Planning Permission-what does 'this bit' mean ?
Discussion
I hope that this is the correct place to ask this. I would appreciate an answer from anyone who has Planning knowledge.
In 1972 our Parish Council was granted ..
"Use of land for a childrens play area O.S. *****
subject to the conditions specified hereunder:-
1) The development to which this permission relates shall be begun not later than the expiration of five years, beginning with the date of this permission.
The reasons for the conditions specified above are:-
1) This condition is imposed in compliance with section 41 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971."
This was /still is, land held in trust by the Parish council for the good of the village and was originally a sheep wash and grazing land. This application was granted to change the use to a childrens play area. The Parish council at the time did not want to install any play equipment, just provide a recreational playarea within the village.
Can someone please explain to me what it means when it mentions the 'development being begun' when there was no development to begin, nothing was being built or installed!. Children had always played there and still do.
Where can I find reference/detail for the Planning act section quoted to find out how it is applicable and relevant to this?
I hope this makes sense.
Cheers and thanks
Brian
In 1972 our Parish Council was granted ..
"Use of land for a childrens play area O.S. *****
subject to the conditions specified hereunder:-
1) The development to which this permission relates shall be begun not later than the expiration of five years, beginning with the date of this permission.
The reasons for the conditions specified above are:-
1) This condition is imposed in compliance with section 41 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971."
This was /still is, land held in trust by the Parish council for the good of the village and was originally a sheep wash and grazing land. This application was granted to change the use to a childrens play area. The Parish council at the time did not want to install any play equipment, just provide a recreational playarea within the village.
Can someone please explain to me what it means when it mentions the 'development being begun' when there was no development to begin, nothing was being built or installed!. Children had always played there and still do.
Where can I find reference/detail for the Planning act section quoted to find out how it is applicable and relevant to this?
I hope this makes sense.
Cheers and thanks
Brian
It is a standard condition imposed on every application, and probably also refers to the use beginning as much as any 'development'
If it had never been used for a children's play area then the permission will have lapsed. Also, if it was used for a period as a children's play area and then used for something else for 10+ years then that would now be the established use.
If it had never been used for a children's play area then the permission will have lapsed. Also, if it was used for a period as a children's play area and then used for something else for 10+ years then that would now be the established use.
There's loads of case law on whether or not a consent has been "implemented" and no hard and fast answer that fits every case.
If the permission is expressed to be for "change of use" (not physical works or installing swings & slides etc) then I think you have a very good case to argue that its continued use as an informal play area, without any works being carried out, is enough to amount to implementation.
If the consent was really for the carrying out of physical works, then a court might consider that implementation requires something physical to have been carried out - a fence, a gate, posts for swings etc - for the consent to have been implemented.
Why do you ask?
If the permission is expressed to be for "change of use" (not physical works or installing swings & slides etc) then I think you have a very good case to argue that its continued use as an informal play area, without any works being carried out, is enough to amount to implementation.
If the consent was really for the carrying out of physical works, then a court might consider that implementation requires something physical to have been carried out - a fence, a gate, posts for swings etc - for the consent to have been implemented.
Why do you ask?
Hub said:
It is a standard condition imposed on every application, and probably also refers to the use beginning as much as any 'development'
If it had never been used for a children's play area then the permission will have lapsed. Also, if it was used for a period as a children's play area and then used for something else for 10+ years then that would now be the established use.
^^^^^^^ ThisIf it had never been used for a children's play area then the permission will have lapsed. Also, if it was used for a period as a children's play area and then used for something else for 10+ years then that would now be the established use.
As you can tell there is a background and a history to the query.
Will try to keep it simple
Area was designated a playarea in 1972 and kids played there, land still grazed for 9 months each year to keep grass down.
1979 and new housing in the village, new, active mums wanted a toddlers playground with pre-5's play things ( swings/slide etc) Parish Council let them apply for Planning permission to fence a part off and install. All done by mums group (wife was part of it at the time). Fence kept sheep and children apart. All fine, super little area.
2011. After years of trying to find alternative site-none found- PC applied for and received £k in grants/S101 money etc to install equipment in the playarea ( not the enclosed fenced bit of 1979-too small) for the 8-15 yr olds. Use of money was time limited. PC was told by Planners original 1972 permission was OK if they got testiments from villagers that they had played there-done-Planners said OK-equipment ordered and installation begun. Residents adjoining (4) didn't like this-employed forceful solicitor and Planners said we have changed our minds and you need planning permission now. Original 1972 permission has expired. Would not give reasons. Planners became hostile to PC. PC solicitor said not to go for planning permission as you already have it.
