Planning issues - post them here MOD WARNING post #1

SeanoChuinn

We are currently thinking of buying a site which has approved planning permission in place for a house. This permissions expires in August 2013 but we don't care if it expires as the planned house has no interest to us and was just butted together to make the site more attractive. We already have our own plans for the home we want to build.

So my question is IF we purchased the site and once this guys planning expires in August, then are we free to reapply (I understand we'd need to jump through all the hoops again...percolation, entrance visability etc. etc. thats not the issue as if its passed once it should again) for planning this time with our own house plans or is there time frames where only one plan can be attached to a piece of land for certain period of time and we'd be left HAVING to build what was already applied for rather than our own house or jsut having to wait for years before we could re-apply. I just am completely ignorant to how this would work.

I realise our own design would have to meet council standards and regulations etc. and thats a process I don't mind getting into once I know for sure we can actually apply for planning on our own home rather than the existing planning.

Hope its not too confusing!!! Thanks all.

sydthebeat

SeanoChuinn wrote: »

...... thats not the issue as if its passed once it should again)........

WHOOOW THERE

Thats a serious assumption to make, and it could be a very costly one.

there is absolutely NO guarantee that planing will be granted on a site that already has had planning. many things can happen in the meantime.

for some examples:
1. Flood plain maps are now widespread where they were no 5 years ago
2. The county development plan could have, and probably has, changed... meaning different planning standards to be met.
3. newer development in the area may have changed the site context completely and issue such as ribbon development may apply.

Your options as i see it are:
firstly go to the planner and ask is there any reason an extension of time wouldnt be granted on the application as you are thinking of purchasing the site.
If there is no reason then try to purchase the site subject to the granting of a time extension of 5 years. The vendor may play hardball here, so you may have to purchase as is.

Apply for the extension of time and hope to be granted.
After the granting of the extension, apply to change the house design.... this is very common these days.


otherwise what you would have to do is apply for a change of design now.
be granted and start work as early as possible ie 18 weeks (mid june) and hope that construction would be up to wall plate before the expiry of teh permission. Prior to the expiry, you have to apply for a time extension to complete the build... usually 18 months or 2 years period.


id advise going down the first route.

SeanoChuinn

Thank you Syd, I didn't mean to sound non-chalant in assuming that we could simply sweep in and build, this unfortunately reflects my complete ignorance of the processes. I have heard and seen a few horror stories with planning and I just wanted to see where we would stand. As I said in the post I am completely ignorant of planning and all of the twists and turns that happening while in that process.

Some clarifacation for me...when you say planner you mean the County Planner? When you say vendor you mean the people selling the site? Do they need to put in the extension? Or can we do that?

Unfortunately our position at the moment is that we are not able to start any kind of construction as we don't currently live at home. I had hoped in my completely fairy tale mind that we could purchase the site, let the existing planning expire and then in a year or two, when we had returned home, apply for new planning on the site. Oh how simple I am!!

Thank you.

sydthebeat

SeanoChuinn wrote: »

Thank you Syd, I didn't mean to sound non-chalant in assuming that we could simply sweep in and build, this unfortunately reflects my complete ignorance of the processes. I have heard and seen a few horror stories with planning and I just wanted to see where we would stand. As I said in the post I am completely ignorant of planning and all of the twists and turns that happening while in that process.

Some clarifacation for me...when you say planner you mean the County Planner? When you say vendor you mean the people selling the site? Do they need to put in the extension? Or can we do that?

Unfortunately our position at the moment is that we are not able to start any kind of construction as we don't currently live at home. I had hoped in my completely fairy tale mind that we could purchase the site, let the existing planning expire and then in a year or two, when we had returned home, apply for new planning on the site. Oh how simple I am!!

Thank you.

planner = the person determine your application in the county council

vendor = seller of site

yes, it would be a good idea for the seller at this stage to apply for a time extension of 5 years. Perhaps theres a reason they havent??
They are selling the site as is; they dont have to do anything.... but if they havent the site sold by the expiry of the planning, then what they have to sell significantly devalues.

