johnglas wrote:Not to mention daft; no wonder planning gets such a bad name. Since when did 'overlooking' actually have anything to do with looking?! The concept implies overSHADOWING, i.e. the bulk of one building overwhelming another - apart from observing a minimum distance between buildings it's hard to see that the concept has any meaning at all. It's equivalent to 'I have a right to a view'. It's about time the planning system got a bit more real.
goneill wrote:No, I've sold the idea of flat roof terraces a couple of times. And the last time I checked there wasn't any absolute right to be not overlooked or overshadowed
goneill wrote:Cairnduff case, Waterloo Road
goneill wrote:So, you're sitting in your office, wondering if the phone will ever ring again, when someone calls to say that they've made terrace use of a flat roof at their house, and they now have a great sea view and view of the next door neighbour's garden, and the council have served an enforcement notice. You advise them to either stop using the terrace or to seek retention permission which they do but fail. They appeal to the bord and fail there too. I think (but am not certain) that once you've applied for permission you surrender any claims you might have for exemption. Do you think you have advised them correctly? We know that's what Parka would have done.
goneill wrote:No, I didn't say I would advise them to do that. I might, depending on the circumstances, have written to the council saying that I believed the use of the roof was exempted under Section 4. And the council might then have quietly gone away.
goneill wrote:Henno, you never really said how you would advise the hypothetical client who came asking what do do about the enforcement notice he had received in relation to using a flat roof as a terrace. In one case I wrote to the council claiming exemption and they backed off.