Costly Planning condition

Troy2013

Hey folks, sorry in advance for the long post!

Hoping some wise soul will have a bit of guidance on a planning condition causing me serious heart palpitations tonight.

The planning condition states we have to set back the road boundary by 2metres& Tarmac that area to the specification of the road engineer. On the face of it you loose some garden etc. but the main problem is the costs.

To explain, Our site road boundary is 140feet long, there are 16 fully mature oak trees on it which will require a road closure to take down (busy regional road), at least 40% of our garden is 12feet below the road level and 3 ESB poles run along the ditch.

We thought the set back was just to comply with sight lines as the current driveway was in before planning laws existed but we are now told (off the record) that it's a road widening exercise by the council. Quotes to comply with the condition are now in at over €160k!! Yes, you read that figure right.. Supposedly between felling licenses, road closures& needing retaining walls to hold the fill up to road level this is a conservative cost and obviously renders our planning useless to us(we don't even have that money for the entire renovation).

We missed the appeal time as the quotes took ages to come in& we never expected it to be so huge!

House has been there for nearly a century& the entrance was previously used to have farm machinery going in and out with no regard for safety or sight lines. The road engineer doesn't seem to want to engage with us to find an achievable compromise which is bizarre as we could just live in the house without doing the planned work and use the unsafe driveway as is.

Any advice is really appreciated. Thanks.

DOCARCH

You have not said what you applied for planning permission for? Is it to extend the existing house?

Troy2013

DOCARCH wrote: »

You have not said what you applied for planning permission for? Is it to extend the existing house?

Sorry- should have put that in! Planning is to extend the house& to put in a replacement septic tank.

delfagio

Hi Troy,

To be honest, I think this is a bit cheeky and smart for the council to be trying to get you basically to do their work. It seems they are as you found out off the record, looking to try widen the road and it's a bit of a get out clause for them to get you to cough up and do the works.

Personally I would if it was possible, don't do any works to your house and give it a couple of years and see if the council then do these works themselves.

They may have to approach you then to get permission to extend the road /retaining wall onto your property. This may involve wayleave agreement which they would have to pay a sum of money to you. There again I'm not exactly sure of where the land boundaries are or if this is even possible without seeing what they plan for the road.

160k on top of an extension price is crazy, and personally you would need a bloody mortgage alone just for these road works etc and couldn't possibly see a bank agreeing to that.

Sorry, I'm bloody mad just from reading your post.

Maybe see if there is an architect or solicitor that could advise you on this.

I can't see how if there is an existing property and driveway entrance there that they could make you do all these changes just for you to add an extension and septic tank.

Troy2013

delfagio wrote: »

Hi Troy,

To be honest, I think this is a bit cheeky and smart for the council to be trying to get you basically to do their work. It seems they are as you found out off the record, looking to try widen the road and it's a bit of a get out clause for them to get you to cough up and do the works.

Personally I would if it was possible, don't do any works to your house and give it a couple of years and see if the council then do these works themselves.

They may have to approach you then to get permission to extend the road /retaining wall onto your property. This may involve wayleave agreement which they would have to pay a sum of money to you. There again I'm not exactly sure of where the land boundaries are or if this is even possible without seeing what they plan for the road.

160k on top of an extension price is crazy, and personally you would need a bloody mortgage alone just for these road works etc and couldn't possibly see a bank agreeing to that.

Sorry, I'm bloody mad just from reading your post.

Maybe see if there is an architect or solicitor that could advise you on this.

I can't see how if there is an existing property and driveway entrance there that they could make you do all these changes just for you to add an extension and septic tank.

Hi Delfagio,

Thanks very much for taking the time to reply.

I am glad to hear that someone else thinks it is totally unreasonable. Sometimes when you are so close to the problem it is hard to know if you are taking it too personally and not seeing the wood from the trees- or in our case 16 trees!!

