New neighbour applies for permission for monstrous extension - without telling us

Addle

Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »

I really appreciate your post.

Some posters early on the thread (who I did not respond to) sought to paint me as being unreasonable for believing as a courtesy I should have been told. Their opinion is misguided and naive.

As there was no pre-plan consultation, I've been forced down the formal route of filing an objection against an adjoining occupant, which I would never normally do.

And as you say, if it goes to An Bord Pleanala they could now be looking at two to three years before they turn a brick.

All of this could have been avoided.

They let you know the site notice was up.
You have no relationship with them.
Have you such amazing powers of persuasion that you think that having a chat with you would make them change their plans?

You may not be the only party making an observation.
And no matter what conversations shoulda woulda coulda happened, you would always have to make an observation.

C3PO

bigpink wrote: »

I agree new neighbors should have at least out of courtesy chatted with the OP

Possibly, but I have no doubt that the OP would none the less be still objecting to the plans as submitted!

Call me Al

Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »

I really appreciate your post.

Some posters early on the thread (who I did not respond to) sought to paint me as being unreasonable for believing as a courtesy I should have been told. Their opinion is misguided and naive.

As there was no pre-plan consultation, I've been forced down the formal route of filing an objection against an adjoining occupant, which I would never normally do.

And as you say, if it goes to An Bord Pleanala they could now be looking at two to three years before they turn a brick.

All of this could have been avoided.

Whether you're being reasonable or not to expect to have been afforded a common courtesy has nothing to do with the situation you're in. They have fulfilled their legal obligations to you and that may be all they care about. For all you know they may have zero interest in living in the place and may just flip it, or alternatively may rent it out if there is a protracted planning timeframe and their cashflow comes under pressure.
I think you were naive to expect to have been consulted. You need to park it and move on. In fact I can't understand why you're still talking about it and giving it any headspace. It's done. Deal with the planning facts.

mikeymouse

Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »

I really appreciate your post.

Some posters early on the thread (who I did not respond to) sought to paint me as being unreasonable for believing as a courtesy I should have been told. Their opinion is misguided and naive.

As there was no pre-plan consultation, I've been forced down the formal route of filing an objection against an adjoining occupant, which I would never normally do.

And as you say, if it goes to An Bord Pleanala they could now be looking at two to three years before they turn a brick.

All of this could have been avoided.

So , if they engaged with you initially, you would have no issues with their plans?

Penn

Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »

I really appreciate your post.

Some posters early on the thread (who I did not respond to) sought to paint me as being unreasonable for believing as a courtesy I should have been told. Their opinion is misguided and naive.

As there was no pre-plan consultation, I've been forced down the formal route of filing an objection against an adjoining occupant, which I would never normally do.

And as you say, if it goes to An Bord Pleanala they could now be looking at two to three years before they turn a brick.

All of this could have been avoided.

People were simply saying the neighbours didn't have to consult with you or tell you about it. It would have been a courtesy for them to do so, and it's what I usually recommend clients do, but the neighbours are under no obligation whatsoever to do so, and in this case chose not to. But that's the purpose of the site notice; whether they tell you or not, the site notice has made you aware they have applied for planning.

As for An Bord Pleanala, the time limit for deciding on matters tends to be 18 weeks. They can at their own discretion decide they need more time to review it, but for a rear extension to a house, it's unlikely they would need to exceed the 18 weeks. Bear in mind, if the planners agree with you and refuse permission or make them change the design in a way they don't like, appealing to ABP is an avenue open to them too, and ABP may side with them.

I would think though, the reason they didn't consult with you is because they like the design, they knew you wouldn't be happy with it, the design meets their criteria, their architect/professional believes it'll be accepted by the planners possibly with a small change depending on what the planners see the impact being on the neighbouring properties (regardless of whether you object or not), and if it goes to ABP, again they may feel they have a strong enough chance of getting it granted. Bringing it to your attention before applying would have given you more time to formulate an objection. Again, it would have been a courtesy to discuss it with you, but they're under no obligation to do so.

Either way, there is a process in place for all of this, which is working. Via the site notice, they have made you aware they have lodged an application. You have the chance to submit an objection. Depending on the decision, either party may appeal to ABP, and ABP will make the final decision.

Mrs OBumble

Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »

Today's "modern home" is sterile and soulless speaks of nothing but debt.

Surely soulless is an accurate reflection of post-Catholic Ireland where "everyone" knows that souls don't really exist.

gargargar

They knew you wouldn't like it therefore they didn't consult you. That tells you where they are at. It's now up to you to put an objection in using an architect/engineer to frame the issues.

Let's be honest, you were never going to agree on the design anyway, so no point in lying to yourself that this could have been avoided.

