Planning issues - post them here MOD WARNING post #1

BryanF

Hailhail1967 wrote: »

Apologies, it genuinely wasn't an attempt to break the law. I just meant was their specifics in the law which would mean I could change my business plan in some way or if it was stone wall, " its a change of use" so planning must be sought.

Following on from Docarch, will you be providing public liability insurance seeing as you will be having clients on your property/ premises? also are you providing toilet facilities, disabled access, parking etc etc the list goes on:D

Hailhail1967

BryanF wrote: »

Following on from Docarch, will you be providing public liability insurance seeing as you will be having clients on your property/ premises? also are you providing toilet facilities, disabled access, parking etc etc the list goes on:D

Well yes I would have public liability insurance. I was always a bit confused about the whole disabled access, parking and toilet thing. Plenty of business do not have any of those. Or is it that all new premises must have these?

Its all obviously a no go anyway, so I will have to scrap my own premises and work on the road essentially.

BryanF

Hailhail1967 wrote: »

Well yes I would have public liability insurance. I was always a bit confused about the whole disabled access, parking and toilet thing. Plenty of business do not have any of those. Or is it that all new premises must have these?

there is always the option of stating your case to the Local Authority, ive have come across the council representative that takes a common sense approach, but yes a commercial venture requires a commercial planning application, commercial rates, requires a disabled access cert, a Fire cert and a commercial BER cert .

I agree its ridiculous in the situation you outlined. best of luck with what you decide

zaazazu

BryanF wrote: »

there is always the option of stating your case to the Local Authority, ive have come across the council representative that takes a common sense approach, but yes a commercial venture requires a commercial planning application, commercial rates, requires a disabled access cert, a Fire cert and a commercial BER cert .

I agree its ridiculous in the situation you outlined. best of luck with what you decide

I wouldnt fancy your chances on that score. You never know I suppose, but I would say finding a premises might be a better option over all.

randel

I have agreed to purchase a residential house subject to planning permission to change it to commercial ( dental practice ).

I have since learned that in the county development plan, a person is allowed operate a dental/ medical practice in his/her residence as long as the majority of the house is used as residential.

If I was to go this route, and retain most of the house as residential would I avoid having to get a fire / disability access cert etc etc?

sydthebeat

randel wrote: »

I have agreed to purchase a residential house subject to planning permission to change it to commercial ( dental practice ).

I have since learned that in the county development plan, a person is allowed operate a dental/ medical practice in his/her residence as long as the majority of the house is used as residential.

If I was to go this route, and retain most of the house as residential would I avoid having to get a fire / disability access cert etc etc?

short answer no, you wouldnt avoid it.

Fire and disability are part of the building regulations... which are completely separate to planning.

Not only that but you need to comply with ALL building regulations, not just fire and disability.

richban

Also to add - a medical/dental practice is allowed 'in principle' when the zoning is residential, usually regardless of Planning Authority involved- of course you need planning permission where additional traffic generated by the medic crowd/ visitors can be the most problematic issue - theres no way around Fire Cert/ Disability Access Certificate applications once the use is commercial, even if its only a partial use and the majority use remains residential. ... then there's commercial rates.....:eek:

randel

richban wrote: »

Also to add - a medical/dental practice is allowed 'in principle' when the zoning is residential, usually regardless of Planning Authority involved- of course you need planning permission where additional traffic generated by the medic crowd/ visitors can be the most problematic issue - theres no way around Fire Cert/ Disability Access Certificate applications once the use is commercial, even if its only a partial use and the majority use remains residential. ... then there's commercial rates.....:eek:

If I look to rezone the whole house to commercial but for the first few years I only use say 40% of the property for my business and the rest is vacant. Do I only pay rates etc on the 40% or the whole property?

muffler

randel wrote: »

If I look to rezone the whole house to commercial but for the first few years I only use say 40% of the property for my business and the rest is vacant. Do I only pay rates etc on the 40% or the whole property?

Sorry, I have no idea as its not a planning matter. You would need to talk to the central valuations office or whatever they're called these days or phone the local council.

Fozzie Bear

A detached bungalow house on a 1/2 acre I know of will be going on the market soon in Galway City west area, but I have been given first preference on it before that happens.

The only problem with it is an extension that was built onto the back of the house back in the early 90's without PP. The current elderly owners basically built a self contained apartment onto the back of the house (and lived here) along with a separate small garage and slight alteration to the front of the house. The main 3 bedroom house was then rented out. Sometime around 97/98 they applied for and were refused PP by Galway City Council for the already built extension. This was appealed to A.B.P. who granted permission for the garage and alterations to the front but refused it for the apartment.

