The four families
| Family | What blocks |
|---|---|
| Breach | works begun without the required regime |
| Overlay | an easement or protection on the plot |
| Third-party permit | a decision falling to another authority |
| Change in the law | a rule that changes during the project |
The first two can be detected in advance, provided one knows where to look.
The third can be anticipated by identifying the nature of the project and its implications early.
The fourth cannot be controlled, but it can be monitored, as the article on the reform under way explains.
Those invisible at the zoning stage
This is the point that justifies this branch. Obstacles are prevented early and corrected badly afterwards.
A developable plot may carry an easement or fall under a protection regime without the classification in the general development plan hinting at it.
A building merely identified in the municipal document may trigger an obligation towards a State authority, independent of the municipal procedure, covered in the article on easements and protections.
Some projects call for a permit of another kind, whose grant conditions the start even after the building permit, covered in the article on other permits required.
These three elements do not necessarily appear in a standard municipal answer, and must therefore be asked about explicitly.
When each comes to light
Four moments, from the most favourable to the costliest. They mark the opportunities to detect an obstacle.
At the preliminary check, if it was carried out fully, which is the ideal case.
During processing, when the municipality seeks an external opinion and the constraint emerges.
After the decision, when a third party appeals on the basis of an overlooked rule.
During works, when an inspection reveals non-compliance, the costliest case, covered in the article on building without a permit.
The cost of an obstacle rises sharply with the moment of its discovery, which justifies investing in upfront checking.
The method of anticipation
Four questions to ask explicitly, in addition to the planning documents. They concern easements and protections.
Is the plot affected by an easement or a protection regime, of any kind.
Is the existing building identified in the municipal document or entered in an inventory.
Does the project require a permit other than the municipal one, given its use and its installations.
Is a revision procedure or a legislative change under way capable of affecting the project.
These four questions do not follow from zoning, which is why they must be asked separately.
What does not constitute protection
Two frequent illusions, to be set aside.
The longevity of a practice. A use tolerated for many years does not create an acquired right, and it remains open to challenge.
The existence of a similar neighbouring building. A permit granted elsewhere creates no binding precedent, compliance being assessed project by project.
The articles in this branch
The article on building without a permit covers sanctions. The consequences are set out there.
The article on easements and protections covers overlays. How to find them is explained there.
The article on other permits required covers decisions falling to other authorities. The regimes concerned are listed there.
The article on the reform under way covers developments. Its progress is followed there.
The article on the timeline of a project offers a programming method. The milestones are ordered there.
This article reflects the regulatory framework at the date of checking and serves professional orientation. It does not replace consultation of the municipality or legal advice.