Refused Planning Permission. where do we stand?

BoozyBabe

Hi, just looking for a bit of advice.
Applied for planning permission back in June. Got assigned the planner, & the roads engineer, to be told that the engineer was a complete 'you know what' & to expect a difficult road ahead!
Well, a difficult road it was!! & because of this we got a local councillor on board to try & help out with things.
Anyway, on the day the permission was due a decision, it was moved to Further Info. There were a few minor issues from the planner, which could be solved immediately, but then two whole pages from the engineer!
Most of which was already in the plans submitted, but he'd just never bothered to check, & other things missing for a good reason & this reason clearly explained.
One of these things was that in order for the entracne to be save, we'll need to move the hedge back. This is fine by us, we own the field so there'll be no prob in doing this. However, the engineer wanted a leagal document to state this.
He was informed again that as we own the field, we do not need a legal doc. So, the further info was submitted & we waited again.
The final decision was due today, so we got our councillor to give the planner a call last week to see if there were any issues. They would not take or return his call.
We found out at the weekend, that they'd made the decision last Thur to refuse planning permission, thus why they wouldn't take the call.

We found out yesterday why we were refused. Again, the engineer insisted we have a legal doc stating we can move the hedge & as we didn't submit one, he was refusing permission!!!!

It since turns out, that the planner over our application & the main planner in the council offices stated that our permission SHOULD be granted, but the engineer dug his heels in & refused.

Our local councillor is having a meeting with them this week.

Where do we stand? We DO NOT need a legal doc as we own the bloody land!! They were told this twice, & yet they turned down our application. They are at fault here. Surely we shouldn't have to go through the whole permission again because of this.
Can a decision simply be overturned, or how does this work?

Thanks for taking the time to read.
Hope some of ye have experience of this & can help.
(Even if it's to give me bad news, atleast I know where I stand.)
Thanks,
BB

RKQ

BoozyBabe wrote: »

However, the engineer wanted a leagal document to state this.
He was informed again that as we own the field, we do not need a legal doc. So, the further info was submitted & we waited again.

Surely we shouldn't have to go through the whole permission again because of this.
Can a decision simply be overturned, or how does this work?

A decision has been made. It can only be overturned by appeal to An Bord Pleanala.

Why didn't you submitt a letter stating that you would remove or push back the ditch, to achieve the required sight-lines?
Owning the land is not relevant - it seems you didn't state in writing that the ditch would be removed. The FI was a good oppertunity to alay the Engineers worries.

No6

I find in general if you and your clients are reasonable and a little flexible with the planners & engineers you can avoid situations like this. I think you should have given the engineer a letter stating you own the land with a copy of your folio showng that you do and agree to set back the hedge / fence to whatever is required. I''m not sure what you mean by a Legal Doccument as if you submit a letter stating you will carry out the required work as part of a planning it will have a legal status in regard to that permission. I also find councillers tend to muddy the waters and get the planners and engineers backs up, best avoided in my opinion.

BoozyBabe

Yes we did.
It was even drawn on the plans where the new hedge position would be. (even the 1st time the plans were submitted.
EVERYTHING was there. & was there very clearly at that!
They're happy with everything. His only problem was that he wanted to see that we were allowed to move the hedge to it's new position, & we provided proof both times that this was ok as we owned the land.
What else are you supposed to do!!!!
Like I said, even the guy over planning in the council office was satisfied that we'd provided adequate info for the planning to be approved.

I don't understand why his final decision wasn't taken instead of some engineers.
We provided absolutely everything, complied with absolutely everything they asked, so I find it very very unfiar of them to refuse based on something we all know, even they've now admitted was not needed in the 1st place!

