Planning Applications
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
East Northamptonshire Council East Northamptonshire House Cedar Drive THRAPSTON Northamptonshire NN14 4LZ APPLICATIONS FOR DETERMINATION DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE 10 June 2009 INDEX OF APPLICATIONS FOR CONSIDERATION Application Location Recom. Page EN/08/01119/LDE Buildings OP0056 SP9871, Chelveston Refuse 2 Road, Stanwick EN/09/00190/FUL Turners Yard, Oundle Grant 14 EN/09/00364/FUL Land Corner Of Coffee Tavern Lane And Refuse 17 Corner Of Rectory Road, Rushden EN/09/00546/FUL Land Adjacent And Opposite New Lodge Grant 24 Farm, Slipton Lane, Sudborough Development Control Committee 1 of 29 Date printed 10 June 2009 Committee Report Committee Date : 10 June 2009 Printed: 2 June 2009 Case Officer Anna Lee EN/08/01119/LDE Date received Date valid Overall Expiry Parish 29 May 2008 29 May 2008 24 July 2008 Stanwick Applicant Mr Clayford Agent Wilbraham Associates - Mark Flood Location Buildings OP0056 SP9871 Chelveston Road Stanwick Northamptonshire Proposal Certificate of lawfulness for siting of a mobile home for residential use. The application is brought to Development Control Committee at the request of a Ward Member. 1 Summary of Recommendation 1.1 That the lawful development certificate be REFUSED. 2. The Proposal 2.1 This is an application for a lawful development certificate for the siting of an existing mobile home for residential use. 2.2 When submitted, the application was for the siting of the mobile home and for use of the land as a scrap yard. The application was however amended by a letter received on 8th December 2008 and the scrap yard use was removed as the applicant was unable to provide further information to substantiate the application for this element. 2.3 What Members need to consider is whether the existing residential mobile home is exempt from enforcement action and is therefore “lawful”. A breach of planning control becomes “immune” from planning enforcement if no action is taken within certain time limits. 2.4 In considering time limits, the four year rule gives immunity to one kind of change of use only and this is occupation as a single dwellinghouse. It does not apply where the residential occupation is of a mobile home or caravan as these structures are not classed as buildings and the 10 year rule would apply. The four year rule, however, may apply in cases where a mobile home has been altered to an extent that it has become a permanent structure. In this application, the mobile home is not a permanent structure. The agent has confirmed in an email dated 15th May 2009 that the mobile home stands on concrete blocks and is not permanently fixed to the ground. Furthermore, the mobile home, measuring approximately 7.5 metres in length by 2.8 metres in width, is a structure that has been brought onto the site and which can also be easily removed from the site. 2.5 The relevant period is therefore 10 years and continuous occupation over this period needs to have been demonstrated. The legislation is clear that the onus of proof of the mobile home as a dwelling is on the applicant and that the relevant test of the evidence is “the balance of probability”. Development Control Committee 2 of 29 Date printed 10 June 2009 3 The Site and Surroundings 3.1 The application site lies on the eastern side of Stanwick, approximately 50 metres outside the settlement boundary of the village, as defined in the Three Towns Plan. 3.2 The site is known as ‘The Dixie’ by locals and sits immediately south of the Chelveston Road. The site is surrounded by open countryside to the north, east and south, and residential properties lie adjacent to the site to the west. The site is relatively well screened from the road and the wider surrounding area. 3.3 A block plan has been submitted with the application (included in Appendix 1) to show the position of the various structures within the site. The mobile home the subject of this application is positioned in position D of the submitted plan and is situated next to the entrance of the site. A series of outbuildings is found in position C. The building marked A (positioned outside the red line of the site) is a large open-sided storage barn and building B is a large enclosed building constructed using corrugated-iron sheeting. 