BarryD2

Penn wrote: »

As for An Bord Pleanala, the time limit for deciding on matters tends to be 18 weeks. They can at their own discretion decide they need more time to review it, but for a rear extension to a house, it's unlikely they would need to exceed the 18 weeks. Bear in mind, if the planners agree with you and refuse permission or make them change the design in a way they don't like, appealing to ABP is an avenue open to them too, and ABP may side with them.

That's how the system works alright in theory. And maybe if the applicants had consulted and agreed with their neighbours and everyone was happy, that's how it might proceed. But if parties are unhappy and want to delay, frustrate, appeal etc. and depending on workload on planning dept and ABP, it can run and run. The worst thing people can do in situations like this is to make enemies with existing neighbours.

Penn

BarryD2 wrote: »

That's how the system works alright in theory. And maybe if the applicants had consulted and agreed with their neighbours and everyone was happy, that's how it might proceed. But if parties are unhappy and want to delay, frustrate, appeal etc. and depending on workload on planning dept and ABP, it can run and run. The worst thing people can do in situations like this is to make enemies with existing neighbours.

No, there are set rules and timelines about who can apply and when.

Once the planning application is lodged, there's a 5 week period of submissions for objections. By week 8, planners must notify parties of proposed decision or request further information. If further information lodged, planners have 4 weeks to make decision.

Once decision is made parties have 4 weeks to appeal to An Bord Pleanala. Once appeal is made, parties can't issue any new documents or discuss further with ABP unless directly asked to by ABP. ABP have 18 weeks (again, at their own discretion to extend) to make decision which is final, unless either party feels there was a breach in how ABP handled the case (as opposed to disagreeing with the decision or why they made that decision).

There is only so much people can do to drag it out for as long as possible. Appeals without proper substance will be quickly dismissed as such. PLanning Authority and ABP also have defined timelines to issue decisions.

chuck eastwood

We had a similar issue with a neighbour of 15 years. A monster of an extension blocking out any and all light to my garden where I grow veg etc with my young children and it would cover their play area almost 75% of daylight hours.
Like you they didn't consult us, later admitting they had hoped we wouldn't notice or bite our lip. I had to go to the council to get the plans and I was horrified.
I sent him a message asking for a sit down chat about the proposed extension. I politely said as it stood I would object in any manner possible if we were face with a loss of light and as planning in west Wicklow is hard enough to get I had no problem dragging it out for years considering he didn't consult us. Many here say why should he consult us, the other side is why shouldn't you or i object and make his life as difficult as he proposed to make mine. In the end he changed his plans to ensure that the build was sloped and the loss of sunlight was drastically reduced. Happy neighbours again but I would have done everything in my power to stop the original build. My base point to him was that they lived in a estate not out in the countryside. Any build would heavily impact on my family which would in turn mean friction between the family's. Obviously he could have been pig headed but thankfully after a few weeks they came back to us and showed the proposed changes

Vim Fuego

No one is obliged to consult anyone, but it makes a lot of sense to do so. Even if the motivation is selfish, you would save yourself a lot of heartache from objections and appeals to ABP.

My worst nightmare is applying for planning and getting a response like this from practically your whole neighbourhood:



The application above ended up being refused. The next application got an equal amount of objections but got permission, but then it got dragged into an appeal with ABP. It was a long time before a brick was laid on that build I'd say. I know the applicant in this case and he is still on eggshells with any dealings with these neighbours.

Vim Fuego

Vim Fuego wrote: »

No one is obliged to consult anyone, but it makes a lot of sense to do so. Even if the motivation is selfish, you would save yourself a lot of heartache from objections and appeals to ABP.

My worst nightmare is applying for planning and getting a response like this from practically your whole neighbourhood:



The application above ended up being refused. The next application got an equal amount of objections but got permission, but then it got dragged into an appeal with ABP. It was a long time before a brick was laid on that build I'd say. I know the applicant in this case and he is still on eggshells with any dealings with these neighbours.

Required? No. Advised? Well if you want to get on with your build then yes, absolutely. Any idea why this guy didn’t consult first?

Suckit

I worked on a house years ago as a gopher, the owners were just back from America. They also had planned on a high extension that was also quite big. They were granted planning permission and the build was going ahead. Then the neighbour uncovered or pointed out some daylight law.
I was young, and can't remember the full details but I spent a week helping to tear it down again.
Basically the neighbours were not allowed to have their daylight blocked or compromised. Once that was pointed out the work that had been done had to be torn down. Luckily they hadn't progressed any further than the basic shell.
The couple had tried to argue that a tree had been there or something, but it didn't matter, whatever their argument was.

