Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Planning issues - post them here MOD WARNING post #1

Options
1…8182848687…112

Comments

  • Options
    #2492
    begod
    Registered Users Posts: 61 ✭✭begod


    BryanF wrote: »
    as syd said and without meaning to sound harsh: If you can't afford a measly two WAste treatment units, there's not much chance of you building a house.

    Ok fair enough can't afford are the wrong words, 'didn't want to spend on' would admittedly more like it.

    Anyway like I said it's not an option for reasons given so the extra cost is irrelevant and so is merging the tanks into one for both buildings.

    The architect says it would be a roll of the dice but I'm just wondering if anyone has had a similar experience and what was their outcome or if someone has a different idea or opinion as to what I could do.


  • Options
    #2493
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,046 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    begod wrote: »
    Ok fair enough can't afford are the wrong words, 'didn't want to spend on' would admittedly more like it.

    Anyway like I said it's not an option for reasons given so the extra cost is irrelevant and so is merging the tanks into one for both buildings.

    The architect says it would be a roll of the dice but I'm just wondering if anyone has had a similar experience and what was their outcome or if someone has a different idea or opinion as to what I could do.

    in my experience

    1. if the reason for refusal was an over intensification of septic tanks in an area, this would not be overcome by the replacement of one by a treatment system.
    2. two independent houses connecting to one treatment system is not acceptable from a planning point of view, where the existing house has a suitable septic tank.


    have you attended a preplaning meeting with your architect and asked the planner if the architects solution to the problem is acceptable?


  • Options
    #2494
    begod
    Registered Users Posts: 61 ✭✭begod


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    in my experience

    1. if the reason for refusal was an over intensification of septic tanks in an area, this would not be overcome by the replacement of one by a treatment system.
    2. two independent houses connecting to one treatment system is not acceptable from a planning point of view, where the existing house has a suitable septic tank.


    have you attended a preplaning meeting with your architect and asked the planner if the architects solution to the problem is acceptable?

    No, I mentioned talking to the planner but the architect said she would just say go back and read the report but I will press this further now.

    No.1 is the answer I thought I would probably get but I was hoping I wouldn't.

    I wonder if they had the choice of system, say a Bord Na Mona system, would that help at all.

    Going to push for a meeting with planners and hope for the best.

    Thanks for the info.


  • Options
    #2495
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,046 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    begod wrote: »
    No, I mentioned talking to the planner but the architect said she would just say go back and read the report but I will press this further now.

    No.1 is the answer I thought I would probably get but I was hoping I wouldn't.

    I wonder if they had the choice of system, say a Bord Na Mona system, would that help at all.

    Going to push for a meeting with planners and hope for the best.

    Thanks for the info.

    just as an aside, my local authority actually prefer to see septic tanks working properly than treatment systems.

    definitely push for a pre planning meeting, you dont want to be spending money unnecessarily


  • Options
    #2496
    begod
    Registered Users Posts: 61 ✭✭begod


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    my local authority actually prefer to see septic tanks working properly than treatment systems.

    Just out of curiosity do you know why they prefer septic tanks, from what I've read and heard from others the water that comes out of those modern systems can be reused as service water, some say even drinkable ( not that I'd try :eek:), so I just assumed they would be the preferred system by planners.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2497
    loremolis
    Registered Users Posts: 944 ✭✭✭loremolis


    I came across an Irish planning website/blog recently that was well done and up to date. It included links to
    Interesting referral and appeal decisions by the Board.
    Problem is I can't remember what the name of it was.
    Anyone think they might know?


  • Options
    #2498
    Supertech
    Registered Users Posts: 597 ✭✭✭Supertech


    loremolis wrote: »
    I came across an Irish planning website/blog recently that was well done and up to date. It included links to
    Interesting referral and appeal decisions by the Board.
    Problem is I can't remember what the name of it was.
    Anyone think they might know?

    Is this the one ?

    http://buckplanning.blogspot.ie/


  • Options
    #2499
    loremolis
    Registered Users Posts: 944 ✭✭✭loremolis


    Supertech wrote: »
    Is this the one ?

    http://buckplanning.blogspot.ie/

    No. That came up when I googled


  • Options
    #2500
    cb7
    Registered Users Posts: 146 ✭✭cb7


    On our planning conditions it states the following has to be planted:
    Species to include thorn, beech, ash, oak, hazel, sycamore and holly. How strict are they on this?? Can laurels be planted instead? The council have been onto us that we have not planted trees yet.


