Replacement Dwelling Meath CoCo

Get a properly qualified Planning Consultant rather than an architect.

http://www.irishplanninginstitute.ie/ipi/practice-map/

@roisindubh wrote:

I have been refused pp for a replacement dewlling on a site in Co Meath. The house i wish to replace is about 100 years old and was my old family home. It has been unoccupied for approx 20 years. The four walls and the roof are in tact, it still has an Electricty supply and in the planners report she does consider that the house could be considered habitable as per the development plan. However my architect in his report on the old dwelling suggests that the it had been used to house animals (hens). This enabled the planner to consider the use of this dwelling as having been abondoned and therefore would not allow it to be replaced. I own my own home and thereforedo not qualify under ‘Local Needs’ – all other aspects of the planning application were acceptable. I am looking for any suggestions as too how to proceed from here. I think i need an architect who is knowledgeable on the planning process in Meath. This is the second refusal on this site. any advise would be welcome

if a dwelling hasn’t been lived in in 7 years, theoretically the planner can consider the building to have ‘foregone its use’ as a dwelling and can determine as they have… in other woods, i would blame the architect for being truthful.

why not apply to renovate and extend the existing building??? this is a round-a-bout way of getting a house in this area.

Came across a situation similar to this years ago. The easiest way we found to get around it was to get the house lived in again. So kick out the chucks, hang a few net cutains, patch up the dodgy door and roof DIY style and trim the grass. Get a few bills redirected to the house and bingo….. now you have a house that is suitable for replacement and ready for a new planning application.
The clients patched the dwelling up over a weekend and it cost not much more than their own time. I would not change your architect/agent as this may just add avoidable cost and time.
All a bit silly but some planners can be real cute.

@goneill wrote:

@henno wrote:

if a dwelling hasn’t been lived in in 7 years, theoretically the planner can consider the building to have ‘foregone its use’ as a dwelling and can determine as they have… QUOTE]

I have often heard this – but where is it written down?

General rule of thumb derived from High Court cases involving the planning & Development interpretation/concept of ‘abandonment’.

I don’t usually flag wave for my profession but this case really highlights why you need to talk to an IPI accredited consultant who would produce a site feasibility assessment before hiring an architect or some other local yahoo passing themselves off as ‘ De Plannin’ Consultint’.

Have been considering renovating the old dwelling but this as a last resort option – I have spent €5K already on plans and “architects” fees and have my heart set on the new build –

Sounds like trying to make the old house more lived in might definately be worth a shot – Tks

@StephenC wrote:

Get a properly qualified Planning Consultant rather than an architect.

http://www.irishplanninginstitute.ie/ipi/practice-map/

As a completly inexperienced client going looking for planning permission in the first instance it seems rather unfair that people (“architects” )who do not know what they are doing can charge absorbent fees for inadequate advice. Should my “architect” not have advised me that i needed a Planning Consultant also as he is not wel enough informed to submit a planning application. He now has my money and I now need to employ someone who knows what they are doing!!

google the term + ‘planning law’ or search on here. It usually arises in connection to rights of way and quarries

@roisindubh wrote:

As a completly inexperienced client going looking for planning permission in the first instance it seems rather unfair that people (“architects” )who do not know what they are doing can charge absorbent fees for inadequate advice. Should my “architect” not have advised me that i needed a Planning Consultant also as he is not wel enough informed to submit a planning application. He now has my money and I now need to employ someone who knows what they are doing!!

why do you keep putting the word architect in inverted commas?

it’s been refused twice – why was it refused the other time?
You say the architect “suggests” it was used by animals – how was it worded?

Not a lot of info here compared to the emotive language but, if you feel that their advice has been inadequate / caused you harm, you have redress to the RIAI.

Yeah, looks like your “architect”, architect or agent, whichever, may have scuppered you on this one. Abandonment is more based on the ‘intention’ to abandon rather than the length of time so the storing of farm animals may demonstrate that there was an intention to abandon on the landowners part – the planner dealing with any future application will have the planning history available. I don’t think you have much redress against your “architect”/architect/agent for telling the truth, I don’t think that’s illegal or immoral, it might not be that bright but that’s a different issue. I think the rest of the posters are right, it might take the work of an experienced and tenacious planning consultant to get you permission on this site – and even then there’s no guarantee

I suppose the most thing that has dissapointed me with the whole situation is that i was not advised in the first instant by my agent that the application was a non runner. Had i been advised of the fact that having animals in the house would make it abondoned and therefore not qualify for a replacement dwelling i obviously would not have gone ahead and with getting plans drawn up etc. I accept that my agent was most likely not aware of this situation but i think he should have been.

I’m sorry about your situation – but this does seem like an unfortunate case where the planner was not minded to give permission and found an out – especially as you say yourself you do not have a housing need – already owning one in the area.

As for the ‘exorbitant’ fee of 5k – that seems very reasonable to me for design of a dwelling and production of a planning report for submission (not knowing the work involved admittedly) – what does everyone else think?

If the only reason the planning authority gave for refusal was because it was mentioned in a supporting ducument that the building housed animals then all is not lost at all. for instance, was it submitted that the whole dwelling housed animals? Your architect could argue that only one/two rooms in the house were used to house the hens and thats what they were reporting (maybe that is the case anyway). Basically what im saying is that the reason for refusal is very very weak.
In the case I mentioned earlier, we had to get the house fixed up because if was clearly in a desperate need of repair if it was to be reclaimed. You may not even have to do that.
I just wonder if there was more behind the authoritys decision to refuse and that they just did not want a new house there and by giving a refusal no matter how weak they hoped you would give up on it. Is the house located on the edge of a dual carrigway or something??
From the information you have given I think you would be foolish to throw away the money you have invested already by walking away from it. Get a meeting with your architect, decide whats needed to resubmit the application and…… who pays.

@Davids wrote:

If the only reason the planning authority gave for refusal was because it was mentioned in a supporting ducument that the building housed animals then all is not lost at all. for instance, was it submitted that the whole dwelling housed animals? Your architect could argue that only one/two rooms in the house were used to house the hens and thats what they were reporting (maybe that is the case anyway). Basically what im saying is that the reason for refusal is very very weak.
In the case I mentioned earlier, we had to get the house fixed up because if was clearly in a desperate need of repair if it was to be reclaimed. You may not even have to do that.
I just wonder if there was more behind the authoritys decision to refuse and that they just did not want a new house there and by giving a refusal no matter how weak they hoped you would give up on it. Is the house located on the edge of a dual carrigway or something??
From the information you have given I think you would be foolish to throw away the money you have invested already by walking away from it. Get a meeting with your architect, decide whats needed to resubmit the application and…… who pays.

Tks for your advice – i have decided to try again giving the old house a bit of an overhaul – and getting some mail redirected – the site is not located near a dual carrigway or anything and the Roads/ Sanitary engineers reports had no objections. The planner in her report actually states that she considers that the “existing dewlling on site could be considered habitabital in that the roof, internal and external walls are generally intact however, given that the dwelling has not been inhabited for circa 20 years and is currently used for housing chickens, it would appear the the use of the structure as a dwelling has been abandoned” I think it is worth one more shot before considering refurbishing the old dwelling – (the planner is however quite favourable to this idea which is obviously not helping my case)