We spoke with our Architect & Engineer who both advised that they didn't get very far with the Road Engineer. He claims that the road needs widening for road safety concerns. We had previously agreed, as part of our pre-planning meetings, to move the driveway to achieve better sightlines & cut back trees and ditches accordingly but the conditions themselves go far beyond that.

The current Septic Tank is definitely not good for the environment and we really wanted to improve that to protect the river and wildlife in the area so having to just continue with the old septic tank is doable but not good for anyone!

It is beyond frustrating and we are actually very upset at the minute. I just find it difficult to believe they think we should effectively be responsible for building a road for them. Also, what happens if we did do the work and someone then crashes on the bit we put down or it collapses or whatnot?! It gives me the shivers just thinking about all the potential problems.

I think you may be right, we may just have to try renovate the old bit as best we can (which is really far from ideal with a partial flat roof and damp issues) and which will at best leave us with a 2 bed house.

Does anyone think there is any merit to re-applying for planning (making some minor amendment) and then appealing the condition to An Bord Pleanala?

JimmyMW

Troy2013 wrote: »

Hi Delfagio,

Thanks very much for taking the time to reply.

I am glad to hear that someone else thinks it is totally unreasonable. Sometimes when you are so close to the problem it is hard to know if you are taking it too personally and not seeing the wood from the trees- or in our case 16 trees!!

We spoke with our Architect & Engineer who both advised that they didn't get very far with the Road Engineer. He claims that the road needs widening for road safety concerns. We had previously agreed, as part of our pre-planning meetings, to move the driveway to achieve better sightlines & cut back trees and ditches accordingly but the conditions themselves go far beyond that.

The current Septic Tank is definitely not good for the environment and we really wanted to improve that to protect the river and wildlife in the area so having to just continue with the old septic tank is doable but not good for anyone!

It is beyond frustrating and we are actually very upset at the minute. I just find it difficult to believe they think we should effectively be responsible for building a road for them. Also, what happens if we did do the work and someone then crashes on the bit we put down or it collapses or whatnot?! It gives me the shivers just thinking about all the potential problems.

I think you may be right, we may just have to try renovate the old bit as best we can (which is really far from ideal with a partial flat roof and damp issues) and which will at best leave us with a 2 bed house.

Does anyone think there is any merit to re-applying for planning (making some minor amendment) and then appealing the condition to An Bord Pleanala?

Hi, this whole thing sounds crazy, like you suggested I would re-apply with the driveway in its current position as "existing driveway entrance" let them refuse you if that what it takes and then appeal it. Essentially you are renovating a house here not proposing a new development.

delfagio

No problem Troy,

Maybe another option would be to approach a local councillor or TD and see if they can put pressure on Co Co to upgrade the road widening etc.

That way maybe the road could be widened sooner and then you could reapply for permission for extension and just upgrade your septic tank for now.

Troy2013

JimmyMW wrote: »

Hi, this whole thing sounds crazy, like you suggested I would re-apply with the driveway in its current position as "existing driveway entrance" let them refuse you if that what it takes and then appeal it. Essentially you are renovating a house here not proposing a new development.

I think you are right, we may just have to chance our luck regarding the planning again. I'm very stressed about it and about going to An Bord Pleanala so any advice you or others may have about appealing a decision, especially an onerous Condition like this, would be really appreciated.

Calahonda52

Troy2013 wrote: »

Sorry- should have put that in! Planning is to extend the house & to put in a replacement septic tank.

Can you be a bit more specify here please

Troy2013

delfagio wrote: »

No problem Troy,

Maybe another option would be to approach a local councillor or TD and see if they can put pressure on Co Co to upgrade the road widening etc.

That way maybe the road could be widened sooner and then you could reapply for permission for extension and just upgrade your septic tank for now.

We actually got hold of the road widening plan and it actually proposes widening the road by using the far side of the road ours- i.e. using the farmers land opposite our house- and this makes greater sense given the direction of a bend further up along the road.

