exempt or not?
- This topic has 17 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 10 months ago by
.
- Posts
I just want to throw one out there as to an issue im having with an enforcement officer.
Client wants to build a low wall with metal railing (to match estate entrance railing) on top, total not to exceed 1.2 m around his front garden, and hang 1.2 m high metal gates. He has dogs and wants to keep them in. The enforcement officer is saying this development is not exempt as the railing is metal. She is homing in on the word ‘metal’ in clause 3 of the class 5 exemptions. Now, its my opinion that any ‘railing’ is inherently metal anyway… even the regs make differentiation between a railing and a wooden fence.
My options are to apply for a declaration under section 5 of the act, and wait 5 weeks for a reply from the planners… and if this declaration doesnt match my viewpoint, im looking at a min 18 week (possible 30 week) Bord Pleanala turnaround.
Now this kind of time period is completely unreasonable for my client. He has the railings already made. I know, and he knows, that he can simply not install them, and build a full wall 1.2 high, and then be exempt. But isnt it ridiculous that some technicians reading of the regs can be so skewed as to have this kind of outcome.
anyone any thoughts or advice?
you need to apply for planning permission for a railing or rail-topped wall. the regs are pretty specific about requiring any wall under 1.2m to be capped.
the wall would be capped….
capped with a metal rail above? it’s exempt up to the top of the capping and not exempt above.
yes, capped with a metal railing above.
The wall is exempt, the railing is exempt, are you saying that, in your opinion, a combination of both is not exempt?what are you basing the assumption that a metal railing is exempt on? if you’re that sure, just build it. let the local authority worry about proving you wrong.
if you’d built it and left the planners out of it, chances are it wouldn’t be a problem so long as nobody reported it. how did the enforcement officer get involved? it’s an unfortunate truth that it’s not the letter of the law that applies here, it’s the planning officer’s interpretation of that law.
The situation that youve described happened, a neighbour alerted the LA, and the enforcement oficer is deeming the development not to be exempt, whereas I, and others, deem it to be exempt.
I consider a metal raining exempt as its specifically mentioned as Class 5 exempted development. “The construction, erection or alteration, within or bounding the curtilage of a house, of a gate, gateway, railing or wooden fence or a wall of brick, stone,
blocks with decorative finish, other concrete blocks or mass concrete.directly from DoEHLG….. http://www.environ.ie/en/Publications/DevelopmentandHousing/Planning/FileDownLoad,1586,en.pdf
9. Can I erect walls, fences and gates?
Capped walls made of brick, stone or block with a
decorative finish, railings and wooden fences, but not a
metal palisade or security fences, can be erected as long as
they do not exceed 1.2 metres in height in front of your
house or 2 metres at the side or rear. If the wall is made of
plain blocks or mass concrete it must be rendered or
plastered. Gates and gateways may be built or replaced
providing they do not exceed 2 metres in height. You will
need planning permission if you wish to make a new or
wider access to the public road.is my reading of this unreasonable… because i consider the enforcement officers reading to be unreasonable. I have been told directly by the technician in the enforcement section that its the fact that the railing is ‘metal’ that is the problem. I would have thought that a ‘railing’ by definition and inherent description, is metal anyway….
@henno wrote:
The situation that youve described happened, a neighbour alerted the LA, and the enforcement oficer is deeming the development not to be exempt, whereas I, and others, deem it to be exempt.
I consider a metal raining exempt as its specifically mentioned as Class 5 exempted development. “The construction, erection or alteration, within or bounding the curtilage of a house, of a gate, gateway, railing or wooden fence or a wall of brick, stone,
blocks with decorative finish, other concrete blocks or mass concrete.directly from DoEHLG….. http://www.environ.ie/en/Publications/DevelopmentandHousing/Planning/FileDownLoad,1586,en.pdf
9. Can I erect walls, fences and gates?
Capped walls made of brick, stone or block with a
decorative finish, railings and wooden fences, but not a
metal palisade or security fences, can be erected as long as
they do not exceed 1.2 metres in height in front of your
house or 2 metres at the side or rear. If the wall is made of
plain blocks or mass concrete it must be rendered or
plastered. Gates and gateways may be built or replaced
providing they do not exceed 2 metres in height. You will
need planning permission if you wish to make a new or
wider access to the public road.is my reading of this unreasonable… because i consider the enforcement officers reading to be unreasonable. I have been told directly by the technician in the enforcement section that its the fact that the railing is ‘metal’ that is the problem. I would have thought that a ‘railing’ by definition and inherent description, is metal anyway….
