# Planning requirements



## NormanRobert (23 Aug 2010)

We live in a terraced house  (we 3 storey and neighbour 2 storey); a new neighbour  sougth planning a year ago for a very large 2 storey rear extension which was rejected by the planners. I now return from 4 weeks holidays to find the neighbour ( small builder ) digging foundations in his garden and it looks like he is building at least a one storey  rear extension (counting the blocks about 28 by 14 foot ) and almost on the boundary with our deck/garden, divided only by a fence.In addition it is unclear if he plans a 2 storey extension and I have no idea of  window locations (an issue which the planners commented upon in terms of overlooknig our property when he made the original plannnig application a year ago.). There has been no further planning signage over the year and thus I am unaware of any authorised planning .I dont even know neighbours name  (shoud have kept if from the first applcation a year ago posted on wall etc.)! From the start he didn't want to engage and ignored a welcome card/bottle of wine left for him when he moved in!

Query is what are best steps currently? Call to his door and seek engagement and if no comfort forth coming ,whom do I contact to raise objections/concerns ?


Last time I used an architect and it cost me 900 euros! Migth DIY it this time for now.

Thank you


----------



## onq (23 Aug 2010)

You neighbour may be availing of the exempted development schedule.

This is set out in 

_S.I. 600 of 2001 http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2001/en/si/0600.html

CLASS 1

The extension of a house, by the construction or erection of an extension (including a conservatory) to the rear of the house or by the conversion for use as part of the house of any garage, store, shed or other similar structure attached to the rear or to the side of the house._

_Conditions_

_1. (a) Where the house has not been extended previously, the floor area of any such extension shall not exceed 40 square metres._
_ (b) Subject to paragraph (a), where the house is terraced or  semi-detached, the floor area of any extension above ground level shall  not exceed 12 square metres._
_ (c) Subject to paragraph (a), where the house is detached, the floor  area of any extension above ground level shall not exceed 20 square  metres._
_ 2. (a) Where the house has been extended previously, the floor area of  any such extension, taken together with the floor area of any previous  extension or extensions constructed or erected after 1 October 1964,  including those for which planning permission has been obtained, shall  not exceed 40 square metres._
_ (b) Subject to paragraph (a), where the house is terraced or  semi-detached and has been extended previously, the floor area of any  extension above ground level taken together with the floor area of any  previous extension or extensions above ground level constructed or  erected after 1 October 1964, including those for which planning  permission has been obtained, shall not exceed 12 square metres._
_ (c) Subject to paragraph (a), where the house is detached and has been  extended previously, the floor area of any extension above ground level,  taken together with the floor area of any previous extension or  extensions above ground level constructed or erected after 1 October  1964, including those for which planning permission has been obtained,  shall not exceed 20 square metres._
_ 3. Any above ground floor extension shall be a distance of not less than 2 metres from any party boundary._
_ 4. (a) Where the rear wall of the house does not include a gable, the  height of the walls of any such extension shall not exceed the height of  the rear wall of the house._
_ (b) Where the rear wall of the house includes a gable, the height of the  walls of any such extension shall not exceed the height of the side  walls of the house._
_ (c) The height of the highest part of the roof of any such extension  shall not exceed, in the case of a flat roofed extension, the height of  the eaves or parapet, as may be appropriate, or, in any other case,  shall not exceed the height of the highest part of the roof of the  dwelling._
_ 5. The construction or erection of any such extension to the rear of the  house shall not reduce the area of private open space, reserved  exclusively for the use of the occupants of the house, to the rear of  the house to less than 25 square metres._
_ 6. (a) Any window proposed at ground level in any such extension shall not be less than 1 metre from the boundary it faces._
_ (b) Any window proposed above ground level in any such extension shall not be less than 11 metres from the boundary it faces._
_ (c) Where the house is detached and the floor area of the extension  above ground level exceeds 12 square metres, any window proposed at  above ground level shall not be less than 11 metres from the boundary it  faces._
_ 7. The roof of any extension shall not be used as a balcony or roof garden._

------------------------------------

As amended by 

_S.I. 235 of 2008 http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2008/en/si/0235.html

CLASS 50(__a) 

The demolition of a building, or buildings, within  the curtilage of— (i) a house, (ii) an industrial building, (iii) a  business premises, or (iv) a farmyard complex.(__b) The demolition  of part of a habitable house in connection with the provision of an  extension or porch in accordance with Class 1 or 7, respectively, of  this Part of this Schedule or in accordance with a permission for an  extension or porch under the Act.

