Planning permission objection

Lexus1976

Bought an apartment 4 years ago and have recently discovered that a developer is looking to build apartments (4 stories high) next to my apartment which will block my view completely. Basically i will end up looking out onto a grey wall.

How do I submit my views on this development in order to get it declined by the planning department?

apkb

go to your local councill and make a complaint against the permission. then when the council are reviewing the application they will see your complaint and make decision, i think there should be a reference number to the aplication

muffler

Have a read through this short leaflet

pseudo-tech

Lexus1976 wrote: »

Bought an apartment 4 years ago and have recently discovered that a developer is looking to build apartments (4 stories high) next to my apartment which will block my view completely. Basically i will end up looking out onto a grey wall.

How do I submit my views on this development in order to get it declined by the planning department?

You are not entitled to your view and it is not a valid planning reason for objecting. You will need to find other reasons to support your argument.

Penn

It may not matter if it blocks his view, but how close is it OP? Will it be significantly effecting the amount of light entering through the ope? Right to light is a valid reason

Wonky Knees

There may be a range of legitimate issues which you may wish to object to. Look over the plans in detail and depending on how close the build is to your window and to other windows there may be grounds to object.

You need to be careful of the time limits. You also need to ask yourself how far you wish to go. Would you appeal to the board or even on to the high court? Again, all depends on the facts of the case. Either way I would recommend canvassing the views of other neighbours.

If you then believe you have a strong case, I would even consider approaching the builder in advance of an objection to see if a compromise can be reached. In the current climate it makes sense to try make life less complicated for all concerned. I wouldn't like to be in a builder's shoes facing the prospect of a delayed project or in the shoes of his staff!

Mellor

paddyirishman85 wrote: »

It may not matter if it blocks his view, but how close is it OP? Will it be significantly effecting the amount of light entering through the ope? Right to light is a valid reason

In general. No it isn't. It's a civil matter.
(there can be exceptions)

etcetc

http://www.bvps.org.uk/Grounds%20for%20Objecting.htm

Penn

Mellor wrote: »

In general. No it isn't. It's a civil matter.
(there can be exceptions)

Well obviously it depends on many factors to be taken into consideration, but if it blocks out a lot of the light entering his property, its a much more valid reason to object than the development spoiling his view

Carlow52

paddyirishman85 wrote: »

Well obviously it depends on many factors to be taken into consideration, but if it blocks out a lot of the light entering his property, its a much more valid reason to object than the development spoiling his view

AFAIK there is no right to light in Ireland so unless they brick up his window it will be difficult to pursue

Outkast_IRE

Iv been through objections with people before against large developments in residential areas, and in Cork anyway dont even mention right to light unless the building is being built nearly ontop of you. The planner will see right to light and just skip past it.
You are much better off getting a copy of your local area plan, go into the planning office and get a look of the proposed development and try to find areas that it is at loggerheads with the local area plan.
What size is the development is traffic very bad in your area ? its worth a mention if it is . But get your local area plan and work from there to put forth a well thought out to the point argument.

Mellor

paddyirishman85 wrote: »

Well obviously it depends on many factors to be taken into consideration, but if it blocks out a lot of the light entering his property, its a much more valid reason to object than the development spoiling his view

No it isn't.
Read my last post. Right to light isn't a valid grounds for objection.
It is a civil matter however, and there are easement situations.

archtech

The op hasn't stated how close the proposed building is to his/her property, as this will have a bearing on the validity of any objection. The impact of a building 5m from the op's apartment will be significantly different to the impact of a building sited 40m away.

If the proposed development causes significant overshadowing of the property for long periods of the day, this can and has been used as a valid reason for objecting and has resulted in amendment to or refusal of proposed developments in the past, particularly if no overshadowing of the (objectors) property existed previously.

pseudo-tech

Outkast_IRE wrote: »

Iv been through objections with people before against large developments in residential areas, and in Cork anyway dont even mention right to light unless the building is being built nearly ontop of you. The planner will see right to light and just skip past it.
You are much better off getting a copy of your local area plan, go into the planning office and get a look of the proposed development and try to find areas that it is at loggerheads with the local area plan.
What size is the development is traffic very bad in your area ? its worth a mention if it is . But get your local area plan and work from there to put forth a well thought out to the point argument.

A fine example on how the planning system can be abused by third parties. The OP stated that they did not want a development in close proximity to their apartment as it would block their view. However, as mentioned in the previous posts this may not work so why not try other things to achieve the same objective! Where is the honesty in all of this?
It's just wrong and an abuse of the system!!!!