  • Options
    #2501
    BryanF
    Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators Posts: 10,140 Mod ✭✭✭✭BryanF


    cb7 wrote: »
    On our planning conditions it states the following has to be planted:
    Species to include thorn, beech, ash, oak, hazel, sycamore and holly. How strict are they on this?? Can laurels be planted instead? The council have been onto us that we have not planted trees yet.

    Somewhere it should state: landscaping to be agreed with LA.
    It's up to you to agree planting scheme with them


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2502
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,046 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    loremolis wrote: »
    No. That came up when I googled

    this one?

    http://irishplanningnews.ie/

    its very good to keep up with decisions.


  • Options
    #2503
    loremolis
    Registered Users Posts: 944 ✭✭✭loremolis


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    this one?

    http://irishplanningnews.ie/

    its very good to keep up with decisions.

    That's the one. Thank you very much.


  • Options
    #2504
    bryaj
    Registered Users Posts: 81 ✭✭bryaj


    Would anyone know - does a garda station closed in 2013 require a change of use to enable it to be used as a drug/alcohol rehab clinic run under HSE - the station is still under Office of Public Works - it was not sold as it has telecommunication masts on building.

    Thanks for any advice - don't want to go route of complaint to County Council until I know a little more.


  • Options
    #2505
    44thservice
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 156 ✭✭44thservice


    Is there a need for planning permission extending a 10 x 10 foot by either 10 x 15 or 15 x 15 ? Just as work space for what i do?


  • Options
    #2506
    DOCARCH
    Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 17,726 Mod ✭✭✭✭DOCARCH


    44thservice wrote: »
    Is there a need for planning permission extending a 10 x 10 foot by either 10 x 15 or 15 x 15 ? Just as work space for what i do?

    Depends on what you do and where you do it?


  • Options
    #2507
    44thservice
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 156 ✭✭44thservice


    DOCARCH wrote: »
    Depends on what you do and where you do it?

    :P sorry i mend and craft my own guitars, i need a space where im not subjected to a corner constantly moving stuff around to work on the different parts of the guitar etc


  • Options
    #2508
    RamboArnie
    Registered Users Posts: 17 ✭RamboArnie


    Currently in the construction stage of a small extension and would like to make a few changes that will affect the rear elevation, i.e i have changed the glazing due to structural needs. therefore;

    Is it possible to apply for planning permission for "minor alterations to a previously approved planning permission" without construction coming to a halt on site? can other work carry on while this is in planning?

    thank you


  • Options
    #2509
    BryanF
    Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators Posts: 10,140 Mod ✭✭✭✭BryanF


    RamboArnie wrote: »
    Currently in the construction stage of a small extension and would like to make a few changes that will affect the rear elevation, i.e i have changed the glazing due to structural needs. therefore;

    Is it possible to apply for planning permission for "minor alterations to a previously approved planning permission" without construction coming to a halt on site? can other work carry on while this is in planning?

    thank you
    get your arch to advise and if appropriate submit a letter/drawing to council regularising the changes


  • Options
    #2510
    BryanF
    Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators Posts: 10,140 Mod ✭✭✭✭BryanF


    44thservice wrote: »
    :P sorry i mend and craft my own guitars, i need a space where im not subjected to a corner constantly moving stuff around to work on the different parts of the guitar etc
    what DOCarch is asking:
    is the extension proposed to the rear of your house

    is there any extension there currently and what size is it
    etc etc

    scroll down to schedule 2 part 1 for more info on what is considered exempted development


  • Options
    #2511
    44thservice
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 156 ✭✭44thservice


    BryanF wrote: »
    what DOCarch is asking:
    is the extension proposed to the rear of your house

    is there any extension there currently and what size is it
    etc etc

    scroll down to schedule 2 part 1 for more info on what is considered exempted development


    its just a 10 foot by 10 foot basic shed for our lawn cutting and other garden stuf


