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

Class 37 - Exempted Development Clause Abuse & Inaction By Planning Enforcment

Options
  • 28-07-2020 6:39pm
    #1
    vixdname
    Registered Users Posts: 1,151 ✭✭✭


    Hi All,

    Long story short.
    Land owner adjoining the land to the rear of a few houses has used his land as a temporary campsite for the last 3 years.

    In year one he had tents, caravans and tents etc parked on his land and attempted to run all summer long like this.

    Official complaint went to Coco. planning enforcement who in turn made his, after a months notice, shut down the unauthorized development, at which stage it didnt make too much difference to him as it was near September and camping season was near finished.

    Year two, he attempted to do to do the same but was advised that he wasnt allowed operate.
    He came back and used a "Class 37" exempted development, which is as follows:

    CLASS 37

    Development consisting of the use of land for any fair, funfair, bazaar or circus or any local event of a religious, cultural, educational, political, social, recreational or sporting character and the placing or maintenance of tents, vans or other temporary or movable structures or objects on the land in connection with such use.

    1. The land shall not be used for any such purposes either continuously for a period exceeding 15 days or occasionally for periods exceeding in aggregate 30 days in any year.

    2. On the discontinuance of such use the land shall be reinstated save to such extent as may be authorised or required by a permission under the Act.


    He made up a name for the "events" he was running to try and legitimise them when in reality it was just a way of getting campers onto his land for 30 days per year.

    This year he has had capers on his land since the end of June and has had campers on his land up to today, with is 30 annual allowance expiring on the 30th July.

    He is advertising camping until the end of August, which is 2 months, double what his annual allowance allows.

    Planning enforcement have been advised for the last 6 weeks that he intends to go over his annual allowance and have promised on 2 occasions to send him a letter to cease but as of yesterday, after a brief call, no such letter has been sent only another most likely empty promise from the coco.

    Does anyone know if An Bord Pleanna can help with this, or what action I can take against the coco. in order to force them to uphold the planning regulations they supposedly are there to enforce, or if anyone has any other ideas on how to approach this issue we'd be very grateful.

    Sorry about the long post.


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 40,994 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    the wheels of planning enforcement turn very, very slowly... its one of the biggest disgraces in the public service.

    i have seen planning enforcement action take multiple years to come to a conclusion, at which stage the original objector is so distraught and fatigued by the whole process that they never say that its worth it.

    the legislation is unsuitable and at times completely toothless, the time periods involved, and options available, are much too generous in favor of the unauthorised development


  • Options
    #3
    Gumbo
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,443 Mod ✭✭✭✭Gumbo


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    the wheels of planning enforcement turn very, very slowly... its one of the biggest disgraces in the public service.

    i have seen planning enforcement action take multiple years to come to a conclusion, at which stage the original objector is so distraught and fatigued by the whole process that they never say that its worth it.

    the legislation is unsuitable and at times completely toothless, the time periods involved, and options available, are much too generous in favor of the unauthorised development

    The whole reason for this is because a Judge will side with the Defendant in all cases if the Big Bad Local Authority are deemed to have acted "unreasonable".

    I've seen it many times, when the Judge allows the Applicant more time because they are "attempting" to comply with the Enforcement Notice.


  • Options
    #4
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 40,994 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Gumbo wrote: »
    The whole reason for this is because a Judge will side with the Defendant in all cases if the Big Bad Local Authority are deemed to have acted "unreasonable".

    I've seen it many times, when the Judge allows the Applicant more time because they are "attempting" to comply with the Enforcement Notice.

    i dont disagree... judges are very much part of the problem

    https://www.housing.gov.ie/sites/default/files/migrated-files/en/Publications/DevelopmentandHousing/Planning/FileDownLoad%2C31565%2Cen.pdf

    however as can be seen by this document..... its possible to stretch the "warning letter" process out to 22 weeks (!!) before the enforcement process even takes place.

    the enforcement action is almost always preceded by a retention planing application, which, assuming the usual mountain of further information / clarification of further information / significant further information etc can stretch to over 40 weeks......

    follow that up with an inevitable appeal to ABP by the unauthorised developer (UD)... and we all know how slow ABP work.. you could be easily looking at a year for that appeals process. Refusal from the board usually gives the UD a time period in which to cease the use and to begin removal... lets say typically 4 weeks

    then you have, assuming no judicial review, the inevitable task of the local authority to ensure discontinuation of the UD.... which can involve a court order if the UD continues.... lets say conservatively 2 months to achieve

    so...
    12 + 40 + 52 + 4 + 8 = 116 weeks... or over 2 and a quarter years....

    and id suggest that its not at all unusual for an obstructionist UD to stretch these processes out to their extreme hilt, using obfuscation and delay at every turn..... because its actually in their interest to. I have seen this many times before.

    the process is wrong.... it should be weighted in favour of the objector (theoretically an injured party) and the planning authority.... instead iots heavily weighted towards the UD. Judges can only work within the legislation that is provided, and the legislation is at fault.


  • Options
    #5
    Gumbo
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,443 Mod ✭✭✭✭Gumbo


    Tell me Syd.
    I know of many sites ;) that the enforcement is taking 6, 9 or 12 months.


  • Options
    #6
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 40,994 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Ill drop you a pm later today of a case i know which has taken years to resolve.

    in the meantime heres a public record of a case in which an enforcement notice issued on 21st October 2003 made its way to the high court on 18th March 2005.... no mention of a possible 22 week prelude in a "warning letter" process beforehand....
    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/planning-enforcement-notice-must-define-precisely-action-required-and-time-allowed-for-compliance-1.439416

    i dont envy you having to work within this system.

    Im sure the vast majority of cases are genuine mistakes that are resolved through a retention application... my issue however is to those serial unauthorised developers who have a complete disregard for the planning process and any authority that the councils have. The system should be rigorous and vigorous in going after these people, who are deliberately flouting planning law.... but however, in my opinion, the time periods and the system is too lenient on them and leaves it very, very easy for them to delay and obfuscate.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Lumen
    Registered Users Posts: 31,009 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    Whilst there may be an unenforced planning violation, that's only one area of enforcement.

    I wonder whether there are other types of enforcement against the use of the land that the council might be able to enforce more quickly, e.g. health and safety issue (fire safety, issues with sanitation etc).

    Is there adjoining farmland? Muck spreading can cause all sort of hazards.

    He's presumably wide open to a compo claim by campers, I assume he doesn't have the right insurances.


Advertisement