It was/is much worse than this with enforcement being a possibility but it all seems to revolve around the original 1972 permission and what it means.
Minefields are easier to negotiate !
Cheers and thanks for the comments.
Brian
Will try to keep it simple
Area was designated a playarea in 1972 and kids played there, land still grazed for 9 months each year to keep grass down.
1979 and new housing in the village, new, active mums wanted a toddlers playground with pre-5's play things ( swings/slide etc) Parish Council let them apply for Planning permission to fence a part off and install. All done by mums group (wife was part of it at the time). Fence kept sheep and children apart. All fine, super little area.
2011. After years of trying to find alternative site-none found- PC applied for and received £k in grants/S101 money etc to install equipment in the playarea ( not the enclosed fenced bit of 1979-too small) for the 8-15 yr olds. Use of money was time limited. PC was told by Planners original 1972 permission was OK if they got testiments from villagers that they had played there-done-Planners said OK-equipment ordered and installation begun. Residents adjoining (4) didn't like this-employed forceful solicitor and Planners said we have changed our minds and you need planning permission now. Original 1972 permission has expired. Would not give reasons. Planners became hostile to PC. PC solicitor said not to go for planning permission as you already have it.
It was/is much worse than this with enforcement being a possibility but it all seems to revolve around the original 1972 permission and what it means.
Minefields are easier to negotiate !
Cheers and thanks for the comments.
Brian
You could consider submitting an application for a "certificate of lawfulness". You will need to include the evidence you refer to from witnesses willing to testify to the use of the land.
The certificate (if granted) will give a formal, legal confirmation of whether or not the consent was implemented.
Importantly, the fact that local residents don't want the play area is entirely irrelevant to the certificate application. It is a straight question of law, for the Council to decide, whether or not the permission was implemented.
Definitely worth you speaking to a half-decent planning consultant or planning lawyer about this. Give them all the documents, tell them all the background, and they should be able to give you clear guidance for the cost of an hour or so's fees.
The certificate (if granted) will give a formal, legal confirmation of whether or not the consent was implemented.
Importantly, the fact that local residents don't want the play area is entirely irrelevant to the certificate application. It is a straight question of law, for the Council to decide, whether or not the permission was implemented.
Definitely worth you speaking to a half-decent planning consultant or planning lawyer about this. Give them all the documents, tell them all the background, and they should be able to give you clear guidance for the cost of an hour or so's fees.
Gruber said:
You could consider submitting an application for a "certificate of lawfulness". You will need to include the evidence you refer to from witnesses willing to testify to the use of the land.
The certificate (if granted) will give a formal, legal confirmation of whether or not the consent was implemented.
Importantly, the fact that local residents don't want the play area is entirely irrelevant to the certificate application. It is a straight question of law, for the Council to decide, whether or not the permission was implemented.
Definitely worth you speaking to a half-decent planning consultant or planning lawyer about this. Give them all the documents, tell them all the background, and they should be able to give you clear guidance for the cost of an hour or so's fees.
^^^^ thisThe certificate (if granted) will give a formal, legal confirmation of whether or not the consent was implemented.
Importantly, the fact that local residents don't want the play area is entirely irrelevant to the certificate application. It is a straight question of law, for the Council to decide, whether or not the permission was implemented.
Definitely worth you speaking to a half-decent planning consultant or planning lawyer about this. Give them all the documents, tell them all the background, and they should be able to give you clear guidance for the cost of an hour or so's fees.
Planning lawyer or consultant is your way forward. Normally I would recommend a consultant, but this case seems to be more up the street of a planning lawyer. I could PM you a name but they do not come cheap.
We may be able to help a bit more if we could see the original consent, in particular we need to know what the application was for, in terms of the wording defineing the application. Planningref number means it may be possible to see the files online.
Were ages specified in the original application? That copy appears to be only the final decision notice. I know that is often all that exists if these old applications, but if there is anything else, it would be helpful. The site-plan would also be helpful (normally a map with a red shap drawn around an area).
What I am thinking is that possibly the area in question has been seen to be an extension of the area for which a change of use was originally granted. I think this because you mention that the area originally fenced off was too small and that a new area has been fenced off for the new equipment. If the area for the older children falls outside the area highlighted in the original plans, or the age range falls outside that originally specified, then consent will be required IMHO.
What I am thinking is that possibly the area in question has been seen to be an extension of the area for which a change of use was originally granted. I think this because you mention that the area originally fenced off was too small and that a new area has been fenced off for the new equipment. If the area for the older children falls outside the area highlighted in the original plans, or the age range falls outside that originally specified, then consent will be required IMHO.