BoozyBabe

As I said already, we gave them everything.
We were flexible on everything.
We provided proof of everything.
But as I also said, before even beginning the process, when we were assigned the engineer, we were told we'd have trouble. If he gets a notion about anything he will not be talked to or will not change his mind. & this has turned out to be the case.
The actual planner was more than helpful & had no problem working out the other issues with us.
We didn't stick our heels in about anything, complied with everything they asked.
We provided proof that we owned the land & therefore that was all that was required to allow us to move the hedge & the planners agreed that was acceptable.
The engineer did not.

sydthebeat

BoozyBabe wrote: »

As I said already, we gave them everything.
We were flexible on everything.
We provided proof of everything.
But as I also said, before even beginning the process, when we were assigned the engineer, we were told we'd have trouble. If he gets a notion about anything he will not be talked to or will not change his mind. & this has turned out to be the case.
The actual planner was more than helpful & had no problem working out the other issues with us.
We didn't stick our heels in about anything, complied with everything they asked.
We provided proof that we owned the land & therefore that was all that was required to allow us to move the hedge & the planners agreed that was acceptable.
The engineer did not.

were land registry and folio maps (6 copies) included with the application, which showed you owned the land??

if so the engineer was already supplied with this information....

BoozyBabe

No6 wrote: »

I''m not sure what you mean by a Legal Doccument

We're also not sure what's meant by this now, as everything we had, we gave! Honestly.
I'm not trying to bend the truth here to make them sound like big bad monsters or anything.
I'm giving you facts, & wondering why they could've done this.
It makes absolutely no sense.
They could not give any answers yesterday when questioned on it as they also could see no reason why it was refused. Makes you wonder who makes the decisions when the two planners involved agree it should have been granted!!!!
There's a meeting about it this week to discuss why this happened, but it's their mistake, so I don't see why we chould have to go through the entire process again because of it.

RKQ

Its not possible for the Council to change its decision.

Put in a new application with a letter stating the ditch will be moved to achieve sightlines or appeal to An Bord Pleanala!

You don't have any other choice!

BoozyBabe

Thanks RKQ.
That's what I wanted to know.

muffler

Just a couple of points to note. You can show vision lines on a map and you can show the overall landholding on a map but in this case you should have given a letter stating that you would remove the hedge as requested. Showing lines on a map and giving signed/written commitments are 2 different things.

The engineer does not or did not refuse your planning application (well not directly anyhow). He is asked to prepare a report and a recommendation and that recommendation can then be accepted or rejected by the planner.

I dont want to complicate things here (and I dont want a lengthy debate on the matter either) but generally speaking it would be the senior planner who makes the decision. Thats the short version. Engineers, Fire Officers, EHO's and even junior planners all make recommendations first and then the senior planner decides on it. Again his wouldnt be the final decision but its the normal practice for the county manager to accept the decision/recommendation of the senior planner.

What to do now: First of all go to the planning office and get the hard copy of the file and trawl through it and see where along the chain of command did the application fail. If it has been refused on that one issue only then you need to address that issue. Ask the planner what exactly you have to submit by way of letters, maps, plans or whatever so that your next application will run through smoothly.

You could also remove the hedge now prior to resubmitting your application and (if he is willing to do so) ask the engineer to meet you on site to establish that he is happy with the vision lines having been achieved. As you own the land you then need to submit a letter saying that you will maintain the vision lines.

Finally you could appeal this to An Bord Pleanala but I wouldnt recommend it. You are much better off going in with a new application again.

Milo98

muffler wrote: »

You could also remove the hedge now prior to resubmitting your application and (if he is willing to do so) ask the engineer to meet you on site to establish that he is happy with the vision lines having been achieved. As you own the land you then need to submit a letter saying that you will maintain the vision lines.

+1 to all that Muffler said.
We have a similar problem with our planning and are soley being refused on the entrance. We were advised in our engineers report to remove/maintain hedgerows (even though we have sightlines without doing it)- no problem there.
We were however advised that you cannot cut back or remove hedgerows a lot of the time during the year as recent EPA guidelines forbid it as the little birdies & wildlife will have no where to go. Its okay to do it around now (Novemeber/December)- you will notice a lot of farmers out doing it around now, but do check with the LA before you do it as you don't want to get into trouble for doing it at the wrong time of the year.
Good luck with the planning- we are still in our battle and its been nearly two years & been advised it will be a third- just be patient

RKQ

Milo98 wrote: »

We were however advised that you cannot cut back or remove hedgerows a lot of the time during the year as recent EPA guidelines forbid it as the little birdies & wildlife will have no where to go. Its okay to do it around now (Novemeber/December)- you will notice a lot of farmers out doing it around now, but do check with the LA before you do it as you don't want to get into trouble for doing it at the wrong time of the year.

