# Planning - urban/rural boundary problem



## kkmaan (21 Apr 2014)

A site with FPP for a house has come up that might suit us.
I spoke with the Auctioneer who tells me that the site is in the same parish that my granmother is from - first box ticked for applying.
I met with the planner for the area who tells me straight out that there is no point in proceeding because there is a rural/urban boundary in the parish. The site is in the rural part - my granmother is from the urban part.
The thing is that the site is only 0.4 KM on the wrong side.
I have spoken with a few architects who say that restrictions such as this are lifted all of the time in cases where smaller details were initially preventing planning.
Some people say it can be worth talking to a politician who might send a letter or speak to the planner to try to lift the restriction. 
Has anyone any experience or knowledge of a similar situation with a successful outcome?
Thanks in advance for replies.


----------



## RainyDay (21 Apr 2014)

I'm a bit confused - if the site already has FPP, why don't you just go ahead with building.


----------



## kkmaan (21 Apr 2014)

The FPP is in the site owners name. I would need to apply to get the planning in my name.
There are restrictions in that you have to be from the area, or parents/granparents.


----------



## lowCO2design (22 Apr 2014)

kkmaan said:


> A site with FPP for a house has come up that might suit us.
> I spoke with the Auctioneer who tells me that the site is in the same parish that my granmother is from - first box ticked for applying.
> I met with the planner for the area who tells me straight out that there is no point in proceeding because there is a rural/urban boundary in the parish. The site is in the rural part - my granmother is from the urban part.
> The thing is that the site is only 0.4 KM on the wrong side.
> ...


it is very difficult. unless you are a farmer son/daughter. people waste a lot of time and money on these things. best to look for a site within the village boundary.


----------



## Guns N Roses (23 Apr 2014)

kkmaan said:


> Some people say it can be worth talking to a politician who might send a letter or speak to the planner to try to lift the restriction.


 
Don't waste your time. Politicians cannot make the Planner in question lift the restriction. Restrictions like this are usually written into the Local Authorities County Development Plan which would have been adopted by Local Councillors.

Easier to find a more suitable site in my opinion.


----------



## kkmaan (24 Apr 2014)

Thanks for that. Very frustrating in that I have a connection with the parish, but 0.4 km on the wrong side of the rural boundary.
Might go back to the planner and see is there any possibility at all of reconsidering...


----------



## Bronte (24 Apr 2014)

kkmaan said:


> The FPP is in the site owners name. I would need to apply to get the planning in my name.
> There are restrictions in that you have to be from the area, or parents/granparents.


 
I find this kind of thing ludicrous, the site has planning so from a planning point of view everything is ok, but just because you're not from the area you cannot build.  

Is there any way around this, doing the building with the current site owners name I wonder.  

Your original post had me thinking once again a brown envelope is needed, maybe directly to the planner, I'm not advocating it, but it seems to be endemic in Ireland to get certain things done.


----------



## Woodie (24 Apr 2014)

kkmaan said:


> Thanks for that. Very frustrating in that I have a connection with the parish, but 0.4 km on the wrong side of the rural boundary.
> Might go back to the planner and see is there any possibility at all of reconsidering...


Forgetting the issues about auctioneers (who want to sell you something), architects (who want to sell you something), politicians and brown bags, this is a planning issue.  You are entitled to a fair hearing in any planning process.  The  ad hoc nature of  rural planning over the last decades has created huge problems.  Your key pointer is the Planner.   You already said the Planner you spoke with thinks you will fail so a refuse recommendation in the first instance might be the likely outcome.  The positives are that planning has already agreed that the site is suitable for development.    As long are you are not deviating much from the  plans with FPP then your case is even stronger.   So the only issue is apparently proving your need to be in the area.  You have links and it will be even better if those links are current.  Where is your work located, do you have plans for rural enterprise, what will you offer the community, can you get support from community organisations to support your planning application?  It is up to you to prove your case.  Even if you fail at county level, you can always appeal to ABP.  Do however stick to planning facts, go through the development plan and see if anything can support your application.  

Whether you like it or not County plans are in place to try to control uncontrollable development. Most planners are not out to stop you but they need to follow the development plans set out by their authority.


----------



## Guns N Roses (24 Apr 2014)

Bronte said:


> Your original post had me thinking once again a brown envelope is needed, maybe directly to the planner, I'm not advocating it, but it seems to be endemic in Ireland to get certain things done.