Edited by TheAlfaMale on Wednesday 11th January 19:27
TheAlfaMale said:
Were ages specified in the original application? That copy appears to be only the final decision notice. I know that is often all that exists if these old applications, but if there is anything else, it would be helpful. The site-plan would also be helpful (normally a map with a red shap drawn around an area).
What I am thinking is that possibly the area in question has been seen to be an extension of the area for which a change of use was originally granted. I think this because you mention that the area originally fenced off was too small and that a new area has been fenced off for the new equipment. If the area for the older children falls outside the area highlighted in the original plans, or the age range falls outside that originally specified, then consent will be required IMHO.
Disagree. Ages are irrelevant, the term in use is Childrens Play Area end of, no conditions on age limits. This seems to be more a case of questioning the villagers evidence of use to date or someone questioning whether the erection of equipment would require an additional application.What I am thinking is that possibly the area in question has been seen to be an extension of the area for which a change of use was originally granted. I think this because you mention that the area originally fenced off was too small and that a new area has been fenced off for the new equipment. If the area for the older children falls outside the area highlighted in the original plans, or the age range falls outside that originally specified, then consent will be required IMHO.
Edited by TheAlfaMale on Wednesday 11th January 19:27
Either way nothing to do with adjoining residents, PC should tell LA that they need to deliver an opinion of whether an enforcement position exists or refuse further communication on the matter. If they believe an enforcement condition exists they must say why.
TheAlfaMale said:
Were ages specified in the original application? That copy appears to be only the final decision notice. I know that is often all that exists if these old applications, but if there is anything else, it would be helpful. The site-plan would also be helpful (normally a map with a red shap drawn around an area).
What I am thinking is that possibly the area in question has been seen to be an extension of the area for which a change of use was originally granted. I think this because you mention that the area originally fenced off was too small and that a new area has been fenced off for the new equipment. If the area for the older children falls outside the area highlighted in the original plans, or the age range falls outside that originally specified, then consent will be required IMHO.
To answer the questions.. no ages were mentioned at all, just 'children'. The whole area (2 acres ?) has banks, stream, bushes, flood plain, hillocks etc and the toddlers bit is a fenced off bit in the middle of the hillock bit, ideal for rolling down ! The new play equipment (5 pieces) is next to this toddler area but on the other side of the fence but still within the whole site, if you follow ? No new fencing around the new equipment.What I am thinking is that possibly the area in question has been seen to be an extension of the area for which a change of use was originally granted. I think this because you mention that the area originally fenced off was too small and that a new area has been fenced off for the new equipment. If the area for the older children falls outside the area highlighted in the original plans, or the age range falls outside that originally specified, then consent will be required IMHO.
Edited by TheAlfaMale on Wednesday 11th January 19:27
Cheers
Brian
Mr GrimNasty said:
Well I guess the original consent has been implemented and a level of use/structure established for a very long time. Any additions really should be consider a material intensification, and require new permission(s).
Interesting ! The PC solicitor mentioned this ages ago but as it was never picked up by the other lot the advice was to say nowt !Cheers
Brian
One further point to consider...
If the install is already under way, does the Council really want the bad PR of taking enforcement action against a children's play area?
My guess is that they won't. Can you imagine the havoc in the local press, with lots of angry mum's out in force?
I'd be minded to get on with the installation and tell the Council to come and have a go if they think they're brave enough.
You can always get consent retrospectively.
If the install is already under way, does the Council really want the bad PR of taking enforcement action against a children's play area?
My guess is that they won't. Can you imagine the havoc in the local press, with lots of angry mum's out in force?
I'd be minded to get on with the installation and tell the Council to come and have a go if they think they're brave enough.
You can always get consent retrospectively.
I am not convinced that the installation of play equipment on land that has a consent as a playground requires a planning application anyway? Otherwise playgrounds up and down the country would be illegal.
I have developed many times where a playground is required, but the nature of any equipment has not been part of the application, merely a blue (usually) line around the play area.
Doingthe work and applying retrospectively is all well and good and may work, but you need to realise that if retrospective consent is not granted then the site will have to be returned to its previous state.
I have developed many times where a playground is required, but the nature of any equipment has not been part of the application, merely a blue (usually) line around the play area.
Doingthe work and applying retrospectively is all well and good and may work, but you need to realise that if retrospective consent is not granted then the site will have to be returned to its previous state.
Gassing Station | Homes, Gardens and DIY | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff