Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Planning-'exceptional circumstances'

  • 09-04-2019 8:25am
    #1
    realdanbreen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,493 ✭✭✭


    My friend(it's always a friend isn't it:D) has applied to build a house and has satisfied all criteria so far bar one.
    The planner says the road is sub standard( it apparently wasn't sub standard some years ago when some gigantic houses were built on the road!) and in order to grant permission one of the criteria is that the applicant be 'from the road' . The applicant is from less than one mile away albeit not from the road.
    There is a junction with another road 500 yards from the site and it's on that road the applicant lives. Houses have sprung up all over the area in recent years, most are not from the parish, many not from the county, and some not from this country yet they seemed to have no problem getting permission.
    Has anyone any suggestions as to how to approach this with the planner?


Comments

  • #2
    looksee
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,430 ✭✭✭✭looksee


    Get a politician on board.

    Have they actually been refused, or is this pre-planning?


  • #3
    Gumbo
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 41,550 Mod ✭✭✭✭Gumbo


    Appeal the Decision to ABP.


  • #4
    realdanbreen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,493 ✭✭✭realdanbreen


    looksee wrote: »
    Get a politician on board.

    Have they actually been refused, or is this pre-planning?


    It's pre planning.
    Got a politician to make contact but he is apparently getting nowhere.
    Also the planner doesn't appear to be prepared to meet with the applicants engineer to discuss the issue, can they do that ?


  • #5
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 42,569 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    get the applicant to include in the application the upgrade of the road to a standard that acceptable.....


  • #6
    realdanbreen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,493 ✭✭✭realdanbreen


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    get the applicant to include in the application the upgrade of the road to a standard that acceptable.....

    The applicant has submitted photos measurements etc to show that but the planners beef seems to be that the applicant is not 'from the road'.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 42,569 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    realdanbreen wrote: »
    The applicant has submitted photos measurements etc to show that but the planners beef seems to be that the applicant is not 'from the road'.

    if its a local needs issue, then most council are pretty prescribed as to what constitutes meeting the requirements.

    being originally and longstandingly from 500 meters away, which i imagine is the same townland or an adjoining one.... and being still a "rural" area... they should meet it

    there may not be a way of telling until an application is put in.

    "not being from the same road" is an extremely unusual requirement... so i wonder if theres more to this


  • #8
    woohoo!!!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 803 ✭✭✭woohoo!!!


    Seems very harsh based on what you've said. I would be asking a politician to ask on his behalf. Specifically what does the local needs policy say, and does it include the wording 'from the same road' (It wont). I suspect the road is narrow and in poor condition and a call has been made to halt more houses on it with the exception of folk on that road. Good luck.


  • #9
    realdanbreen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,493 ✭✭✭realdanbreen


    What's involved if one has to go to an border pleannala? Is it costly and does it take it long to get a decision?


  • #10
    Calahonda52
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,143 ✭✭✭✭Calahonda52


    realdanbreen wrote: »
    What's involved if one has to go to an border pleannala? Is it costly and does it take it long to get a decision?
    Backlog at present, supposed to be 18 weeks but is longer, currently about 35% of cases are done inside the 18 weeks
    cost minimum 1k plus VAT

    “I can’t pay my staff or mortgage with instagram likes”.



  • #11
    realdanbreen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,493 ✭✭✭realdanbreen


    Do you get an opportunity to put your case in person? Part of the problem here appears to be that the planner dealing with the application paid no attention to the supporting documentation that the applicant submitted.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    realdanbreen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,493 ✭✭✭realdanbreen


    So my mate heard that his application was about to be refused and withdrew it rather than get a refusal. He intends going for it again and wonders would applying for a pre planning meeting be the way to go.


  • #13
    Gumbo
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 41,550 Mod ✭✭✭✭Gumbo


    realdanbreen wrote: »
    So my mate heard that his application was about to be refused and withdrew it rather than get a refusal. He intends going for it again and wonders would applying for a pre planning meeting be the way to go.

    If rural, you should always go for a Pre-Planning meeting.


  • #14
    realdanbreen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,493 ✭✭✭realdanbreen


    kceire wrote: »
    realdanbreen wrote: »
    So my mate heard that his application was about to be refused and withdrew it rather than get a refusal. He intends going for it again and wonders would applying for a pre planning meeting be the way to go.

    If rural, you should always go for a Pre-Planning meeting.
    How does one go about requesting it?


  • #15
    Gumbo
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 41,550 Mod ✭✭✭✭Gumbo


    realdanbreen wrote: »
    How does one go about requesting it?

    What council area are you in?
    They all operate slightly different. Some have formal Pre-Planning forms that you fill in, attach drawings to and email in. Others, you simply email PDF's to the area planner for their opinions.


  • #16
    arctictree
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,401 ✭✭✭arctictree


    kceire wrote: »
    What council area are you in?
    They all operate slightly different. Some have formal Pre-Planning forms that you fill in, attach drawings to and email in. Others, you simply email PDF's to the area planner for their opinions.