Mrs Shuttleworth

Just had it pointed out to me by that the Dublin City Development Plan 2016-2022 at clause 17.3 "Residential Amenities" states:

"It is advisable to discuss your proposals with your neighbours prior to submitting a planning application."

http://www.dublincity.ie/main-menu-services-planning-city-development-plan/dublin-city-development-plan-2016-2022

Call me Al

Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »

Just had it pointed out to me by that the Dublin City Development Plan 2016-2022 at clause 17.3 "Residential Amenities" states:

"It is advisable to discuss your proposals with your neighbours prior to submitting a planning application."

http://www.dublincity.ie/main-menu-services-planning-city-development-plan/dublin-city-development-plan-2016-2022

And?
Did your neighbours break the law? No.
I can't understand why you seem to be so fixated on this point. They didn't discuss their plans.Your objection won't be successful if this is what you're basing it on. You need planning facts.

Mrs Shuttleworth

All I'm doing is pointing out the official guidance on the matter that I didn't know up to this point nor has anyone else mentioned, for the benefit of other posters who've been discussing constructively on this thread.

Vim Fuego

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Required? No. Advised? Well if you want to get on with your build then yes, absolutely. Any idea why this guy didn’t consult first?

I don’t really know to be honest. We’re not that close, he mentioned he had a lot of trouble with his build so I looked it up.

I think it was a mix of him being a young arrogant guy at the time who snapped up a good house for a bargain price in a fairly posh area (these houses would now ask a million) and I’d say he didn’t even think to call into the neighbours. He also mentioned that the ringleader of the objectors had a reputation for this sort of thing in that area. Some of the objections do seem a bit fussy to be honest.

BarryD2

Penn wrote: »

There is only so much people can do to drag it out for as long as possible. Appeals without proper substance will be quickly dismissed as such. PLanning Authority and ABP also have defined timelines to issue decisions.

That depends entirely on the planning authorities. If they refuse PP and the applicants appeal and are refused again. They may then reapply with a modified proposal which is also objected to etc. Add in requests for further info and the issue can drag on and on.

We put a large two storey extension on a house in an established estate recently. As some of the neighbours were a bit older and had been there for a long time, we decided the wise thing to do was to try and get to know as many of them as possible beforehand.

Although we could not move into the house after buying it as it needed to be gutted, myself and my heavily pregnant wife spent a few fine Saturdays over the summer doing unnecessary jobs in the garden (it was going to be torn up by diggers anyway) and gradually we met all the neighbours and outlined our plans to them in a casual manner. When the notice went up, there were no surprises for anyone and I think they appreciated that and we had no objections.

Going about it the other way just seems like it would annoy people and if some people were that way inclined, would invite objections for the sake of it.

anewme

People are too hard on OP. It’s reasonable to be consulted about plans which impact your enjoyment of your property. Even from a practical point of view of suppliers delivering which could impact parking, access etc. The planning guides recommend consulting neighbours for a reason.

OP, they haven’t consulted you. So note that and park it. Do not tell them either that you will be objecting. You need to get the best expertise and advice you can afford and fight it all the way. Even down to the timing of the objection . I would not be worried about the relationship with neighbors, treat them the exact way they have treated you.

Thestones

If people expect to have any reasonable/civil relationship with a neighbour then surely common sense would suggest that they consult before submitting plans for a massive extension. Friend of mine, her neighbour had plans for a huge extension and called in to show them, they weren't happy and asked them to amend as would loose a lot of light, they did change it and it's now built, neighbourly relations in tact!

sami2015

Hi OP,
I would not tell anyone that you will object "because they did not discuss it with you".


If it is the house that it seems from some comments passed then they do not own the property yet but are sale agreed and merely have agreement from the owner/legal reps to actually apply for planning. If it is the house I think it is then it does look rather huge and overbearing.... and quite expensive to build. Some other houses on that section of the road have gone big too so it will not be the first in the row to be looking for this type of extension.



I would suggest that you try to get the upper story rear sections pushed back away from the boundary wall. Also remember you may want to extend at some stage... make sure that you retain some ownership of the "party" wall and that it is sized such that you could build on it in future.... it could save you some money (and space) and if you even have to take down part of garage etc to get it reinforced and good foundations under it it could be long term gain for short term pain....


Good luck,
sammy

Gumbo

Thestones wrote: »

If people expect to have any reasonable/civil relationship with a neighbour then surely common sense would suggest that they consult before submitting plans for a massive extension. Friend of mine, her neighbour had plans for a huge extension and called in to show them, they weren't happy and asked them to amend as would loose a lot of light, they did change it and it's now built, neighbourly relations in tact!

To some extent I agree but from working in this field, I’ve seen it the opposite way so many times.

Neighbor a consults neighbor b.
Agreement and neighbor a reduced and builds.

Neighbor b then decides they want to extend and then realise the what design they want and end up building bigger than they allowed neighbor a.

Or neighbor b sells, someone else buys and builds bigger.

Now neighbor a compromised and gained nothing.

