Application documentation

Article 22 of the Planning Regulations and the application form sets out the documentation that is required to accompany a planning application, i.e. the notices, the location/layout plans, the plans and particulars required to

describe the proposals, the appropriate fee and the information required in certain instances e.g., letter of consent from the landowner, certificate of exemption from Part V or evidence as to the suitability of the site for a proposed system of wastewater disposal.

Article 22(3), as inserted by the 2006 Regulations, clarifies that in accordance with section 248 of the Planning Act planning authorities may consent to the receipt of the application wholly or partly in electronic form and that in the case of electronic submission one copy will be sufficient. To allow such receipt, Article 22(2)(a) now allows for “a copy of the relevant page of the newspaper” to be submitted as an alternative to “the relevant page of the newspaper”.

The maps, plans and drawings required by Article 22 must comply with the requirements of Article 23. Amendments were made in the 2006 Regulations which allow location maps and site or layout plans to be of a scale agreed in advance with the planning authority. In some instances planning authorities are given some discretion - where the terms “as may be appropriate” or “main features” are used – as to the degree of detail and amount of information that they locally require. In some cases the information required will be quite basic; in other cases, such as in the case of a protected structure, it may be more detailed. Planning authorities should use this discretion in a manner that ensures the efficient operation of the development management system and avoids unnecessary delays while ensuring that public participation rights are safeguarded. While it is important that the Planning Regulations are complied with, it is equally important that the planning authority should not go beyond the requirements of the Regulations, making more onerous demands than the Regulations permit. For instance, it is not open to planning authorities to require particular colours on maps, plans, etc. where this is not required by the Regulations. It is open to planning authorities to request (but not require), if desired, in their own planning leaflets, or on their websites, that the maps and drawings be pre-sorted into 6 sets.

In relation to the other mandatory documentation under Article 22, planning authorities should take a reasonable approach in validating such documentation. In relation to the requirement that evidence as to the suitability of the site for the proposed system of wastewater disposal (where it is proposed to dispose of wastewater other than to a public sewer) must be supplied with the application, planning authorities should not be over-rigorous in assessing the adequacy of the evidence for the purposes of validation:

further evidence may be sought by way of further information.

When submitting a planning application for the development of homes on lands subject to Part V of the Act, the legislation requires an applicant to specify the manner in which he/she intends to comply with the Part V obligation. This requires the applicant to indicate which of the options set out in section 96(3)(a) or section 96(3)(b) it is proposed to use to achieve compliance with Part V. As outlined in Appendix A (para. 2) of DEHLG Circular AHS 4/06, submission of the agreement in principle reached at

pre-planning stage, if any, provided that it clearly specifies the manner of compliance with Part V, will be sufficient to comply with this requirement.

Article 22A of the Regulations allows a planning authority to require the applicant to submit specified additional information with the planning application and sub-articles (2) to (5) of Article 23 provide for the submission of additional information/evidence in particular cases i.e. additional details in relation to works to a protected structure; a transport assessment; additional copies of maps, etc; a scale model, photographs, etc. It is important to note however that the non-submission of any of this information/material cannot be a cause of invalidation of the application, and in cases of non-submission of such information the planning authority should proceed to formally request the required information/material under Article 33.

3.9 Fees

Schedule 9 of the Regulations indicates the fee that must be paid with each application. In some cases there may be a genuine misinterpretation of the Schedule. Where the fee is overpaid it should be accepted as validating the application and the balance of the fee should, of course, be refunded. Where the fee is substantially paid, but there is an underpayment, the applicant should be contacted and given the opportunity, within a short specified time frame, to submit the balance. The application should be regarded as valid until this time limit has expired.

3.10 Validation

Where the requirements of Article 18 (newspaper notice), Article 19(1)(a) (site notice) and Article 22 (application form and required accompanying documentation) are complied with the application is then deemed to be valid.

As set out in the preceding paragraphs, planning authorities should adopt a reasonable approach towards validation. While compliance with the Planning Regulations is essential, particularly to protect the interests and participation rights of third parties who may be affected by the proposed development, planning authorities should take a common sense approach and should avoid invalidating applications on very minor points such as a mis-spelling or an illegible signature, particularly if third party rights are not prejudiced. While it is of course the responsibility of applicants and agents to submit applications which comply with the Regulations, planning authorities might consider an approach whereby (as recommended in the case of a small underpayment of a fee) in a case where an application contains just one minor defect, the applicant would be contacted and offered the opportunity, within a very tight time-frame, to correct the defect (the application would be regarded as valid in the interim period).

The Planning Regulations provide that when an application is deemed valid, the planning authority will stamp each document with the date of its receipt and send an acknowledgement to the applicant. Documents should not be

date-stamped before validation, as, in the event of the application being deemed invalid, the applicant may wish to use some of the documents in a subsequent application. It will be important therefore that the planning authority, while not date-stamping all the documents prior to validation, have some mechanism for noting the date of receipt of the application, e.g. by initially date-stamping only the application form, on receipt of the application.

It is in the planning authority’s interest to ensure that planning applications are validated as quickly as possible to minimise the amount of time and effort that will otherwise go into returning the planning application and the fee, informing any objectors and returning such fees. As the authority’s planning applications list must be prepared not later than the fifth working day following a particular week, (i.e. by the following Friday) a similar period of time should be aimed at for validating a planning application. Under the Planning Regulations the weekly list must indicate which applications have been invalidated, so that persons wishing to make submissions are aware of this fact.

Best practice example

A new applications unit was established in Galway County Council comprising 6 administrative and technical staff. The team is responsible for the acceptance, validation and distribution to the planners/assessment centre of all new planning applications received both at the public counter and by post.

The administrative team accepts all planning applications at a dedicated counter, which can accommodate up to three customers at any one time and the technical team is responsible for the validation/mapping of all planning applications. The team is also involved with other planning procedures within the office. Both teams were given special training and instruction in relation to all relevant aspects of the Planning and Development Regulations 2001 and IT training e.g. ECDL etc.

Software requirements include iPlan, SoftCoWeb, PlanReg and Map Info.

The advantages of this system are

The agent and applicant know that the file is valid.

The files are on the planner’s desk within 7 days.

Better customer service.

Increased security for file and fee.

Reduced number of files to handle.

Cost savings.

Increased staff productivity.