Conditions

1. No such building or buildings shall abut on another building in  separate ownership.2.The cumulative floor area of any such building, or  buildings, shall not exceed: (a) in the case of a building, or buildings  within the curtilage of a house, 40 square metres, and (b) in all other  cases, 100 square metres.3. No such demolition shall be carried out to  facilitate development of any class prescribed for the purposes of  section 176 of the Act._

-----------------------------------

There are other parts of the Acts and Regulations which can and do affect and mitigate this, including the Land Conveyancing Law Reform Act, 2009.

[broken link removed]

http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28/acts/2009/a2709.pdf

This Act has not been tested to any great degree in case law yet as far as I know.

Chapter 3, pp 38-43 including Sections 43 to 47 inclusive seem to bring in some revolutionary concepts of how to deal with Party Wall matters.

-----------------------------------

In relation to unauthorised use, unless you want to retain an archtiect or planning consultant to do the work for you, you could look up the planning file of the previous application that was refused and find out who the person was at that time.

Then you could write to him or the builder on site to see what's what - failing this you could refer the matter to Planning Enforcement to see if a breach is occurring and to the Health and Safety Authority to see that all matters are being done correctly on site.
Its better in my opinion to retain a professional to advise you in these matters - planners and the HSA don't appreciate time-wasters or cranks and a simply site inspection wil inform a good planning consultantor architect allied to a planning file inspection and a chat to the local planning officer.
A set of photos and a written report/query to the planning officer, plus say two site inspections should set you back no more than say €500.

With regard to your neighbour, assuming he is availing of the Exempted development schedule as amended; -

The 40 sq.m. can be entirely on one level or can hace up to 12 sqm on 1st floor if terraced.
Keeping back from the boundary is good practice in the absence of an agreement.
Ground floor windows must in general be more than 1.0M back from the boundary.


However these two parts of S.I. 235 of 2008 quoted above are intriguing because of the letter and intent of the law, which seems unclear:

_"The demolition  of part of a habitable house in connection with the  provision of an  extension or porch in accordance with Class 1 or 7,  respectively, of  this Part of this Schedule or in accordance with a  permission for an  extension or porch under the Act."_

AND

_"__1. No such building or buildings shall abut on another building in  separate ownership."_

Does this mean people cannot demolish part of a terrace to extend it, as your neighbour appears to have done?
A literal interpretation suggests this might be the case.


I cannot comment more on AAM because each development is different and there may be many other factors involved.
Sorry to hear you appear to have grumpy neighbours.

FWIW

ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon         as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal action    be      taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in         Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the matters    at      hand.


----------



## Ó Murchú (23 Aug 2010)

onq said:


> I cannot comment more on AAM because each development is different and there may be many other factors involved.
> Sorry to hear you appear to have grumpy neighbours.
> 
> FWIW
> ...




*Moderators, *while the reply was informative, surely this represents blatant advertising - informing the OP that he will be unable to answer more questions on the subject and then providing a link to his own company who deal in such situations. It's would be very disappointing to see this creep into AAM.


----------



## Mpsox (23 Aug 2010)

Best place to start is your local council planning offices, I can't say for definite on all counties, but some allow you to do a search online based on an address or street and house number. They'll inform you if there were any appeals to the original decision or revised planning applications made.

Given the measurements, the council (who in my own experience were very helpful) may be able to tell you if the build is likely to be an exempt structure.


----------



## Leo (23 Aug 2010)

Ó Murchú said:


> *Moderators, *while the reply was informative, surely this represents blatant advertising - informing the OP that he will be unable to answer more questions on the subject and then providing a link to his own company who deal in such situations. It's would be very disappointing to see this creep into AAM.


 
onq is always very informative, and his signature also complies fully with the . 
Leo


----------



## Ó Murchú (24 Aug 2010)

leo, my bad re rule 6 of the posting guidelines.

can you please define 'regular user' so i too can add a link to my website while in no way appearing like an advertisement for architectural services?

o murchu


----------



## Leo (24 Aug 2010)

Ó Murchú said:


> can you please define 'regular user' so i too can add a link to my website while in no way appearing like an advertisement for architectural services?


