Substamtial Additional info? what is it?

@JacobsSlave wrote:

:confused:What constitutes substantial addtional information?

I have recently lodged an objection for a group against a large scale mixed use retail/office development in a housing estate green area. The objection was lodged and acknowledge. Since then, about 2 and a half months ago, an additional info was asked for. I was not informed. This week, a new site notice was erected outlining it is for additional info, and a new news paper notice aswell. The development changed from a retail/office combination to a retail/office/apartment combination, with the planners wanting the office on the ground floor (basement – front on one side only i.e. split level building) and the retail moved to the ground floor (previously on basement level).

The LA are saying we were not entitled to be informed, but surely this constitutes substantial change, and we should have benn nbotified. Is there any legislation etc which governs this ‘grey area’.

The area plan (SLAP) states that any retail within a housing estate should be small in size and benifit the residents. The offices and retail combined in original application was about 18000 sq.ft. Not very small.

Any help is welcomed?
JS

My experience is that it is in the power of the LA to decide whether to inform observers in this area.
It is grossly unfair and represents a regular abuse of the meaning and purpose of FI requests. Basically councils who either can’t be bothered or who have resoucing issues use FI to steer a development towards a preferred option rather than through the proper pre-planning channels.

I am waiting for someone wealthy enough to bring a case in this regard to judicial review as it is an abuse of the system IMO. It must happen eventually.

when the council request the applicant to readvertise and reerect a site notice, they are informing the public as required by legislation. The public then have a two week period to make submissions from the date of receipt of the additional information.

as far as i know the council are required to notify submitters of their request for further information, so its up to the submitters to review this info and make additional submissions.

Henno did you mean “receipt of” rather than “request for” in your last sentence? It’s my understanding that they must do both.

@henno wrote:

when the council request the applicant to readvertise and reerect a site notice, they are informing the public as required by legislation. The public then have a two week period to make submissions from the date of receipt of the additional information.

as far as i know the council are required to notify submitters of their request for further information, so its up to the submitters to review this info and make additional submissions.

The LA have only decided to issue the FI Receipt to me, as rep for the objectoors, after the two weeks were up. I was under the impression that they LA had 3 days to inform objectors of decisions and information like this to allow adequate time to comment. I think you will see this challenged by us, and if its the legislation which is at fault, and a letter to the department of the enviroment falls on deaf ears, Maybe a word with the EU Commissioner will prove benificial. This is the second time this LA has done this, first time failing to inform us of a decision to grant until a week before the deadline to appeal to An Bord Pleanala was due. Obviously a week is precious little time and our objection missed the deadline.

Where do you go from there if your complaints are ignored by the LA?

JS

Sounds like you’ll be off to the high courts with this one. Any decision made by the LA under the circumstances you’ve outlined (ie notifying after the deadline) should be quashed in the courts. Otherwise if you think you can win on pure planning grounds, simply appeal to the Bord.