Shared right of way - permission to upgrade

Eclectic Dan

There seem to be a million threads on 'Right of Way' issues on boards - but none of them seem to answer a question for me...

A planning application has been submitted to carry out improvement works to a shared private laneway which has shared ownership and a shared right of way.

Is the legal consent of all 'right of way' holders and affected landowners strictly required before carrying out any works? Should the council request this information before granting planning?

If a shared right of way isn't shown on landdirect.ie, does it mean that it hasn't been registered properly yet?

sydthebeat

That's not a planning question, that's a legal question.

The council can give permission for a development which is illegal, as their authority does not stretch to determining land ownership / right of way issues.

By virtue of being granted permission does not automatically ordain legal right to carry out said permission

Eclectic Dan

sydthebeat wrote: »

That's not a planning question, that's a legal question.

The council can give permission for a development which is illegal, as their authority does not stretch to determining land ownership / right of way issues.

By virtue of being granted permission does not automatically ordain legal right to carry out said permission

I thought similar, but the local Development Plan contains the following development management standard that has me thinking otherwise:

"
Development on Private Laneways
The Council will have regard to the following in their assessment of development proposals on private lanes:
- Evidence that the applicant has the legal right to use the lane as an access/egress to/from thew proposed development and to undertake any required upgrades to its condition, alignment and sightlines.
"

sydthebeat

Eclectic Dan wrote: »

I thought similar, but the local Development Plan contains the following development management standard that has me thinking otherwise:

"
Development on Private Laneways
The Council will have regard to the following in their assessment of development proposals on private lanes:
- Evidence that the applicant has the legal right to use the lane as an access/egress to/from thew proposed development and to undertake any required upgrades to its condition, alignment and sightlines.
"

??

That agrees with my point ??

The applicant must show they have the legal right to carry out the development.
The council haven't the power to ordain that right.

If the applicant can show they have the legal entitlement then good for them, if they can't, then they can't carry out the development.

If the lane is "shared" but no right of way ever registered then you're in a sticky situation. The original land reg docs may show the lane being in one ownership, and you may have to go to court to prove a right of way exists

Eclectic Dan

Sorry, we're maybe on different wavelengths here - my OP might have been poorly worded.

Yep I understand that the council can't ordain any legal rights, but I'm wondering whether (before granting permission) the council could/should insist on seeing evidence of (1) The applicants right of way (2) Permission from those who share ownership and the right of way to carry out upgrade works?

Might a right of way be registered, but not shown on landdirect.ie?

sydthebeat

Eclectic Dan wrote: »

Sorry, we're maybe on different wavelengths here - my OP might have been poorly worded.

Yep I understand that the council can't ordain any legal rights, but I'm wondering whether (before granting permission) the council could/should insist on seeing evidence of (1) The applicants right of way (2) Permission from those who share ownership and the right of way to carry out upgrade works?

Might a right of way be registered, but not shown on landdirect.ie?

Yes it might be registered and not shown on landdirect. Contact a solicitor to do a search for it.

Yes the council should insist on seeing evidence of ownership of lands pertaining to development.

However, if the applicant actually owns the land... And let's say 4 other people have rights of way over it for access to their lands..... Then it's reasonable to say that the applicant does not need the ROW peoples permission as the development will be on land the applicant actually owns.

Eclectic Dan

sydthebeat wrote: »

Yes it might be registered and not shown on landdirect. Contact a solicitor to do a search for it.

Yes the council should insist on seeing evidence of ownership of lands pertaining to development.

However, if the applicant actually owns the land... And let's say 4 other people have rights of way over it for access to their lands..... Then it's reasonable to say that the applicant does not need the ROW peoples permission as the development will be on land the applicant actually owns.

Perfect, thanks a million for the help!

The area requiring upgrade is maybe 75% owned by the applicant, 25% owned by a 3rd party. The applicant claims a right of way to access the area of works also - presumably evidence of this ROW would have to be submitted?

Any way around getting a solicitor to check ROW registration?

em_cat

Eclectic Dan wrote: »

"
Development on Private Laneways
The Council will have regard to the following in their assessment of development proposals on private lanes:
- Evidence that the applicant has the legal right to use the lane as an access/egress to/from thew proposed development and to undertake any required upgrades to its condition, alignment and sightlines.
"

CoCo's DO NOT check ownerships, they ask the applicants if they have the right and put the onus on the applicants to be honest.

At least not in our case. We’re in a situation by which one of our neighbours applied for planning to build a double height extension that will require him to set scaffolding on the gable end, flanks about 70% the length of our 15m private lane way and will block our vehicular access, by which we have full access as we own the lane way in its entirety. We sent in an observation and a planning application showing the ownership and no ROW's, however the planning officer completely disregarded this and granted him full planning.