Planning issues - post them here MOD WARNING post #1

Mellor

uptowngirly wrote: »

Ah flip - that's how his brother got PP on the land - he was told that the fact that there was a gate there was really important.

It was probably the fact that the existing gate was a good entry, ie has adequet sightlines, and not any old gate being present

uptowngirly

Thanks a million for the clarification Mellor, fingers crossed the sightlines will be ok for us! I got the copy of the OS maps and sent then on to the architect yesterday. We'll need to break an entrance for the best/adequate sightlines in his opinion so am a bit nervous that it might be an issue, but all we can do is wait and see, there's no point guessing!!

Quick question - do we need to list the renewable energies we plan to use for the planning app? I forgot to ask this and we are still having a mare of a time with the air to water pump or geothermal underground debate?

sydthebeat

uptowngirly wrote: »

Thanks a million for the clarification Mellor, fingers crossed the sightlines will be ok for us! I got the copy of the OS maps and sent then on to the architect yesterday. We'll need to break an entrance for the best/adequate sightlines in his opinion so am a bit nervous that it might be an issue, but all we can do is wait and see, there's no point guessing!!

Quick question - do we need to list the renewable energies we plan to use for the planning app? I forgot to ask this and we are still having a mare of a time with the air to water pump or geothermal underground debate?

a piece of advice, put you effort and funds into reducing the need for heat energy.... and not into expensive, low running cost (*gulp) heating systems.

if your dwelling requires minimal heating, in real terms it doesnt matter if that heat energy comes from wood, solid fuel, oil or electricity.

perversly, heat pumps and UFH work best in highly insulated airtight dwellings... but if you go that little bit further with insulation and air tightness, you remove the need for this very expensive installation.

Newgirl

Just wanted to let you know we got our planning, 3rd time lucky, 14 standard conditions. Thanks to everyone who answered the questions I posted here. Now the fun really starts.

muffler

Newgirl wrote: »

Just wanted to let you know we got our planning, 3rd time lucky, 14 standard conditions. Thanks to everyone who answered the questions I posted here. Now the fun really starts.

Congrats, well done.

Its all downhill from here

JuniorB

Newgirl wrote: »

Just wanted to let you know we got our planning, 3rd time lucky, 14 standard conditions. Thanks to everyone who answered the questions I posted here. Now the fun really starts.

Brilliant news Newgirl. One hurdle over anyway ... next the banks!
Best of luck

uptowngirly

Congratulations Newgirl - how exciting!! Hoping to be in the same boat as you in a couple of months, so there's a small bit of the green eyed monster that you're ready to go!

Best of luck and enjoy every bit of it - you only get to build your dream house once!! (well that's what I keep telling my boyfriend while sending him links to Grand Designs!!)

uptowngirly

Hi there!

We have the OS map and our architect is mapping out a site for us (there's 6 acres of road frontage to choose from).

He put the house 23 metres away from the boyfriend's parents house (his brother has a house about the same distance away on the other side). We want to be around 75 metres away from the inlaws but the architect is unsure as to whether the planners would have an issue with this.

Also - what distance can you be from the road - we want to put the house back a bit from a point of view of traffic noise.

What do ye think lads??

rayjdav

Uptowngirly,
Your Architect should refer to your specific CDP, wherein it should state the seperation distance from the public road. Usually these differ whatwith National/Regional/Local road types.
Re the distance from adjoining property, is your site directly adjacent to the in laws? If so, dont see how the council could seriously question it.:rolleyes: On the other hand, if your site is not attached to the boundary of the in laws, then there could be a question of breaking a "streetscape". If you had a pre-planning, for what there worth, this may have been discussed and resolved? The only way in my opinion to get a definitive is to lodge and wait for the Further Information request, because there will be one, regardless.:eek::eek:

uptowngirly

Its Fingal County Council we'll be dealing with!

The site is adjacent to the inlaws - it's a farm so they own the whole area and will sign a site over to us. There is also a septic tank in the field where we want to build hence another reason to move further away than 23 metres!

I'll take a look at the CDP and see what it says re distance from the road - thanks for the heads up on that!

We were advised not to go for a pre-planning meeting and just to submit plans and wait for the further information stuff....

Krispie

uptowngirly wrote: »

There is also a septic tank in the field where we want to build hence another reason to move further away than 23 metres!

