If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on 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

Planning Query

  • 17-05-2024 11:26am
    Registered Users Posts: 9

    Hi, I have been granted planning permission for an old extension built and one of the conditions is that the water from the additional footprint must not go into the sewage drain. the wording of the condition is 'The surface water generated by the increase in footprint to be retained, or from an equivalent are, shall be disconnected from the discharge to the drain/sewer and shall be infiltrated locally, to a soak pit or similar. The soak pit shall be designed to BRE Digest 365, shall be at a minimum of 5 metres from the house, and shall have no impact on neighbouring properties'

    My question is can I zone in on the word retained and interpret that as meaning a 'water butt' connected to a downpipe meets this condition. for me, this is simpler and less expensive than a soakpit! thanks


  • Registered Users Posts: 384 ✭✭Biker1

    You must direct the surface water to a new soakpit. If you want to retain some water in a butt that's fine.

  • Registered Users Posts: 9 jonocon123

    Does the wording not suggest retained OR soakpit, as in one or the other?

  • Registered Users Posts: 282 ✭✭TheSunIsShining

    Where would the water go after the butt is full?

  • Registered Users Posts: 9 jonocon123

    Well I agree, if just left it'll fill but the wording suggests retain OR soakpit. Maybe I'm a stickler for wording and maybe my interpretation is completely wrong

  • Registered Users Posts: 39,200 ✭✭✭✭Mellor

    The wording is fine. You are just reading it incorrectly .

    The surface water can't go to the foul sewer. It needs to go to either retained OR go to a soak pit. It's referring to where the water goes, not what system you install.

    If you have both a butt and a soak pit. If one volume goes to the butt, and another volume goes to the soak pitt. No water goes to the Butt AND the soak pit, water only only one or the other.

    Unless your butt is so bit that it will never be filled. You'll need a means to deal with the overflow.

  • Advertisement
  • Subscribers Posts: 41,394 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat

    it clearly says "retained AND infiltrated locally to a soakpit"

    you can "retain" in any number of methods (with a water butt being one)… and then it must be piped to a BRE compliant siakaway

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,502 ✭✭✭hesker

    Does the word “retained” not refer to the retention application. Seems to me they are referring to the footprint of the structure being retained or an equivalent area

    It is the structure that is being retained not the water

  • Subscribers Posts: 41,394 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,076 ✭✭✭rayjdav

    I read that as basically the volume of water from the area for retention only cannot be discharged into the storm sewer. It must be to a soakpit or similar.