Thanks for the advice about the T.D. anything would be worth a shot!

JimmyMW

Troy2013 wrote: »

I think you are right, we may just have to chance our luck regarding the planning again. I'm very stressed about it and about going to An Bord Pleanala so any advice you or others may have about appealing a decision, especially an onerous Condition like this, would be really appreciated.

If I were you I would get an experience local planning consultant on the job now who is familiar with the whole process, this person will give you the best advice of all and will be money well spent IMO

Troy2013

Calahonda52 wrote: »

Can you be a bit more specify here please

It is proposed to extend the house by about 970sq feet (large I know but it really is needed as the current house is small) and to replace the current septic tank with a more environmentally friendly version.

They have said they have no issue with the design of the extension, ridge heights or anything regarding the house itself. All the issues are arising regarding the roadway/boundary.

Troy2013

JimmyMW wrote: »

If I were you I would get an experience local planning consultant on the job now who is familiar with the whole process, this person will give you the best advice of all and will be money well spent IMO

I thought it was your Engineer or Architect who would be a planning Consultant but if people advise in this specific area then I would gladly pay someone to sort this mess out. Any recommendations for one in Cork?

Del2005

I've seen plenty of renovated houses with huge gaps between the road and their boundary wall, there's no chance of the roads ever being widened. Think it's a planning requirement to make sure that vehicles parking outside the property aren't affecting traffic flow. Have you looked at planning approval for other houses in your county, do they have similar requirements?

JimmyMW

Troy2013 wrote: »

I thought it was your Engineer or Architect who would be a planning Consultant but if people advise in this specific area then I would gladly pay someone to sort this mess out. Any recommendations for one in Cork?

Yes you are correct, however this is dependent on the quality of the architect you originally picked, if they are not used to dealing with out of the ordinary planning problems they will be no good to you. I have no recommendations as thankfully I have never had this kinda problem, however if you Google planning consultants cork you will see some companies who specialize on planning issues. Best of luck

Mellifera

Troy, you've been a bit swindled I think. You've not mentioned the county council...whilst I'd like to know, fair play to your discretion!
In my experience, they are being way over the top but you will often see local authorities try it on. It is the Local Authorities responsibility to maintain, upkeep and build roads. It is often a condition of planning to set back your boundary wall for future widening but in this case it seems ludicrous that you are also being expected to do the work. Incidentally, knocking 16 mature (?) oak trees could be an environmental/heritage issue if your house is over 100 years old.
Not knowing your particular circumstance in terms of the road alignment, I'd also wonder about what's going on either side of your property. It would not be considered good practice to widen your section of road without the other two sides being the same width as well. If nothing else you'll get people parking on it, etc.
Legally, (I'm not a solicitor!), it is normal that you own to the centre of the road. Council should be getting a wayleave/CPO as per earlier posters comment.
In all, this is not a common occurrence, (at least, this extent of request). I would suggest as earlier posters: go to local councillor and if that doesn't work then try hold off on doing the works for a while...presumably you have a five year window?
On a side note; the road engineer isn't helping themselves by not getting back in touch but in their defence they don't always know the final condition that's been put down. I've seen it done where a planner has imposed a condition that the road engineer wasn't even consulted on. On that note, can you view the documents online? Normally if you look up your planning ref/docs online you can see the planners report...all contributions should be on that.
Hope it works out for you!

Troy2013

Del2005 wrote: »

I've seen plenty of renovated houses with huge gaps between the road and their boundary wall, there's no chance of the roads ever being widened. Think it's a planning requirement to make sure that vehicles parking outside the property aren't affecting traffic flow. Have you looked at planning approval for other houses in your county, do they have similar requirements?

Interestingly two new houses were refused permission up the road (new dwellings) as the opening in the ditches and removal of trees was considered to be in contravention of the Wildlife/habitat legislation and the removal of trees and hedgerows was not in keeping with the County Development Plan. So, it seems they make the rules up as they go along!