This has been the case for a number of years, however ditches on "dangerous" bends etc can be trimmed at any time as human life is important too.

IMO its a good law if used with common sence as human life takes priority. So I believe if its dangerous, remove it to achieve sightlines.

November is a good time to "move" trees or push back ditches, as trees can be moved and survive. So if you are careful alot of the existing trees may survive the move.

Calluna

If you were completely confident that the only issue was the legal letter, it might be worth appealling to An Bord Pleannala, as you would have the opportunity to submit some information (e.g. the letter) and it might be a simple way to overturn decision. However, as muffler said - it was a senior planner who signed your refusal, and not the engineer and while they may pass the book and say it was the engineer, before appealling it would be important to be very confident that the moving of the hedge/legal letter is the only issue. It's usually not enough to say 'we said all that' - if they missed it in the original application, you need to do more, even if you think it's not necessary - at the end of the day you are trying to please them, regardless of how menial or unnecessary the item is. Appealling to the board might be time consuming however.... Any planning consultant in your area who would cast an eye over the application and give you advice based on local knowledge?

sinnerboy

muffler wrote: »

What to do now: First of all go to the planning office and get the hard copy of the file and trawl through it and see where along the chain of command did the application fail. If it has been refused on that one issue only then you need to address that issue. Ask the planner what exactly you have to submit by way of letters, maps, plans or whatever so that your next application will run through smoothly.

+1000

archtech

Calluna wrote: »

If you were completely confident that the only issue was the legal letter, it might be worth appealling to An Bord Pleannala, as you would have the opportunity to submit some information (e.g. the letter) and it might be a simple way to overturn decision. However, as muffler said - it was a senior planner who signed your refusal, and not the engineer and while they may pass the book and say it was the engineer, before appealling it would be important to be very confident that the moving of the hedge/legal letter is the only issue. It's usually not enough to say 'we said all that' - if they missed it in the original application, you need to do more, even if you think it's not necessary - at the end of the day you are trying to please them, regardless of how menial or unnecessary the item is. Appealling to the board might be time consuming however.... Any planning consultant in your area who would cast an eye over the application and give you advice based on local knowledge?

you would get a fresh application lodged and even deal with any further information request in the period it would take the board to make a decision, It would properly cost less too, but as otheswr have said review the planning file and address the issues as the planning authority wish, if they want a letter give it to them.

sinnerboy

Carefull - you can't lodge the same thing twice . You will have to change your proposals first .

RKQ

sinnerboy wrote: »

Carefull - you can't lodge the same thing twice . You will have to change your proposals first .

I don't follow? If the house design is acceptable then there is no need to revise it. What proposals should be changed?

Naturally a letter clearly indicating revised sight lines on applicants own land, and clearly agreeing to cut back or move the ditch as necessary to achieve full sight lines, will be "new" information or at least clarification.

archtech

sinnerboy wrote: »

Carefull - you can't lodge the same thing twice . You will have to change your proposals first .

Based on the information the op supplied the only additional information they require is the letter/agreement regarding the boundary set-back. The rest of the application can remain the same.

You might advise where in the planning and development regulations that you have to change your proposals in a subsequent application or lodge the same thing twice?

sinnerboy

archtech wrote: »

You might advise where in the planning and development regulations that you have to change your proposals in a subsequent application or lodge the same thing twice?

Not just now - but basic principle is - you can not apply , get refused and reapply .

The op's application is REFUSED . To appeal it - go to ABP . In time .