It wouldnt be a good idea to let the planning lapse. Although planing be granted on a site is a good sign, its no guarantee of future planning.
If you purchase a 'site' now and teh planner lapses, in effect then all you have is a bit of a field.

SeanoChuinn

I guess I will really have to find out what the story is on the site. It's a rural location, with only a couple of older existing houses and farm buildings in the near vicinity. According to the Auctioneer they tried to sell 4 years ago, but couldn't sell. From the research I've been able to do on my own local council website the initial planning was applied for in Dec/2004, then they extended it to July/2008 and the auctioneer has told me it expires in Aug/2013. Which would line up with the 5 year extensions you mentioned Syd. The planned house is just a very standard straight up/straight down design and I suspect it was only included to increase the attractiveness of the site, as it is in a rural location which might not appeal to everyone.

I guess it's off to the Council planner with me to try find out some more information. I am sure with the expiry fast approaching the seller will not want the planning to laspe so might be best to hold out and see what happens - they may extend it themselves and the reality is that we are not yet at the point where we really need to buy, so could wait it out.

On a positive note the shape of the house (rectulangar) could easily be incorporated into our own house design if we did decide to purchase, extend and then change the house plans. Thank you Syd for all the information, I know how hard it is to try answer these kind of questions with every situation so different and specific.

sydthebeat

SeanoChuinn wrote: »

I guess I will really have to find out what the story is on the site. It's a rural location, with only a couple of older existing houses and farm buildings in the near vicinity. According to the Auctioneer they tried to sell 4 years ago, but couldn't sell. From the research I've been able to do on my own local council website the initial planning was applied for in Dec/2004, then they extended it to July/2008 and the auctioneer has told me it expires in Aug/2013. Which would line up with the 5 year extensions you mentioned Syd. The planned house is just a very standard straight up/straight down design and I suspect it was only included to increase the attractiveness of the site, as it is in a rural location which might not appeal to everyone.

I guess it's off to the Council planner with me to try find out some more information. I am sure with the expiry fast approaching the seller will not want the planning to laspe so might be best to hold out and see what happens - they may extend it themselves and the reality is that we are not yet at the point where we really need to buy, so could wait it out.

On a positive note the shape of the house (rectulangar) could easily be incorporated into our own house design if we did decide to purchase, extend and then change the house plans. Thank you Syd for all the information, I know how hard it is to try answer these kind of questions with every situation so different and specific.

The bad news is the planning can only be extended once, so there is no way it can last beyond this year.

SeanoChuinn

Ok that makes sense becasue from what I can tell the first time was an extension and the second was a change to the plans. For some reason the planning has managed to be active since 2004. We'll see what happens. Thanks Syd.

muffler

SeanoChuinn wrote: »

Ok that makes sense becasue from what I can tell the first time was an extension and the second was a change to the plans. For some reason the planning has managed to be active since 2004. We'll see what happens. Thanks Syd.

Is there a possibility that the first permission was an outline permission (its valid for 3 years) and then he made the full application just before the 3 years were up?

?Cee?view

Good morning all,

A question which I suspect will be straightforward to those of you trained in the area, but unfortunately I can't find an answer on.

My house opens on the front onto a public road, with the driveway opening onto this same road. To the rear there is another public road, with no opening from my house/property onto this.

Would I need planning permission to put a pedestrian gates "into" my wall to the rear on which there is at present no opening?

Thanks in advance.

sydthebeat

churchview wrote: »

Good morning all,

A question which I suspect will be straightforward to those of you trained in the area, but unfortunately I can't find an answer on.

My house opens on the front onto a public road, with the driveway opening onto this same road. To the rear there is another public road, with no opening from my house/property onto this.

Would I need planning permission to put a pedestrian gates "into" my wall to the rear on which there is at present no opening?

Thanks in advance.

CLASS 5
The construction, erection or alteration,
within or bounding the curtilage of a
house, of a gate, gateway, railing or
wooden fence or a wall of brick, stone,
blocks with decorative finish, other
concrete blocks or mass concrete.