So now the house will be going on the market in the coming weeks subject to PP for the apartment. From reading the original application and refusal on the GCC site they seemed to have a problem with it being a separate apartment from the house. So my question is will G.C.C. be likely to grant permission after this length of time and after these people have pissed them around so much? If I buy it I would be knocking the main house and apartment into one and using the lot as our main residence.

I am going to meet with GCC about it but I'd like any advice or suggestions I can get beforehand.

sydthebeat

Fozzie Bear wrote: »

A detached bungalow house on a 1/2 acre I know of will be going on the market soon in Galway City west area, but I have been given first preference on it before that happens.

The only problem with it is an extension that was built onto the back of the house back in the early 90's without PP. The current elderly owners basically built a self contained apartment onto the back of the house (and lived here) along with a separate small garage and slight alteration to the front of the house. The main 3 bedroom house was then rented out. Sometime around 97/98 they applied for and were refused PP by Galway City Council for the already built extension. This was appealed to A.B.P. who granted permission for the garage and alterations to the front but refused it for the apartment.

So now the house will be going on the market in the coming weeks subject to PP for the apartment. From reading the original application and refusal on the GCC site they seemed to have a problem with it being a separate apartment from the house. So my question is will G.C.C. be likely to grant permission after this length of time and after these people have pissed them around so much? If I buy it I would be knocking the main house and apartment into one and using the lot as our main residence.

I am going to meet with GCC about it but I'd like any advice or suggestions I can get beforehand.

highly unlikely they would grant permission now for something they refused 15 years ago, and is still in operation.

They could very simply not accept any application to retain because they made a decision on it already and the new application is significantly similar to the original application.

you must also understand that the council cannot accept any planning application as valid where an unauthorised development exists on site..... that is, an application for ANYTHING.
if you insist on going ahead subject to pp, then have a chat with a planner to see if they will accept this application firstly. They may see it as a way to solve the unauthorised nature of the development.... but alternatively they may decide that they cannot accept any application at all on that site.

windyboy

Hi Guys,

Have a condition of planning which states 'Certified Monitoring of the effluent quality shall be carried out on an annual basis on the anniversary of the initial commissioning of the system, and the results shall be retained by the owner of the property, their assigns or agents for possible future inspection. '

We have an Envirocare P6 unit and are coming up to 1st anniversary of moving in so I was looking to deal with this issue however I have heard from someone in sales of PET systems that is not a straight forward test and could be quite expensive. Has anyone else had the same condition attached and can you advise who you engaged to carry this out and costs?

Thanks Windyboy

fd2k12

Hi Everyone,:)
I recently applied to my local co.co for planning permission to extend my house, the council have come back to me saying that they have serious concerns with regard to the existing access point on to a national road with a speed limit of 100km/hr. The development plan states that access on to such a road must have 215m sight distance in either direction to ensure a safe means of access from the house to the road and vice versa. Also, I intend on using the existing access and do not intend on changing this, as it wouldn't be feasible based on the site layout and the proposed new extension. I would estimate sight distances at 100m and 150m.

If the access point is existing, then does the development plan apply or maybe the council are just highlighting a safety concern they feel is necessary to be assessed.

Any help or advise would be grately appreciated as it would be a shame to lose planning over an existing access point.
Thanks!:D

sydthebeat

i suppose the council are looking at it from the point of view of:
(a) it is a dangerous access point
(b) they can only dictate alterations to make it safer at a planing application stage
(c) its in your interest to make it safer, if possible.

If there is another possibility of a different much safer access point to the dwelling, then the council would be correct to insist on that change during the application, even if it means a total redesign of the proposed extension.

(not being intimately involved i cant comment further than that)

the council cannot stop you using the existing access, but they can refuse the planning for extension if they feel it would lead to dangerous ingress - egress actions. remember you could have large trucks coming in and out of this entrance during the build and that alone could be reason for refusal.

sydthebeat

merged with other planning issues thread

fd2k12

Thanks for the response, the existing access point has been used for years with no incidents or accidents. Yes, I would prefer it if the access was safer and especially during the construction period, and I knew that before the council returned these comments, but based on their assessment, I feel they are making to big of a deal out of this considering it is an existing dwelling house and access point.
I cannot move the extension or really redesign the extension in a way that would change the councils perspective on this as the road frontage is limited from access on to the road point of view.

rocksby

fd2k12 wrote: »

Hi Everyone,:)
I recently applied to my local co.co for planning permission to extend my house, the council have come back to me saying that they have serious concerns with regard to the existing access point on to a national road with a speed limit of 100km/hr. The development plan states that access on to such a road must have 215m sight distance in either direction to ensure a safe means of access from the house to the road and vice versa. Also, I intend on using the existing access and do not intend on changing this, as it wouldn't be feasible based on the site layout and the proposed new extension. I would estimate sight distances at 100m and 150m.

