Appeal Decision
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Appeal Decision Site Inspection on 14 November 2013 by Graham Self MA MSc FRTPI Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Decision date: 13 December 2013 Appeal Reference: APP/Y3940/X/13/2191522 Site at: 101A Bradford Leigh, Bradford-on-Avon BA15 2RW • The appeal is made by Mrs G Marston under Section 195 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compensation Act 1991 against the failure of Wiltshire Council to decide an application for a certificate of lawfulness within the appropriate period. • The application was dated 5 July 2012. • The application was made under Section 191 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended. • The application sought a certificate of lawfulness for: "Use of building (edged in red on the plan DWG1) as a separate dwelling". Summary of Decision: The appeal succeeds and a certificate of lawfulness is granted. Procedural Matter and Costs 1. Mrs Marston has also appealed against the refusal by Wiltshire Council to grant another application for a certificate of lawfulness. That appeal relates to different development on a different site and is the subject of a separate decision. 2. An application for an award of costs has been made on behalf of the appellant against Wiltshire Council. The costs application is the subject of a separate decision. Reasons 3. This appeal relates to a single-storey building which stands to the east of the house known as 101a Bradford Leigh. I saw during my inspection that although the building is crudely constructed and offers only basic accommodation, it provides all the necessary facilities for day-to-day living. It has apparently been occupied by a Mr William Morris, also known as Taffy. 4. It is common ground between the appellant and the council that the use of the building as a dwelling has never been authorised. The main issue raised by this appeal is whether the appellant has proved, on the balance of probability, that the change of use of the building to use as a single dwellinghouse occurred four years or more before 5 July 2012 and continued as an unauthorised use until that date. 1 Appeal Decision APP/Y3940/X/13/2191522 5. The evidence submitted in support of the appeal includes a statutory declaration by Mrs Marston, a letter apparently signed by Mr Morris, various documents relating to Mr Morris' income tax records, a letter from a former employer, and other documents relating to Mr Morris' disability living allowance, driving licence, insurance, bank statements, and a letter from a local medical practice. Most of these documents show that Mr Morris used either "101a Bradford Leigh", or "c/o 101 Bradford Leigh" or "Mayfield, Bradford Leigh" as his postal address. Similarly, there are copies of electricity bills indicating that a separate electricity supply may have been installed to the building. None of this information provides clear evidence that Mr Morris, or anyone else, lived in the building throughout the relevant four-year period. 6. More significant support for the appellant's case is contained in letters from several people. A Mrs Rawlings, who has evidently been a regular visitor to the site, confirms that Mr Morris was "a long term fixture" and that she only saw him come into the house on occasions when he was paying his rent. A Mr Moon, who states that he has lived at 101a Bradford Leigh since June 2008, states that Mr Morris "has always lived in the green house and has never lived in the main house". Other letters are evidently from persons who have worked at the site or have kept livestock there. One of these letters, dated 26 April 2013, refers to Mayfield and confirms that Mr Morris has lived in "the dwelling" for approximately 10-12 years. Another letter states that Mr Morris "has been living in a dwelling at Mayfield which is found to the rear of 102a Bradford Leigh since at least 2003". 7. There are inconsistencies in the claims made by and for the appellant, for example in the use of different addresses for the building and on the matter of postal delivery. As regards the latter point, the appeal statement states that "Mr Morris does not have a letter box for his dwelling, so his post is delivered to the host dwelling"; but in an email on 14 August 2012, the appellant's agent wrote: "Correspondence addressed to 101a Mayfield is delivered to the application dwelling". However, such inconsistencies are offset by the number of people other than those with a direct interest in the case who have supplied written information. 8. The council have described this case as "finely balanced" and I agree - there is certainly room for doubt; but on balance, I judge that the evidence shows that the building was probably used as a dwelling during the four-year period before 5 July 2012, so I conclude that a certificate should be granted. 9. On a point of detail, although the application referred to a building "edged red", I am wording the certificate to refer to the building "coloured red" because that is how it appears on the relevant plan. Formal Decision 10. For the reasons given above I conclude that the council's deemed refusal to grant a certificate of lawfulness in respect of "use of building edged in red on the plan DWG1 as a separate dwelling" was not well founded. Therefore the appeal succeeds. I shall exercise accordingly the powers transferred to me under section 195(2) of the 1990 Act as amended. A certificate of lawfulness is attached. G F Self Inspector 2 Lawful Development Certificate APPEAL REFERENCE APP/Y3940/X/13/2191522 TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990: SECTION 191 or 192 (as amended by section 10 of the Planning and Compensation Act 1991) THE TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT PROCEDURE) (ENGLAND) ORDER 2010: ARTICLE 35 IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that on 5 July 2012 the use described in the First Schedule hereto, in respect of the land specified in the Second Schedule hereto and coloured red on the plan attached to this certificate would have been lawful within the meaning of section 191(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended, for the following reason: The change of use of the building to use as a single dwellinghouse occurred more than four years before 5 July 2012 without planning permission and continued throughout the four years until that date. G F Self INSPECTOR First Schedule Use of the building as a single dwellinghouse. Second Schedule Land adjacent to No 101a Bradford Leigh, Bradford-on-Avon BA15 2RW. 3 Appeal Decision APP/Y3940/X/13/2191522 NOTES 1. This certificate is issued solely for the purpose of section 191 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended. 2. It certifies that the use described in the First Schedule taking place on the land specified in the Second Schedule would have been lawful on the certified date and thus would not have been liable to enforcement action under section 172 of the 1990 Act on that date. 3. This certificate applies only to the extent of the use described in the First Schedule and to the land specified in the Second Schedule and identified on the attached plan. Any use which is materially different from that described, or which relates to any other land, may result in a breach of planning control which is liable to enforcement action by the local planning authority. 4. The effect of the certificate is subject to the provisions in section 192(4) of the 1990 Act, as amended, which state that the lawfulness of a specified use is only conclusively presumed where there has been no material change, before the use is instituted, in any of the matters which were relevant to the decision about lawfulness. 4 Appeal Decision APP/Y3940/X/13/2191522 Plan This is the plan referred to in the Lawful Development Certificate dated:13 December 2013 by Graham Self MA MSc FRTPI Land adjacent to 101a Bradford Leigh, Bradford-on-Avon BA15 2RW Appeal ref: APP/Y3940/X/13/2191522 Decision date: 13 December 2013 5 .