Planning Permission

Ginger83

Hi, we were refused pp this week on the ground that they say there are too many waste water treatment systems in one area. The nearest house is 300metres away. Has anyone ever come across this.It sound like a bull**** excuse to me.

Salmon

Did you look for full pp or outline pp. My brother was turned down for the same reason! The councillor reckoned that they only refused him because he had looked for outline. He reckons if my bro re-applies for full pp with a waste water treatment plant he'll get it! Ginger, did your application have a waste water treatment plant in it?

damiand

300m seems like a substantial distance from an adjoining dwelling. What was the full reasons for resusal Salmon & Ginger83.

Dont mind your councillor, full of ****. You still have you right to appeal the decision to An Bord Pleanala.

You can view your file at the offices of the Planning Authority during office hours. A report should state why you were refused and expand on the reason for refusal, that being too many treatment systems in an area.

Salmon

Damiand,

Yeah he has seen the final report and the reason for refusal was that the council felt that there were too many septic tanks in the same area! I was just saying above that the councillor said that after talking to the county manger there was a good chance of getting the planning once there was a new application with a treatment plant on it! I know its a little different than the ops problem but I just said i'd throw that into the mix!!

damiand

Salmon

Trust me County Managers do not get that involved in planning applications to the extent that they advised Councillors that one treatment may be better than another. Smells wrong. pardon the pun

It sounds if your brother paid (big) money for a really bad technician who made money (is going to make money) from a repeat planning application.

The other thing about public health/ septic tank reasons for refusal is that they are about protecting drinking water quality.

Naux

Nowadays I think that nearly all of the councils prefer to see waste water treatment plants in new applications rather than septic tanks. I assume if the OP resubmits plans with a treatment plant then everything should be Ok.

quattfa3

Just to agree with damiand and in disagreement with Naux.

The council has a responsibility to consider the impact of new developments on water abstraction in source protection zones. These areas can be defined in a number of ways, but one type of arbitrary delineation, used in the absence of detailed hydrogeological mapping, is distance. 1000m to 300m from a public water supply or a group water scheme is defined as the Outer Source Protection Zone and within 300m is defined as the Inner Source Protection Zone. Regardless of how it was delineated, your development falls within one of these zones.

If I were in your shoes I would try to arrange a meeting or a phone call to the planner or environmental health officer in charge of this application and try to see if any solution is possible.

If they are adamant that there isn't any easily available option open to you. I would recommend contracting a reputable environmental engineering firm to carry out hydrogeological investigations for you in order to put forward scientific evidence that would satisfy the local authority that the accumulation of significant nitrate and/or microbiological contamination is unlikely.

This could cost you a substantial sum of money so you have to ask yourself is it worth it. The geologists should be able to give you odds for success before investigations begin and because of the location of your site success is not assured. You could be throwing good money after bad.

The warning is: Paying big money for sites without planning permission, even where it seems like a gimme, is foolhardy.

Best of luck

muffler

damiand wrote:

It sounds if your brother paid (big) money for a really bad technician who made money (is going to make money) from a repeat planning application.

A really bad technician???

How do you know it was a technician who carried out the work?

Ginger83

The refusal said "The development will consist of an excessive concentration of waste water treatment systems in a limited area" The area is poorly drained so we went for a Klargester reedbed system, I cannot understand their refusal unless it comes under issues they have not stated.

Mellor

muffler wrote:

A really bad technician???

How do you know it was a technician who carried out the work?

Assumption, its great isn't it.

people always make assumptions like that. a draftsman with a book of house plans would be more likely. then again alot of people cant tell the difference between either of them, or an architects assistant too.