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2512
    BryanF
    Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators Posts: 10,140 Mod ✭✭✭✭BryanF


    cb7 wrote: »
    On our planning conditions it states the following has to be planted:
    Species to include thorn, beech, ash, oak, hazel, sycamore and holly. How strict are they on this?? Can laurels be planted instead? The council have been onto us that we have not planted trees yet.
    44thservice wrote: »
    Is there a need for planning permission extending a 10 x 10 foot by either 10 x 15 or 15 x 15 ? Just as work space for what i do?
    DOCARCH wrote: »
    Depends on what you do and where you do it?
    44thservice wrote: »
    :P sorry i mend and craft my own guitars, i need a space where im not subjected to a corner constantly moving stuff around to work on the different parts of the guitar etc
    BryanF wrote: »
    what DOCarch is asking:
    is the extension proposed to the rear of your house

    is there any extension there currently and what size is it
    etc etc

    scroll down to schedule 2 part 1 for more info on what is considered exempted development
    44thservice wrote: »
    its just a 10 foot by 10 foot basic shed for our lawn cutting and other garden stuf

    Ok, I miss understood, due to a lack of clear info. Anyhow read the exempted section on sheds in the legislation I posted


  • Options
    #2513
    jensully19
    Registered Users Posts: 2 ✭jensully19


    Hello

    Does anyone know if you are required to get planning permission if there is the shell of an old house on it already? Its a derelict house but house is still there all the same

    Any info would be great thanks

    :D


  • Options
    #2514
    DOCARCH
    Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 17,726 Mod ✭✭✭✭DOCARCH


    If the house is not habitable, the use has been 'extinguished' and you need planning permission to reinstate.


  • Options
    #2515
    Ice87
    Registered Users Posts: 315 ✭✭Ice87


    Hi folks,

    Quick question. We are looking to move the front door of our house to a more central location. It's currently a bit to the right. Do we require planning permission for this? We won't be extending to the front will just be changing the face of the house.

    Any advice appreciated.

    Cheers!


  • Options
    #2516
    Gumbo
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,475 Mod ✭✭✭✭Gumbo


    Ice87 wrote: »
    Hi folks,

    Quick question. We are looking to move the front door of our house to a more central location. It's currently a bit to the right. Do we require planning permission for this? We won't be extending to the front will just be changing the face of the house.

    Any advice appreciated.

    Cheers!

    I would think yes, depending on how much you are moving it and if it would be very noticeable.

    What's happening with the internal layout that the door can move to the middle?


  • Options
    #2517
    Ice87
    Registered Users Posts: 315 ✭✭Ice87


    The front door currently leads in to a sitting room and the old kitchen that was at the front of the house will act as our new hallway with the kitchen moving to the rear.

    The front door will probably only be moving about 5 foot in total.


  • Options
    #2518
    loremolis
    Registered Users Posts: 944 ✭✭✭loremolis


    DOCARCH wrote: »
    If the house is not habitable, the use has been 'extinguished' and you need planning permission to reinstate.

    Are you sure? Wasn't there a high court case recently feeling with abandonment of uses?


  • Options
    #2519
    summereire
    Registered Users Posts: 299 ✭✭summereire


    If a building is granted planning and built entirely according to planning, but just not fully completed, and is used for a long time (decades)- what is then the status of finishing it off now according to the original planning?

    Can it:

    1) Be completed without further paperwork because it was granted planning for the above to begin with

    2) Needs another application, in which case is it:
    2a: planning is applied for the just the additional bit (even though it was previously granted)
    2b: planning is applied for the whole building (existing and new bit), both of which were previously granted but only the existing part of which was built
    2c: retention is applied for the existing part and a new application for the previously approved but not built bit (if so are these two separate processes or one application)

    Thank you very much for your thoughts on this.


  • Options
    #2520
    BryanF
    Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators Posts: 10,140 Mod ✭✭✭✭BryanF


    summereire wrote: »
    If a building is granted planning and built entirely according to planning, but just not fully completed, and is used for a long time (decades)- what is then the status of finishing it off now .
    if the building is not completed, then it's not in compliance with planning...

    Seek professional advice. The question is to vague.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2521
    summereire
    Registered Users Posts: 299 ✭✭summereire


    BryanF wrote: »
    if the building is not completed, then it's not in compliance with planning...

    Seek professional advice. The question is to vague.

    Thanks, I will be but am keen to do the research first. As the building is partially completed and has been in use for a few decades, the question is how to regularise that and expand it- hence the possible options I listed. Is there anywhere where the process for this is outlined- either in the form of a guide or any tips to what legislation particularly deals with this?


Advertisement