# Site notice



## Henny Penny (25 Nov 2004)

What happens when a planning application is submitted detailing the site of the site notice and no notice is actually present? Is the application invalid ... or is the applicant simply asked to put up a proper sign?


----------



## ClubMan (25 Nov 2004)

has a bit of information on this:



> The site notice must remain in place for at least 5 weeks from the date of receipt of the planning application.



For more detailed information I presume that you'd need to contact the local authority or perhaps the Department of Environment.


----------



## nogser (25 Nov 2004)

This happened to a neighbour of mine.  If you are looking to object you are on very strong grounds.  There application was rejected although the objectors went heavy handed with a solictors letter to the neighbours and the council.  Subsequent correct resubmission was successful though.

Nogser


----------



## sunnyday (25 Nov 2004)

AFAIK, during their site inspection, this is one of the first things the council checks, so if you're asking from the point of view of the applicant, I'd caution against taking any chances/shortcuts on this matter.


----------



## Henny Penny (26 Nov 2004)

Thanks for your replies. No I am not the applicant, I am intent on objecting to this application. I spoke to a lady in the planning office this morning who said my objection should make mention of the fact that the site notice was not in place when the application was submitted ... I am pretty sure the applicant will get a tip-off as to when the inspection will happen, so I don't want to take any chances.


----------



## rainyday (26 Nov 2004)

Might be a good idea to take some pictures of the site without the site notice with your buddy holding a copy of that day's Irish Times (to confirm the date) & send these in with your objection.


----------



## Henny Penny (26 Nov 2004)

Hi rainyday ... thought of that ... I think I will do that ... thanks.


----------



## XXXAnother PersonXXX (26 Nov 2004)

Beware in case they say the notice was somewhere you didn't take a photograph of. Or that you were obscuring the site notice etc...


----------



## nogser (26 Nov 2004)

HennyPenny

Also get a witness or two perferably not your partner as this can help in a dispute.  As I said it may only delay things as there is nothing stopping the applicant reapplying immediately.

Nogser


----------



## zag (26 Nov 2004)

I don't think you can object to a development based on a site notice being there or not.

As far as I know you can notify the planning department and they will check it out.  If the notice is not visible from the boundary then they can get the applicant to display it and wait another 5 weeks.

z


----------



## sunnyday (27 Nov 2004)

> I don't think you can object to a development based on a site notice being there or not.


I'm not certain either, and the online guide for my area isn't clear either. But I would be furious if you could not object based on the absence of a site notice. The whole idea is to make an open and public statement of your intent to develop a site, hence the newspaper ad plus site notice. The general public _must_ be given the opportunity to object. But if they dont know about the development, how can they object? It would be easy to miss the newspaper ad, and so without the site notice, one could easily be unaware of a potential development. If you are objecting, I'd stress your feeling that the site notice was deliberately missing in order to conceal the proposed development, and that this is a direct violation of the correct procedure. 
Having said all that, it's been rightly pointed out that this alone as your objection would more than likely only serve to delay things, and would probably not have much bearing on a decision to grant permission. If you like to post more info on why you'd like to stop the development (if that's what you want to do), maybe some of us can make suggestions on how best to object.


----------



## elderdog (27 Nov 2004)

Lack of site notice should result in automatic refusal.

Of course they can always apply again and do it right.

Take photographs, get a couple of witnesses etc then notify the local authority.

Have a look on the DCC website. You will see that this is a very common reason for refusal.


----------



## Henny Penny (27 Nov 2004)

Thank you once again for the advice. 

I am objecting to the proposed development of 46 houses to the rear of my house. The development will encroach on my property, devalue my house and comprimise my security. 

The developer has already been granted (un-opposed) permission to build 58 houses which are under construction as we speak. He is applying for this extra no. of houses as an extention of his current scheme.

The scheme would qualify for rural renewal section 23 type tax relief. The houses would be starter homes/investment properties.

I have spoken to the county council, and brought to their attention the lack of site notice. They informed me that I must submit this as part of my objection. The developer will undoubtedly be aware of the date the council inspectors arrival and will arrange a site notice in his/her honour!!!

I just would like to cover all possibilities ... so that this development will not proceed as it is ... don't get me wrong, I have no opjection to appropriate development. I feel while there is no development plan in place for my village, development will continue unhindered without any improvement in public services. Where I live, the nearest town is 7 miles away. There are very limited services ... 2 shops, 2 restaurants and 4 pubs.There is no public transport to speak of. There is no doctor, dentist, chemist, bank etc. There is very little public lighting ... and no footpaths. There is no industry in the area. The local NS is a two room school which is on a waiting list for a new school ... I'm pretty sure my children will have finished school before that comes to fruition.