Stipulations:

1. The height of any such structure
shall not exceed 2 metres or, in the case
of a wall or fence within or bounding any
garden or other space in front of a house,
1.2 metres.

2. Every wall other than a dry or natural
stone wall bounding any garden or other
space shall be capped and the face of any
wall of concrete or concrete block (other
than blocks with decorative finish) which
will be visible from any road, path or
public area, including public open space,
shall be rendered or plastered.

3. No such structure shall be a metal
palisade or other security fence.


if you want "to be sure, to be sure" you could apply for a section 8 declaration for your local authority.

DOCARCH

Hopefully I don't get shot down for this! :P

Generally, you do not need planning permission to form/create a new pedestrian entrance.

But, before doing anything, check with your local authority.

You do (definitely) need planning permission to form/create a new vehicular entrance (or extend/widen an existing one).

Poor Uncle Tom

DOCARCH wrote: »

Hopefully I don't get shot down for this! :P

Generally, you do not need planning permission to form/create a new pedestrian entrance.

But, before doing anything, check with your local authority.

You do (definitely) need planning permission to form/create a new vehicular entrance (or extend/widen an existing one).

With the exception of "onto private property". If the roadway is public I would say you should be fine, if the roadway is private you will need permission.

DOCARCH

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

With the exception of "onto private property". If the roadway is public I would say you should be fine, if the roadway is private you will need permission.

Yes - very true - I should have added that caveat.

apollo10

Hi there,

I'm just wondering if anyone can give me some advice. I bought my home 9 years ago and extended at the back at that time (no planning needed). My dad did this extension for me. I have just got plans drawn up by an architect to build on at the side and to change the roof (hipped to apex).

He has found a big problem however when he got the drainage plans from dublin city council for my planning application. It appears that there is a public sewer running down the side of my house (where I want to build) but it also seems to run under the side of the extension at the back of the house (about a half metre).

I know now that I cant build at the side as I'll be building over the public sewer and is not permitted. I'm gutted about this but I'm more worried about the fact that there was a genuine error made by building over the sewer as it passed down the back of my garden. There are no manholes on my property so there was no was Dad knew at the time.

As drainage plans are required on planning applications I'm now afraid to put in a planning application to just get the roof changed as this will draw attention to the fact that the extension at the back is running over the sewer.

Is this risky? Should I first apply for retention of the rear extension or is it likely to be refused? Also is there a possibility that the extension will be ok because it was built over 7 years ago?

Thanks for any suggestions you may have.

smellyfinger

Percolation rules etc for waste water treatment systems change as time passes and just because it passed before it may not pass again. And if it does pass you need to check out the costs of the unit and the percolation area. I did one a couple of years ago that cost in excess of €13000. You can apply for planning on that site,without the need for the planning already in place to expire. The easiest solution if you like the place is to buy it subject to planning, hire a suitably qualified and experienced architect/engineer who knows the planning process and proceed from there.

sydthebeat

smellyfinger wrote: »

Percolation rules etc for waste water treatment systems change as time passes and just because it passed before it may not pass again. And if it does pass you need to check out the costs of the unit and the percolation area. I did one a couple of years ago that cost in excess of €13000. You can apply for planning on that site,without the need for the planning already in place to expire. The easiest solution if you like the place is to buy it subject to planning, hire a suitably qualified and experienced architect/engineer who knows the planning process and proceed from there.

When posting advice in this thread, please quote exactly what post you are replying to.

Otherwise the post appears in isolation and irrelevant.

Your post above for example.

smellyfinger

smellyfinger wrote: »

Percolation rules etc for waste water treatment systems change as time passes and just because it passed before it may not pass again. And if it does pass you need to check out the costs of the unit and the percolation area. I did one a couple of years ago that cost in excess of €13000. You can apply for planning on that site,without the need for the planning already in place to expire. The easiest solution if you like the place is to buy it subject to planning, hire a suitably qualified and experienced architect/engineer who knows the planning process and proceed from there.