Cyrus

At the end of the day people can apply for what they want on their own private property it'll either get approved or rejected and everyone has their opportunity to object . You have no relationship with them and they aren't your neighbors yet so this thing of courtesy is nonsense really , different if you were living beside each other for 5 years.
.I've heard of plenty of people who have gone down the pop into the new neighbor route with new plans and got nothing but abuse and hassle.

Generally in Ireland and even more so in the more expensive parts of Dublin people believe they are entitled to everything and noone should be allowed build anything beside them. Let the planners decide.

Penn

BarryD2 wrote: »

That depends entirely on the planning authorities. If they refuse PP and the applicants appeal and are refused again. They may then reapply with a modified proposal which is also objected to etc. Add in requests for further info and the issue can drag on and on.

Yes, but the cause for delay in those cases are the applicants. The planning authority have strict time limits for which to issue decisions. If applicants re-apply, or take however long to respond to requests for further information, the planning authority still have set time limits by which to decide on same.

Simple_Simone

Thestones wrote: »

If people expect to have any reasonable/civil relationship with a neighbour then surely common sense would suggest that they consult before submitting plans for a massive extension. Friend of mine, her neighbour had plans for a huge extension and called in to show them, they weren't happy and asked them to amend as would loose a lot of light, they did change it and it's now built, neighbourly relations in tact!

Perhaps they made discreet enquiries about their neighbour and made an informed decision not to approach them. And, judging by the OP's repeated hysterical, albeit amusing, references to the height of Trump's wall, their decision may very well have been a prudent one.

listermint

Cyrus wrote: »

At the end of the day people can apply for what they want on their own private property it'll either get approved or rejected and everyone has their opportunity to object . You have no relationship with them and they aren't your neighbors yet so this thing of courtesy is nonsense really , different if you were living beside each other for 5 years.
.I've heard of plenty of people who have gone down the pop into the new neighbor route with new plans and got nothing but abuse and hassle.

Generally in Ireland and even more so in the more expensive parts of Dublin people believe they are entitled to everything and noone should be allowed build anything beside them. Let the planners decide.

You forgot the part where you will be living beside them..


Ridiculous point of view tbh.

Homer

listermint wrote: »

You forgot the part where you will be living beside them..


Ridiculous point of view tbh.

Your attitude just reinforces his point :rolleyes:

antiskeptic

Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »

Hi, I'd appreciate any comments on my situation.

We are living in a 1940s war era semi-d. Looking at our house beside the non-joined property to the left, the two garages adjoin at the front, two passageways then adjoin behind the garages, both of which then lead into the respective gardens.

We have lived there for many years and always got on great with the neighbour who sadly died two years ago.

The house was sold last October and there was hardly a sight of the new owners. We caught a glimpse of them one day and they said hello then dropped in a Christmas card with their mobile numbers at Xmas to which we replied. All fine and ok so far. No further sight of them since then.

Last Wednesday I got a text message from the wifey telling me that a "site notice" had gone up for "a rear extension".

Having some experience in the area of property, I looked up the plans on the DCC website.

I was horrified to see that they plan demolishing the passageway on their side and building a 20 foot wall right up adjacent to the boundary which will block out all the light entering our kitchen, breakfast room and converted passageway which is used as a conservatory. By way of contrast the Trump Wall is only ten feet higher!

This wall would then join across their new kitchen to create a new master bedroom and en suite with a flat roof, above eaves level of the main house roof and have floor to ceiling windows at the front facing the main road. The edifice would then turn to the right, be filled out right to the boundary with us down the garden, have a master bedroom facing into the back garden with floor to ceiling windows and sliding doors and a terrace. These windows/doors would then peer directly into my own extension at the back.

The protruding master bedroom would then block and overshadow the light coming into my garden terrace adjacent to the back of my house and block off the light entering the rear bedrooms of our house and our view (we can currently see as far as the Spire).

They are also planning a chimney stack beside my wall sitting on top of their new kitchen, which will extend to the height of the main house itself. What the hell is that for?

I am absolutely furious that this was carried out with no consultation or notification to us.

I have heard varying arguments that there is no "right to light" but surely building a 20 foot wall right up against the wall and roof glass of my passageway cannot be permitted?

I need a drink.

Mrs S

You may have already taken up the soundest bit of advice already - hire a pro to formulate relevant-to-planning-law grounds for objection.

The question then is which pro. As everywhere else in life, being a pro doesn't make you a good pro. And you want a good one.

You can peruse on line planning applications in your coco area (and beyond) and determine which applications have been successfully objected to and by which pro. Including ones involving an ABP appeal.

Cyrus

listermint wrote: »

You forgot the part where you will be living beside them..


Ridiculous point of view tbh.

i find your view ridiculous, as i said there is a clear framework, you cannot rely on people being reasonable, its why we have laws.