I have reservations about the capacity of the public sewage scheme. I have reservations about land drainage ... the area is often flooded. I would have concerns about the water quality of the mains water also.

I would love to hear any suggestions to assist in my objection ... 
Thanks again.


----------



## MaxKolbe03 (27 Nov 2004)

Elderdog is 100% correct. Not having the site notice in place at the time the planning application is submitted (and for 5 weeks after) should lead to automatic rejection of the application as invalid. Similarly if the application is not submitted within 2 weeks of the press notice appearing in the paper, it will be invalid.

Planning authorities will usually be sticky about this, particularly if the office is busy (which they invariably are) as it is an easy way to claer their backlog.

Your guide in these matters should be the Planning and Development Regulations 2001 which you can view by going to www.irishstatutebook.ie

Article 17 of these regulation states:

An applicant shall within the period of 2 weeks before the making of a planning application— 
 (a)  give notice of the intention to make the application in a newspaper in accordance with article 18, and 
 (b)  give notice of the intention to make the application by the erection or fixing of a site notice in accordance with article 19. 


Articles 19 + 18 set out the information to be contained in and the appearance/fixing of the notice. 

You should point out the above Regulations in your objection to the Council. If the site notice really wasn't up before the application was submitted then you should point out that the Council have no choice but to throw it back at the developer. The Council (and the developer) will know full well that An Bord Pleanala won't think twice about overturning any decision made by the council under these circumstances.

Of course, none of this will prevent the developer from applying again and getting it right. My advice is just to do your homework, read your county development plan fully and quote liberally from it (where it supports your arguments). The points you outlined above are a good start.

If your case is strong enough you should stick to your guns. There's enough terrible developments around the country already passed by planners with no vision.


----------



## sunnyday (29 Nov 2004)

> I would love to hear any suggestions to assist in my objection ...


I think what you've written above already is a very comprehensive list of good valid reasons why this is "over developement" of the area. What's the road like that passes the entrance to this developement? Would the extra traffic pose any safety risk?


----------



## Henny Penny (30 Nov 2004)

Thanks again sunnyday. I have considered the road, safety etc. and will add this to my objection.

Does anyone know what the threshold is for the request of a EIS? The developer in question has already constructed 104 houses in two phases and has a further 46 + 25 in planning. I reckon he thinks by making separate applications for each phase he can circumvent the planning demand for an EIS.


----------



## MaxKolbe03 (30 Nov 2004)

STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS.
S.I. No. 600 of 2001.

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 2001


Schedule 5 (Developments requiring an EIS)

10 (b) (i) Construction of more than 500 dwelling units.


Think you're out of luck.


----------



## sunnyday (30 Nov 2004)

An EIS may not be called for based on the number of units but you've stated that;


> I have reservations about the capacity of the public sewage scheme. I have reservations about land drainage ... the area is often flooded. I would have concerns about the water quality of the mains water also.


This could possibly warrent one, particularily due to the risk of flooding. Dunboyne should be fresh in the minds of most councils, and hopefully they would be keen to avoid the same mistakes. Ss does flood risk come under the remit of the EIS?


----------



## Henny Penny (30 Nov 2004)

Thanks again ... I will include risk of flooding in my submission. The lands are low lying and prone to flooding due to their proximity to the river.


----------



## Henny Penny (7 Dec 2004)

*Just keeping you posted ...*

... site notice has still not been erected and yet planning permission has been approved ... have got my objecting hat on ... planning in this country is a joke ... asked the county council did they do a site inspection ... was politey told that there was no record of one ... and yet they approve planning permission ...


----------



## sunnyday (8 Dec 2004)

*Re: Just keeping you posted ...*

Thanks for the update, but


> site notice has still not been erected and yet planning permission has been approved


Is it possible that the site notice was in place for the 5 week period required, and subsequently removed? ie. it doesn't necessarily have to be there when approval is actually granted. Could you have started checking for it after the 5 week period had passed?
Anyway, many of the points you mention above should be very good grounds for an appeal to An Bord Pleannala. Don't let this go just because your first attempt to object was not a success.


----------



## Henny Penny (8 Dec 2004)

Thanks again sunnyday ... no site notice has ever been erected ... I have been looking since the notice was placed in the newspaper ... 
I have not yet put in my objection ... I am waiting until the second last day ... in the hope that if the council do decide to reject the planning permission the developer will not have sufficient time to draw up a new set of plans and re-submit before the end of year deadline for the Rural renewal scheme. Failing that, I will still appeal to an Bord Pleannala ... I have contacted an Taisce who have agreed to send a submission also.


----------

