The remarks of an inspector dealing with a claim that the continued use of premises near Bristol as an A3 restaurant was lawful remind us that sometimes there is just no substitute for life experience (DCS Number 400-025-114).
Posts By: dcplatest
When a relationship comes to an end it can be complicated, and our exit from the European Union is no exception. Until everything is settled, then, the Human Rights Act of 1998 remains in place, and a claim that human rights have been breached or are threatened remains a regular occurrence during the course of planning applications and appeals. That being so, it might be useful to file a recent appeal case (DCS Number 400-024-906), in which the inspector gives a neat summary of the relationship between the planning system and human rights legislation.
Sometimes, the warm glow which a planning approval notice brings with it can cool on reading the conditions attached, especially if they are pre-commencement conditions with the potential to hold up the development. In these circumstances, it is worth reflecting on whether they were ever agreed to, as a recent appeal case shows (DCS Number 400-024-751).
In determining an appeal against an enforcement notice directed at the conversion of a terrace house in southeast London to two flats (DCS Number 400-024-950), an inspector has explained how a notice might constitute a nullity.
Appellants who were hoping to gain permission for an additional residential caravan on their pitch in north Yorkshire will no doubt be interested in the fate of the Finney judgment, reported in A conflict situation, in the Supreme Court.
Is pre-application advice sometimes a poisoned chalice? A case in point concerns a recent appeal relating to a proposal for a new dwelling to the rear of an existing house in Derbyshire (DCS Number 400-025-015). In this case the inspector awarded costs against the council after she found the pre-application advice which had been given to be misleading.
….and everything in its place.
An inspector has decided that a digital advertisement to replace a paper and paste advertisement would be out of place in suburban Bristol (DCS Number 400-024-682).
In an appeal case in which the potential threat to residential amenity came from an airborne source the inspector took the topography of the land into account in coming to her decision. In this case (DCS Number 400-024-952) a south Wales householder was denied permission to retain a pigeon loft in his rear garden.
A light touch is one thing but you can go too far.
In dealing with an appeal relating to a prior approval application for a rear extension to a house in southeast London under Part 1, Class A of the GPDO (DCS Number 400-024-852) an inspector pointed out that the plans do not need to be drawn to scale.
The change of use of a B1(c) light industrial building in southeast London used for the manufacture of event sets to C3 residential under Schedule 2, Part 3, Class PA of the GPDO has been deemed to be permitted development by an inspector notwithstanding intervening uses since the relevant date (DCS Number 200-009-116).