vertical metal poles closely spaced together, especially with a pointed top is technically a palisade – no matter what the common perception of a palisade fence is. A railing is a series of horizontal rails between vertical uprights.
depends on how pedantic you want to be. what you describe would be the common perception of a railing. They’re right, you’ve the moral high ground. potato potato tomato tomato let’s call the whole thing offfffffffffff.
from the same document
“3. No such structure shall be a metal
palisade or other security fence.”it’s a matter of interpretation. i don’t disagree with you, i’m just suggesting that the planning officer’s opinion is the one that matters. ask for a second opinion within the planning authority
@wearnicehats wrote:
vertical metal poles closely spaced together, especially with a pointed top is technically a palisade – no matter what the common perception of a palisade fence is. A railing is a series of horizontal rails between vertical uprights.
depends on how pedantic you want to be. what you describe would be the common perception of a railing. They’re right, you’ve the moral high ground. potato potato tomato tomato let’s call the whole thing offfffffffffff.
Thank you for your definition, it makes a lot of sense from a pedantic point of view, however it doesnt from an interpretive viewpoint. If the council offered the same distinction i would accept that, however, its the fact the railing is ‘metal’ thats causing the problem.
I have before expressed the view , in the context of compliance with building regulations that our system of architect opinions is inferior to the UK local authority building control approval system . I think again. This example of LA idiocy henno is a powerful argument for not giving the buggers any more resources .
Why did the neighbour object? Is it an open-plan estate? Nothing looks more stupid than a fortress in the middle of an estate.
Great word, palisade. The old Romans had their fort on a hill; ringed it with stakes, (palus) palisade. The hill became known as Palatine, and the large dwelling thereon gave the name to palace. The powers of the occupant then led us to Palatinate.
Kb@KerryBog2 wrote:
Why did the neighbour object? Is it an open-plan estate? Nothing looks more stupid than a fortress in the middle of an estate.
Great word, palisade. The old Romans had their fort on a hill; ringed it with stakes, (palus) palisade. The hill became known as Palatine, and the large dwelling thereon gave the name to palace. The powers of the occupant then led us to Palatinate.
KbYes it is an open planned estate of 6 dwellings. I agree that it looks ridiculous to have one walled in dwelling in an estate of open-planed front gardens. However, if the LA wanted to protect the open plan nature, they should have included a condition of planning stating no development is exempt, which they did not. So, my point is the the client can build a 1.2 rendered capped block wall without seeking permission (which in my opinion would look immeasurably worse), but the 360mm high block wall with ‘railing’ over to match estate entrance is deemed to require permission because the railing is metal. Ridiculous and unreasonable in my opinion, and also in the opinion of a representative of DoEHLG when contacted for a clarification, to quote “if thats the reading of the enforcement officer, we would consider it a silly reading”. But unfortunately, they have no say in the matter.
…. keep us posted please Henno …
Update:
Building Enforcement has deemed the development to be exempt after our request for clarification on why they thought it required permission in the first place.
Client and agent are both happy!!great henno – not section 5 ? just letter to LA?
@sinnerboy wrote:
great henno – not section 5 ? just letter to LA?
no, simply a clarification request by us to the enforcement section regarding the warning letter. We explained our reasons for claiming the development was exempt, and they accepted that explanation.
@wearnicehats wrote:
vertical metal poles closely spaced together, especially with a pointed top is technically a palisade – no matter what the common perception of a palisade fence is. A railing is a series of horizontal rails between vertical uprights.
depends on how pedantic you want to be. what you describe would be the common perception of a railing. They’re right, you’ve the moral high ground. potato potato tomato tomato let’s call the whole thing offfffffffffff.
I know you are being technically correct, but in the context of the DOE act, I don’t think they were refering to all vertical rails as palisade. I am pretty sure that the common use of palisade applies.
Security fence could also apply to alot of fenses.
Also, I know you weren’t suggested the technically correct interpetation was the one intended by the DOE but rather the onlt the PE officer was going on.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
