Michelle Morrison had “no confidence” that her neighbour’s proposed landscaping scheme would provide privacy for her home in Dalkey, Dublin, the High Court heard yesterday.
In an affidavit, Ms Morrison, wife of singer Van Morrison, said she had reluctantly taken proceedings against her local council over its alleged failure to protect her privacy through the planning system because she had "no other means" of protecting the amenity of her property and the privacy of her family.
Ms Morrison, Kilross House, Sorrento Road, said she strongly disputed claims by a tree expert retained by her neighbours, Mary and Desmond Kavanagh, that their proposed shrub and tree planting scheme would provide privacy.
Today was the third day of proceedings by Ms Morrison against Dun Laoghaire Rathdown Co Council in which she alleges the council failed to protect her privacy when it accepted a notice from the Kavanaghs last September that they were in compliance with a planning permission issued the previous August for their 7,500 square foot home, Mount Alverno.
Talks to try to resolve the dispute failed and the case resumed today.
Ms Morrison is seeking leave to quash the compliance order on grounds there was alleged unauthorised development of the driveway to Mount Alverno at the time. She claims the decision only provided for the planting of shrubs between the properties when trees had been stipulated as part of three planning permissions issued to the Kavanaghs.
While the council issued enforcement notices against the Kavanaghs and most of those matters were later rectified by subsequent applications, it was anticipated the council would bring a prosecution but this had not occurred to date, she said.
She did not understand a process whereby her neighbours could obtain a compliance order for a drawing which "clearly indicates unauthorised development", including the driveway. Replacement tree planting cannot take place in accordance with planning permissions until a valid compliance notice is made, she said.
She disputed claims by Mark Boyle, the Kavanagh's landscaping expert, they were committed to achieving a high standard of landscaping screening using trees and shrubs.
"I do not have any confidence in these assurances", she said. She regarded them as "disingenuous in the extreme" because they did not even take account of the fact eight trees had been removed since last September.
Those trees were "clearly marked for retention" in the original landscape proposals, known as the "Murray Plan" which was submitted as part of the planning applications, Ms Morrison said.
During yesterday's hearing, Eamon Galligan SC, for Ms Morrision, said she had not opposed the Kavanagh's planning applications and had entered into discussions with them over their plans. Mr Justice Hanna remarked she was "trying to be a constructive neighbour".
Counsel read affidavits from tree experts for both sides in which there was considerable dispute over what was required.
Mr Galligan said there was a difference of interpretation about the Murray Plan which identified certain trees for retention, removal and replanting. The Kavanaghs had argued the Murray Plan was later overtaken with the "Ledbetter Drawings" submitted as part of compliance applications which they later submitted.
Counsel said it was the view of Ms Morrison's expert, arborolgist Joseph McConville, certain trees should not have been removed and that shrubs like bay laurel and cherry laurel — which are currently on the site in pots — did not constitute replacement trees and would not provide the level of privacy Ms Morrison had enjoyed.
The trees that needed to be replaced — including sycamore, poplar and cypress — provided a level of screening that shrubs could not, counsel said.
The case continues.