If LA see same proposals again - they will refuse it again

RKQ

sinnerboy wrote: »

Not just now - but basic principle is - you can not apply , get refused and reapply .

The op's application is REFUSED . To appeal it - go to ABP . In time .

If LA see same proposals again - they will refuse it again

Not true... seen an application refused for the 4th time, each basically the same.
Also seen the exact same application granted on third attempt. Strange but true.

I'm not aware of a legal requirement to change anything - but it would be common sense!
So I see where you are coming from Sinnerboy but I'm not aware of a legal requirement.

You can't apply for permission on a site that is before ABP / being appealed, at the same time.

archtech

RKQ wrote: »

Not true... seen an application refused for the 4th time, each basically the same.
Also seen the exact same application granted on third attempt. Strange but true.

I'm not aware of a legal requirement to change anything - but it would be common sense!
So I see where you are coming from Sinnerboy but I'm not aware of a legal requirement.

You can't apply for permission on a site that is before ABP / being appealed, at the same time.

I am aware of a similar thing happing on at least two different occasions, once a grant at the second attempt, the second a grant on the fourth attempt

sinnerboy

Can't find chapter and verse on it - I may not either , granted .

But think about it . How can a planner credibly refuse something and then turn around a little while later and grant it ?

If the op wants to do this I would suggest changes - like omit a porch , re configure windows or the like . i.e. changes that retain the essence of what she wants - but changes all the same . Don't re submit precisely the same thing again . 3rd party objectors ( if there are any - op did not mention ) would make a big deal of that

RKQ

sinnerboy wrote: »

But think about it . How can a planner credibly refuse something and then turn around a little while later and grant it ?

Common sense and planning law are not the same thing!
The submitted "letter" on sightlines is a change / revision / extra info.

You may not find a legal reference but I'm happy to pm ABP Inspectors report questioning how The same planner could change her decision on the third exact application. You can read it in black and white.

A number of us have witnessed exact (validated) applications granted on third attempt.

Lets agree to differ on this point of Law.......:)

Slig

If you check the hard copy file in the planning office you should be able to find the reports from the various planners and engineers. Check this yourself and address ALL issues. It is very rare that you would get refused planning if all the engineers reccomend a grant and only one a refusal.

This is the stage where I find local councillors muddy the water and cause confusion.

Sinnerboy, I agree that the appliocation should be changed for the reasons you mentioned but alas consistancy is something that is very lacking in our planning system.

A nicely proportioned house can be refused on a design basis while the site next door could get permission for a White house replica complete with flagpoles a week later. The councils responce is that the turn over of planners is to blame.

muffler

sinnerboy wrote: »

Not just now - but basic principle is - you can not apply , get refused and reapply .

The op's application is REFUSED . To appeal it - go to ABP . In time .

If LA see same proposals again - they will refuse it again

Im not aware of any basis for not allowing a second application for the same proposal other than a concurrent appeal with ABP.

Sticking to the OP here. He was refused permission as he had an application submitted that didnt have a "legal" letter with it. All he now has to do is submit another application with the "legal" letter enclosed. That effectively, technically, & legally makes it a new and different application. It happens all the time.

The government even do the same with referendums

Charcoal

Having been through a very similar experience I have two pieces of advice.

1. Further information. Give them whatever they want. Regardless of how ridiculous it is. If you do you will get planning permission. If you don't, they regard it as a personal insult where you think you know more than them. If you had submitted the legal letter, you would have your planning permission now. We learned this the hard way.

2. Absolutely no reason why you need to submit different plans. Just submit the same plans you did with the further information request, and the legal letter. We did not have to change our plans. N.B. ensure your new site notice is on yellow background - you have to do this when a second application goes in on the one site.

I would agree with anyone who says just resubmit. It will be quicker, and you may rub the planners up the wrong way in appealing it. That could make life very difficult for you, particularly if its upheld and you have to start from scratch.

You will get there, we did, seems like a long time ago now, but I remember only too well what a horrible process it was. Give me clampers over planners any day!!