An entrepreneur who converted his childhood dwelling into a pizza establishment in Dublin 4 has been instructed to fork out just above €7,000 because of infringements towards urban planning laws and needs to implement many changes in order to maintain income.
Earlier this year, Basil Whelan, recognised as Basil Pizza of Ringsend Road, was prosecuted by Dublin City Council (DCC) due to his failure to adhere to an enforcement notice from 2018 pertaining to his end gable pizza shop.
The case brought forward by the Dublin District Court was postponed, and Mr Whelan was summoned to a court hearing under Judge Anthony Halpin.
The accused was held accountable for a violation under Section 154 of the Planning and Development Act, 2000, for neglecting to take action as specified by the council.
The municipal body had insisted on the termination of the ground floor of the property, located at 95 Ringsend Road, Dublin 4, inclusive of the frontal and lateral open areas, being used as a eatery with takeaway service.
Whelan was instructed to dismantle the outdoor seating areas, fixtures and fittings from the frontal and lateral open areas, as well as the boundary fencing from the face of the building.
DCC’s solicitor, Michael Quinlan, communicated to Judge Halpin that the defendant was overseas during the initial stages of the case yet had been present in court to acknowledge the council’s demand.
The solicitor expressed his understanding that Mr Whelan was “prepared to make a commitment”.
The defending barrister stated that his client would provide a commitment under oath “to the council’s satisfaction and to resolve the issue”.
The court was informed that in March, a €500 penalty had been imposed alongside orders to cover €6,604 in charges and to fully abide by the initial enforcement notice within a quarter of a year.
Mr Quinlan clarified that Mr Whelan had not met these requirements according to the council’s position, however he added, “Judge, I anticipate Mr Whelan will pledge to comply”.
In response to the judge’s inquiry, Mr. Whelan affirmed, “I do, your honour”. Judge Halpin allotted him time until the first day of January to adhere to the requirements of the enforcement notification, to which the operator of the pizzeria responded, “That’s acceptable”. The council’s legal representative chimed in, clarifying for the court’s understanding, “In this case, judge, either Mr. Whelan will execute the necessary tasks or halt his business activities on the first day of January. It’s basically an either/or scenario.” The case proceedings were postponed until the 14th of January to ensure his compliance.