If the access point is existing, then does the development plan apply or maybe the council are just highlighting a safety concern they feel is necessary to be assessed.

Any help or advise would be grately appreciated as it would be a shame to lose planning over an existing access point.
Thanks!:D

Ok, I presume they have issued a request for further information. But what exactky have they asked you for?

fd2k12

Hi Rocksby,
They have asked me for sight distances and a plan of how I will improve the current sight distances from the existing access point......which in my view is redundant.

rocksby

fd2k12 wrote: »

Hi Rocksby,
They have asked me for sight distances and a plan of how I will improve the current sight distances from the existing access point......which in my view is redundant.

Have they asked you anything else?

melly101

Hi all,

we got a final grant of permission in 2009 and built straight away, we put a small (12m2) single story extension to the rear presuming it was exempt now we are closing the permission with the coco (looking for the return of bonds) they inspected and say its not exempt as the house had an open planning file.. fair enough hands up, but tell me, is a retention application refer only to the rear extension or is it for the entire build including the extension?? Id hate to have to go thru it all again.. Mucho thanks

to add some light details - Wicklow cc, 220m2 2 story rural build, remainder of planning is 100% and engineer has signed off on everything..

DOCARCH

Hi Melly101. When was the house completed and/or when did you move in to the house? When did you build the extension - during the main build?

rocksby

melly101 wrote: »

Hi all,

we got a final grant of permission in 2009 and built straight away, we put a small (12m2) single story extension to the rear presuming it was exempt now we are closing the permission with the coco (looking for the return of bonds) they inspected and say its not exempt as the house had an open planning file.. fair enough hands up, but tell me, is a retention application refer only to the rear extension or is it for the entire build including the extension?? Id hate to have to go thru it all again.. Mucho thanks

to add some light details - Wicklow cc, 220m2 2 story rural build, remainder of planning is 100% and engineer has signed off on everything..

What is meant by an open planning file?

DOCARCH

rocksby wrote: »

What is meant by an open planning file?

That's sort of at the root of my question above.

An 'open planning file'? Never heard of this and I can't imagine it having any legal status in terms of defining when a development is complete?

muffler

melly101 wrote: »

its not exempt as the house had an open planning file.. fair enough hands up

I would think the "open file" term is used by planners when making reference to unauthorised development. The OP has acknowledged that he made a mistake (highlighted above) so thats an indication that the extension was most likely built at the same time as the house thus in breach of the original PP.

But to answer the question put by melly101: Yes, normally you would have to make an application for retention of the house and the planning fee is €2.50 per m2. However if you get your architect to be selective in what he is applying for (on your behalf) then you may get away with paying for the 12m2 only but the fee will be the minimum payable i.e. €102

sydthebeat

I have had to deal with this exact issue before and the council would only accept full retention of all the dwelling.

If you think about it, they have to. By classifying that the dwelling as built is different from the one granted permission the only way to resolve the issue is to retain the dwelling in full.

That has been my experience anyway

muffler

melly101 wrote: »

Hi all,

we got a final grant of permission in 2009 and built straight away, we put a small (12m2) single story extension to the rear presuming it was exempt now we are closing the permission with the coco (looking for the return of bonds) they inspected and say its not exempt as the house had an open planning file.. fair enough hands up, but tell me, is a retention application refer only to the rear extension or is it for the entire build including the extension?? Id hate to have to go thru it all again.. Mucho thanks

to add some light details - Wicklow cc, 220m2 2 story rural build, remainder of planning is 100% and engineer has signed off on everything..

Guys, a few posts went off on a wider debate on the issue surrounding the points raised in the above post so I have moved them to a new thread here for further debate of the actual regulations rather than have this single query bogged down with responses that the OP is probably not interested in.

F1Jimbo

Hi there, just wondering how u got on with the container? Is it allowed as I plan to do the same soon? Thanks!

Jaap

Can a county council put a condition on your planning permission that you have to close over an exisiting entrance to the site with hedgerow?
We have a main entrance which is fine to use sight lines wise, but this other existing entrance (used for 20 years plus to service lands) we have been told to close.
My family still use this existing entrance which leads on to their own private lane to service other land they own.

sydthebeat

Jaap wrote: »

Can a county council put a condition on your planning permission that you have to close over an exisiting entrance to the site with hedgerow?
We have a main entrance which is fine to use sight lines wise, but this other existing entrance (used for 20 years plus to service lands) we have been told to close.
My family still use this existing entrance which leads on to their own private lane to service other land they own.

yes they can.

my user name

Hi - something strange here. A family applied for planning permission to build house, were refused, appealed the decision etc etc and eventually got the permission. However, the strange thing is that the development address on the application is not the road that they plan to build on/open up access to?

edit: merged with planning issues thread
sydthebeat