As per seanochuinns post earlier

karenmaryobrien

Hi,

I'm considering buying a house that had previously been sale agreed. The sale fell through because the buyer specified at the outset that the offer was unconditional. However his surveyor discovered that a new septic tank would be needed. So the buyer changed his offer to 'subject to planning permission' (for the septic tank). The owner did not agree to this and the sale fell through.

So my query is what kind of things could cause rejection of planning permission of a replacement septic tank? My main concern would be planning issues that I can't do anything to resolve. I am considering making an offer but I don't want to end up in a house that I can't live in because I can't get planning permission for a required new septic tank.

I have filled in the necessary pre-planning consulation forms about this but my county council have informed me that it takes 4-weeks to process, whereupon I will then get a paper based response. Face-to-face pre-planning consultations are apparently no longer possible because of a shortage of planners So any advice in the meantime would be much appreciated.

Supertech

karenmaryobrien wrote: »

Hi,

I'm considering buying a house that had previously been sale agreed. The sale fell through because the buyer specified at the outset that the offer was unconditional. However his surveyor discovered that a new septic tank would be needed. So the buyer changed his offer to 'subject to planning permission' (for the septic tank). The owner did not agree to this and the sale fell through.

So my query is what kind of things could cause rejection of planning permission of a replacement septic tank? My main concern would be planning issues that I can't do anything to resolve. I am considering making an offer but I don't want to end up in a house that I can't live in because I can't get planning permission for a required new septic tank.

I have filled in the necessary pre-planning consulation forms about this but my county council have informed me that it takes 4-weeks to process, whereupon I will then get a paper based response. Face-to-face pre-planning consultations are apparently no longer possible because of a shortage of planners So any advice in the meantime would be much appreciated.

If the owner refused the original subject to planning offer, I take it he won't accept such an offer from you either. Buying without planning for any proposed improvements, or in this case necessary works, is a huge risk, and I'd avoid it personally.

Firstly, I'd say a paper based response will only quote you chapter and verse from the development plan, and will probably be as clear as mud to you.

You could try a local councillor, to see if he or she could secure a face to face meeting for you. Certainly in some areas, these happen .

Have you had an inspection done yourself, and if so what does that highlight ? The report commissioned by the previous prospective purchaser will likely not be made available to you. (Is it just a new septic tank, or an entire new system - percolation area and the works ?)

If not you should consider having one done. It might be wise to have someone who is on the panel for site suitability assessment in your area look at the property and kill two birds with one stone (so you're looking for someone who does site suitability assessments and house inspections) and see what they have to say about it.

In terms of what could go wrong, well the most obvious thing is that the site suitability assessment might fail. Secondly, the site suitability assessment may indicate that an entire new treatment system is required resulting in additional expense, and there might not be enough land associated with the house to accommodate a modern percolation area. You could also have objections from neighbours.

I think in light of the publicity around non-functioning septic tanks it would be very difficult for a council to refuse you outright when there's an existing house there, and that some solution would have to be reached but as I've said it's a huge risk to assume that everything will be OK. Only the local authority can grant you planning permission, so even with an expert opinion given in an inspection report on the site you won't know until you have a site suitability assessment carried out, and a planning application lodged and granted permission. With inspections of septic tank systems imminent, you can't afford to take a risk. There is talk of a grant system for remedial works to non compliant systems, but it won't cover the full cost, and the amount granted will be based on your earnings.

Tread carefully.

karenmaryobrien

Thank you so much Supertech for such a helpful and informative reply!

I haven't yet gotten an inspection done but that was going to be my next move - I will definitely take your advice about getting a site suitability assessment done as part of the inspection.

And I will most definitely tread carefully - even if it's unlikely that there won't be some kind of possible workaround, it's still too much of a risk to take. I guess if the site suitability inspection fails at least I can walk away. If it passes I'll have to consider my next move very carefully.

rayjdav

Supertech wrote: »

If not you should consider having one done. It might be wise to have someone who is on the panel for site suitability assessment in your area look at the property and kill two birds with one stone (so you're looking for someone who does site suitability assessments and house inspections) and see what they have to say about it.

