Thanks to everyone for the comments so far.
spoil_sport wrote:There is still 3m between? That is still reasonably generous, if it is to the norh of you, then the new wall is south facing? In that case, if the new wall is a smooth white render, it might even increase the amount of reflected light into your north facing windows?
I'd say "generous" wasn't the first word that came into my mind when I saw the plans!
I'd obviously much prefer natural light to artificial/reflective light. At the moment, my desk faces out of the gable window, with plenty of light and a good view of some trees and the sky. The proposed structure would just give me a blank wall. Even a white rendered wall could never increase the amount of light when daylight is being replaced, and walls that start out brilliant white often don't stay like that for long.
damproof wrote:I wouldn't bother going to that expense - sounds to me like the planner has looked at the distance between your dwelling and the proposed development and figured that its going to have an acceptable impact - no amount of third party surveys are going to change that at this point. If you don't like the decision of the PA then appeal it to An Bord Pleanala and if that doesn't work then suck it up and get on with things. You could always try to include spoil_sport's suggestion of a smooth white render on a supplementary submission
I'll definitely go to ABP if the PA grants permission, but I certainly wouldn't just "suck it up" if ABP granted permission as well. The right to light is an ancient one worth fighting for.
publicrealm wrote:Right to light is a legal issue (rights acquired after 20 years of continuous light) - not a planning issue.
However, daylight is a planning issue - insofar as Planning Authorities tend to abide by the so called Littlefair Guidelines. These set out recommendations for day-lighting (and sunlighting - sunlight is not an issue with a north facing facade) and it is likely that the scenario you propose would diminish the daylight to the two windows. This is dependant on the width of the obstruction as well as its height and if I were you I would ask the Planning Authority (or the Board) to seek a daylight analysis from the applicant which addresses your windows. Be aware that bedroom windows are not considered as sensitive as living room/dining/kitchens - but are considered.
We've had far more than 20 years of continuous light, so I think we've got a good case should it go that far. Like I say, the PA have already asked for further information without mentioning us, so I'd guess they're not interested in our daylight. I did mention it in my objection, but to no avail
Hopefully ABP will be more understanding if it goes that far. Would they take into account the fact that I use the guest bedroom as an office?
corkblow-in wrote:I'd agree with spoil sport - I don't think you have much of a case due to the fact that its to the north and there is a relatively generous 3m. Do not waste money on daylighting studies / reports etc.
One route you could take is how they propose to maintain the gable if its right up against your boundary - are they expecting you to provide a right of way? Also if its up against the boundary is the gable ladder overhanging your property?
Will probably not get the building refused, but could be pushed 1.0 - 1.5 m further from your house.
If they're expecting a right of way, they'll have a long wait
They haven't mentioned anything about how they intend to maintain the wall. They never bothered discussing anything with me, so there's no way I'll be doing them any favours! From the plans, it appears that they want to remove the existing block wall and have their gable as the new boundary. Whether they can remove what's probably a party wall is another legal issue I guess. The plans also seem to indicate a roof flush with the gable, so no overhang. Obviously we wouldn't permit such anyway.
tungstentee wrote:doing a cursory check (25 degree rule) daylighting to your rooms would be affected
further and more detailed tests woulld need to be done (as in the littlefair doc mentioned previously)
Thanks for taking the time to do that tungstentee. Hopefully the PA or ABP will do some cursory checks of their own before granting any permission!
If anyone has any more comments, they're still welcome.