Extension or not ?

Marian9

My neighbor is building an "extension" to his terraced house. This extension shares part of a wall, but for the rest, it is completely independent. No inside access from the main house to the extension, 2 separate ESB meters, 2 distinct front doors and addresses, 2 different heating system, independent sewer etc...
Is this possible without planning permission ?

sydthebeat

Marian9 wrote: »

My neighbor is building an "extension" to his terraced house. This extension shares part of a wall, but for the rest, it is completely independent. No inside access from the main house to the extension, 2 separate ESB meters, 2 distinct front doors and addresses, 2 different heating system, independent sewer etc...
Is this possible without planning permission ?

yes. Once al lother conditions

Its dependent on the use. If the use is ancillary to the main house then its exempt.

However if its use is as an independent housing units it is not.

Are you sure of 2 ESB meters?

Marian9

Yes, two distinct lines and meter.
Two distinct Eircom lines aswell.
And the extension is 53 sqm (mesured at outside walls).

sydthebeat

you're very well equipped with information

Straight away that needs planning permission. The most you can build without permission is 40 sq m (internally). And its highly unlikely the external walls equate to 13 sq m

Marian9

Thanks for your answer.
Now, could you tell what document to refer for theses rules, please ?

sydthebeat

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2001/en/si/0600.html#sched2
section 2 of S.I. No. 600/2001 — Planning and Development Regulations, 2001


http://www.wicklow.ie/Apps/WicklowBeta/Publications/Planning/Schedule%202-%20Planning%20Reg%202001.pdf

CLASS 1
The extension of a house, by the
construction or erection of an extension
(including a conservatory) to the rear of
the house or by the conversion for use as
part of the house of any garage, store,
shed or other similar structure attached to
the rear or to the side of the house.

subject to the following 7 limitations:


1. (a) Where the house has not been
extended previously, the floor area of
any such extension shall not exceed 40
square metres.
(b) Subject to paragraph (a), where the
house is terraced or semi-detached, the
floor area of any extension above
ground level shall not exceed 12 square
metres.
(c) Subject to paragraph (a), where the
house is detached, the floor area of any
extension above ground level shall not
exceed 20 square metres.

2. (a) Where the house has been
extended previously, the floor area of
any such extension, taken together with
the floor area of any previous extension
or extensions constructed or erected
after 1 October 1964, including those
for which planning permission has been
obtained, shall not exceed 40 square
metres.
(b) Subject to paragraph (a), where the
house is terraced or semi-detached and
has been extended previously, the floor
area of any extension above ground
level taken together with the floor area
of any previous extension or extensions
above ground level constructed or
erected after 1 October 1964, including
those for which planning permission has
been obtained, shall not exceed 12
square metres.
(c) Subject to paragraph (a), where the
house is detached and has been
extended previously, the floor area of
any extension above ground level, taken
together with the floor area of any
previous extension or extensions above
ground level constructed or erected after
1 October 1964, including those for
which planning permission has been
obtained, shall not exceed 20 square
metres.

3. Any above ground floor extension
shall be a distance of not less than 2
metres from any party boundary.

4. (a) Where the rear wall of the house
does not include a gable, the height of
the walls of any such extension shall
not exceed the height of the rear wall of
the house.
(b) Where the rear wall of the house
includes a gable, the height of the walls
of any such extension shall not exceed
the height of the side walls of the house.
(c) The height of the highest part of the
roof of any such extension shall not
exceed, in the case of a flat roofed
extension, the height of the eaves or
parapet, as may be appropriate, or, in
any other case, shall not exceed the
height of the highest part of the roof of
the dwelling.

5. The construction or erection of any
such extension to the rear of the house
shall not reduce the area of private open
space, reserved exclusively for the use
of the occupants of the house, to the rear
of the house to less than 25 square
metres.

6. (a) Any window proposed at ground
level in any such extension shall not be
less than 1 metre from the boundary it
faces.
(b) Any window proposed above ground
level in any such extension shall not be
less than 11 metres from the boundary it
faces.
(c) Where the house is detached and the
floor area of the extension above
ground level exceeds 12 square metres,
any window proposed at above ground
level shall not be less than 11 metres
from the boundary it faces.

7. The roof of any extension shall not
be used as a balcony or roof garden.

Marian9

Whow !
I'm impressed. Many thanks for your time.

Mellor

Marian9 wrote: »

No inside access from the main house to the extension, 2 separate ESB meters, 2 distinct front doors and addresses, 2 different heating system, independent sewer etc...
Is this possible without planning permission ?

I'm not sure how you would know any of those things.
Have you seen the separate ESB meters, heating system, sewer etc.
how do you know here is no access internally etc.
None of those things make a difference to planning but the separate services would suggest an intention to use it as separately accommodation, which requires PP.

