An Ennis couple withdrew their objection to a €20 million housing scheme after the developers paid them over €100,000 and gave them two free sites, it has emerged.
However, the payment to Mr Vincent and Ms Ann Coffey of Clon Road, Ennis, has not stopped them from successfully appealing against a subsequent application by the same developers, Luxury Homes (Galway) Ltd, to build a €10 million development on a nearby site in Ennis.
An Bord Pleanála yesterday upheld the Coffeys' appeal against the decision by Clare Co Council to grant planning permission to the company for 88 residential units on Ennis's Quin Road.
These homes were planned to go next to the 154 residential units already built by Luxury Homes (Galway) Ltd in the area.
In that case, the developers pressed ahead with the scheme after the Coffeys withdrew their appeal to An Bord Pleanála against the proposal.
The managing director of Luxury Homes (Galway) Ltd, Mr Sean Cleary, confirmed yesterday that £85,000 (€107,930) was paid to the Coffeys and that they have almost completed building houses on the two sites that they were also given.
The transaction only emerged in correspondence received by An Bord Pleanála while it was adjudicating on the current 88-residential unit development.
The Coffeys objected to the current proposal, pointing out that their lands are used at present as a "Knackery Yard" and that if the housing was permitted, it would seriously impact on the validity of their operation and its continued existence would be seriously at risk.
In response, the developers claimed that the Coffeys' objection to the current development was vexatious and should be dismissed. There is also reference to the payments that resulted in the Coffey's withdrawing their appeal in 1999.
In response, the Coffeys told the appeals board that the legally binding contract between themselves and the developers relating to the previous planning application did not stop them objecting to the new housing scheme.
The letter from the Coffeys states that at no time did they approach the developers with the intention of securing payment of money, gifts, consideration or other inducement by any person.
They claim that they had lodged a valid appeal against the previous application. Subsequently they were approached on a number of occasions by the developers to withdraw the appeal.
The letter stated that the offer from the developers was accepted by the Coffeys as the company was advised that this was the best way to address their concerns rather than taking a risk on the appeal.
The letter claimed the Coffeys were entitled to oppose the new proposal, and they were of the view that no further development of the nature proposed was going to take place in any closer proximity to their business.
Mr Coffey declined to comment yesterday.
However, Mr Cleary of Luxury Homes said: "I respect Mr Coffey's right to appeal, but in view of what occurred in relation to the previous planning application, I would have thought that he would have waived his right to appeal on this occasion."
Mr Cleary remarked that he is now sorry he paid the Coffeys the money and not taken his chances with An Bord Pleanála in relation to the first development.
Ironically, the Coffeys successful appeal may yet provide an unexpected windfall for the developers as the appeals board refused planning permission partly on the grounds that the proposed scheme should be of a higher density.
Mr Cleary confirmed that his company is now to lodge plans for a development of a higher density for the same site.
