Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk | law-index | Acts | Members Image galleries

Change of use

Land, Registered Land, Planning law etc.

Re: Change of use

Postby atticus » Wed Dec 13, 2017 2:39 pm

You wish to challenge a planning decision made in 2000? Good luck with that.
atticus - a very stable genius
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 20103
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Change of use

Postby BakersDozen » Wed Dec 13, 2017 3:40 pm

a change of use decision which was given on 424b in 2000 was approved however were there any conditions to that use, its a small premises with parking for 2 cars outside, plus there is the other business next door a hairdresser at 425a, so thats two spaces gone by a worker from each business. the take away employs 4 people who all have their own private cars which they use to go delivering. so in total there are 5 cars there but only 2 spaces before customers turn up. the premises is on a junction so some of the most horrendous parking pavement happens by these employees and customers just park on the junction. as you can imagine it creates severe highway problems and risks to public safety. there is a lay-by around the corner in front of alternative shops which cars could park in but they are too lazy to walk the distance and it requires walking down a flight of steps.

now in 2007 - 425 ****** road applied for a change of use ***/2007/0110, (was somebody going to make 425a and 425b into one)
The Council of the ************* District in pursuance of powers under the above mentioned Act hereby REFUSE to permit the development described above in accordance with plans ref: 001F; 002F; 003F; 004F; for the reason(s) specified below:-

1.The traffic generated by the proposed development would be likely to result in an increase in highway danger owing to increased use of the existing access to the frontage car parking area which affords restricted visibility to the west for drivers of vehicles emerging from the access. Furthermore, the proposed development would also result in an increase in the likelihood of highway danger to road users owing to the likelihood of vehicles waiting on the public highway. As such the proposal is contrary to the provisions of Policy H19 and T16 of the ************************ Local Plan.

then in 2010 the existing takeaway with the change of use approved in 2000 applied for longer opening hours ***/2010/0654
1 The proposed variation would be likely to result in an increase in the number of vehicles being parked on the public highway with a consequent increase in the likelihood of highway danger to road users. The application is therefore considered to be contrary to the provisions of policies H19 and T14 of the ****** Local Plan.

Now why are they saying there is a likelihood of highway danger to road users if they wanted to stay open from 11.30pm to 2am when there are less cars on the road, yet this was overlooked in 2000 when they approved change of use application to trade between the hours 3pm to 11.30pm during the school children rush hour and worker rush hours from 15.30pm to 18.30pm when there is all the trouble.
BakersDozen
 
Posts: 135
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 4:10 pm

Re: Change of use

Postby atticus » Wed Dec 13, 2017 3:53 pm

You have said that the permission for change of use was given in 2000. The subsequent decisions appear to be refusals of applications.
atticus - a very stable genius
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 20103
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Change of use

Postby dls » Wed Dec 13, 2017 4:29 pm

Yu need to be sure that a permission grated to the entire property does not also include its subdivisions.
David Swarbrick (Admin) dswarb@gmail.com - 0795 457 9992
User avatar
dls
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12338
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire

Re: Change of use

Postby BakersDozen » Wed Dec 13, 2017 4:31 pm

yes are we agreed they are at odds with each other?

in 2000 at address 425b change of use approved to hot food take away

in 2007 at address 425 there was an application concerning change of use to hot food take away rejected (it is assumed someone was going to make 425a and 425b into one)

in 2010 at address 425a there was an application concerning variation of use to extend the opening hours rejected (even though it should have been made on 425b)

someone made a mess in 2000 when they approved it?
BakersDozen
 
Posts: 135
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 4:10 pm

Re: Change of use

Postby BakersDozen » Wed Dec 13, 2017 4:32 pm

dls wrote:Yu need to be sure that a permission grated to the entire property does not also include its subdivisions.


obviously not or why was the 2007 application for 425 turned down as it is assumed the application was to knock through 425a and 425b into one
BakersDozen
 
Posts: 135
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 4:10 pm

Re: Change of use

Postby dls » Thu Dec 14, 2017 10:50 am

You cannot make any such assumption.
David Swarbrick (Admin) dswarb@gmail.com - 0795 457 9992
User avatar
dls
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12338
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire

Re: Change of use

Postby BakersDozen » Thu Dec 14, 2017 5:33 pm

Well a little progress report,


Why were applications ***/1988/0402 and ***/1988/0475 rejected for a change of use for 425a ****** Road?

Why was application ***/2000/0357 for 425b ****** Road which was approved not contrary to the provisions of the Policy H19, T14 and T16 of the *** *** Local Plan, like ***/2007/0110 and ***/2010/0654 were from the same building.

I would like to make a Stage 1 complaint about ***/2000/0357 being at odds with reasons for refusal of applications ***/2007/0110 and ***/2010/0654 and the lack of due diligence in the processing of it all causing confusion.

and the reply was


Dear Mr BakersDozen,

I am about to leave the office and I am not here tomorrow. I will take a look on Friday and will have to forward to my Supervisor as a stage 1 complaint which I will discuss with them.

Kind regards

Compliance and Monitoring Officer
Planning Enforcement
Regulatory Services

One suspects they will end up in a bit of a pickle here, if they say 2000/0357 is fine then so should 2007/0110 and 2010/0654 but if they go the other way and they say there is a problem what then for the business.

Can they attach conditions to the intensity of use at the site or my preferred option just close it down as they have stuck in a hole in the wall cash machine 3 months ago and now applying for retrospective planning permission.
BakersDozen
 
Posts: 135
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 4:10 pm

Previous

Return to Land Law

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests