Posts Categorized: Cut-out-and-keep

Making a start






Judging the amount of works necessary to constitute the implementation of a planning permission can be difficult, although an inspector dealing with an appeal against the refusal of a certificate of lawfulness for a replacement dwelling in Kent (DCS Number 400-013-504) was ‘mindful that very little is needed to implement a permission for operational development’. This tallies with the inspector’s finding in Cemetery firm digs itself out of a hole.

Read more on Making a start…

Q When is a rooflight not a rooflight?






A When it’s not in a roof

See what you think of this one – we’re not sure what to make of it here. An inspector has denied a lawful development certificate for a rooflight to a basement underneath the garden of a house in central London on the basis that it would not be in the roof and would therefore not constitute permitted development (DCS Number 400-013-551).

Read more on Q When is a rooflight not a rooflight?…

Permitted development rights apply to HMOs






There is sometimes a degree of uncertainty concerning the application of permitted development rights to houses in multiple occupation. Here is an inspector setting the record straight (DCS Number 400-013-332):

“The appeal property is a mid terrace building currently in use as a small House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) for up to 6 people (Class C4). The proposal seeks approval for a single storey rear extension with a flat roof to 6 metres (m) from the original rear wall of the house. The GPDO allows for such extensions to terraced dwellinghouses. However, it is the Council’s assertion that given the current use of the appeal property as a small HMO, it does not benefit from such permitted development rights under the provisions of the GPDO.

Read more on Permitted development rights apply to HMOs…

Expediency






Readers dealing with enforcement matters will know that it is a matter of judgement for a local authority as to whether or not it is expedient to take enforcement action against a breach of planning legislation; the funds to pursue such action are, of course, drawn from the public purse.

Read more on Expediency…

Rave on






Whilst we are on the subject of definitions, here is an appeal case in which the inspector considers the definition of a nightclub (DCS Number 400-013-247).

Planning permission had been granted for the use of edge-of-centre premises in west Yorkshire as an internet lounge and sandwich bar. An enforcement notice alleged an unauthorised material change of use to uses including a nightclub and shisha lounge.

Read more on Rave on…

Q Is horticulture agriculture?






A It depends.

Readers working in the rural area will be aware that agriculture, as defined in s336 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, includes horticulture. Nevertheless, an inspector has issued a certificate of lawfulness for the occupation of an agricultural dwelling in Cornwall in breach of the occupancy condition, finding that the appellant’s occupation as a gardener did not comply with its terms (DCS Number 200-005-591).

Read more on Q Is horticulture agriculture?…

Just not listening






Having awarded costs against a planning authority after finding that its “unreasonableness was compounded by its obduracy when presented with clear and compelling evidence on relevant case law by the appellant” an inspector must have been a little surprised to find that the authority had again refused planning permission for a similar development for the same reason.

Read more on Just not listening…