Stating the obvious but you cannot contain someone elses septic tank/perc area within the curtilage of your site. I assume your arch has ommitted it from within your boundary?

uptowngirly

Yes he has - sorry for not being clear - the point I was trying to make was that we wanted to be a fair distance away from it!

zelemon

Hi folks,

i have a corner site which is effectively exposed on three sides, can anyone enlighten me as to what the rules are regarding planning exemptions in corner sites?

kind regards,
DM

muffler

zelemon wrote: »

Hi folks,

i have a corner site which is effectively exposed on three sides, can anyone enlighten me as to what the rules are regarding planning exemptions in corner sites?

kind regards,
DM

Im not sure I quite understand what you mean by "three sides" but is it a vacant site or is there a structure of some sort on it?

zelemon

Apologies, there is a house on the site which has a roadway to the west & south & there is a public lane to the east. & an adjoining property to the North, I am looking to extend but don't want to go down the planning line.

muffler

zelemon wrote: »

Apologies, there is a house on the site which has a roadway to the west & south & there is a public lane to the east. & an adjoining property to the North, I am looking to extend but don't want to go down the planning line.

PL5 is an abbreviated version of the standard exemptions. Have a read at that first.

A couple of things to watch out for - if the "adjoining house" is attached (assuming 2 storey here) then the first floor area is restricted a bit - see PL5 above.

When was your house built? Check your planning permission to ensure that the proposed extension does not contravene a condition of the said PP. If its an old house make sure its not a "listed building/protected structure"

Other than that I wouldn't see any major difficulties but Im obviously unaware of the site/property layout. depending on whether its urban or rural the county development plan may require certain building lines.

As is normal in all these situations the best thing is to pop into the local planning office and ask for their opinion also.

The best advice I can give you is not to restrict yourself to keeping the extension as an exempted development. You may well find that the house could be more favorably served by an extension to the side as opposed to the back. Sure, it may cost a little bit to get the PP on it but you could possibly save tenfold on construction costs and also benefit from a more appropriate layout.

mark11272

It is very hard to give advice without further information.

For example the standard exemption is 40sq metres at ground level with no more than 20 sq metres at first floor level for a detached house or 12sq metres at first floor for a semi d or terraced house. However this comes with restrictions for example if the house had ben previously extended without PP since 1st October 1964. Also there are restrictions as to the area of land left after the extension is built, the height of walls, seperation distances, window placement etc.

So if you could give some speific details re house age, pp history, house type, location of of other houses etc, you will get more accurate information.


Check out http://galwayplanningblog.wordpress.com

Corkblowin

Alternatively.....pay an architect / planner to visit to your site and advise you on your options - impossible to do correctly on a forum without pictures, maps etc.

Have them visit the site and write you a letter outlining the issues and the solutions - shouldn't cost much and you'd have certainty - especially if anyone comes asking later on.

Charlie-Bravo

Just doing a planning review for a site in Galway - haven't dealt with any particular rural properties in Galway previously.

This is a very specific question, so I would be grateful for any comments - I note that under the Dev Plan for County Galway, Policy HP16 refers to a CLAR Region 5 in the GTPS - Anyone know where this is? Cannot find it on the GTPS versions 2002. I don't see any later versions. I could always wait for the plannning office to open in the morning but I fear I'll never get someone, like a planner, to tell me what I need to know!

davidhick77

hi, have been refused planning now twicw in last 3 months----why u ask????? the person from the planning dept came out to check the site, went back to office and refused application saying site notice was not up, fair enough i was late putting up the notice, however after re-applying and getting refused for second time for same reason(site notice went straight up this time)...i got suspicious something was not right. seemingly the planning person was looking at an area of land half km away, at opposite end of straight stretch of road to where i hope to build..... they admitted that it was their mistake, and said ive to reapply again. do i have any options other than reapplying in this case? is it possible to use this mistake by council to my advantage in some way towards getting planning...
sorry giving no names other than its in munster.

rayjdav

David,
You have not actually being refused planning as such, just from what you say, your application was invalidated. No consolation I know but at least you are not refused.
I got an invalidation before, admitted totally their fault (no LA name either) and after a lot of arguing, they actually recinded the invalidation. If they as you say have accepted it, try and argue in relation to costs involved re public notice etc. and stick to your guns. Worth a try. Talk to a SEP or someone high, not the admin or validation section.
Now, technically, once it is invalidated and entered on the register, it cannot be undone but, as said above, it was for me.

gman2k

davidhick77 wrote: »

hi, have been refused planning now twicw in last 3 months----why u ask????? the person from the planning dept came out to check the site, went back to office and refused application saying site notice was not up, fair enough i was late putting up the notice, however after re-applying and getting refused for second time for same reason(site notice went straight up this time)...i got suspicious something was not right. seemingly the planning person was looking at an area of land half km away, at opposite end of straight stretch of road to where i hope to build..... they admitted that it was their mistake, and said ive to reapply again. do i have any options other than reapplying in this case? is it possible to use this mistake by council to my advantage in some way towards getting planning...
sorry giving no names other than its in munster.

