Planning Right of way

Demoliter

Hi all,
I recently applied for and was granted planning for a one off house on a greenfield site in Tipp. This site adjoins another small corn field and the farmer who sold it to me has asked me before the sale if I would grant him a right of way at the bottom of my site so he can access the cornfield. I have no issue with this, my site is plenty big enough and this right of way would be rarely used. My question is that since a new right of way is about to be given over my site (i.e. the outlined site in red I got planning for)- will this affect my planning? His right of way was not shown when I went for planning because we didn't have it agreed at that stage. Do i need to go for planning again? I want to make sure I'm complying with everything for the mortgage! Mick.

aujopimur

This is my experience of a rarely used right of way, trucks, tractors, machinery and various traffic on a daily basis.
Things and people change, I'd say NO.

Demoliter

The right of way is agreed, my question is whether or not the planning for my house is still valid.

Calahonda52

Demoliter wrote: »

The right of way is agreed, my question is whether or not the planning for my house is still valid.

I don't think its valid and neither do I think any bank will be happy with this arrangement because it materially alters the value of the site: devalues in other words.
What happens when he sell the "small corn field to another punter and the ROW gets upgraded to full vehicular access.....

Di you take legal advice on this?

the_pen_turner

Can you put limits ona right of way.
Like time of the day it will be used,
Weight of vehicles, how often they are going to use it, maintance Keeping the gates locked etc
Only used for agri. No right of way for livestock


I don't know if these are possible legally or not

Demoliter

So your saying if someone has a planning granted, and then decides later to grant a right of way over part of their site to another party, then their planning is invalid and not compliant?

Demoliter

So your saying if someone has a planning granted, and then decides later to grant a right of way over part of their site to another party, then their planning is invalid and not compliant? My issue is not with the right of way, my question has to do with the status of my own granted planning.

Angry bird

I don't think it has planning implications as (I'm assuming) you will be carrying your development in accordance with the approved plans and details. I think it's purely a matter to nail with your and his solicitor as part of your land registry details.

Penn

Angry bird wrote: »

I don't think it has planning implications as (I'm assuming) you will be carrying your development in accordance with the approved plans and details. I think it's purely a matter to nail with your and his solicitor as part of your land registry details.

Not if the sightlines, visibility splays etc are designed for domestic vehicle use only and not agricultural vehicles.

http://www.tipperarycoco.ie/sites/default/files/Written%20Statement%20%26%20Appendicies%201-5.pdf

The sight visibility triangle is measured at the proposed entrance from a set-back distance of 2.4 m (single residential) or 4.5 m (multiple residential/ commercial/agricultural/other) (the ‘X’ distance) from the road edge at the centre of the entrance, to points in both directions on the nearside road edge which are the sight distance (‘Y’ distance) away.

If he's using the entrance as an entrance off the road into a field also, that would be agricultural use and has different sightline requirements than just the residential usage of his house. That does affect planning.

If however the plan is simply to provide another separate entrance to the field on the OP's land as a right of way, the new entrance requires a separate planning permission application.

Metric Tensor

There's a difference between a legal right of way across land - which has nothing to do with planning.

AND

Changes to the proposed use of an entrance - which may require planning.


I fully accept that one is linked to another but to be exact - you do not need planning permission to grant a right-of-way. You may need planning permission to alter the use of your entrance.

Penn

Metric Tensor wrote: »

There's a difference between a legal right of way across land - which has nothing to do with planning.

AND

Changes to the proposed use of an entrance - which may require planning.


I fully accept that one is linked to another but to be exact - you do not need planning permission to grant a right-of-way. You may need planning permission to alter the use of your entrance.

Completely agree. It's not the right of way itself that causes the planning issue. But if the entrance is going to be used for agricultural purposes too, regardless of whether it's the OP or someone the OP is giving a right of way to, the proposed use of the entrance as was likely submitted is not in compliance with planning permission.

However, it seems more likely that the RoW is regarding forming a new site entrance further down the site. That wouldn't affect the OP's planning, but would require new planning permission itself.

Angry bird

Good points, would need to know proposed access details for the ROW.

Youredeadright

The private ROW gives the farmer permission to go from point A (which is before your land) to point B (the cornfield) across your land. Any talk of the specific use of entrances and sightlines is irrelevant to the ROW in that the ROW document isn't going to require a certain type of entrance. The planning permission is done and doesn't condition anything either. If it was me and I had the planning permission sorted I'd plough on.

ht9zni1gs28crp

No need for planning changes, although the legal side of things will have additional paperwork. I recently went through this with the ESB due to an underground cable on site and relevant maintenance access requirements.