 
Hi Ó Murchú. A regular user is usually defined by the 'Frequent Poster' tag achieved after 50 posts and a minimum time period. 
Leo


----------



## onq (25 Aug 2010)

Leo said:


> onq is always very informative, and his signature also complies fully with the .
> Leo



(bows)

Thanks Leo,

Another important thing to note is that the poster can only append a sig to a relevant post.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in my case appending my sig to a post about say, gardening, would be inappropriate, since I can claim no expertise in the matter.

Also on posts like this, general posts about the forum it would be inappropriate to include my sig.

ONQ.


----------



## Ó Murchú (25 Aug 2010)

But ONQ, you would gain little from advertising your services in a gardening forum - so not only would it be inappropriate, it would be totally unnecessary as a poster is highly unlikely to contact you to plant their daffodils!! 

Your signature is appended to all of your posts [from what I have seen that is] - ONQ is your signature, however the website you provided is a link to your business. 

By the way, I have no problem with this advertising as it seems to be acceptable with the moderators.

Apologies to NormanRobert for hijacking your post.

Ó Murchú


----------



## RKQ (26 Aug 2010)

NormanRobert said:


> Last time I used an architect and it cost me 900 euros! Migth DIY it this time for now.


 
I'd agree with ONQ and advise retaining a professional. 
However, to start the ball rolling - DIY will be fine for the first few steps of the process.

Step 1. Try to talk to your neighbour, in a polite, friendly manner.
If this fails move to step 2.

Step 2. Do a Planning check - use house address if you don't know your neighbours surname. This can be done on-line with most Councils. Check the Planners notes / comment on the last application, which was refused.

Step 3. If no new application was granted and your neighbour is unhelpfull & You feel the extension *might* enfringe on your rights - contact Enforcement section of your Planning Dept. Get the Council to inspect the works. 

Once the Enforcement Officer inspects the works they will decide if the extension is exempted development or a breach of planning permission.

Good luck.


----------



## onq (26 Aug 2010)

Ó Murchú said:


> But ONQ, you would gain little from advertising your services in a gardening forum - so not only would it be inappropriate, it would be totally unnecessary as a poster is highly unlikely to contact you to plant their daffodils!!
> 
> Your signature is appended to all of your posts [from what I have seen that is] - ONQ is your signature, however the website you provided is a link to your business.
> 
> ...



"If you would argue with me, first define your terms."
ONQ is my nic and this is usually appended to all my posts.
My minimalist sig file is my website address, which isn't always appended.

You're coming to this as a newbie, so take some time and do a little research before making allegations or invoking rules.
For example. you could have reported my post to the moderators directly, without making an issue of it in the thread.

I'm replying to you in the thread because it looks like you're going to continue making a meal out of it even after you've been well-informed.
This is after me taking time to try to warn you about a common misapprehension.
Keep biting the hand that feeds you.

ONQ.


----------



## Ó Murchú (27 Aug 2010)

ONQ, you seem to have misinterpreted  what i was saying 



Ó Murchú said:


> By the way, I have no problem with this advertising as it seems to be acceptable with the moderators.



that is i have now read the rules and taken leo's [moderators] point on board and do not have a problem with this advertising as it is in line with AAM policy.

fair point with regard reporting to the moderators 

wishing to make no meal - i'm well fed

peace

Ó Murchú


----------



## onq (27 Aug 2010)

No prob.

I post to AAM pro bono publico.

I don't expect extra or special privileges

Its just that you're not the first to have a go at me for my sig.

(chuckle)

Perhaps I should add another line to it stating which posting requirement it complies with...

ONQ.


----------



## RKQ (27 Aug 2010)

With regards to signatures I'm glad peace has broken out and common sense will prevail.

I'm more like The A-Team.... if you can find me & I think you are worthy of my help then you can hire RKQ.......

I don't have a black van but sometimes I'm charming like Face or crazy like Murdoc but I always "Love it went a Plan comes together!"

Now wheres that cigar....

Oh back on thread, OP let us know how you get on with steps 1 to 3.


----------