A 'trick' a lot of people use is to take a picture of the site notice in situ and include this photo with the planning application also.
I also used to have a standard letter included with applications for city locations regarding ongoing checking of the site notice for the necessary durations and making note of vandalism on site removing notices previously etc.
Having said that, if the planner visits and cannot find the notice, then the power is with them. You just need to build up your case strongly from the beginning....

Mono25

Hi

I did do a search but couldnt find anything so sorry if repeating someone else. Also I hope I'm not contravening forum rules I'm only asking for advise not how to fiddle planning laws.

I have been refused planning in Fingal based on family home in RV1 zone but proposed site is in RU apart from that I tick every single box. The family house is literally 300 mtr from the boundary line that divides RV1 & RU. The family home has only been zoned RV1 since 1999 before this it was RU and I have been living there all my life (31 years). Surely there is some sort of leeway in cases like this.

Can anyone help at all

Cheers

rayjdav

Mono25 wrote: »

Hi

I did do a search but couldnt find anything so sorry if repeating someone else. Also I hope I'm not contravening forum rules I'm only asking for advise not how to fiddle planning laws.

I have been refused planning in Fingal based on family home in RV1 zone but proposed site is in RU apart from that I tick every single box. The family house is literally 300 mtr from the boundary line that divides RV1 & RU. The family home has only been zoned RV1 since 1999 before this it was RU and I have been living there all my life (31 years). Surely there is some sort of leeway in cases like this.

Can anyone help at all

Cheers

Mono,
To throw it out to more heads, and to save us having to read the specific Fingal CDP, can you explain, with an extract from same, what RV1 + RV Zones actually are?
The more info the better chance of a resolution for you.;)

Lougar

Hello Ladies and gents. Apologies in advance but I'm new to this! I was just wondering if anyone has ever come across or been in our situation? My Partner and I have applied for planning and are awaiting the decision. However we do not, as of yet, satisfy the 7 year rule. Initially our architect advised us that this should not be a problem and to go ahead with seeking planning permission. We will be living in the area 7 years in July of this year. Our planning decision should be forthcoming at the end of February ( unless a further information request is again made). I understand and appreciate that this legislative provision exists but in anybody's experience or knowledge, is there any leeway? Would there be any possibility that the planner may give provisional permission and state that building may not commence till July or do you think it will be an absolute refusal....?

Thanks in advance

Mono25

rayjdav wrote: »

Mono,
To throw it out to more heads, and to save us having to read the specific Fingal CDP, can you explain, with an extract from same, what RV1 + RV Zones actually are?
The more info the better chance of a resolution for you.;)

oh yeah sorry, just presumed people would know that but why would everyone know fingal's dp. I will get the extracts later on.

cheers

kidsbo

Can anyone help me with this?

A client of mine received outline planning permission in 08 to build a house. One of the conditions attached to the permission said that only the applicant/members of his family could live in the house for a period of 5 years from the date of construction. Subsequently, my client got full planning permission but there was no residency condition about living in the house for 5 years and no condition stating that the development must comply with the outline planning permission. My client now needs to sell the house. His solicitor thinks he might have a problem because of the residency condition on the outline planning permission. I think the full permission supersedes the outline and therefore that there is no active residency condition. The CoCo are of the opinion that there is a residency condition but have indicated they would allow the property to be sold if the purchaser complies with the "local person" criteria. Unfortunately, the buyer is not local.

Any advice / experience on this matter?

sydthebeat

kidsbo wrote: »

Can anyone help me with this?

A client of mine received outline planning permission in 08 to build a house. One of the conditions attached to the permission said that only the applicant/members of his family could live in the house for a period of 5 years from the date of construction. Subsequently, my client got full planning permission but there was no residency condition about living in the house for 5 years and no condition stating that the development must comply with the outline planning permission. My client now needs to sell the house. His solicitor thinks he might have a problem because of the residency condition on the outline planning permission. I think the full permission supersedes the outline and therefore that there is no active residency condition. The CoCo are of the opinion that there is a residency condition but have indicated they would allow the property to be sold if the purchaser complies with the "local person" criteria. Unfortunately, the buyer is not local.

Any advice / experience on this matter?

did your client apply for a new "full" planning permission.... or did they apply for "permission subsequent on the grant of outline"

if it was a new full permission application that that is the "live" permission on site and supercedes any pervious permission. is the dwelling complete?

kidsbo

We had direct experience of this when a client of ours was apppx 6 months short of the 7 year period. We submitted detailed evidence of their history in the area and evidence of their intention to continue living in the area (young children enrolled in local school etc) on the basis of which the planner decided to grant permission. I dont think the planner would conditionalise the grant of permission so that you can't start construction till after the 7 years. However, they might delibeately seek further info in order to extend matters so that any grant of permission will be issued after you have surpassed the 7 year period. That way they are covered and can argue that they applied planning plicy correctly.

kidsbo

No, it was permission consequent. Yes, the dwelling is complete.