Marian9 wrote: »

Yes, two distinct lines and meter.
Two distinct Eircom lines aswell.
And the extension is 53 sqm (mesured at outside walls).

If the 53 sq.m is accurate then it required PP.
How do you know its 50sqm, did you see plans or estimate.

Marian9

Well, The ESB man told me about the meters and has to get in and out each construction for the readings. A second front door has been opened and the hall has been partitioned (Visible from outside). The phone lines are at 2 separate addresses in the phone book. The sewer pipes of the extension are sticking out through the boundary wall, and the water falls in the open, in a hole dug in my garden (Don't know where it goes then).
As for the measurements, they are as accurate as a mesuring tape can be, but from the outside walls around the construction.

Marian9

On a ground level pitched roofed extension built on the boundary line, my neighbor has opened 2 "Velux" of the side of the roof facing now my kitchen and bedroom.:eek:
Them "Velux" are located over 3.50m from ground.
I learnt previously :
(a) Any window proposed at ground
level in any such extension shall not be
less than 1 meter from the boundary it
faces.
(b) Any window proposed above ground
level in any such extension shall not be
less than 11 meters from the boundary it
faces.
My questions :
Are "Velux" considered as windows ?
If they are not, why not ?
If they are, when they are on a pitched roof, are they considered at ground level ?

sydthebeat

Thread merged, please dont open multiple threads one a singular issue.

Marian9 wrote: »

On a ground level pitched roofed extension built on the boundary line, my neighbor has opened 2 "Velux" of the side of the roof facing now my kitchen and bedroom.:eek:
Them "Velux" are located over 3.50m from ground.
I learnt previously :
(a) Any window proposed at ground
level in any such extension shall not be
less than 1 meter from the boundary it
faces.
(b) Any window proposed above ground
level in any such extension shall not be
less than 11 meters from the boundary it
faces.
My questions :
Are "Velux" considered as windows ?
If they are not, why not ?
If they are, when they are on a pitched roof, are they considered at ground level ?

Velux rooflights have been shown to be exempt from permission in various An Bord Pleanala determinations.

Thats a very small issue in your case. the obvious on is the size of the extension.

If you have suspicions that your neighbour is breaking the law you are entitled to report him to the relevant authority, who, in this case, is your local planning office.

Defor_Dog

I believe that "velux" rooflights are generally not seen as windows per say as the generally are installed in pitched rooves meaning that occupant is looking at the sky through them and not overlooking your property or directly in through your windows....
But if there is a direct view from these veluxes into your house then you would have a very strong argument to say that these are indeed "windows".
But as already staed above by others the extension as a whole is your "macro"concern, the velux is "micro"

Mellor

Marian9 wrote: »

Are "Velux" considered as windows ?
If they are not, why not ?
If they are, when they are on a pitched roof, are they considered at ground level ?

No they aren't windows. They are rooflights.
The reason being they don't over look your property, which is the reason for the control.
They aren't at ground level nor an above ground level. Its roof level. Neither the 1m nor the 11m control applies.

I'd say stop worrying about tryign to catch them in a technicality and look at the bigger issues. The size, and the intention to lease are pretty concrete reasons for planning beign required.

Defor_Dog wrote: »

But if there is a direct view from these veluxes into your house then you would have a very strong argument to say that these are indeed "windows".

The velux windows are on a roof at 3.5m high, the only way they could look directly into the OPs house if their was a over looking window in it.

Marian9

Thank you everyone.
Following your advices, I have sent a letter with my concerns about the extension next door to the local authorities.
This morning a nice gentleman came from the planning office. Because the construction got a government grant, he was consulted officially and gave himself the agreement to build it without PP.
Very kind, he has explained every single point.


Are 53 sqm not a bit too big ?
This is the outside surface. It is not unusual to have over 13 sqm of masonry on a 40 sqm extension and we don't check on the size of a construction once it has started.


Can one build over the main sewer line, now ?
His extension has been allowed over the main sewer line because it is exempt of PP. Yours had to stay behind the line because you built it with PP.


Doesn't it look like a semi-detached bungalow ?
When we received the demand, the owner said the extension was ancillary to the main house. We don't check on the use of an extension after it is built. The fact that there is no access from the house to the extension is not a problem as long as there is a shared wall.


The boundary wall is cracking under the weight !
The cracks and the absence of foundation are not a planning office issue. There are building rules, but they are only guide lines. It is only the owner's responsibility to check on the foundations of his construction.


Can you see the encroachment ?
Trespassing and encroachment are not a planning office issue. The walls, eaves and gutters only seem to have encroached into your property. In fact, in Ireland, nobody can tell where a boundary is. The land register is not reliable. The presence of concrete posts and a fence are not sufficient to establish a boundary with certainty.