3.4 During the Officer’s site visit on 2nd July 2008, a large portacabin was found situated to the immediate west of building B within which there were rooms which appeared to be in use for residential occupation. At the time, it was claimed by the occupant that he had recently moved into this portacabin. In the agent’s letter dated 5th August 2008, the agent explains that the portacabin was brought onto the land by the applicant in February 2007 for storage and has been used as a shelter/sitting area, and confirms that the applicant’s main residence is in the mobile home labelled D. Two other caravans were found to the rear of the portacabin in an area covered by overgrown lawn. 3.5 Wood, tyres and metal were found ordered into piles on the site. Building A was mostly vacant and former farming materials which included a tractor were stored in building B. Other than the caravans, the only vehicle found on the site was the private vehicle of the occupant, Mr Morris. 4 Policy Considerations 4.1 Policy considerations are not relevant to the outcome of an application for a lawful development certificate. The sole consideration in the determination of this application is whether the applicant is able to demonstrate with evidence that the described usage has been on-going for a period of 10 years or more. 5 Planning History 5.1 An application was submitted for a dwellinghouse and garage under reference: EN/02/00714/OUT (see Appendixes 2-4). 5.1.1 This application was refused at Development Control Committee on 13.02.2003 for reasons of development outside the confines of the settlement, setting a precedent for other residential development and harm to the character of the area. The application was taken to appeal and was dismissed at an appeal on 09.09.2003. 5.1.2 The Officer Report and Inspector’s decision in the EN/02/00714/OUT application mentioned the presence of a mobile home on the site. A mobile home was identified on the submitted location plan (see Appendix 2). In addition, the Officer report of EN/02/00714/OUT stated: 5.1.3 “The applicant applied for consent in 1996 to permanently site a mobile home on the property. Although this was refused, the applicant has intermittently lived in the mobile home before and since that time and would appear to be still living there”, (paragraph 7.7). 5.1.4 “Although not a material planning consideration the applicant's agent has pointed out that the applicant has become increasingly troubled by ill health. He has stated that his current living conditions are totally unsuitable but he has no other assets or place to live. The applicant proposes to sell the site for a single dwelling and use the proceeds to find himself Development Control Committee 3 of 29 Date printed 10 June 2009 suitable accommodation. Also, the applicant would appear to have no means of tidying the site”, (paragraph 7.9). 5.2 Another application was submitted in 1996 for a change of use of land for the siting of a permanent mobile home, under reference: 96/00628/OUT (see Appendixes 5-8). The location of the proposed mobile home was identified on the site plan submitted in this application (see Appendix 5). This application was refused on 17.12.1996 for similar reasons as ref: EN/02/00714/OUT. 5.2.1 In this application, a letter dated 16th September 1996 submitted by the agent mentioned that the site has been occupied by a number of mobile homes in the past (Appendix 7). 5.3 01/00072/PPU, Enforcement enquiry, Nature: ‘Untidy land and tipping’, case opened on 09.04.2001 and case closed on 11.01.2007. A letter dated October 2003 was sent to Mr Morris to ask Mr Morris to tidy the site. 5.4 96/00057/PPD, Enforcement enquiry, Nature: ‘Positioning of mobile home on agricultural land’, case opened on 10.05.1996 and case closed on 19.08.1996. There was an entry on the Council’s database which states that a mobile home was removed from the site. 5.5 An enforcement case was opened on 20.05.2009 in respect of the portacabin and caravans on the site ‘Possible unauthorised storage of portacabin, caravan and vehicles on land’ under ref: 09/00122/PPU and investigations are being carried out. 6 Consultations and Representations 6.1 Seven letters were received from neighbours and other witnesses (Appendixes 18-24): 6.1.1 Owner of 6 Chelveston Road (with Statutory Declaration) - Confirms spending the last 17 months supervising the building of a bungalow on a site nearby and did not observe any scrap yard business or regular occupation of a caravan or mobile home. “Between November 2007 and March 2008 I regularly attended my property on a weekly basis at 6 Chelveston Road supervising the building of a retirement bungalow. During this time I did not observe or hear any activity to support the claim that the land know as Dixie was being used as a scrap yard or that there was any regular occupation of a caravan or mobile home. Prior to 2008 the land now known as 6 Chelveston Road was owned by my parents who lived for 18 years in the adjacent property (5 Chelveston Road) and prior to their death in 2005 I visited them regularly during the week and never witnessed any activity”.