One thing here, I 'd be surprised if the seller agreed to let you dig in his garden area for a site test without some sort of agreement to purchase??

Would it not be more logical for you to get him/her to do the test and maybe enter into agreement on that basis? They must get a registered professional on coco list so the results will have to be binding and above board. Also, it takes the possibility of wasted money away from you and onto the seller. And if your sale falls through, at least they will have the results to hand for the next buyer to see.

Supertech

I wouldn't necessarily be suggesting to do the test right now ray, particularly if the vendor is pushing to sell the site 'as seen'. But if the desk study was carried out, then the immediate issues would be highlighted, and the OP could then take it to the next step. If there is an issue found with the existing system then would be the time to broker a deal about who does the test and when. My sense is that the vendor doesn't even want it to go that far at present.

stodwyer

Hi all.
I'm trying to design an extension to an existing cottage for a client of mine. Trouble is the council have limited 60 sqm to the extension due to poor percolation. The existing cottage has a poorly built extension and a first floor. The council Will let me offset the existing extension (which is being demolished) against the new build but will not let me offset the first floor of the cottage. Which my client is willing to sign a section 47 stating that it will never be used. Also if the first floor is allowed the extension of the new build will be 42sqm.

Also would you count an internal first floor void down to ground floor as floor area? The council are not allowing that either.

Thanks in advance
Stodwyer

Poor Uncle Tom

S.I No. 128 of 2004 is used to calculate the floor area.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2004/en/si/0128.html

If you have a first floor and it is habitable then it has to be included in the floor area. If it is not needed as a habitable area, then remove it as such.

It doesn't make any design sense to have a habitable area of a house and a legal agreement from the owner to never use it, that's just silly.

stodwyer

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

S.I No. 128 of 2004 is used to calculate the floor area.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2004/en/si/0128.html

If you have a first floor and it is habitable then it has to be included in the floor area. If it is not needed as a habitable area, then remove it as such.

It doesn't make any design sense to have a habitable area of a house and a legal agreement from the owner to never use it, that's just silly.

Thanks Uncle Tom

But It will never be used as the current ground floor of the cottage is proposed to be a vaulted ceiling sitting room. It will never be used. I understand the council are cautious as they feel that it might be used later on therefore increasing the total floor area of the entire building. But it will not.

Poor Uncle Tom

stodwyer wrote: »

Thanks Uncle Tom

But It will never be used as the current ground floor of the cottage is proposed to be a vaulted ceiling sitting room. It will never be used. I understand the council are cautious as they feel that it might be used later on therefore increasing the total floor area of the entire building. But it will not.

If it is an entire open ceiling area, with no floor, then there is no floor area to add in, regardless of the floor to inside of roof height.

If their logic were to be followed the floor area of every house could be increased as every house is capable of having a basement excavated at any time.

stodwyer

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

If it is an entire open ceiling area, with no floor, then there is no floor area to add in, regardless of the floor to inside of roof height.

If their logic were to be followed the floor area of every house could be increased as every house is capable of having a basement excavated at any time.

So do you think that I should be entitled to offset first floor area of the cottage being removed against the proposed extension? And that it should be acceptable with or without a legal statement?

Poor Uncle Tom

stodwyer wrote: »

So do you think that I should be entitled to offset first floor area of the cottage being removed against the proposed extension? And that it should be acceptable with or without a legal statement?

Unfortunately, I am not the one who has to accept it, it's the planning officer. If you can't convince the planner you could consider putting your arguments to the director of services.

stodwyer

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

Unfortunately, I am not the one who has to accept it, it's the planning officer. If you can't convince the planner you could consider putting your arguments to the director of services.

Sorry. What I meant was do you think I am right on pursuing this and saying that I am entitled to argue the case.

Poor Uncle Tom

stodwyer wrote: »

Sorry. What I meant was do you think I am right on pursuing this and saying that I am entitled to argue the case.

If I understand you right, then yes.