ltd mixed-use scheme proposed the demolition of the Marble Arch pub in Drimnagh. Photograph: David Sleator
Conor McGregor’s Emrajare Ltd mixed-use scheme proposed the demolition of the Marble Arch pub in Drimnagh. Photograph: David Sleator

An Bord Pleanála has delivered a knockout blow to plans by Conor McGregor for a multimillion euro eight-storey, 113-unit apartment block in the MMA fighter’s home area of Drimnagh, Dublin.

In a decision issued on Friday, the appeals board roundly rejected Mr McGregor’s Emrajare Ltd mixed-use scheme that proposed the demolition of the Marble Arch pub that Mr McGregor purchased for a reported €1.5-€2 million three years ago.

Emrajare’s large scale residential development (LRD) application was to include the construction of a three-to-eight storey, 113-unit apartment scheme, a restaurant/bar/cafe, gym and retail unit on a 0.72 acre site at Benbulbin Road, Drimnagh.

The Marble Arch plan consisted of 57 two-bed units, 53 one-bed units and three studios.

READ MORE

An Bord Pleanála dismissed an appeal by McGregor’s Emrajare against a previous planning refusal from Dublin City Council in January.

More than 20 objections were lodged by locals and the appeals board refused planning permission on three separate grounds.

It also rejected Mr McGregor’s bid to secure permission by offering to reduce the scale of the scheme by more than one third.

Council refuses planning permission for Conor McGregor hotel in HowthOpens in new window ]

It found the scheme would provide a significantly excessive density of units per hectare and concluded that, due to the lack of private amenity space for a significant number of the proposed apartments, it would be an inappropriate form of development in its location.

The board stated it would provide substandard residential amenity and would seriously injure the existing amenities of the area.

Due to the height scale, massing and density at the prominent corner site, it said, the scheme would constitute overdevelopment. It cited significant overbearing and overlooking, especially of the existing houses on Galtymore Road.

As part of the appeal, Mr McGregor had put forward an alternative 72-apartment, six-storey apartment block scheme that was a 36 per cent decrease on the original plan.

The appeals board noted the revision but considered it had insufficient detail to give it the necessary consideration.

The board noted, in particular, the lack of floor plans, Housing Quality Assessment and other documentation that would be required.