    In my case, I just rang the planner and spoke to her on the phone. She explained the reasons for refusal, made some suggestions and I took it from there.


  • #17
    realdanbreen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,493 ✭✭✭realdanbreen


    arctictree wrote: »
    In my case, I just rang the planner and spoke to her on the phone. She explained the reasons for refusal, made some suggestions and I took it from there.


    This particular planner refused to speak with the engineer acting on the applicants behalf. Would only communicate via email and at that gave no indication that she even read submissions made by the applicants engineer. When you hear an elected TD suggest that you re apply and hope to be lucky and that the application doesn't land on 'her' desk then you know where you stand. Absolutely disgraceful and apparently nothing can be done about it, another person in an untouchable job not having to account to anyone.


  • #18
    woohoo!!!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 803 ✭✭✭woohoo!!!


    realdanbreen wrote: »
    arctictree wrote: »
    In my case, I just rang the planner and spoke to her on the phone. She explained the reasons for refusal, made some suggestions and I took it from there.


    This particular planner refused to speak with the engineer acting on the applicants behalf. Would only communicate via email and at that gave no indication that she even read submissions made by the applicants engineer. When you hear an elected TD suggest that you re apply and hope to be lucky and that the application doesn't land on 'her' desk then you know where you stand. Absolutely disgraceful and apparently nothing can be done about it, another person in an untouchable job not having to account to anyone.
    Back in the day lobbying by politicians led to all sorts of dodgy crap getting granted. There's more to it that what you're letting on I'd say.


  • #19
    realdanbreen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,493 ✭✭✭realdanbreen


    woohoo!!! wrote: »
    realdanbreen wrote: »
    arctictree wrote: »
    In my case, I just rang the planner and spoke to her on the phone. She explained the reasons for refusal, made some suggestions and I took it from there.


    This particular planner refused to speak with the engineer acting on the applicants behalf. Would only communicate via email and at that gave no indication that she even read submissions made by the applicants engineer. When you hear an elected TD suggest that you re apply and hope to be lucky and that the application doesn't land on 'her' desk then you know where you stand. Absolutely disgraceful and apparently nothing can be done about it, another person in an untouchable job not having to account to anyone.
    Back in the day lobbying by politicians led to all sorts of dodgy crap getting granted. There's more to it that what you're letting on I'd say.
    There genuinely is not. Perhaps if the applicant had connections / money and was trying something dodgy they might be successful. Apart from suggesting there's more than I'm 'letting on' do you think the planners behaviour is acceptable?


  • #20
    arctictree
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,401 ✭✭✭arctictree


    realdanbreen wrote: »
    This particular planner refused to speak with the engineer acting on the applicants behalf.

    So why didn't the applicant ring the planner directly? I found that none of the professionals acting on my behalf would contact the planner. I had to do it myself.


  • #21
    woohoo!!!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 803 ✭✭✭woohoo!!!


    realdanbreen wrote: »
    woohoo!!! wrote: »
    realdanbreen wrote: »
    arctictree wrote: »
    In my case, I just rang the planner and spoke to her on the phone. She explained the reasons for refusal, made some suggestions and I took it from there.


    This particular planner refused to speak with the engineer acting on the applicants behalf. Would only communicate via email and at that gave no indication that she even read submissions made by the applicants engineer. When you hear an elected TD suggest that you re apply and hope to be lucky and that the application doesn't land on 'her' desk then you know where you stand. Absolutely disgraceful and apparently nothing can be done about it, another person in an untouchable job not having to account to anyone.
    Back in the day lobbying by politicians led to all sorts of dodgy crap getting granted. There's more to it that what you're letting on I'd say.
    There genuinely is not. Perhaps if the applicant had connections / money and was trying something dodgy they might be successful. Apart from suggesting there's more than I'm 'letting on' do you think the planners behaviour is acceptable?
    Not really, perhaps there's a history there, there's something that's not adding up.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    realdanbreen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,493 ✭✭✭realdanbreen


    woohoo!!! wrote: »
    realdanbreen wrote: »
    woohoo!!! wrote: »
    realdanbreen wrote: »
    arctictree wrote: »
    In my case, I just rang the planner and spoke to her on the phone. She explained the reasons for refusal, made some suggestions and I took it from there.


    This particular planner refused to speak with the engineer acting on the applicants behalf. Would only communicate via email and at that gave no indication that she even read submissions made by the applicants engineer. When you hear an elected TD suggest that you re apply and hope to be lucky and that the application doesn't land on 'her' desk then you know where you stand. Absolutely disgraceful and apparently nothing can be done about it, another person in an untouchable job not having to account to anyone.
    Back in the day lobbying by politicians led to all sorts of dodgy crap getting granted. There's more to it that what you're letting on I'd say.
    There genuinely is not. Perhaps if the applicant had connections / money and was trying something dodgy they might be successful. Apart from suggesting there's more than I'm 'letting on' do you think the planners behaviour is acceptable?
    Not really, perhaps there's a history there, there's something that's not adding up.
    I'll explain as slowly as I can.There is no history, no previous application for the site, no previous application by the applicant, no 'not letting on'' no nothing. As I said earlier the planner is being a tit and acting as a law onto herself and , as can be seen here also, appears to be untouchable.