 
This is exactly the kind of behaviour that got this country into the current economic mess. 

Most planners are honest and enforce the planning laws by the book. Even if you managed to bribe the planner, their decission has to be approved at management level where any decission not in accordance with the Local Development Plan will be spotted. In my experience any attempt to corrupt the planning process usually gets reported to the relevent authorities.

I'm always amazed that us Irish love to make rules & laws and then try to baypass them when it suits us.


----------



## daithi28 (24 Apr 2014)

Bronte said:


> I find this kind of thing ludicrous, the site has planning so from a planning point of view everything is ok, but just because you're not from the area you cannot build.
> 
> Is there any way around this, doing the building with the current site owners name I wonder.
> 
> Your original post had me thinking once again a brown envelope is needed, maybe directly to the planner, I'm not advocating it, but it seems to be endemic in Ireland to get certain things done.


 
1.
The Departments "Development Management Guidelines for Planning Authorities" are used by all Planning Authorities in the preparation of rural housing policy. The purpose of the guildelines is to facilitate rural development based on rural housing needs, either for those that are born and reared in the rural area and wish to remain in their community or for those persons who have a specific need to live in the countryside e.g farmers. The Guidelines are also there to prevent urban generated rural housing, i.e. development by people who live in a town, have no particular tie to the rural area but like the idea of living in a big house on half an acre in the countryside. It is completely unsustainable and I think it is absolutely correct. If you are from an urban area and wish to live in the countryside, then go buy an existing property and live there.

2.
Getting the property built by the current site owners name will not work, as there will be a planning condition attached to the permission requiring 1st occupancy of the dwelling to the person who qualified to get the permission in the first place. There will also be a clause for a Section 47 Legal Agreement which would be signed between the qualifying occupier and the Planning Authority which relates to occupancy.

3.
Brown envelope........really? That one-liner is about two decades out of date 

As Guns N Roses said, most planners are honest and enforce the planning laws by the book. Also Planners reports are recommendations to grant or refuse not actual decisions to grant or refuse. Their recommendation will almost always be countersigned by a more senior planner, and in all cases must be signed by the County Manager who is the person who actually makes the legal decision on the application.

If you intend to proposition the planner in question with some hard cash, then bring comfortable clothing with you as you'll most definitely be sitting in a cell in the local cop-shop by close of business.


----------



## Bronte (24 Apr 2014)

Guns N Roses said:


> This is exactly the kind of behaviour that got this country into the current economic mess.
> 
> Most planners are honest and enforce the planning laws by the book.
> 
> I'm always amazed that us Irish love to make rules & laws and then try to baypass them when it suits us.


 
I'm well aware of how the economic mess came about, and I'm not advocating breaking rules and laws, I'm merely pointing out that it happens and if anyone thinks it still doesn't happen, well they are wrong.  

Look at the carry on right now with FG 'bribing' certain well heeled middle class areas with lower property taxes.  When the whole thing goes into the one kitty and won't make one wit of difference to anything.


----------



## dereko1969 (24 Apr 2014)

Bronte said:


> I find this kind of thing ludicrous, the site has planning so from a planning point of view everything is ok, but just because you're not from the area you cannot build.
> 
> Is there any way around this, doing the building with the current site owners name I wonder.
> 
> Your original post had me thinking once again a brown envelope is needed, maybe directly to the planner, I'm not advocating it, but it seems to be endemic in Ireland to get certain things done.


 
I'm surprised at you, you're usually sensible.

The whole point of the "local" getting the planning permission was to fudge the increasing size of small towns and villages. Of course it was abused by all and sundry, houses were built and then sold straight away and no enforcement of the local requirement was done.

The original idea of locals only (or those that had a connection - parent/grandparent) made some sense as these towns and villages should not have had any green-field building apart from those looking to build on parents/relatives land.


----------



## RainyDay (25 Apr 2014)

daithi28 said:


> 2.
> Getting the property built by the current site owners name will not work, as there will be a planning condition attached to the permission requiring 1st occupancy of the dwelling to the person who qualified to get the permission in the first place. There will also be a clause for a Section 47 Legal Agreement which would be signed between the qualifying occupier and the Planning Authority which relates to occupancy.





dereko1969 said:


> Of course it was abused by all and sundry, houses were built and then sold straight away and no enforcement of the local requirement was done.


Wasn't there also a legal condition that stops the house being resold right away?


----------