Penn

pseudo-tech wrote: »

A fine example on how the planning system can be abused by third parties. The OP stated that they did not want a development in close proximity to their apartment as it would block their view. However, as mentioned in the previous posts this may not work so why not try other things to achieve the same objective! Where is the honesty in all of this?
It's just wrong and an abuse of the system!!!!

I don't see how its an abuse of the system. We've suggested other matters he can object on, and if any of them are valid reasons to lodge an objection, the OP is well within his rights to. Obviously, not having seen the plans or the area, we have no idea if these are valid reasons, but that is for the council to decide and determine. That is what the system is there for

beolight

cant see what all fuss is about

this apartment block will never be built

have you not read the papers/ listened to the news lately?

developer is only going through the motions on instruction from his bank ontill NAMA step in

onq

Mellor wrote: »

In general. No it isn't. It's a civil matter.
(there can be exceptions)

Been a while since I last looked at this, so I may stand corrected.

Rights to Ancient Lights is a Civil matter.
Test case was a jeweller who needed north light to do his work.
Rests on the quantum and quality of light as opposed to a view AFAICR.
Only establishes rights in a particular sense, i.e. for particular window opes in particular elevations for a particular use.

On the other hand...

Visual Amenity, Overshadowing and Overlooking are planning matters.
Daylight amenity -vs overshadowing is one criterion you can usually suggest to a planning officer.
I think the Building Research Establishment standard is the current one - this may supersede the older one requiring a quantum of sunlight into the private rear area of the house on a particular date in March of any year.
Sun path diagrams and angles could be reasonably requested to establish the effect on adjoining developments.
It will also help the OP to quantify the actual reduction in amenity, as opposed to what he may perceive will occur.

Visual Amenity is a separate planning issue as is provision of Public Open Space as well as the quality of the open space provided.
The previous planning application [the apartment in which the OP lives] may have justified its density partly by the amount of and quality of open space and the high level of labndscaping/design, facilities and amenity within it.

Another useful approach is to assess the application in terms fo local need and amenity.
This is potentially more easily quantifiable and therefore harder for the developer to rebut if its true.
No local authority wants to add to the debacle of endless empty apartments dotted all over their functional area.
In this case a survey of all the unfinished and/or empty/unlet/unsold apartments in the area could be carried out and an argument advanced on prematurity grounds which could sway the planners and perhaps An Bórd Pleanála.

An Observation could be made within five weeks from the date of lodgement of the application taking all these factors into account, but you'd have to prove the point in the case of each issue you raise.

Its not an easy task for a layperson and there are no guarantees, even for a planning consultant or architect competent to advise on planning matters.
But equally, with an surfeit of residential accommodation available, there is no pressing need for the permission either.

The OP should consider that unless is a View is Listed its not protected, and its usually listed for the benefit of The Public Good, not the private amenity of individual apartment dwellers [sometimes hard to see the difference here].

The OP should consider that if you want a good job done you have to be prepared to develop the expertise yourself and do it, or else pay for it to be done - defending your position will cost money.

The OP should also consider that this may be a long haul, that he will have to mount a sustainable defence each time the developer makes a planning application - the developer has to only succeed once.

That having been said, the developer across the road from a neighbour of mine is currently looking at the refusal of his sixth planning application.

Competent, polite persistence sometimes pays.

HTH

ONQ.

onq

pseudo-tech wrote: »

A fine example on how the planning system can be abused by third parties. The OP stated that they did not want a development in close proximity to their apartment as it would block their view. However, as mentioned in the previous posts this may not work so why not try other things to achieve the same objective! Where is the honesty in all of this?
It's just wrong and an abuse of the system!!!!

If you're working within the system, it cannot be an abuse OF the system.
Please don't knock someone for knowing how to use what is a very democratic and inclusive planning process.

ONQ.

onq

pseudo-tech wrote: »

You are not entitled to your view and it is not a valid planning reason for objecting. You will need to find other reasons to support your argument.

Have you asked the OP if the view is Listed yet?
Or if some of the adjoining site is sterilised for whatever reason?
Can we try and get a better quality of exercise in this thread than jumping at conclusions?

ONQ.

Outkast_IRE

pseudo-tech wrote: »

A fine example on how the planning system can be abused by third parties. The OP stated that they did not want a development in close proximity to their apartment as it would block their view. However, as mentioned in the previous posts this may not work so why not try other things to achieve the same objective! Where is the honesty in all of this?
It's just wrong and an abuse of the system!!!!

Its not an abuse of the system if there is a conflict with the local area plan he has every right to point it out . The planner will decide if he raises a vaild point . Where is the abuse ?