What is this gully trap doing in my garden?
As for the encroachment, it is not our problem and nobody can tell if it is in your garden. It is not unusual to have kitchen and bathroom sewer pipes falling in an open gully trap previously designed for rain water.
　
Then he asked what made me wonder about the extension.

I should not have mentioned www.board.ie !

Not only does he thinks very little about it, he warned me about the risks of getting advices from this website.
He explained : "They know nothing about Ireland. Most of them have lived in England. Here it is not like in England. Irish have a long history of braking the laws. It is a tradition. The judges understand that. Here the law has little to do with justice".

Finally, he gave me many examples were the judge ruled unexpectedly on strong cases, warned me about all the money I would loose if I was to challenge the extension and told me that we might even end-up, like many, with a jail sentence if we do not address the judge in an appropriate manner while in the court room.

At my age, I am not willing to fight a lost battle and this gentleman has been very clear on that.
Thank you again everyone.

BryanF

Sounds like we should have suggested professional advice and that person (arch or surveyor) spoken to your mate from the council in your stead... Some of the language used above is outrageous, but we haven't seen this extension!

Markcheese

Wow, that last post from Marian 9 read very depressing , run along there now , and don't be concerning yourself with these things, planning building control and trespass just don't link up .... And don't think about the courts cos sometimes our judiciary like to be arseholes ...... ( I always thought if u split 1 house in 2 you needed planning, let alone built a second house onto the back wall ?

sydthebeat

assuming a 3 walled extension and assume standard measurements of 5 x 8 meters.... that means the 13 sq m extra comes from building walls that are 720mm thick !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i sincerely doubt they are that thick.


as to the language and advice he gave you, i am simply dumbfounded... that a government official would use such disparaging and simply incorrect advice.

Its my opinion that the guy knows his balls are on the chopping block if he gave the go ahead for something which required planning permission.... and this is his way of tell you to "shut up"..... its not you who would be challenging anything, its the local authority who would have to serve enforcement notice if the building is unauthorised.... im deeply disappointed that this is the standard of advice you were given.

muffler

I'm shocked at what has transpired. The planner appeared to be covering his ass to no ends and in a roundabout way was threatening. Quite simply he cant say or do those things and based on what you have said he is a total and utter disgrace and is certainly not representative of planners as a whole.

Marian9 wrote: »

At my age, I am not willing to fight a lost battle and this gentleman has been very clear on that.

Listen, you have proved on this thread that you can write and maybe this is an over-simplistic observation but in my opinion that is all you have to do.

Write a letter to the planning dept (address it to the Co. Secretary) and ask for a written response to your complaint. Write a letter to the building control dept also outlining all your concerns. Be sure to keep a record of dates that letters were posted, people visited your property etc etc. If matters haven't been resolved or you suspect some form of cover-up then contact the Ombudsman's Office.

BryanF

am I right in thinking that such an extension type is not included in the draft building control legislation, it says a lot about our supposed 'building control' and what will be gained by this amendment.
My advice to the op would be to send a letter to the senior executive planner for the area and copy it to the building control officer and an board pleanala

DOCARCH

Marian, do you know what section of the 'planning department' the guy came from and/or did he give you his title (was he a planning officer, building control officer, enforcement officer)?

I would suggest, first, you make a written complaint to the enforcement section (rather than just the planning department) of the Council - this being a seperate section of the planning department. Many Councils will have information of how you do this/where to send your complaint. The Council have to investigate and then outline their findings back to you in writing.

Also wondering did the guy have a small piece of carpet with him and a brush to sweep things under it! Sounds like he was trying placate you with is 'superior' knowledge.

One thing that is correct, I'm afraid, is that issues of tresspass are civil matters between you and your neighbour - the Council will not get involved in issues such as this (they have no remit to).

rayjdav

Marian,
+ 1 to all above advise but I would seriously consider, as BryanF suggested, that you now engage a good Local AT/Arch to have a site visit and then for them to correspond with the LA on your behalf. Not meaning to belittle your attempts but, as you have met mini Hitler, we are used to dealing with the odd awkward b****x that they have a tendancy to hire and off the cuff can respond and argue their sometimes ludicrious comments/decisions with extracts from Law/Legislation, that a lot of them actually don't know, despite it being their job.

If the above is verbatim, it is disgraceful that the LA could actully let that level of knowledge:rolleyes: loose on the public.

Signing off from Munster, seemingly now in Engerland??

Poor Uncle Tom

Marian9 wrote: »

This morning a nice gentleman came from the planning office. Because the construction got a government grant, he was consulted officially and gave himself the agreement to build it without PP.
Very kind, he has explained every single point.