Troy2013

Mellifera wrote: »

Troy, you've been a bit swindled I think. You've not mentioned the county council...whilst I'd like to know, fair play to your discretion!
In my experience, they are being way over the top but you will often see local authorities try it on. It is the Local Authorities responsibility to maintain, upkeep and build roads. It is often a condition of planning to set back your boundary wall for future widening but in this case it seems ludicrous that you are also being expected to do the work. Incidentally, knocking 16 mature (?) oak trees could be an environmental/heritage issue if your house is over 100 years old.
Not knowing your particular circumstance in terms of the road alignment, I'd also wonder about what's going on either side of your property. It would not be considered good practice to widen your section of road without the other two sides being the same width as well. If nothing else you'll get people parking on it, etc.
Legally, (I'm not a solicitor!), it is normal that you own to the centre of the road. Council should be getting a wayleave/CPO as per earlier posters comment.
In all, this is not a common occurrence, (at least, this extent of request). I would suggest as earlier posters: go to local councillor and if that doesn't work then try hold off on doing the works for a while...presumably you have a five year window?
On a side note; the road engineer isn't helping themselves by not getting back in touch but in their defence they don't always know the final condition that's been put down. I've seen it done where a planner has imposed a condition that the road engineer wasn't even consulted on. On that note, can you view the documents online? Normally if you look up your planning ref/docs online you can see the planners report...all contributions should be on that.
Hope it works out for you!

I genuinely think this is a Road Engineer request as the Planner in his report stated he had serious concerns at the removal of the trees and hedgerows as it would completely alter the existing landscape.Also, a follow on condition of our planning states we have to submit a landscaping plan to show how we are going to compensate for the removal of the trees/shrubs and show a replanting scheme. The 'landscape plan' then has to be accepted by the Planner prior to commencement of works.

In principle I don't have a huge issue with the two metres. I feel like I'm giving them free land but otherwise it's not the end of the world. If we were just to move the boundary that would be costly enough but the costs to move the ESB poles, tarmac the area to their specification & to have the area filled to sit level with the current road is the major issue really.

We have spoken with the lady that owns the land on either side of our property and she said no plans or approaches have been made to her regarding widening the road. Part of her land is even further below the level of the road (falling off into a valley and stream) and would be a serious project to try to put a wider road on.

Maybe not so discreet...I didn't name the Council but i did mention the area we would need to find a Planning Consultant in

Dudda

Apply for planning permission again. Any new application granted supersedes the previous one and be more alert if they condition the new one and appeal it straight away. You could include an architect's report in your new application which mentions sight lines, age and quality of the existing trees which you intend to keep and how they encourage local wildlife and environment etc. crap talk. This way you are highlighting to the planners items and might be more reluctant to apply such conditions advised to him by the roads department.

everypenny

That's fn(king outrageous! Why didn't your architect recomend appealing it at the time?

Mellifera

Troy2013 wrote:

We have spoken with the lady that owns the land on either side of our property and she said no plans or approaches have been made to her regarding widening the road. Part of her land is even further below the level of the road (falling off into a valley and stream) and would be a serious project to try to put a wider road on.

Troy2013 wrote:

Maybe not so discreet...I didn't name the Council but i did mention the area we would need to find a Planning Consultant in

Troy2013 wrote:

In principle I don't have a huge issue with the two metres. I feel like I'm giving them free land but otherwise it's not the end of the world. If we were just to move the boundary that would be costly enough but the costs to move the ESB poles, tarmac the area to their specification & to have the area filled to sit level with the current road is the major issue really.

Troy2013 wrote:

I genuinely think this is a Road Engineer request as the Planner in his report stated he had serious concerns at the removal of the trees and hedgerows as it would completely alter the existing landscape.Also, a follow on condition of our planning states we have to submit a landscaping plan to show how we are going to compensate for the removal of the trees/shrubs and show a replanting scheme. The 'landscape plan' then has to be accepted by the Planner prior to commencement of works.