  • #23
    woohoo!!!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 803 ✭✭✭woohoo!!!


    realdanbreen wrote: »
    woohoo!!! wrote: »
    realdanbreen wrote: »
    woohoo!!! wrote: »
    realdanbreen wrote: »
    arctictree wrote: »
    In my case, I just rang the planner and spoke to her on the phone. She explained the reasons for refusal, made some suggestions and I took it from there.


    This particular planner refused to speak with the engineer acting on the applicants behalf. Would only communicate via email and at that gave no indication that she even read submissions made by the applicants engineer. When you hear an elected TD suggest that you re apply and hope to be lucky and that the application doesn't land on 'her' desk then you know where you stand. Absolutely disgraceful and apparently nothing can be done about it, another person in an untouchable job not having to account to anyone.
    Back in the day lobbying by politicians led to all sorts of dodgy crap getting granted. There's more to it that what you're letting on I'd say.
    There genuinely is not. Perhaps if the applicant had connections / money and was trying something dodgy they might be successful. Apart from suggesting there's more than I'm 'letting on' do you think the planners behaviour is acceptable?
    Not really, perhaps there's a history there, there's something that's not adding up.
    I'll explain as slowly as I can.There is no history, no previous application for the site, no previous application by the applicant, no 'not letting on'' no nothing. As I said earlier the planner is being a tit and acting as a law onto herself and , as can be seen here also, appears to be untouchable.
    No I meant with the engineer. The planner makes a recommendation, which can be over ruled by someone more senior, if it merits such. So again I'm suggesting that something doesn't add up. Beyond that Id need to see actual details, as in the planning files so for that reason I'm out.


  • #24
    realdanbreen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,493 ✭✭✭realdanbreen


    woohoo!!! wrote: »
    realdanbreen wrote: »
    woohoo!!! wrote: »
    realdanbreen wrote: »
    woohoo!!! wrote: »
    realdanbreen wrote: »
    arctictree wrote: »
    In my case, I just rang the planner and spoke to her on the phone. She explained the reasons for refusal, made some suggestions and I took it from there.


    This particular planner refused to speak with the engineer acting on the applicants behalf. Would only communicate via email and at that gave no indication that she even read submissions made by the applicants engineer. When you hear an elected TD suggest that you re apply and hope to be lucky and that the application doesn't land on 'her' desk then you know where you stand. Absolutely disgraceful and apparently nothing can be done about it, another person in an untouchable job not having to account to anyone.
    Back in the day lobbying by politicians led to all sorts of dodgy crap getting granted. There's more to it that what you're letting on I'd say.
    There genuinely is not. Perhaps if the applicant had connections / money and was trying something dodgy they might be successful. Apart from suggesting there's more than I'm 'letting on' do you think the planners behaviour is acceptable?
    Not really, perhaps there's a history there, there's something that's not adding up.
    I'll explain as slowly as I can.There is no history, no previous application for the site, no previous application by the applicant, no 'not letting on'' no nothing. As I said earlier the planner is being a tit and acting as a law onto herself and , as can be seen here also, appears to be untouchable.
    No I meant with the engineer. The planner makes a recommendation, which can be over ruled by someone more senior, if it merits such. So again I'm suggesting that something doesn't add up. Beyond that Id need to see actual details, as in the planning files so for that reason I'm out.
    Nothing to do with the engineer. The planner has a reputation for, and I'm quoting those who have dealt with her, being tough, very hostile, extremely awkward etc. The frustrating thing is that nobody including the chief planner will do anything about it.


  • #25
    ANXIOUS
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,095 ✭✭✭ANXIOUS


    realdanbreen wrote: »
    Nothing to do with the engineer. The planner has a reputation for, and I'm quoting those who have dealt with her, being tough, very hostile, extremely awkward etc. The frustrating thing is that nobody including the chief planner will do anything about it.

    That's the bit I don't understand if you're certain you're right and they are wrong, let her reject you appeal and you win.

    Unless you think she has a valid reason to reject.


  • #26
    realdanbreen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,493 ✭✭✭realdanbreen


    ANXIOUS wrote: »
    realdanbreen wrote: »
    Nothing to do with the engineer. The planner has a reputation for, and I'm quoting those who have dealt with her, being tough, very hostile, extremely awkward etc. The frustrating thing is that nobody including the chief planner will do anything about it.

    That's the bit I don't understand if you're certain you're right and they are wrong, let her reject you appeal and you win.

    Unless you think she has a valid reason to reject.
    Certainly if it is rejected it will go to ABP but my point is that even though her behaviour in this matter is appalling there appears to be nothing one can do about it.


Advertisement