We don't know the particular ins and outs of this case, so it is going to be very hard for anyone here to say whether the Local Authority was wrong or right in giving the go ahead for this the way they did. One thing is certain, no Local Authority can give the go ahead to encroach or trespass on others property, that is a legal issue and one any Architect/Engineer/Arch Tech/Surveyor can solve with your solicitor.

Marian9 wrote: »

Are 53 sqm not a bit too big ?
This is the outside surface. It is not unusual to have over 13 sqm of masonry on a 40 sqm extension and we don't check on the size of a construction once it has started.

You are being mislead here. As sydthebeat has shown above it is not likely that there would be 13 sqm of area under external walls and it is the job of the LA to check on the size of a construction of foot of a specific neighbouring complaint.

Marian9 wrote: »

Can one build over the main sewer line, now ?
His extension has been allowed over the main sewer line because it is exempt of PP. Yours had to stay behind the line because you built it with PP.

I would like to see this in writing from this official.

Marian9 wrote: »

Doesn't it look like a semi-detached bungalow ?
When we received the demand, the owner said the extension was ancillary to the main house. We don't check on the use of an extension after it is built. The fact that there is no access from the house to the extension is not a problem as long as there is a shared wall.

To protect householders, the demand on amenities and services alike it is the duty of the LA to satisfy themselves that any extension would be used for the needs and enjoyment of the existing occupants and their family. It doesn't sound to me like this LA representative has taken account of this.

Marian9 wrote: »

The boundary wall is cracking under the weight !
The cracks and the absence of foundation are not a planning office issue. There are building rules, but they are only guide lines. It is only the owner's responsibility to check on the foundations of his construction.

For LA estates, full, as constructed details can be requested by the LA if they are concerned about the safety of any construction, in order to satisfy themselves that any unsafe building practices will not lead to any accidents. I would have thought that this would have been highlighted by the fact that you asked the question at all.

Marian9 wrote: »

Can you see the encroachment ?
Trespassing and encroachment are not a planning office issue. The walls, eaves and gutters only seem to have encroached into your property. In fact, in Ireland, nobody can tell where a boundary is. The land register is not reliable. The presence of concrete posts and a fence are not sufficient to establish a boundary with certainty.

There are two parts to this:
1. This 'nice gentleman from the planning office' has indicated that there appears to be encroachment. This is enough on its own to halt the construction in full until this legal issue is sorted out to everyones best interest.
2. Only in a very small percentage of cases are boundaries not immediately identifiable. If the housing development is under 30 years old there will be individual property maps with Declaration of Identities attached and these would have been marked out by and signed off by competent Architects/Engineers, etc. The remainder of that statement is simply not true.

Marian9 wrote: »

What is this gully trap doing in my garden?
As for the encroachment, it is not our problem and nobody can tell if it is in your garden. It is not unusual to have kitchen and bathroom sewer pipes falling in an open gully trap previously designed for rain water.

This statement is just confusing, you need to get in a good local Arch Tech/Engineer etc., to protect your own interests. They should be able to establish what is actually happening.
　

Marian9 wrote: »

Then he asked what made me wonder about the extension.

I should not have mentioned www.board.ie !

Not only does he thinks very little about it, he warned me about the risks of getting advices from this website.
He explained : "They know nothing about Ireland. Most of them have lived in England. Here it is not like in England. Irish have a long history of braking the laws. It is a tradition. The judges understand that. Here the law has little to do with justice".

His opinion of Boards.ie is irrelevant, the rest of the statement is just an untruth. Boards.ie is Irish based. The Planning & Construction Forum answer relevant posts using links to the Irish Planning and Development Act., Irish Legislation and Building Regulations and while we may discuss other countries planning laws and building regulations it is generally to compare them to our own. All the moderators on the C&P forum happen to be Irish, (not that that matters). A lot of the posters on this site and the moderators here are professionals in this field and a lot have been self employed in this field for a very long time. Whether someone has lived in England is irrelevant.

Marian9 wrote: »

Finally, he gave me many examples were the judge ruled unexpectedly on strong cases, warned me about all the money I would loose if I was to challenge the extension and told me that we might even end-up, like many, with a jail sentence if we do not address the judge in an appropriate manner while in the court room.

This is tantamount to being a threat and I would ask him to put it in writing.

Marian9 wrote: »

At my age, I am not willing to fight a lost battle and this gentleman has been very clear on that.
Thank you again everyone.

If this thread is genuine and what you have discussed is actually the case then the Enforcement Section of the LA needs to address your concerns in writing, you will need to contact a good local professional, as mentioned, and your solicitor. After all if there is encroachment, etc., this affects the sale ability and value of your property.