😊did notice that at the end. Still reckon you're being taken advantage of...I am also in this area and have some experience in this area. This is unheard of! Seems a shame that you have to be the one who has to reapply for planning etc. Would definitely recommend the councillor route first...bane of planners lives!
Let us know how you get on.

BryanF

Councillor = https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nepotism

The same option should be Applied without the need for politic's IMHO

lownhard

Dudda wrote: »

Apply for planning permission again. Any new application granted supersedes the previous one and be more alert if they condition the new one and appeal it straight away. You could include an architect's report in your new application which mentions sight lines, age and quality of the existing trees which you intend to keep and how they encourage local wildlife and environment etc. crap talk. This way you are highlighting to the planners items and might be more reluctant to apply such conditions advised to him by the roads department.

This is the best you can do.

It is the council's goal is to work towards the stated aims of it's development plans, hence the condition.

Similar happened us during planning process, where the transport section was initially looking for us to knock a big granite wall and rebuild it 4 metres back and landscape the area for a possible road widening scheme that barely had a drawing. We met with them and told them this was nonsense (cutting down mature trees, wasting resources, creating an area for littering etc) for project with no funding and they came round. They included a condition that we keep the area they require free from development, but they are still going to have to pay for it if they scheme ever goes ahead and buy the land too!

I think you need good professionals with you to make sure that next time round you put your case to the powers that be. All that evidence about your neighbouring sites being refused on wildlife grounds is playing into your hands. But there is no guarantees. CC planning departments are enigmatic and planners can be quirky. That is why we have ABP.

Other option is add less than 40m2 and hope the current septic tank continues to function!

Troy2013

everypenny wrote: »

That's fn(king outrageous! Why didn't your architect recomend appealing it at the time?

I really don't think our Architect appreciated the fall of ground on our site or how costly the condition would actually be to comply with. I think he lacks experience in a rural planning setting and so it was our mistake in hiring him really.

Troy2013

lownhard wrote: »

This is the best you can do.

It is the council's goal is to work towards the stated aims of it's development plans, hence the condition.

Similar happened us during planning process, where the transport section was initially looking for us to knock a big granite wall and rebuild it 4 metres back and landscape the area for a possible road widening scheme that barely had a drawing. We met with them and told them this was nonsense (cutting down mature trees, wasting resources, creating an area for littering etc) for project with no funding and they came round. They included a condition that we keep the area they require free from development, but they are still going to have to pay for it if they scheme ever goes ahead and buy the land too!

I think you need good professionals with you to make sure that next time round you put your case to the powers that be. All that evidence about your neighbouring sites being refused on wildlife grounds is playing into your hands. But there is no guarantees. CC planning departments are enigmatic and planners can be quirky. That is why we have ABP.

Other option is add less than 40m2 and hope the current septic tank continues to function!

Thanks a million for taking the time to reply. It is good to hear from someone who had such a condition amended to a more reasonable standpoint.

I would gladly keep the two meters free from development to allow for later road widening if they would agree to that. It's not the two meters of land that troubles us as much as we genuinely cannot afford to do the works they want us to undertake.

Did you have to appeal the planning condition or was it a negotiated amendment at a later stage? The first we saw this condition was in the preliminary planning grant as all discussions with the road engineer prior to submission had regarded sight lines and we complied with all those requests.

Angry bird

An outrageous and onerous condition with no justiciation, the only thing they could reasonably conditon is to set back your entrance to the future road edge line. If not done already, apply for permisison to remove that condition, I wouldn't meet them half way with a set back either at this stage, their job to widen roads, Bord Pleanala would not uphold such a ridiculous condition. Good luck.

Timmaay

Are they utterly taking the piss, there is no way in hell I'd knock 16 mature Oak trees for such a pointless reason, irrespective of the silly costs quoted. Dig your heals in, but don't lose any more sleep over it ha.